498 réponses à ce sujet

[agathokakological]

LegendaryBlade wrote...

"I have no problem with how bad the writing is or how many plotholes there are, as long as the ending is very pretty and thematic"

Got it.

Anyone who is satisfied with the endings as they are now have been indoctrinated by BioWare.

[Dragoonlordz]

Malal Belakor wrote...

Phideaux the Barbarian wrote...

I have no problem with Shep dieing in the end. My to biggest complaints are 1) The lack of follow up on what happens to everyone else. I mean, I have been following some of these people since ME1. 2) This is actually my biggest grip. I HATE the fact BW is trying to force me to play MP. It's the only way to see the "good" endings. I hate MP with a passion. One of the reasons that I so enjoy ME is that it is a single player game. Same reason that I enjoy Skyrim and the same reason that I stopped buying Modern Warfare type games. Most people are jerks but give them the anonymity of being online and they become total ass hats.
I played ME2 over and over to see the different choices and the effects they had, bought all the DLC etc. I don't think that I will be going that route with 3. I think one play through is enough. I can't say I hated the the game but I didn't like it nearly as much as the first two.

but you can have the best ending without multiplayer

i don't want to read all the 6 pages... but  Joker and Ida, togheter in a uncorrupted garden... they looks like the new Adam and Eve in the garden of eden (i took the middle path at the end, and what i said makes A LOT of sense)
am I the only one who have thought this?

I was not as concerned about making sense of everything, I just wanted an emotional end to the trilogy not a biography or documentary filling in all the blanks that others did not like left unfilled. All the choices that mattered to me from ME2 and ME1 plus major choices in ME3 prior to the end was enough for me to be content with the choices element of the franchise and title. Maybe I am one of a few who desired that outcome but I was happy to get such.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 16 mars 2012 - 12:00 .

[ERenfield]

Harbinger of your Destiny wrote...
Mass Effect was supposed to be our Citizen Kane, our Star Wars. It was to show the mainstream that video games can give you not only something that is just as good as what a movie or a book can give it can do it better. But because of the endings That all goes to crap.

And that is why I feel the ending is precisely the strongest of all its elements.



Purely for the sake of my point of view being a little clearer, I'm copy/pasting from a post I made on this elsewhere.

...............................................................................................................................................................................................

[The Ben] Kuchera article on Penny Arcade [...] isolates what I think is the other, indeed the major feature of the ME3 ending that makes it not only - per Kuchera - 'worthy of the series', but also an independently great achievement.
Namely that, seen in light of the ending, "the story is now a tragedy, not an adventure" (emphasis mine).

This is a very big deal! Up to the run-to-the-beam scene (arguably - though Thessia already hints otherwise), Mass Effect is a story of a great hero facing impossible odds, and believing they can overcome them. This is reinforced with Sovereign's defeat, then again with the Collector mission, and again via the Crucible MacGuffin - as much for Shepard as for the player.

And then at the end of all things, the truth: this was a lie. There is no way to beat the Reapers, and there never was.


This, ladies and gents, is tragedy ™*. Far from being bad writing, such tragic ™ situations are found in many great masterpieces of literature. More so, this is what the deux ex machina originally was devised to address: the fact that the audience has (to put it mildly) been punched in the gut, and the play must end in some other way than pure hopelessness.

The whole point behind a tragedy - and I stand by my considering Mass Effect a legitimate bearer of the title - is for it to transfigure the audience morally and emotionally, not entertain them. To expose them to the human condition.

And so it always saddens me how people seem to think 'deus ex machina' is an inherently bad narrative device, when it was never intended to be a plot solution, but rather a moral one. By the time the Catalyst intervenes, Shepard has failed. Yet very obviously, Shepard has done more than any other person (being the tragic hero) to fight for his belief. Thus the deus ex machina shows up, not to resolve the plot, but to facilitate Shepard's redemption. (Again: per its original purpose.)

Yet instead of just leaving things there and sticking to the classical blueprint, the writers actually paid tribute to the choice that the Mass Effect series has been all about, by giving Shepard (or more likely the player) a choice on how Shepard is to be redeemed - on how exactly the deus ex machina's benevolence will operate to ensure the plot's non-nihilistic conclusion.

(Wherein all choices they give are bad, precisely because at this point Shepard has failed, and is being thrown a bone by the gods/the Catalyst because of what Shepard is, not because of what Shepard did. In the truest classical fashion, Shepard emerges as the perfect mortal hero, and at the same time that perfect hero is found unable to transcend mortality itself. Where by 'mortality' I don't mean 'Shepard can die', but rather 'Shepard can fail': the theme of classical tragedy.)


I get that people may not have wanted the writers to go all 'transfigurative' on them, and that this whole thing may have felt like they were watching a Roland Emmerich movie, until suddenly Stanley Kubrick showed up. But bad writing? Hardly.

(Short of the literary presentation of the Catalyst sequence, which wasn't exceptional. The sequence itself, however, was.)


tl;dr to everyone's taste (or expectations of empowerment) it may not have been, but the ending of ME3 isn't bad writing.

Or if it is, then I guess the ending of [spoiler redacted] is bad writing too. And let's not even bring up the classics.




*I use the ™ to demarcate the classical sense of the words 'tragedy' and 'tragic' - vs. 'a tragic [sad] accident'. 

Modifié par ERenfield, 16 mars 2012 - 12:33 .

[DarkSpider88]

@ Dragoonlordz

While you may have completely valid opinions, just like everyone is allowed to have. In all honesty your avatar makes it hard to take you seriously.

[Dragoonlordz]

agathokakological wrote...

LegendaryBlade wrote...

"I have no problem with how bad the writing is or how many plotholes there are, as long as the ending is very pretty and thematic"

Got it.

Anyone who is satisfied with the endings as they are now have been indoctrinated by BioWare.

Or maybe we have better self control over our emotions regarding what disappoints us not turning into burning pillars of anger and bitterness and just also different preferences to what we wanted to see at the end of the game.

Shocking I know. 

[Dragoonlordz]

DarkSpider88 wrote...

@ Dragoonlordz

While you may have completely valid opinions, just like everyone is allowed to have. In all honesty your avatar makes it hard to take you seriously.

I know that's why I use it, that and everyone generally says they like it until now.

I'll switch it to my more serious one for you.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 16 mars 2012 - 12:07 .

[trembli0s]

So you're telling me they spent approximately 90 hours developing an epic hero and in the last 10 minutes they decided that they were going to turn him into a tragic hero.

I expect Pixar is furiously writing a script where the positive moral message gets upended in the last 5 minutes for something tragic like throwing all toys into bonfires.

L O L

[ERenfield]

trembli0s wrote...

So you're telling me they spent approximately 90 hours developing an epic hero and in the last 10 minutes they decided that they were going to turn him into a tragic hero.

I expect Pixar is furiously writing a script where the positive moral message gets upended in the last 5 minutes for something tragic like throwing all toys into bonfires.

L O L

I'm telling you (and Ben Kuchera is telling you) that the ending shows him to have been a tragic hero all along.

(Which you are warranted to dislike! I'm just saying the ending isn't as random or as artless as one might think.)


Consider this: at which point in the series was it established to any degree of certainty that you can win the war?

[louislingg]

I am starting to come around more and more on the ending thanks to posts like these, and also a more complete understanding of what BioWare wanted to do with the game.

Or at least I am starting to understand why it is that the developers believe they gave us what they promised us.

[ERenfield]

louislingg wrote...

I am starting to come around more and more on the ending thanks to posts like these, and also a more complete understanding of what BioWare wanted to do with the game.

Or at least I am starting to understand why it is that the developers believe they gave us what they promised us.

If this concerns my post, then I'm quite honoured to have helped achieve this.

(Of course, both Kuchera and myself could be wrong, but Drew Karpyshyn also brought that article up, apparently.)

[Weeboss]

I thought the ending was overall pretty good. I have gripes with Starchild a little bit, but still satisfying after thinking about it for a little.

[leafyFresh]

Even if everyone loved the endings, you have to admit that all 3 choices are all quite similar. From how the game was advertised, I was under the impression that "all 15 possible endings" or however many minor differences there are would be more unique.

[frostajulie]

7 pages and I didn't read them all but I saw a handful of people liked the endings and many people took another opportunity to mourn by vocalizing their loss. Could the people who liked the endings vote on the poll, I would like to see if I really am in the minority or not.

[Uezurii]

This posts is not meant offensive...but i just dont understand...

I dont understand how you can be happy with people being stuck on an unknown planet, with characters being there that could have been killed on Earth in the final run, and ofcourse with the whole fleet just floating there, not having the resources to get back home... Does it leave it open? Sure it does, but only for the impossible to avoid outcome, the fleet nor the stranded Normandy just wont make it. Why was the normandy even in a Relay tunnel anyway and not next to the citadel still figthing the battle?

That you like the ending is great, and the fact that you people apparantly can ignore the huge plot holes and inconsistencies. Dont get me wrong though, the road towards the ending was great, the last few choices are good too, it's just the poor execution of them, and the few minutes that leads up to it and that comes after you make the choice, that just doesn't cut it.

[SteveGarbage]

I honestly spent about 10 minutes standing in the same place on the top of the Citadel trying to figure out what I wanted to do among my three choices. When I finally chose (Synthesis) after it was all I over, I still sat there wondering if I had made the best choice. I wasn't happy or sad or angry or anything, I was just kind of, wondering.

I WAS happy that it wasn't a "The Crucible activates, all the Reapers die and everything is super great and goes back to normal." The perfect ending would have totally been wrong and horrible, in my opinion. Whether Shepard lives or dies wouldn't have mattered. But after that, you can't just WIN and be done with it.

For me, it was the true no-win situation. And I liked that.
After listening to my three options, none of them sounded right. None of them really even sounded good. It came down to me trying to figure out which would be the best for the future. I knew at that point that it wasn't about me and what I wanted, but what might be best for the galaxy as a whole.

Destroy seemed to put everyone danger in the future from AI.
Control seemed like a major risk - what if I couldn't control the Reapers. And then they'd still be out there.
Synthesis seemed like the best option, although combining all organic and synthetic life seemed so radical I couldn't wrap my head around it.

Maybe I'm just too easy going and don't get so invested in these games like a lot of people do to the point of pure outrage that I see in post after post - but I almost think it's a case of "too big to succeed." I don't know that there is anything BioWare could have done to close this series perfectly. There was so much hype, I don't know how they could live up to those expectations.

[Wowlock]

ERenfield wrote...

trembli0s wrote...

So you're telling me they spent approximately 90 hours developing an epic hero and in the last 10 minutes they decided that they were going to turn him into a tragic hero.

I expect Pixar is furiously writing a script where the positive moral message gets upended in the last 5 minutes for something tragic like throwing all toys into bonfires.

L O L

I'm telling you (and Ben Kuchera is telling you) that the ending shows him to have been a tragic hero all along.

(Which you are warranted to dislike! I'm just saying the ending isn't as random or as artless as one might think.)


Consider this: at which point in the series was it established to any degree of certainty that you can win the war?

Being a tragical story is one thing....

Bringing out of series elements ( yes, we never heard of any GOD-like AI in the series up until last 5 minutes ) to change the theme and the tone of the series...is just a weak and nonsensical way to do it.

If they wanted to change the story to a tragic one, they failed at it because it is not tragic...it is Tragically nonsensical....

[Vedexent]

If you have to EXPLAIN your art, you failed.

If your art angers your audience, it shows that you didn't understand your audience.

Art is about communication, expression, and education.

If you try to make a "statement" and it misses your audience, you've failed.

If you've developed a new "artistic expression" and you can't lead your audience to it, educate them up to understanding it, you've failed.

Are the ME3 endings "artistic"? Perhap - but given that the "art" has been missed by a SIZEABLE chunk of the audience, it's failed art at best.

Damage control threads trying to convince people that the endings that made them feel like crap are really "good" after all, aside.

Modifié par Vedexent, 16 mars 2012 - 01:41 .

[Norrax]

PiEman wrote...

Do you people not understand that we don't like the endings because of the fact that they make the rest of the choices pointless, and not just how they were written?

They said there would be a large number of endings, based on how people played. Instead, there were three based on a last second choice in the last 10 minutes.

ahmen!
, and to people who liked the ending past andersons death............well i'm sure satan will be adding a 10th level of hell for it soon.......

[Dragoonlordz]

frostajulie wrote...

7 pages and I didn't read them all but I saw a handful of people liked the endings and many people took another opportunity to mourn by vocalizing their loss. Could the people who liked the endings vote on the poll, I would like to see if I really am in the minority or not.

It doesn't matter whether we are the majority or minority what matters is that we gained enjoyment and are happy with what we recieved and that made our purchase worthwhile. A poll on these forums will go very much against those of us who enjoyed the ending.

However coming at it from the same perspective that many fans will be, new ones and those not present here. Those who buy games to enjoy them, casually and not hardcore lore or die hard ME fans. A large amount of the sales for ME3 will be based on that group though the die hard fans will say it is not so because they may feel it marginalizes them. I am quite sure many will feel the same way as Gabe did here and ourselves (even though we have been long time fans of the franchise and developer) from that group but those people do not spend their time here, do not vote in polls and do not care much for what a Bioware or Mass Effect fanatic would say (the silent majority as it were numbering in the millions), but will will not know what they feel because they are the kind who do not care for polls and making statements on developer forums.


What matters is that we enjoyed it.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 16 mars 2012 - 02:00 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Norrax wrote...

PiEman wrote...

Do you people not understand that we don't like the endings because of the fact that they make the rest of the choices pointless, and not just how they were written?

They said there would be a large number of endings, based on how people played. Instead, there were three based on a last second choice in the last 10 minutes.

ahmen!
, and to people who liked the ending past andersons death............well i'm sure satan will be adding a 10th level of hell for it soon.......

Put it this way we are the happy ones, we were entertained and therefore we are not the ones filled with rage or anger, disappointment or depressed. We kind of win in this regard. We are happy regardless of if we have to visit the 10th level of hell because we enjoyed it. 

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 16 mars 2012 - 01:47 .

[Dragoonlordz]

SteveGarbage wrote...

I honestly spent about 10 minutes standing in the same place on the top of the Citadel trying to figure out what I wanted to do among my three choices. When I finally chose (Synthesis) after it was all I over, I still sat there wondering if I had made the best choice. I wasn't happy or sad or angry or anything, I was just kind of, wondering.

I WAS happy that it wasn't a "The Crucible activates, all the Reapers die and everything is super great and goes back to normal." The perfect ending would have totally been wrong and horrible, in my opinion. Whether Shepard lives or dies wouldn't have mattered. But after that, you can't just WIN and be done with it.

For me, it was the true no-win situation. And I liked that.
After listening to my three options, none of them sounded right. None of them really even sounded good. It came down to me trying to figure out which would be the best for the future. I knew at that point that it wasn't about me and what I wanted, but what might be best for the galaxy as a whole.

Destroy seemed to put everyone danger in the future from AI.
Control seemed like a major risk - what if I couldn't control the Reapers. And then they'd still be out there.
Synthesis seemed like the best option, although combining all organic and synthetic life seemed so radical I couldn't wrap my head around it.

Maybe I'm just too easy going and don't get so invested in these games like a lot of people do to the point of pure outrage that I see in post after post - but I almost think it's a case of "too big to succeed." I don't know that there is anything BioWare could have done to close this series perfectly. There was so much hype, I don't know how they could live up to those expectations.

It was exactly the same for me the way I played was through the eyes of my character, not like mentioned before an overlord who knows the result of every action. For my character that choices was very hard and I too walked back and forth and my character realised that the time he was taking was costing the lives of those around him which could be seen clearly through the battle raging outside in plain sight.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 16 mars 2012 - 02:01 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Vedexent wrote...


If you have to EXPLAIN your art, you failed.

If your art angers your audience, it shows that you didn't understand your audience.

Art is about communication, expression, and education.

If you try to make a "statement" and it misses your audience, you've failed.

If you've developed a new "artistic expression" and you can't lead your audience to it, educate them up to understanding it, you've failed.

Are the ME3 endings "artistic"? Perhap - but given that the "art" has been missed by a SIZEABLE chunk of the audience, it's failed art at best.

Damage control threads trying to convince people that the endings that made them feel like crap are really "good" after all, aside.

This thread is not in the slightest what you imply it to be, it is a space where those who did enjoy it expressed why both for Bioware and for like minded people. This is not a thread for convincing others and never has been though many have come in who did not like the ending and tried to turn it into such. They have come in asking me questions like somehow I am their personal genie and can magically fix their enjoyment of it just because I did find enjoyment myself. I do not have the same problems as them, their problems with it are not my problems and their constant trying to convince me I am wrong in that I enjoyed what I did is immature and silly. I can't fix their problems and issues and have no intention of doing so, I only stated why for me it was not a problem on the first post in the thread. 

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 16 mars 2012 - 02:02 .

[ERenfield]

Wowlock wrote...
Being a tragical story is one thing....

Bringing out of series elements ( yes, we never heard of any GOD-like AI in the series up until last 5 minutes ) to change the theme and the tone of the series...is just a weak and nonsensical way to do it.

If they wanted to change the story to a tragic one, they failed at it because it is not tragic...it is Tragically nonsensical....

With respect, I would point you to my previous comments on what any deus ex machina is meant to achieve.


In general, I'm not here trying to tell anyone they have no right to reject the ending, because it's art. I am just explaining why it may be possible to like the ending in a way that doesn't just boil down to fanboyish ignorance.

(Much like there are reasons to dislike the ending that do not boil down to a childish tantrum, even if it is art.)


Indeed, as mentioned, whether the ending is successful art is a separate topic, and one sensitive to whether you think, as Vedexent does, that art must be well-received by the majority of its audience to be considered succesful.

Modifié par ERenfield, 16 mars 2012 - 05:46 .

[Malal Belakor]

Norrax wrote...

PiEman wrote...

Do you people not understand that we don't like the endings because of the fact that they make the rest of the choices pointless, and not just how they were written?

They said there would be a large number of endings, based on how people played. Instead, there were three based on a last second choice in the last 10 minutes.

ahmen!
, and to people who liked the ending past andersons death............well i'm sure satan will be adding a 10th level of hell for it soon.......

the choices weren't pointless... they influence the story DURING the story, the way your Shepard lives... would it be better with some differences between the 3 endings? of course
is it pointless making different choices during the game? false

[Subject M]

I am happy for you OP, that you enjoyed the ending. I don't think anyone have any problem with it until you run into the starchild. I think we can even learn to accept the starchild as long as we cam get some more answers and avoid the three "solutions". I feel like Žižek asking for another pill.

www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par Subject M, 16 mars 2012 - 11:20 .