873 réponses à ce sujet

[Denora]

OP, nice formatting. I respect your opinion on liking the ending. I'm also glad people have been calm and civil on this thread (I swear one more flame war and I'm leaving the forums ,)

Now respectively, I do feel some of your points are very true, however are not really relevant to pro-ending standpoint. I love the over-arching themes and the larger issues that Bioware addresses in their games is part of what make them great.

Also, I take certain issue with some of said points. We're divided on the forum, a forum where we're all fans of Bioware's games regardless of views on the ending. Some of the points again divide us into them and us.

Please, NONE of you would be here if you didn't enjoy Bioware's games overall.

Also in regards to the Retake, most members honestly try to be civil, the few that attack Devs/Bioware or Harass other members just make the overall look bad, so on their behalf I apologize.

I've been a fan of Bioware's games for a long time and the part that I love is the interactivity and customization allowed for me to take.

This isn't just Shepard or just the spirit monk or the warden, this is my character that I made. They're the car and I'm the driver if you understand.

Do I want to help the mages? Yes, so then I help free the mages from the Circle forever changing the rest of the Game.

Overall Mass Effect is no different. However the feeling of choice of the ending was not akin to that of my Shepard, it felt like my car was hijacked onto a new highway.
The endings were not what I ever expected. It honestly felt like the game didn't end until the credits rolled.

I personally chose the destroy ending. When I played, I still haven't gone to BSN except to check at the Galaxy Map and download the sound track. So I had no idea of the ending. I fully thought that the boy was lying about destroying all synthetic life and only wanted me to avoid killing them/him.

I saw the gasp of life and expected an epilogue, but sadly I wasn't given one. That's all I wanted an epilogue. You used the example of Midclorians from Star Wars t state that a good story doesn't need everything explained. I understand that, but I feel personally that an entire part of the story is missing. I just feels wrong, to me.

All I've wanted was closure, I feel my Shepard fought for the Galaxy, but also for a more personal reason, his/her LI and friends. I can understand the self-sacrifice for them but, mostly the destruction of the relays, the citadel, and most of Earth? In a game all about choice, no way do I want t choose that.

I respect Artistic Creativity very much. My Girlfriend is an Artist trying to work for Pixar and I'm a Programmer/Writer trying to work for Bioware someday. However history and even modern society is filled with thousands of examples of art that's changed based on the request of critics or patrons whether to sell or get in a Gallery.

The Ending of Mass Effect is no different, merely the Audience and type of Critic. The Ending is a work of art with fans as critics, and some want change, and some do not.

On a Final Note (I apologize for length), I hope we can get along better, I know no less then 7 people and 4 friends who left the forums merely due to the maturity level and lack of cool headed civil mindedness in these discussions.

Modifié par Denora, 22 mars 2012 - 01:17 .

[RiouHotaru]

Baronesa wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

Mr Indivisible wrote...

Two things I find amusing about the pro-ending crowd:

1. They don't want us to have additional endings, at worst more variety to the endings (and at best, a whole new chapter!) means more re-playability, and potentially extra content.

2. They defend artistic integrity in a medium that is purely interactive, TV is not, Paintings are not, Books are not. Games are a fully interactive experience, start to finish, and as such involve the end user (note its called user) in its world and creative process. Why shouldn't we have input? (Even non-interactive mediums have input from the public, seriously here guys)

I won't say anything about the second point, but in the first point, it's that the endings as is?  Are fine.  I'd prefer to see more CONTEXT.  To see an explaination for what takes place.  I mean, the idea of the Catalyst would likely be far more palatable if there was more background information.

But there's no reason to completely rewrite the ending.

I'm sorry Riou... but for someone who quite vocally complained about the story direction taken on another game, because it negated the way the player's characters would react in that situation, and shoehorned us into playing the stupid game and losing by default (Alexis Cole, Statesman, Sister Psyche), I found it a bit hard to believe you accept endings that basically negate the way Shepard has been presented during not 1, but 3 games, going against the odds, rejecting the offers made by Saren and Harbinger, keeping true to self determination.. to finally simply give up and accept the logic of a genocidal god-child?

Hello Nesa 

Anyway, there's a difference.  With CoX, we're given all the context and all the background, but it doesn't matter, we're still forced into making terrible choices.  We know the who/what/when/where/why in that case.

Here, we don't.  I'll openly admit, I think the Catalyst doesn't have enough background.  So in this case, you can't say for certain the decisions are bad decisions when we don't know enough about what's happening.  The endings would likely make MUCH more sense if there was some context to go with them.  Like we had with ME2 (I blew up the base because TIM had a consistent record of being a lying jackass.  Thus, context.)

[Teeebs]

Pro-enders or EAWare insiders.....hmmm

[Ender99]

Mad-Hamlet wrote...

No, no, no, let them speak. The Pro-Enders (Not to be confused with the Pro-Enders, supporters of Ender Wiggins, Xenoicide Extraordinaire) should speak, supported in their speech and praised for their commitment to what they value...whatever that is as I have no intention of listing to anything they have to say.
Their is greatness in diversity; complexity in form, grace in friction and difference. Options palpitate beneath the surface of reality waiting to blossom forth in a cornucopia of colors, a complete spectrum of possibility. The entire hue of choice like...red, blue and green...and the rest too, should be valued. (You see what I did there? I saw what I did there. Yeah, I went there)

I actually don't understand any of their objections but that's fine- though it sounds like if they ever buy a car and it's a lemon they have to take it to preserve manufacturers' integrity. I don't get it, not even a little but I accept it.

I'm just not changing my mind.

Hey, Ender didn't know what he was doing when he committed the Xenoicide!

As for the individuals activily objecting to an optional DLC, well, S\\some people just like controversy...and some people work for Bioware. Take your pick.

Hold the line for as long as it takes.

[ticklefist]

HenchxNarf wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

ticklefist wrote...

OK fine. We don't have a right to ask people to change the ending. Fine. We have the right to wave money in their face though. Now which do you think matters more to your precious artists?

I'm pretty sure 50,000 won't make EA bat an eyelash about sales. You all could not buy anything from them and it wouldn't make a difference. 3.5+ Million people bought the game. 50k is nothing.

Too bad you're not pretty sure it's 50,000.

Even if it was more, it's a fraction of the sales.

If it were the wold against just you it would still "only be a fraction" of the sales. That's not an argument. I really have no problem with you liking the ending. I have a problem with you skirting around the obvious to make your points seem more valid.

[JasonC Shepard]

CavScout wrote...

JasonC Shepard wrote...

CavScout wrote...
You're presuming an artist advertising his art is no longer an artist. It is simply a false premise. Nothing wrong with an artist promoting their art.

Edit to add: Art is not limited to the visual medium... Beethoven would have an issue with that.

I'm not saying he/she is no longer an artist.  I'm just saying why defend their integrity if they degrade it on their own?
EDIT:  I'm sorry, I meant to say that visual media was one of the forms of art.

Again you are presuming that artists who promote their art are somehow degrading it. The premise is false.

But isn't there enough promotion with the Mass Effect 3 ads and with the actual game?  My view on promotion is, if you can't win someone over with the experience you've already provided then there is no reason to further promote it.  Pushing a consumer to buy more of your work isn't right from my stand point.  They either enjoy it and will buy more, or not.

[Cloaking_Thane]

Why cant organics and synthetics co-exist? Shep proves they can

[ashdrake1]

KTheAlchemist wrote...

I'm sorry, but this entire thing simply feels like arguing for the sake of arguing. If there is DLC which adds to or creates the possibility of new endings, and you don't care for it...

Don't. Install. The DLC.

It's really just that easy. The rest your post is just a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between player and developer on games...they are art, yes, but a fundamentally different sort of art.

And the real bottom line here is that Bioware lied to us. They sold us an ending experience that they apparently had no intention to provide. You can't hide that behind "artistic integrity".

Don't install the DLC has nothing to do with artistic integrity.  This whole movement is a giant leap forward in mediocrity.  Why try something deep, when shallow sells.

[111987]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Why cant organics and synthetics co-exist? Shep proves they can

The fact that for out of the 300 years the Geth have been in existence, they've been at odds against organics, disproves your assertion. A week of cooperation diesn't guarantee anything in the long term.

[pomrink]

ashdrake1 wrote...

KTheAlchemist wrote...

I'm sorry, but this entire thing simply feels like arguing for the sake of arguing. If there is DLC which adds to or creates the possibility of new endings, and you don't care for it...

Don't. Install. The DLC.

It's really just that easy. The rest your post is just a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between player and developer on games...they are art, yes, but a fundamentally different sort of art.

And the real bottom line here is that Bioware lied to us. They sold us an ending experience that they apparently had no intention to provide. You can't hide that behind "artistic integrity".

Don't install the DLC has nothing to do with artistic integrity.  This whole movement is a giant leap forward in mediocrity.  Why try something deep, when shallow sells.

It's not deep though.

[Mahrac]

this thread is like an all out brawl, minus the violence

[Ashilana]

If we accept that ME3 was art that should not changed.... this means that the take home messages from the ending are

A) The Illusive Man was right, even if he was indoctrinated to think the way he did.

Free will is unimportant, all life in the universe has to be fundamentally altered without consent.

C) Massive genocide is a great option... it even rewards you by living!

[chkchkchk]

MintyCool wrote...

We feel it's not the public's right to demand that the fiction of the Mass Effect Universe be altered just because they disagree with narratives conclusion. If changes are made to the fiction; we feel the repercussions will send devastating ripples throughout the entire industry.

I didn't see this thread before I made my own.  These forums are wild!  But Mass Effect is closer to participatory art.  This isn't ordinary fiction created by a single author in isolation.

With an artist-audience relationship so intimate, it's only natural that the audience will be moved strongly.  All the anger and passion we're seeing is a direct result of this.  The outcry is exactly what Bioware should have foreseen, because it is exactly the kind of passion they set out to cultivate.  You cannot draw the audience in so deeply and not expect to get a reaction.

...

The Mass Effect trilogy isn't the private work of a hermit who lived and died without ever showcasing his work.  The Mass Effect trilogy is a unique work of participatory art, and in this kind of art the relationship between artist and audience is as intimate as you can get.  It is a step below collaboration.  Everyone becomes invested in what's created.  It's only natural, because it is the whole point. 

[CavScout]

pomrink wrote...

CavScout wrote...

pomrink wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KTheAlchemist wrote...

I'm sorry, but this entire thing simply feels like arguing for the sake of arguing. If there is DLC which adds to or creates the possibility of new endings, and you don't care for it...

Don't. Install. The DLC.

It's really just that easy.

Let test that premise: If you don't like the games endings and you don't care for them...
Don't. Install. The Game.

Was it really just that easy?

That argument is invalid. The game was already purchased.

Oh really? How will one know they won't like the DLC without purchasing it then?

Again, invalid argument. Endgame DLC will be released to much fanfair. It is not possible to preorder DLC. People will be knowledgeable about it far before they buy it.  Ending leaks were said to be incorrect. They were accurate.

The argument is valid. You're saying folks should buy something they don't like. Except you won't hold your self/side to the same "rule". At best you pandering with crappy logic at worst just a hard-on hypocrite.

If "don't buy it if you don't like it" is valid for the DLC it's valid for the game as well. Hell, the game had "much fanfair" too. Yet here you are, with it purchased, crying to high-heaven about how much you dislike it.

[Tyrzun]

Denora it's sad they left. That's what the powers that be want. That's why there are people that attack the Retake movement. They WANT them to just go away, because if they do... they lose.

It's why all of the paid for websites attack us as well. Insult after insult and even the PR moves by Bioware are insults. Claiming we are a small portion when we are the majority according to all of the player reviews and polls.

Then the Enders come on here and further say we are bad blah blah blah. The side that gets attacked the most is easily the Retake movement. So, I totally understand some wanting to fight back. However, that doesn't excuse insulting another poster, personally attacking a Bioware staff member, or making any kind of threats etc..

The OPs original post is an attack of Retake because it's pretending Retake is about something it's not. Changing the argument is an attack.

This is about false advertising by Bioware. Which is unethical at the least. That's it. None of this "like" or dislike the 3 generic endings matters at all.

[hardcoregmr]

As a gamer who did not like any of the endings (synthesis included) I think the real winner here is: Gamers! Beyond the petty differences in liking certain aspects of gaming the news that the ening will be updated says that gamers do have a voice with respectable Devs. I think all gamers (especailly the more reasonable fans) condemn anyone who would malaciously troll a dev, and its a sign of the industries growth that reasonable gamers and devs can have an open dialouge about content.
Not that I think gamers should start forming petitions and Retake "X" movements to accomplish this end in every instance, but I do think that it shows a level of artistic flexiblity to actively listen to fan feedback and then in some way attempt to accomodate that. All I can ask for now is that they take the time to look at all the endings plot holes and fill them with substanative story that has been the staple of the ME franchise since the very beginning.
Bioware has taken a huge step in winning back my business, not because they are going to change the ending but because they are listening and attempting to find a middle ground to an obviously troubling and divisive issue.

In short, Thanks Bioware! Winner: Gamers! Everyone else is just polarizing an issue that by this time next month will hopefully be a thing of the past, covered up by the awesomeness of ME3 and endings that everyone can enjoy.

[Mahrac]

111987 wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Why cant organics and synthetics co-exist? Shep proves they can

The fact that for out of the 300 years the Geth have been in existence, they've been at odds against organics, disproves your assertion. A week of cooperation diesn't guarantee anything in the long term.

they've been at odds because organics were unwilling to co-exist. now the quarians have rannoch, and they are learning to get along

[Cloaking_Thane]

111987 wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Why cant organics and synthetics co-exist? Shep proves they can

The fact that for out of the 300 years the Geth have been in existence, they've been at odds against organics, disproves your assertion. A week of cooperation diesn't guarantee anything in the long term.

Clearly we played far different games. I dont even know where to address it but lets start here

The quarians started the war, and once legion uploaded the complete consensus all was well

[rhyddhau]

Oh good, it's turned into an "Us vs. Them" thing amongst the community. That's mature and helpful.

[Joush]

111987 wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Why cant organics and synthetics co-exist? Shep proves they can

The fact that for out of the 300 years the Geth have been in existence, they've been at odds against organics, disproves your assertion. A week of cooperation diesn't guarantee anything in the long term.

The Geth stopped fighting the Quarians when the Quarians left orbit and stayed in their own small area of space. So they had a few decades of war followed by 250+ years of peaceful coexsistance, followed by attacking organics only under the control of Reapers. EDI never, when allowed to act as a free willed being, made an attempt to oppose all organic life. 

[CavScout]

KTheAlchemist wrote...

CavScout wrote...

KTheAlchemist wrote...

I'm sorry, but this entire thing simply feels like arguing for the sake of arguing. If there is DLC which adds to or creates the possibility of new endings, and you don't care for it...

Don't. Install. The DLC.

It's really just that easy.

Let test that premise: If you don't like the games endings and you don't care for them...
Don't. Install. The Game.

Was it really just that easy?

Do you want to be taken seriously? Or do you want to be seen as a troll? Kudos for not addressing the rest of my post and taking the quote out of context.

At any rate, funny you should bring that up, actually. Game development is an industry that has built up, over time, a system that prevents customer recourse if dissatisfied with a product. Especially if you are, like me, a PC gamer. It's one of the many things that have built up to the level of upset...I think that perhaps the ending of ME3 is really the log that broke the camel's back rather than necessarily the sum total of the reason for the upset. Both for Bioware personally, and for the games industry as well.

That said...your suggestion even beyond that is nonsensical. If they release an optional DLC that adds new endings, and you have the option not to install it, what do you lose?

If nothing is done, what the rest of us lose is a satisfactory ending, and the multiple meaningful-to-choice endings we were promised by Bioware.

If a DLC that adds new endings is released and you don't install it, you still get to keep the endings that you ostensibly prefer. You lose nothing.

Again, this is why it feels like arguing for the sake of arguing.

If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.

If "don't buy it" is valid for one product, it's valid for another. Don't be pissed if your ill-conceived retort was turned against you.

[ashdrake1]

pomrink wrote...

ashdrake1 wrote...

KTheAlchemist wrote...

I'm sorry, but this entire thing simply feels like arguing for the sake of arguing. If there is DLC which adds to or creates the possibility of new endings, and you don't care for it...

Don't. Install. The DLC.

It's really just that easy. The rest your post is just a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between player and developer on games...they are art, yes, but a fundamentally different sort of art.

And the real bottom line here is that Bioware lied to us. They sold us an ending experience that they apparently had no intention to provide. You can't hide that behind "artistic integrity".

Don't install the DLC has nothing to do with artistic integrity.  This whole movement is a giant leap forward in mediocrity.  Why try something deep, when shallow sells.

It's not deep though.

Bull.  I have never seen the speculation for what occurs after the end, or outright conspiracy theory's that this game has generated.  It's awesome that you did not think about what path to take for the future of a civilization, but I had really had to contemplate what path I chose.

[dointime85]

MintyCool wrote...
We defend creative risk and artistic integrity in all mediums of art.

We defend conventional integrity by holding the producers accountable to their promises. Plus, you express a limited view of what characterizes the artistic process.

We feel it's not the public's right to demand that the fiction of the Mass Effect Universe be altered just because they disagree with narratives conclusion.

We can demand whatever we want (free speech ftw), we just don't have a right to see our demands fulfilled.

If changes are made to the fiction; we feel the repercussions will send devastating ripples throughout the entire industry.

Like developers taking more care to eliminate logical errors and stop making false pre-release promises?


Why I don't feel the ending works on a philosophical, thematic level (has been posted often, so the short version):

- The choices are given by an ai-deity which we must trust without reason, and which shows not even the tiniest bit of remorse (which is important to me) over aeons of genocide justified by a very disturbing logic
- Therefore, there's reason to suspect that control doesn't break the cycle, synthesis works like reaper tech implants (cf. Saren/ Greyson), plus it eliminates all diversity, which has been such a massive theme in all the Mass Effect games (assembling the diverse crew in ME2, and the species in ME3) Destroy presumably destroys all the geth and EDI (again, if we're supposed to believe god child).

The synthetics vs. organics theme was featured heavily in ME1, but the reason the theme doesn't work out very well in the final choice is that neither one really satisfyingly addresses what you have learned through EDI and the geth (if you took the paragon route) and because you are given the choice by your genocidal enemy, without even being able to point out the obvious flaws in his logic. The lack of trust in the reliability of this entity destroys all philosophical pondering you might give the decision.

Also, the synthetics vs. organics conflict had already been lifted to be nothing but one aspect of more general themes: unity in diversity, tolerance vs prejudice, taking risks by trusting potentially dangerous enemies, achieving the impossible through cooperation.

It's funny. As I'm writing this I actually become aware of how close they actually came to writing a great ending. Maybe Mac Walters' originally written parts that were cut would have been all that was needed to make me a pro-ending guy (speculation for everyone!). All these choices are reflected the only problem is that godchild has operated on such a horrendous logic and it's really unclear why he's giving us all these choices (other than: your fleet is so strong it's threatening me). 

This desperate need to dig up plot holes and inconsistencies from the hard core is entirely unhealthy for the series and its fans. All stories have inconsistencies, stories you tell to your friends are punched up exaggerations of what really happened.

all stories have them, me1 and me2, the novels, but me3 had a few too many and too obvious.

[Arthorius]

111987 wrote...

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Why cant organics and synthetics co-exist? Shep proves they can

The fact that for out of the 300 years the Geth have been in existence, they've been at odds against organics, disproves your assertion. A week of cooperation diesn't guarantee anything in the long term.

The fact that they spent these 300 years without trying to destroy their creators, the fact that they willingly spared them after the war, and the fact that it took Reaper influence to make them attack organics, disproves Ventkid assertion. 

[GodChildInTheMachine]

Cloaking_Thane wrote...

Why cant organics and synthetics co-exist? Shep proves they can

Listen boy... yer doin sum o that galdurn thinkin that gets people in trouble. Just accept the message of the great Space Racist Demiurge and pipe down naw!