220 réponses à ce sujet

[WarBaby2]

Ahm... no. Thanks for asking, though. :-)

[balance5050]

CronoDragoon wrote...

skaye wrote...

As a general point, do you think that maybe people are a little addicted to the idea of 'closure'? I'm guessing that maybe the people who don't like these endings are the same folks who didn't enjoy the Inception or Sopranos endings?

Inception's ending fit the theme of the movie, which was reality vs. illusion. You are left to wonder whether or not Leo really is in reality, or still trapped in dreams, which was the central theme of the movie. Haven't seen Sopranos.

Unless there is a specific reason why a story leaves out closure, closure needs to be there as a part of the narrative structure.

Yeah, its not like they would put out a DLC that was actually back in reality, because the ending was actally a dream/ test  by Harbinger to indoctrinate/inecept Shepard....that was sarcasm.

[Eirnae]

I respect your opinion, skaye, and agree to disagree.

[Gau]

Meshaber wrote...

Gau wrote...

Way too many people didn't play the ME2 DLC. In "The Arrival" you delay the reaper invasion by destroying a mass relay in a colonial Batarian system at the edge of the galaxy. The massive amount of energy stored in the relay wipes out the system killing over 300,000 colonists. The result of this is the reason you start off ME3 as decommissioned, and part of the side conversations about why the Batarians are so ticked off at you.

TLDR: In ME universe destroying a mass effect relay creates a MASSIVE explosion.

We are all aware. We are also aware that asteroids were not slammed into the relays, and they were not destroyed by sheer force, which is apparent if you watch the ending, so there is no reason to believe this would happen. It's like saying that just because cars in hollywood explode if they are stopped by crashing into a tree, they should also explode just by parking them, because the important thing is that stopping leads to explosion.

Cars don't explode if you crash them into a tree, its called pyrotechnics/special effects/etc.

Compare it to a battery (albeit this is a relatively small explosion).  If you throw a battery into a fire you'll get an explosion.  If you lightly place a battery into a fire - same thing.  Force doesn't matter in many explosions.

[Themanclaw]

Collaborative project between "Lucir" and I.
Alternative Paragon Ending with Tali Romance

[Meshaber]

Gau wrote...

Meshaber wrote...

Gau wrote...

Way too many people didn't play the ME2 DLC. In "The Arrival" you delay the reaper invasion by destroying a mass relay in a colonial Batarian system at the edge of the galaxy. The massive amount of energy stored in the relay wipes out the system killing over 300,000 colonists. The result of this is the reason you start off ME3 as decommissioned, and part of the side conversations about why the Batarians are so ticked off at you.

TLDR: In ME universe destroying a mass effect relay creates a MASSIVE explosion.

We are all aware. We are also aware that asteroids were not slammed into the relays, and they were not destroyed by sheer force, which is apparent if you watch the ending, so there is no reason to believe this would happen. It's like saying that just because cars in hollywood explode if they are stopped by crashing into a tree, they should also explode just by parking them, because the important thing is that stopping leads to explosion.

Cars don't explode if you crash them into a tree, its called pyrotechnics/special effects/etc.

Compare it to a battery (albeit this is a relatively small explosion).  If you throw a battery into a fire you'll get an explosion.  If you lightly place a battery into a fire - same thing.  Force doesn't matter in many explosions.

Cars in hollywood.

[QuarianHIV]

If you really loved the endings, you'd be on your 4th playthrough by now, and you'd even be skipping meals, much less spend time posting here.

Get lost, liar.

[Tequila Man]

Zen_Mojo wrote...

I used to wonder how people could get so many posts in threads saying they liked the endings. Then I realize 9 out of 10 of those posts are people arguing with them.

Hehehe.

[balance5050]

Gau wrote...

Meshaber wrote...

Gau wrote...

Way too many people didn't play the ME2 DLC. In "The Arrival" you delay the reaper invasion by destroying a mass relay in a colonial Batarian system at the edge of the galaxy. The massive amount of energy stored in the relay wipes out the system killing over 300,000 colonists. The result of this is the reason you start off ME3 as decommissioned, and part of the side conversations about why the Batarians are so ticked off at you.

TLDR: In ME universe destroying a mass effect relay creates a MASSIVE explosion.

We are all aware. We are also aware that asteroids were not slammed into the relays, and they were not destroyed by sheer force, which is apparent if you watch the ending, so there is no reason to believe this would happen. It's like saying that just because cars in hollywood explode if they are stopped by crashing into a tree, they should also explode just by parking them, because the important thing is that stopping leads to explosion.

Cars don't explode if you crash them into a tree, its called pyrotechnics/special effects/etc.

Compare it to a battery (albeit this is a relatively small explosion).  If you throw a battery into a fire you'll get an explosion.  If you lightly place a battery into a fire - same thing.  Force doesn't matter in many explosions.

"The ariival" DLC was basically just a huge clue.

[Cobra5]

No, I don't LOVE them. I don't really see what everyone is up in arms about, either. I think they're fine, but it was a little predictable.

The only thing I don't get is where was the Normandy going and why was the crew on it?

[Ivikatasha]

So you loved the random teleporting members that probably should have died as they were next to you running when the reaper blast hit? Yet they randomly appear on the normady unharmed in some random location.

Plot holes are good?

[healed1337]

GodChildInTheMachine wrote...

But you would literally have to be brain dead to accept the ME3 ending for its (lack of) complexity and narrative logic.

Uh, being literally brain dead would mean that your brain doesn't function at all. It means that you can't even comprehend the difference between red and blue even if your eyes can sense the difference.

Don't get me wrong, the ending does have problems, but I appreciate the concept behind it and haven't seen many complaints that can't be defended against.

[KotorEffect3]

I didn't like the endings but the melodramatic over the top way people are reacting to them is just out of control.

[DirectorStormchaser1]

Tequila Man wrote...

HOW MANY TIMES....

WHY....

STRENGTH! Give me STRENGTH....


YOU... YOU.... NERFHERDER.


We don't want Cindarella endings. WE WANT ONES THAT MAKE SENSE AND RESPECT US AS CUSTOMERS AND ADULTS.

It did make sense it was final Indoctrination.

Here since you are an obviously drunk from Tequila.

Proof the ending is Indoctrination.

Let us start with Mass Effect 1. EDEN PRIME. "When the ship landed it emitted some type of signal that bore into my head". That was the start of Indoctrination on Shepherd.

Mass Effect 1 Virmire. Again the signal was emitting when Saren fled from battle. Shepherd again being close to signals which caused indoctrination.

Mass Effect 2: The implants Reaper Tech.

Mass Effect 2: Arrival locked in a Reaper artifact room which bore into Shepherd's head the Reaper fleet coming.

Mass Effect 2: Collector Base with human Reaper attacking Shepherd. More and more Shepherd will somehow be affected by Indoctrination.

Mass Effect 3: The attack Shepherd knew they were already at Earth.

And, all the encounters with Reapers and Reaper Tech would have been too much for Shepherd to handle why he had those "dreams".

Which brings this up.

After being hit by Harbinger's laser, look behind you. There are 3 trees from the dream which were not there running down the hill.

Going through Conduit with no vehicle. Need protection from vehicle armor to go through Conduit. Please refer to Mass Effect 1. Mass Effect 1 you run through Conduit on Ilum, you die.

Illusive Man has gun just appear in his hand. All NPCs has visible weapons where they were if they were being used. Illusive Man is a dream.

And, best of all when he meets Catalyst. "I am the one that Controls the Reapers". In reality Harbinger "Controls the Reapers".

What does Legion say in the Geth Playform interface "I appear as a pleasant form to your eyes".

Shepherd saw that Catalyst was Harbinger he would not be so eager to be indoctrinated.

Psychology 101: Dreams are in reverse of reality. The colors would be reverse. Destroying Repears, Paragon which makes Shepherd not become indoctrinated. Controlling Reapers, Renegade which makes Shepherd become indoctrinated. Third choice is what Saren probably chose when becoming indoctrinated.

The crash on Normandy on a strange world is a dream. Having Shepherd think they are safe when in reality probably crashing onto Earth with 2 real endings, crew surviving or dying.

And, lastly. The part Catalyst was on was not protected by a dome and Shepherd is somehow surviving in the vacuum of space with no helmet and a destroyed environmental suit.

Which brings to the last scene. The camera goes up a small hill exactly like where they fought Harbinger and see Shepherd take a breath of air. Meaning he decided to destroy the Reapers which made Shepherd not become indoctrinated. While the other 2 leads to indoctrination.

[ShepGep]

Bottom line...they copped out on the ending like the copped out on Tali's face. A stock photo and a bad acid trip of an ending that made no sense.

Oh, also, Google space winter in Google Images and you'll see just how bad they copped out and how lazy they really got towards the end.

Modifié par ShepGep, 14 mars 2012 - 04:50 .

[Gemini1179]

Meshaber wrote...

We are all aware. We are also aware that asteroids were not slammed into the relays, and they were not destroyed by sheer force, which is apparent if you watch the ending, so there is no reason to believe this would happen. It's like saying that just because cars in hollywood explode if they are stopped by crashing into a tree, they should also explode just by parking them, because the important thing is that stopping leads to explosion.

This argument is false. Taking the ME universe in the vacuum of its medium-a series of video games- what we are conclusively *told* is that the destruction of a Mass Relay will destroy the system it is in. There is nothing in the endings to suggest that this doesn't happen. In fact, the idea that the destruction of the relays can be seen from outside our galaxy suggests visually that the explosions are in fact much larger than the one in Arrival. (If you wish to interject here that that was merely an artistic impression, please provide the proof of that theory)

What you are doing is rationalizing. Mass Effect is a visual medium and it should be explained within the medium. Your argument is speculation and rationalization at best.

By your logic, we can deduce that Shepard never in fact became a Spectre and is in fact in an insane asylum having gone crazy from the contact with the beacon on Eden Prime. There is the same amount of evidence there as there is to support your theory that the exploding ME relays didn't destroy the systems they were in, aka, none.

[Walrusninja]

I respect your insanity ... I mean ... opinion!

[Ivikatasha]

ShepGep wrote...


Oh, also, Google space winter in Google Images and you'll see just how bad they copped out and how lazy they really got towards the end.

SERIOUSLY?!?!

Didn't know about that one.....

[OtaconUCF]

Adamantium93 wrote...

Not sure if serious.

skaye wrote...

and to make a kind of concluding judgement about the series' principle themes.

Particularly that part.

I know right? skaye, do you mean how all the choices we're given throw all those themes out the window? That kind of concluding judgement?

[savionen]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

I didn't like the endings but the melodramatic over the top way people are reacting to them is just out of control.

It's seemed pretty civil to me. I'm actually really surprised. I've never such a large group in a video game community rally for the same thing.

[Turtles_AWD]

skaye wrote...

I absolutely adored the ending to this game.

Each option gave a sense of finality, a real commitment to the science fiction that underpins the series: that the galaxy is locked in a cycle where organics and synthetics contend for supremacy. And this game lets me completely rewrite the future of that universe. 

The option I chose for my 'primary' playthrough (spoiler!) was the synergy (middle) route. Haunting, shaking, and with that great kicker after the credits.

What did people want? What were people expecting? A kind of "and then Shepard killed the reapers and everyone was okay and there was another sex scene with Liara rainbows butterflies medals Chewbacca roar end credits" sort of thing?

What we get here is far better - an opportunity to have a powerful impact on the universe, and to make a kind of concluding judgement about the series' principle themes.

I don't accept some of the arguments floating around, that the final choices didn't reflect the series' 'paragon/renegade' duality. We got given some very complex options, with massive iceburgs of unforeseen consequences in each one. What, did people want a drop-down menu, listing the effects?

I loved this series, but its not until these endings that Mass Effect is elevated to the status of powerful science fiction. I for one would be very upset if Bioware changed them even a jot. They're beautiful just as they are.

Anyway, this thread is just to congratulate Bioware - I've been following you guys since Baldur's Gate, and I can't wait to see what happens next - and to see if anybody else has a more positive response to the endings.

The underpinning of the series is not one in which organics and synthetics contend for supremacy. It's more about humanity reaching space and discovering it's just one of many races, culturally different and physically unique, and the politics surrounding entering this global community (especially on the rebound of the first contact war). The synthetics are only an issue regarding the geth and ultimately the reapers, but in the first game they're much more sinister and godlike than they are eventually made out to be. As the ghost of that stupid kid tells you, the motivation of the reapers ultimately boils down to "synthetics built by organics will eventually shoot the organics in the face, so we built a bunch of synthetics to shoot the organics in the face before they build synthetics to shoot them in the face." The only "finality" I get from the ending is that the reapers won, and this cycle of organics is over. With all the mass effect relays destroyed (probably resulting in the deaths of billions just with the explosions) almost everyone of every race will be trapped far from their home systems and any planet that can sustain their life, so they'll eventually die out as well.


What did I want? What did I expect?  Well, for one, I expected that whole thing with dark energy to play out in some way. Bailey is all of the sudden an expert on it, not that it's important at all. I expected those stupid dreams where you chase Jason around a forest to be indicative of something more than an imposing of feelings on Shepard, the character I should be the one imposing thoughts and feelings on. I expected not to have Deus Ex's endings again. I wanted the choices I had previously made to have any effect at all. I wanted a playing out of the game's themes regarding death and the afterlife. I wanted the game to transcend typical binary dichotomies, which fell on its face spectacularly once "organic" and "synthetic" became the third word out of anyone's mouth.

I'm not really sure how you feel the ending decision has any weight at all. The mass effect relays blow up, the threat of the reapers has ended, the normandy gets stranded on a jungle planet, Joker and EDI can be seen leaving the normandy. Which one did I just describe? The correct answer is all of them. Yes, even on the "destroy all synthetic life in the galaxy" ending, EDI can be seen leaving the normandy. Do you know why Commander Shepard lives in this ending? It's because his burning hatred for synthetics allows him to sense that not every synthetic has been destroyed, so he's going to track down the normandy no matter how long it takes and put that computer back in its place.

The ending does reflect the paragon/renegade duality which is one of the biggest problems wtih it, because of what paragon and renegade ultimately represent. In the first game they were indicators of how you roleplay. You could pick whatever dialogue option in conversation you wanted and not get locked out of key plot decisions. Having charm and intimidate in the talent tree was problematic on its own, but it worked better because the cutscenes unequivocally belonged to the players. Starting in ME2, paragon and renegade stops being the indicator of how you roleplay and instead become the determinator of how you roleplay. If you want to make the tough paragon decisions in the later parts of the game, you have to have been making paragon decisions pretty much the whole way. If you go paragon in some situations and renegade in others, you'll get locked out of both. I feel pretty positive that everyone played through the game, more or less, with their cursor locked in top right or bottom right. This is reflected in ME3 when the other options are removed entirely. You may as well play the game in action mode because there is no roleplaying to be found here. You will make a predetermined choice if you are a paragon or renegade shepard, and all of your decisions will reflect what you were planning on doing from the beginning of the game. If I can watch all of the cutscenes on youtube and have the exact same experience as playing it myself, it has ceased to be a roleplaying game, and the commander shepard I am playing as has ceased to be MY character.

When that giant space elevator takes you up to the sky, you're faced with the same illusion of choice. Those "icebergs" of consequences are the same in every ending. A drop down menu would have actually had more options as a matter of fact, in this form the ending has commander shepard standing on a gigantic dialogue wheel. Mass Effect one and two elevated the game to powerful science fiction. These endings downgraded it.

Modifié par Turtles_AWD, 14 mars 2012 - 04:59 .

[Meshaber]

Gemini1179 wrote...

This argument is false. Taking the ME universe in the vacuum of its medium-a series of video games- what we are conclusively *told* is that the destruction of a Mass Relay will destroy the system it is in. There is nothing in the endings to suggest that this doesn't happen. In fact, the idea that the destruction of the relays can be seen from outside our galaxy suggests visually that the explosions are in fact much larger than the one in Arrival. (If you wish to interject here that that was merely an artistic impression, please provide the proof of that theory)

What you are doing is rationalizing. Mass Effect is a visual medium and it should be explained within the medium. Your argument is speculation and rationalization at best.

By your logic, we can deduce that Shepard never in fact became a Spectre and is in fact in an insane asylum having gone crazy from the contact with the beacon on Eden Prime. There is the same amount of evidence there as there is to support your theory that the exploding ME relays didn't destroy the systems they were in, aka, none.

The massive explosion in Arrival is the result of all the energy dormant in the Alpha relay being released as the structure holding it together collapses. That energy is being directed through the relay network in the ME3 ending.

As for the visuals that we can see from across the galaxy:

1: They change colour according to the ending you chose, they are not the same explosion as the one in arrival (or larger). They are control/synthesis/destruction (of synthetics) explosions, or so I would assume (yes, that sounds ridiculous, but you get the point).

2: The explosions visual on the galaxy map (or whatever) are MASSIVE. If these were indeed of a similar nature to the one in arrival, there is no way in hell the normandy would survive and land on some planet, because there would be nothing left to land on. The conclusion that those explosions are the same as the one in arrival is demonstrably false.

Modifié par Meshaber, 14 mars 2012 - 05:12 .

[Hudathan]

I'm fine with the theme of the ending, it was just too rushed. I would have liked a longer conversation with the VI regarding the nature of the cycle and the whole organics/synthetics debate, and I would have liked to see more than a single shot of allied soldiers cheering. For me the ending wasn't bad, it was just too short.

I also disagree with some of the complaints regarding the endings. Lack of closure is the most sensible and accurate complaint. But for people to say that the game didn't provide any resolution to player choices over the course of the series is just incorrect. The entirety of the third game has been one long sequence of resolutions to every single galactic conflict Shepard could possibly influence. By the end, the only thing left to do is something that no single person could resolve, and that is to fire up the mysterious Crucible and hope for the best. If the player followed the ideal path, then Shepard has made the galaxy as good as humanly possible before the final battle. The only thing left to do was to make sure the galaxy has the chance to see tomorrow, that hopefully there is a brighter future than mass extinction. The game DOES provide the player with all of these things, but once again the ending is just too short.

[Gemini1179]

Hudathan wrote...
The only thing left to do was to make sure the galaxy has the chance to see tomorrow, that hopefully there is a brighter future than mass extinction. The game DOES provide the player with all of these things, but once again the ending is just too short.

All three endings will bring about mass extinction anyway. Think about it. Every fleet at Earth is stuck to being able to go as far as their FLT drives will take them. Then think about food, resources, etc. Each and every race is cut off from one another. All that peacemaking you did? For naught.

[GodChildInTheMachine]

healed1337 wrote...

GodChildInTheMachine wrote...

But you would literally have to be brain dead to accept the ME3 ending for its (lack of) complexity and narrative logic.

Uh, being literally brain dead would mean that your brain doesn't function at all. It means that you can't even comprehend the difference between red and blue even if your eyes can sense the difference.

Don't get me wrong, the ending does have problems, but I appreciate the concept behind it and haven't seen many complaints that can't be defended against.

I can see how one would appreciate the concept behind the ending, and I could too if they were delivered in a different context.

But there really isn't a solid defense for the ending on a critical level.

Just to define the terms by which I am judging the ending, here is a quote from Aristotle's Poetics:

In the characters too, exactly as in the structure of the incidents, [the poet] ought always to seek what is either necessary or probable, so that it is either necessary or probable that a person of such-and-such a sort say or do things of the same sort, and it is either necessary or probable that this [incident] happen after that one. It is obvious that the solutions of plots too should come about as a result of the plot itself, and not from a contrivance... A contrivance must be used for matters outside the drama—either previous events which are beyond human knowledge, or later ones that need to be foretold or announced... There should be nothing improbable in the incidents; otherwise, it should be outside the tragedy...

Emphasis placed on the part which I think has the most bearing to my argument.

I do not mind that the ending attempted to be profound or "tragic" if you can define it that way. I often enjoy fiction that tries to communicate complex messages, but it is very easy for such an attempt to fail if it disregards the internal consistency of the narrative in favor of some grander artistic statement.

The reason the ending is poor is because it does not rise naturally out of the threads that lead to it, nor does it conclude them that way.

It introduces a new character, who by the narrative of the logic is the prime antagonist, without any ceremony or explanation. Instead of showing through the events of the narrative who this character is and what its motivations are, it has to explain them itself through expositionary dialogue. That kind of exposition needs to be done earlier in the story and is almost universally avoided in the final act.

This mysterious antagonist then issues a new understanding of the fictional world which runs counter to what has been naturally revealed to the audience by the events of the preceding story. To this end it applies logic which can demonstrably be proven false and thoughtless.

(i.e. I heard you didn't want to be killed by synthetics, so I created synthetics to kill you every 50k years so you don't have to be killed by synthetics)

The tone and theme of its message directly contraverts the themes explored in the Mass Effect series, the most of which in my eyes are the ideas of free will, unity, tolerance and what it means to be alive or sentient. It goes so far as to tell you in no uncertain terms that what you have accomplished and the things you have seen (i.e. the peace of the Geth and Quarians and the friendship of EDI) is in fact false or meaningless. (You could honestly make the arguement that this thing is an illogical little space Hitler)

And of course, the protagonist turns from an uncomprimising type of person who will do things by his/her terms or not at all, into a complacent and unscrupulous sucker who does not even question what he is being told when it has the highest consequences ever.

How would you reply to that in defense of the ending?

Modifié par GodChildInTheMachine, 14 mars 2012 - 05:38 .