8 réponses à ce sujet

[New Display Name]

I'm a little worried about ending reception.

The endings are flawed. They are criticized, rightly so.

But there are things I really like about it. I liked that there was no one correct answer in the ending choices. Besides surviving as an easter egg in the destroy ending, they're all more or less equal. Assuming you have enough war assets for earth to survive, the right ending really depends on your perspective.

Yet people are saying they want a "happy ending" and that everything they did was wrong.
I worry about this not because I don't want happy, but because I don't want just one perfect ending.

One thing I keep reading among those who wanted happily-ever-after is that Bioware could have pleased everyone (and themselves) by having those darker endings but still giving other players one sunshine and puppies ending.

I think that would harm the sense of choice - and although I could choose between something like one good ending and 3 bad endings, that's hardly an engaging decision.

[Kronner]

I agree. If not for the Normandy crash, which made no sense, it would have been perfect end to the series, IMHO.

[SaltyWaffles-PD]

Jeez, no. You just aren't getting it. Take Deus Ex's endings, for example. That's how you do it RIGHT. Each of the three endings has HUGE ramifications and lots of bad consequences, but each of them has its own important merits. They also explain what happens as a result, in detail. It also fits right in with the IP and the story so far, unlike ME3's.

ME3's endings were terrible in execution and so out of place. They're utter failures in terms of closure, detail, logic, internal consistency, intrigue, satisfaction, and CHOICE. The three endings are nearly the same with different colors. Hardly anything--including the core details of the endings--is explained before or after, and we're left wondering what the hell happened to the characters and the galaxy as a whole.

That, and these endings render your past actions largely meaningless, in a series founded on the principles of choice and seeing the consequences of those actions.

Modifié par SaltyWaffles-PD, 09 mars 2012 - 11:39 .

[Rukioish]

When I first started the mass effect series, I knew that my job was to stop the reapers once and for all. The costs were high, but I finally did it. I didn't expect there to be butterflies and rainbows after the reapers literally butt****ed half the galaxy.

[New Display Name]

SaltyWaffles-PD wrote...

Jeez, no. You just aren't getting it. Take Deus Ex's endings, for example. That's how you do it RIGHT. Each of the three endings has HUGE ramifications and lots of bad consequences, but each of them has its own important merits.

ME3's endings were terrible in execution and so out of place. They're utter failures in terms of closure, detail, logic, internal consistency, intrigue, satisfaction, and CHOICE. The three endings are nearly the same with different colors. Hardly anything--including the core details of the endings--is explained before or after, and we're left wondering what the hell happened to the characters and the galaxy as a whole.

That, and these endings render your past actions largely meaningless, in a series founded on the principles of choice and seeing the consequences of those actions.

I don't disagree with you.

[Aradace]

Honestly, in my opinion, anyone who expected a "sunshine and rainbows" ending to this series was kinda kidding themselves. I've known since I picked up ME1 that this was basically how things were going to end. Not to the letter mind you but I had a good idea that it was going to be in this ball-park.

[zenoxis]

People who say they want a happy ending are people who are deluding themselves. What they really want is an ending that actually explains something, not create more plotholes. I'd likely wager they wouldn't care that much if Shepard dies, doesn't see his LI, etc., etc., but it is entirely reasonable to ask wtf happens with your teammates, what about the other races, why does the citadel have to blow up or fly away? these are reasonable questions, ones that Bioware should have known would be asked.

The only excuse to not know would be because they either ran out of time, or created this ending in order to boost their ego. This kind of ending is one made entirely for the sake of the creators, not the audience, because it is literally dripping with pretentiousness.

Modifié par zenoxis, 09 mars 2012 - 11:50 .

[Ghost Rider LSOV]

Here we go again "did you expect sunshine and rainbows"?

Well, I'll reply again for the Nth time.

NO.

We don't want "sunshine and rainbows".

If Shepard can't at least be with his LI/crew in the end, which people still call "sunshine and rainbows", "Shepard doesn't sacrifice anything" (but other old teammates and things, Shepard sacrifices a lot, but yeah, people still would find such an ending "unrealistically happy"), at least give us a proper epilogue that tells us:

Who lived?
Who died?
What happened afterwards to Earth, races?
What did our choices do, EXCEPT from ending the Reaper threat?

[FearTheLiving]

Things I hate about the endings.

-Guardian
-Normandy
-Destroy all Synthetics (Makes no sense to kill off anything but Reapers)
-Grandpa
-Mass Relays (Though I understand why they want to do it, don't destroy one great trilogy just so you can "try to make another")