Aller au contenu

Photo

The game was amazing until the last 5 minutes.


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
8 réponses à ce sujet

#1
Smeffects

Smeffects
  • Members
  • 555 messages
-To bioware

Let me get this clear, the game was simply perfect until that very spot. Lets focus on the ending and what was done wrong, what could have been done better and what was done right. (Spoiler, long post and bad english ahead)

The mission in cerberus base was really fun and tied some of the plot element togheter.

The mission in london was also pretty nice and hard on insane, serverd me right to have killed samarah.

Then running toward harbinger was epic, everyone dying around you, i figured while i was running harbinger was gona yell something stupid like: Sheppppaaaaaarrrrrrddddddd! But he actually stayed quiet which made him more manacing then assuming direct control everywhere.  Also if we were gona fight his freaking avatar like sovereign in the middle of an invasion i would have face plamed. Well done on that.

The entrance of the citadel and the confrontation with illusive man was not bad either. It was interesting and much better then earlier idea bioware had where you would fight him like a boss. It would just be out of character and terrible. You made the correct choice here.

The very ending here is the very problem. Its poorly tied up.

-The kid is completly out of place. Why does the catalyst of a device billion years old have the shape of a human boy with a hood.... 2 ways to handle this correctly. Making it a VI like vigil that you simply cant see or investigate option actually doing something and being able to ask himabout his apparence, the logical answer being he took the form of something you know. The problem with this is that this kind of occurance in scifi do happen often. But to be realistic the hero will always wonder and ask about his interlocuter appearance. You have to tell your audiance that, because your audiance is the hero.

-The problem with the green/red/blue endings. Those arent bad endings per say and if handled correctly in the perspective of a game series like mass effect could have been just fine. The problem is that mass effect is all about the choice you made before. Hell i think for most of your player base the ending could have not been a choice and shepard could have died everytime, but their choice would have decided the faith of all your friends, while their war asset decide of the faith of the galaxy itself.

-The 3 choice of ending could have still been ok, but the problem is really no choice changes anything to anyone in the galaxy after the ending. Happy ending is not required here.  Having shepard survive with enough war assest is also not good, again your choice did not have any impact. You can hit maximum war assest doing anything in the game, decided to go on a killing spree in mass effect 1 & 2, no problem youll still get max war assest.

-The normandy crashing. This one simply do not make sense, we are told its bugged right now because for exemple liara and edi(singularity, incinerate, overload= yeah on insane) where on the final mission with me, for all i know they died when harbinger hit us. But they somehow found a way to fly to the normandy and escape to the relay in the last 5 minutes. Which is also strange because the rest of the human fleet does not flee. Who gave joker the order to flee? Im sure hacket would order the whole fleet away if he judged the crucible dangerous but no, joker decided on his own that it was, whens the last time joker bypassed orders? Whens the last time joker ran away from a fight? Pretty sure he was ready to go down with the ship in mass effect 2.

Mass effect 3 ending did somethings right, but it went flat trying to force 2 things: Meaningful ending for the galaxy having a cliffhanger. Neither of these was required to make this story perfect. You had already succeeded in the first 20 hours of the campaign. All you had to do was show choice mattered to something in the last 5 minutes in a brutal and sad ending if you wanted. Happy doesent = good. Good is something else on its own and mass effect last 5 minute, simply does not qualifie as good when takken on its own and its simply turned way down by the fact the rest of your game was flawless story telling wise.

Modifié par Smeffects, 09 mars 2012 - 04:32 .


#2
Mr. Big Pimpin

Mr. Big Pimpin
  • Members
  • 3 310 messages
You should copy and paste your post into one of the larger threads complaining about the ending. The smaller ones are all getting locked, and apparently the larger threads are actually getting read by Bioware.

#3
Smeffects

Smeffects
  • Members
  • 555 messages

Mr. Big Pimpin wrote...

You should copy and paste your post into one of the larger threads complaining about the ending. The smaller ones are all getting locked, and apparently the larger threads are actually getting read by Bioware.


Its more like a review then a complain though. Overall the game was still good. The ending did not make me forget how good the rest was enough to dissmiss that.

Modifié par Smeffects, 09 mars 2012 - 04:34 .


#4
Lyrandori

Lyrandori
  • Members
  • 2 156 messages
Something interesting I myself just considered (by reading other replies around concerning the endings, I didn't came up with it myself, but I'm considering it now)...

Shepard actually dies in ALL cases due to blood loss on the Citadel. Think of the possibility (let's just presume for the heck of it). The camera DID focus on Shepard as he/she looked at the blood loss, and then Hackett contacts him/her saying that nothing happens with the Crucible, that "it's probably something on your side" (control panel in front of Shepard). From that point, the physical shock/trauma was too great, and as soon as Shepard tries to stand up (but really can't) he/she effectively provokes the acceleration towards inevitable death, as he/she painfully tries to even touch the panel in question, even replying to Hackett something like "... can't see..." almost chocking in his/her own blood in the process, then...

Well, at that point then Shepard collapse, never touching the panel. Then, from THAT point, the platform activates and then we can assume that from such a possible scenario that ANYTHING that follows (A.I., appearance being that of the young boy seen at the beginning of the game) is some sort of near-death experience/vision/hallucination (as death claims Shepard), and what we see what we interact with (limping left or right for the choice we made) is all part of that, Shepard's death.

IF that's the case and I admit, it could be, then it would make the ending more tolerable for me anyway. Because otherwise it's just too gray overall, any of the three endings are. But if I consider that in fact Shepard simply died either when Harbinger hit near the beam or due to blood loss on the Citadel then it's... it's actually better that way really, for me anyway.

#5
Davnort

Davnort
  • Members
  • 503 messages
everything was fine until sheperd went up that platform...

#6
Smeffects

Smeffects
  • Members
  • 555 messages

Lyrandori wrote...

Something interesting I myself just considered (by reading other replies around concerning the endings, I didn't came up with it myself, but I'm considering it now)...

Shepard actually dies in ALL cases due to blood loss on the Citadel. Think of the possibility (let's just presume for the heck of it). The camera DID focus on Shepard as he/she looked at the blood loss, and then Hackett contacts him/her saying that nothing happens with the Crucible, that "it's probably something on your side" (control panel in front of Shepard). From that point, the physical shock/trauma was too great, and as soon as Shepard tries to stand up (but really can't) he/she effectively provokes the acceleration towards inevitable death, as he/she painfully tries to even touch the panel in question, even replying to Hackett something like "... can't see..." almost chocking in his/her own blood in the process, then...

Well, at that point then Shepard collapse, never touching the panel. Then, from THAT point, the platform activates and then we can assume that from such a possible scenario that ANYTHING that follows (A.I., appearance being that of the young boy seen at the beginning of the game) is some sort of near-death experience/vision/hallucination (as death claims Shepard), and what we see what we interact with (limping left or right for the choice we made) is all part of that, Shepard's death.

IF that's the case and I admit, it could be, then it would make the ending more tolerable for me anyway. Because otherwise it's just too gray overall, any of the three endings are. But if I consider that in fact Shepard simply died either when Harbinger hit near the beam or due to blood loss on the Citadel then it's... it's actually better that way really, for me anyway.


Thats a good point but again this is scifi, science fiction. Science fiction is the type of fiction that require a certain level of explanation. What would be the point of having the possibility of that 3 second cut scene where shepard lives if he is really dead. Why did space magic happen with shepard near death experience, he died before. Thats the thing here, in science fiction you have to be able to produce a scientific fictional explanation for everything that happens. How your ship flys, how the weapon works, how space magic work (think biotic or jedi), if mass effect took a spiritual theme from the start having a ghost walking around would have been acceptable. The ending is simply not part of the game if its a near death experience, which i dont think it is. I think they simply wanted to make it touching by adding the kid, but such an addition without explanation is not science fiction. Same for the normandy escaping, it was simply put to be a cliffhanger that was simply not required. Cliffhanger for the sake of being one.

Modifié par Smeffects, 09 mars 2012 - 05:00 .


#7
Rehpotsirch

Rehpotsirch
  • Members
  • 25 messages
Bioware had some interesting ideas when it came to the endings, but the execution was poor.

For me, the events after the final decision felt very ambiguous since the same sequence of cutscenes is used for all three endings. They should've had different sequences to show the consequences of those three different choices. It would've been nice to see what happened to everyone after the relays were destroyed, whether they all died or not.

Concerning the post-credits scene, I think it's interesting that the story of Shepard becomes a legend/creation story for some new civilization in the distant future.

#8
Smeffects

Smeffects
  • Members
  • 555 messages

Rehpotsirch wrote...

Bioware had some interesting ideas when it came to the endings, but the execution was poor.

For me, the events after the final decision felt very ambiguous since the same sequence of cutscenes is used for all three endings. They should've had different sequences to show the consequences of those three different choices. It would've been nice to see what happened to everyone after the relays were destroyed, whether they all died or not.

Concerning the post-credits scene, I think it's interesting that the story of Shepard becomes a legend/creation story for some new civilization in the distant future.


Exactly. The ideas where good, but the implentation from a science fiction basis was poor and poor for story telling. You simply cant have a billion of years old device take the form of a human child and your hero play along without even questioning what is going on. You cant force magical cliffhanger and you should not use the same video for every ending, that last one just comes up as a bit lazy.

#9
Rehpotsirch

Rehpotsirch
  • Members
  • 25 messages

Smeffects wrote...

Rehpotsirch wrote...

Bioware had some interesting ideas when it came to the endings, but the execution was poor.

For me, the events after the final decision felt very ambiguous since the same sequence of cutscenes is used for all three endings. They should've had different sequences to show the consequences of those three different choices. It would've been nice to see what happened to everyone after the relays were destroyed, whether they all died or not.

Concerning the post-credits scene, I think it's interesting that the story of Shepard becomes a legend/creation story for some new civilization in the distant future.


Exactly. The ideas where good, but the implentation from a science fiction basis was poor and poor for story telling. You simply cant have a billion of years old device take the form of a human child and your hero play along without even questioning what is going on. You cant force magical cliffhanger and you should not use the same video for every ending, that last one just comes up as a bit lazy.


Well, at least we got to choose the colour of the explosion. =P