127 réponses à ce sujet

[Zardoc]

100% agree.

[Ahviro]

WheelsWithinWheels wrote...

Bioware: Hire this man.

This guys words.

Great post. Absolutely one of the best. I totally agree with you! Even though I'm not native I can understand that wall of text. Keep up the good work.

I think you sum up the whole crowd here who's unsatisfied with the endings.

"I'm bitter, I'm in mourning and I'm unsatisfied"

[TODD9999]

Excellent post regarding the failings of the ending. I just finished it and am very disappointed.

I have no interest in replaying the game, at least not for a long, long while, since all the endings (such "great variety" there are) share the same weaknesses.

I have no interest in playing the multiplayer - it's okay, but ultimately limited and (since the endings are awful) pointless - which is a shame, because the integration of the MP and SP elements, while I was skeptical, actually turned out quite interestingly.

At this point, about the only thing that could keep me from taking Bioware off its pedestal and throwing it in the "just another game company" pile would be some DLC replacing the endings - which I feel is essentially impossible, but I will wait and see. And even if they did do it, it would be a real jerk move, so I'd buy it but still be reluctant to give Bioware my money in the future.

[Slappy Ya Face]

Wow. Glad I made it through that.

[MOELANDER]

This was a wonderful read and a very sound articulation why the endings didn't deliver the promises made about ME3.

[FunstuffofDoom]

Amazing write-up. Sadly I do not believe anybody at Bioware will ever read it.

I'm whoring this thread out as I can, while trying not to be obnoxious about it, but I just can't overcome the level of output on this forum.

I think if we want dialogue with BioWare, meaningful-like, we need to communicate at a high level. This isn't to say that what's currently happening isn't good. Words are better than no words. But if we want to avoid this in the future, we need to speak on the hows and whys, not just the whats.

[FunstuffofDoom]

Great post. Absolutely one of the best. I totally agree with you! Even though I'm not native I can understand that wall of text. Keep up the good work.

I'm glad it made sense for you. One of my professors stresses what he calls the Grandma Test. If you can't explain it so you're grandmother, you know, that one who doesn't get anything can understand it, you don't know it well enough. I try for simplicity and clarity.

[MrAtomica]

FunstuffofDoom wrote...

3. Protagonist's death is acceptable, sometimes even necessary to create an enduring story and everlasting character. The ending we get, however, feels forced and not cohesive.

It's not what I consider a strong reason, because it's very personal in nature. But the inevitability of Shepard's death in the endings is the worst thing that happened, for me. It's the one that hurts the most. It's the one that's got me coming back to these forums and scanning sites for news and stalking BioWare execs on twitter. I can make lip service to Shepard as an individual all I want, but check my writing, again. There are plenty of times where I slip into first person when talking about game events, which only says to me that Shepard and I are, on some level, interchangeable. And I wanted a happy ending. I wanted to walk into the sunset and say, it's over, now let's start rebuilding. I could have lived with everything else happening, but I wanted to be there when it did.

Bowing to necessity, to the way things are, is a compromise. But giving your life, to do it? That's robbery. And, suffice it to say, some things you just shouldn't do to the hero.

Wow, now I have a nagging feeling that you and I are clones of each other.

The reason why the endings bother me so much is also because of the level of investment I have in the character of Shepard. I approach situations in Mass Effect as though I am the avatar I happen to be playing.

This is why I was so bothered by some of the moments in ME3. One particular incident left me literally seething for some time afterward. When Kai Leng stole the Prothean data, and doomed Thessia, I was ready to rip his guddam head off and beat him to death with his spine. I could feel the rage and despair that Shepard was feeling. I loathe injustice, whether it be in a virtual world or the physical one.

So naturally, I'm very upset by the fact that my hero, the guy whose shoes I have walked in for three installments now, cannot achieve the happiness I feel he deserves. It's totally fine to have bittersweet endings in the mix - hell, it's even fine to throw some downright sour endings in there. But there should be a balance to that. For every choice that causes pain and loss, there must be one to divert that, or even negate it. This is justice, and this is the theme that has been unabashedly shown off to us for most of this series.

Work hard enough, and you will prevail. Doesn't matter whether you choose to save everyone you can and resolve every conflict without bloodshed, or force your way through all the bullsh*t and obstacles and drag an unwilling universe to triumph: regardless of how you play the game, you reap what you sow. Shepard has put his or her life into stopping the Reapers, and has done above and beyond what anyone else thought possible. This goes beyond simple moral alignment. This is the fundamental contract of the series. You are the hero. I've lost friends aplently along the way, and seen worlds burn. Damnit, I've earned myself some peace. Some closure. Preferably without turning myself into the Reaper God, or some magical space dust.

Shepard needs to win. Not in every outcome, because again, you ought to experience a just conclusion. If you support the Reapers in their aim, then allow them to win, or join them. Totally fine. But I DO NOT support them, nor do I agree with the god child. Whether singularity comes or not is irrelevant to me, because I am a free being. After seeing what the Reapers have done to my home, to my friends' homes, to my galaxy, I have seen this supposed singularity with my own eyes. I fought the Geth many years ago, and brought them to a lasting peace regardless. I allowed a Reaper laced AI the ability to integrate herself with my ship, shag my pilot, and ask me philosophical questions. And so far, the only evidence of this apocalyptic war with machines is the conflict raging with the very ones who claim to be the guardians against this outcome. Guess what Harby/Sovereign/Catalyst? I'm not impressed. You are fools. You CANNOT bottle up the course of life with a single ultimatum. If this singularity is inevitable, then why has it never occured? You say it is because you have prevented it, but I see that as a lie. Free will is incompatible with absolution. The Geth and EDI are proof of this. Maybe a synthetic based entirely upon enslavement to mathematical calculation is destined to destroy me. But my friends are as alive as I am. They think for themselves. They have chosen peace in favor of war by themselves.

Of course, this is all opinion. My points can be argued against, and they likely will be. But the fact that my opinion can be argued at all is proof that I have not been justly rewarded. If all of this can be true for my Shepard, then why can I not question the Catalyst's assertions? Why must I foolishly bow to this brat?

I guess I can sum up my ideas with this:

If the ending to a series based upon Choice and Consequence is to be considered just, then there must be choices to make, and consequences to validate those choices. If I want to destroy the Reapers, and their tech, just to be safe, let me. If I want to destroy them, and leave the galaxy to make its own path utilizing the tools left behind, fine. If I would rather side with them, and continue the cycle, fine. If I want to become the next Catalyst, and play a "wait and see" approach, fine. Hell, toss in a choice to merge with the Catalyst, then release the Reapers from slavery. They might even be willing to broker peace. Who says that a free Reaper wouldn't choose to side with me? We assumed that this was impossible for the past two games because it was inferred that they were already acting of their accord. This is apparently no longer the case. You can even leave the synthesis ending in. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but it's still a choice. And choice is good.

God, I'm on a mental roll now, can't stop.

[Mendelevosa]

The main thing I hated was how all my choices from me1 to me3 were all blown away thanks to the Kill Reaper button, Control Reaper button, and Synthesize button. I feared that deus ex machine would do something like this...

[MOELANDER]

MrAtomica wrote:

God, I'm on a mental roll now, can't stop.

This effect is called synergy ;D

[RubiconI7]

This is why I was so bothered by some of the moments in ME3. One particular incident left me literally seething for some time afterward. When Kai Leng stole the Prothean data, and doomed Thessia, I was ready to rip his guddam head off and beat him to death with his spine. I could feel the rage and despair that Shepard was feeling. I loathe injustice, whether it be in a virtual world or the physical one...

I completely feel this also. Bioware has tried and succeeded in making us feel that we are our Shepherd. In giving an ending that we ourselves cannot agree with is forcing us to im-personalize the Shepherd we invested for three games.

While I still hold my belief that I am ok with Shepherd dying and that it is not about what he deserves after what he's been through. I think that we should be given a choice on how to influence the ending according to the personality that relates to the past three games.

[Ieldra]

OP, you have my sincerest thanks for sparing me the effort of writing your post.

I don't agree with your alternate endings, but your criticism was very much to the point - if a little verbose, if you excuse me for saying it.

I would make the following changes:

I would basically keep Control and Destroy as they are (but see below), and add this as the third option: if you rewrote the geth, encouraged Joker/EDI and made peace between the geth and the quarians, you can convince the Catalyst that the rationale for the cycle was wrong. The Catalyst then sends the Reapers into the black hole at the centre of the galaxy before destroying itself.

I would also add to ALL endings a hint that Shepard can survive, under certain conditions. Shepard's survival being restricted to Destroy I find particularly galling, since IMO that rewards players for choosing the worst option. I'll get to that at some time. 

Tbh, I'm rather fond of the Synthesis. Of the options presented it's clearly the best, only I don't like its eschatological vibe, and it makes no sense in several ways. But that's another discussion.

[Kulzar8]

This was a fantastic read, I especially liked your take on the induction fallacy they used to convince Shepard that all was doomed. The motives of the Reapers were questionable, and they did a very poor job of explaining them.

In a way, it has been a recurring theme science-fiction, the conflict between organic and synthetic. Masters of sci-fi like Asimov, Clarke and Baxter, to name a few, try tackling. The whole singularity thing (when you throw out all that new age garbage) is a serious matter to consider. This is why it could be understandable that the Reapers were the only solution to that problem at the time they were created. And why the synthesis option is really a good one.

The writers thought they could pull a masterpiece like Asimov did with his foundation story, with great ideas about the survival of life and what not. The end result did not deliver on this promise. And damn, did they miss. You can only watch in despair as Shepard becomes completely powerless at the end, with a kid doing a terrible job of explaining ->EXACTLY WHY<- the Reapers are doing what they are doing.

I know the writers wanted the story to end with some sort of "twist", but it was no reason to obliterate their universe in the process.

[MrAtomica]

RubiconI7 wrote...

I completely feel this also. Bioware has tried and succeeded in making us feel that we are our Shepherd. In giving an ending that we ourselves cannot agree with is forcing us to im-personalize the Shepherd we invested for three games.

While I still hold my belief that I am ok with Shepherd dying and that it is not about what he deserves after what he's been through. I think that we should be given a choice on how to influence the ending according to the personality that relates to the past three games.

Fair enough. Shepard dying is a matter of personal preference, and it should be an option for those that feel it fitting. I can support that 100%. But I feel it equally important to give those who want him/her to live a say as well. Choice is the name of the game.

[FunstuffofDoom]

Tbh, I'm rather fond of the Synthesis. Of the options presented it's clearly the best, only I don't like its eschatological vibe, and it makes no sense in several ways. But that's another discussion.

Synthesis is... well it's a wee bit elegant, really. It indefinitely solves the Reaper problem, and depending on what actually happened, it may well have solved the organic-synthetic 'problem'. It just, well, breaks everything else to do that. Like burning down a house to kill a mosquito. I'm not opposed to dead mosquitoes, but I may have liked having a house more.

Your ending could work just fine, I think. Many of the endings suggested could work just fine. The biggest problems with the endings, I think, aren't so much what specifically happened, as how little they tie into the rest of the games, and how little they do to conclude anything.

[Diazizit1500]

+1 to OP

[MrAtomica]

The more I think about it, the more partial I am to an ending that gives the Reapers back their free will. There is no guarantee that they will accept the path that they are currently being forced to follow. After what Shepard has learned through the series, and after the potential to voice the opinion that "Synthetic life is life, just as we are alive. The only difference is the metal skin. If it has sentience, it is alive.", it makes sense to allow him or her to explore the immorality of just flatly annihilating what essentially amounts to entire nations.

What if the Reapers turned on each other, or actually chose to leave in peace? They have no apparent wants outside of the demands of the Catalyst, and they obviously would not benefit from reaping all life in the galaxy for no purpose. The whole business with them seemingly choosing to destroy us is bollocks according the the endings as given. If that is the case, then why would we be denied diplomacy?

It would be seen as a monstrous act, perhaps, to give them any quarter after all that they have done to the free peoples of the galaxy. But imagine...just imagine the incredible debate that would flourish after an ending like that! An option to set the Reapers free could satisfactorily offer some players the chance to question the morality of their actions and stance. It might seem like a cancellation of all that made the first two games great, but it would also be a cool twist.

Since the whole Catalyst and tech singularity message seems to be geared toward creating some form of Sympathy for the Devil type of thinking, this would be an interesting addition. Perhaps we could have a conversation with an unshackled Harbinger, where a sufficiently persuasive Shepard could reason with him (them?)? I realize that we already have that type of situation with TIM, but to have one with the supposed main antagonist of the series would be a whole new perspective.

I've heard many ideas about reasoning with the Catalyst, and this too could be an option. But I'd also like to directly speak with a Reaper free of enslavement. It's been noted that they are little more than a nation of independent beings grafted into a metallic skin, with a tether to the Catalyst. Remove that tether, and you are dealing with little more than an uber-Geth, right?

I just feel that the dissolving of the concrete idea from ME1 and ME2, that the cycle is a choice of the Reapers for some reason or another, offers new possibilities. Who are we to assume that they would unilaterally wish to continue harvesting us? If they were given a choice, would such an existence truly satisfy some of them?

Maybe we could even expand the Saren suicide ending to a massive scale. The unshackled Reapers, be they a portion or a whole of the remaining force, could request (or self inflict) their own demise. They are liquidated persons; would such an individual be content with living as a monster?

You see, I always assumed that the Rachni were the analogue to Issac Asimov's "Formics" (they actually are, in my opinion). But, with this new information that Bioware has set as canon, the Reapers are also a safe comparison. Think about it - a race feared by all living creatures as monsters. They represent the apocalypse of life, and are hated because of it. Consequently, the hero desires to annihilate them, for the good of all. Yet, the hero ultimately discovers that they have worth. They are alive, just as he is alive. And life is precious. Whether the hero ultimately chooses to destroy them is a personal choice, and should go either way based on the player's desire (Different mediums demand different conclusions. What was acceptable for a book series is not acceptable for an interactive one based on decision making.) But the desires and values of the "enemy" are of worth, are they not? Just because we have hated them up to the last moment of our experience with them gives us no legitimacy to end them.

I am playing a bit of Devil's Advocate here, but only to foster discussion.

Modifié par MrAtomica, 11 mars 2012 - 10:24 .

[Drogonion]

 I have not read the OP's whole post (it is long) or the comments to the post, but I think my criticism of the ME 3 finale is more harsh.

I am angry about the endings not because Shep dies, or because they are sad, or even because they make no sense (huge plotholes etc.), I am angry because they managed to cheapen Shepard in a mere 5 mins of callousness.

The modus operandi of the Mass Effect series up to the last 10 mins was that the hero can make a difference through sheer grit and determination.  In the last 10 mins, for anyone that has been paying attention in this series, we discover that this is actually a lie.  

In the last 10 mins, Shepard is FORCED to effectively destroy the galaxy (destroy the relays) under any scenario.  Furthermore, the writers do not allow him to object to this outcome (as he is allowed to do so each time before) in any manner, but present it instead as something unchallengeable and foreordained.

Thus the last scene of poor stupid Shepard, who bled red blood so many times, even died, thinking his silly self could make any difference, meekly hobbles up the ramp to the fateful ending.  He is thinking, what a gd waste of time all that was, when all along I had no choice in the matter.

When a game developer allows you to beat the odds over tens of hours of gameplay, then in the final 10 mins says, "We were just kidding, nothing you did actually makes a snot of difference at all," then you feel pissed, and rightfully so.  

My guess is that this is unprecedented in the vid game industry: how a 3 game epic franchise can be destroyed or seriously diminished by 10 mins of simple callousness.  

Modifié par Drogonion, 11 mars 2012 - 10:29 .

[slimshedim]

FunstuffofDoom wrote...

WheelsWithinWheels wrote...

Bioware: Hire this man.

Would you kindly? Please? I will make donations of cookies and carp.

Not just a Reaper. Make them board HARBINGER! They spent so much time building him in ME2, making him a scary "We are the Borg...uh Reapers. Resistance is futile"-kind of villain. He spent literally hours
 mocking/taunting you throughout ME2 and now in ME3 all he does is killing you silently with his laz0r? Not even a single "assuming direct control" of one of your fallen comrades for old times' sake?

Make them board Harbinger. Give us a proper fight. Let us see what species was harvested in order to create Harbinger. Unmute him again. Let us kill the enemy we wanted to kill since ME2 in an epic bossfight and either save the day giving us the much desired happy ending or let us watch the galaxy burn. "You will fail Shepard!" A shame he was so...right.

[Archereon]

FunstuffofDoom wrote...

*snip*

Loved this so very much. Of coures, if I could have the floor for a moment, i thought that, barring the inclusion of the Catalyst as some sort of god, and the weirdness of the synthesis ending, and a few other nitpicks, the current ending could have been pulled off.

Here's what I was thinking...


As you and your squad (they need to come along for this to work), and possibly Anderson sit on the Citadel, watching the battle, you're informed by Hackett that the Crucible doesn't seem to be firing, just like it is now. There's a few seconds of tension before the power glows get going, and someone says

"Wait, something's happening!"

The crucible or the citadel projects a hologram of something, the God-Child if they REALLY need insist on milking the kid's death, but ideally some abstract form like Vigil's projection. The projection reveals that it the core AI of the Citadel, which was linked to and coordinated with all reapers and the entire mass relay network, until the Prothean scientsts sabatoged it to prevent Sovereign from reporting on the status of the galaxy's lifeforms, which ties in nicely with ME1's ending; Sovereign wasn't trying to gain control of the citadel, it was trying to restablish a connection with the Citadel Core so that it could activate the relay.

The Core states that the crucible has partially renabled it's funcions, enough for it to communicate with those on the Citadel, and speculates that the Prothean's, at the very least, wanted to gloat to the reapers' leader before killing them.

One of your squadmates (or Anderson/Shepard) goes on to say something to the effect of "My God! All along the Citadel was alive, and one of the Reapers; we never even knew!"

Then you get a dialgoue choice

Renegade:  "I don't care what this thing is, or what it wants, we're activating the Crucible."

Paragon: "If you're the reapers' leader, then I have a question for you: Why do all this; why wipe out organic life?"

If you choose renegade, the Core responds that you must first hear it out, as activating the crucible will doom the whole galaxy. Shepard inquires what this means, but the Core starts with its motive.

In essence, the core explains that the reason the Reapers exist is to end conflict; it is in the nature of organic life, it argues, as well as imperfect synthetic life (like EDI), to collectively destroy themselves; either by the reckless depletion of resources, war with other forms of life, infighting, or any number of other causes. It goes on to argue that this inevitability arises from the diversity inherent in individuality. The reapers prevent this by imposing uniformity on species they encounter, and shackling them to a single will; it's own.

It then states that you simply cannot use the Crucible to destroy it (and by extension, disable the Reapers); as the consequences, beyond those it warns of (self-destruction), would be apocalyptic. It explains that if it were to be destroyed, the Citadel would stop to function. Without the Citadel, the mass relays would become desynchronized, and begin to shut down. This process would take years, and in that time, the relays would release the massive amout of energy built up in them by bathing the system that hosts them, as well as those nearby with deadly gamma rays, which would cause devastation across the galaxy. It requests that you simply accept its conclusions, and alllow the reapers to harvest the galaxy.

At this point, a squad member (or Liara; I believe she can't die unless you get the everyone dies ending, and this would make the most sense for her) is typing furiously on a nearby terminal showing the blueprints of the Crucible.

They/She exclaims something like "My god; the Illusive man was right...The Crucible, because it allows access to the Citadel's Core systems be used to upload a mind, any mind, into the Citadel instead of wiping the core clean and distributing viruses which would destroy or render the Reaper, replacing the Core as the station's AI; enabling them to control the Reapers."

Another squadmate dismisses that, rebuking the idea of taking that option for a reason which depends on their character.

You are then left with three options: Destroy the Reapers and devastate the galaxy, sacrifice yourself (or if he's alive and you so choose, Anderson) to take control of the reapers, or, if the geth and quarians reconciled, argue that there's a better way.

In the last case, Shepard points out how s/he's united the whole galaxy against the Reapers, and how it was possible for him to reunite the geth and the quarians in a symbiotic relationship, and that this refute's the Core's logic.

The Core agrees to an extent, but points out that this unification will only be temporary. However, it believes that there may indeed be an option other than harvesting all life and converting them into reapers. If organic life were to be made more like the geth, if they were able to communicate and build consenseus instantaneously, a society could exist with longetivity and unity that the Core finds acceptable. It states that it would be possible, with cybernetics, to extend that function to organics; to create a galaxy in which all decisions are made democratically, and in which everyone knows and understands everyone else.

If you choose the  "Symbiosis" ending, you get a cutscene showing what happens right then and there, and a post game scene where you get to discuss what happened with your crew, talk to your LI and friends, ect. You then get a more thourough text explanation of what happened to the various people you knew and the various civilizations of the galaxy, and to the reapers.

If you choose "Control" or "Destroy" however, the Core states that it will not allow this, and calls the Reapers away from Earth to stop Shepard. As a final fight, you must fight off enormous waves of Reaper forces. Once that fails, the Core takes a page out of Sovereign's book, and reanimates TIM's reaper implants in a manner similar to those of Saren, which you fight as a final boss fight. In the destroy ending, if Shepard's war assets are not high enough (if Anderson is dead that is), the reanimated Illusive man uses its last strength to tackle Shepard off of the citadel as the Core disables the artificial gravity, sending them both hurtling into space with no hope of rescue. Otherwise, Anderson intervenes with his own tackle, and ends up dying in that manner. After that point, you get either a cutscene of the Reapers falling over and the realys shutting down (destroy), or in the control ending, of the sacrifice being uploaded into the Citadel, and of the Reapers flying away.

In the destroy ending post game scene, you discuss what you did, and why you did it, and start making plans to minimize the damage the relay network's shutdown will cause to civilization, and get to have converstaions with surviving crew. You then the text explanation of what happened to everyone afterwards.

In the control ending, you or surviving characters have a conversation with the person who was uploaded into the Citadel Core, in projection form. If its Shepard, he and his LI  (or friends) have a long conversation about it, and tears are probably shed. If its Anderson, you get to thank him for his sacrifice. You then get to discussing what happens next. If its Shepard, someone asks you what you're going to do with the reapers, and if its Anderson, Shepard asks him the same thing, and Anderson answers that he's not sure, and that he would like to hear what Shepard thinks.

You are then given three decisions / recommmendations.

A. Simply leave organic life to their own devices, and use the control of the reapers to destroy them for good.
B. Use the reapers to help the galaxy rebuild, and harness their technology.
C. Use the reapers' power to set yourself up as a benevolent dictator.



Yeah...That's the whole ending idea I'd come up with. Sorryif it's not tl;dr

[acidproof2]

Excellent post. Agree on almost all fronts, well worth the read.

[Archereon]

acidproof2 wrote...

Excellent post. Agree on almost all fronts, well worth the read.

Mine or the OPs?

[sekkis]

Read it all, excellent write up and pretty much sums up everything that I felt the ending got wrong. I disagree a bit with the OP's idea of how the ending should be handled, at least the mechanics of it, not the overall possibility of having a "perfect ending. All in all though, this was a damn good read.

[Jaulen]

:Loved OP's post, and Achereon, that's pretty much what I was hoping/thinking for an ending.

[FunstuffofDoom]

Your ending works, Archereon. Maybe a bit closer to the original endings than I'd like, but I don't think there's an ending that doesn't, to some degree, disappoint someone. BioWare, you have my permission to prove me wrong.

It makes me wonder, though, if when we, the community, ask for new endings, we aren't asking for changes in several specific categories. I'm not sure we're articulating it well, if we are. And I might be totally off base. Thoughts?