23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Himmelstor]

zegota wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...


Fourth: It's considered very bad writing/storytelling to introduce new characters who have all the answers or enormous power, or some special new ability that a character has, without at the VERY LEAST foreshadowing it. In terms of storytelling, there's no explanation for where he came from. He just appeared in the plot.

The existence of some Master Race outside of the Reapers is foreshadowed in Mass Effect 3 by the Reapers themselves, and alluded to even further back. This has been planned for a while. It's not a rush-job by any means.

And, I still don't know what you want. "What made X?" applies to the Reapers if Star Child wasn't there. And if they told you where Star Child came from, it would apply to whatever made him. Sometimes things just are. I don't need to know the details of the creation of the universe to have an effective story.

This 'Master Race' is alluded to.  The child/ai/ghost on the citadel was not. Normally this would be fine, but it is responsible for everything afterwards. That's called a Deus Ex Machina. Or Diabolus Ex Machina, depending on your opinion on how good/bad the endings are. These are not considered good writing.

[CerberusMolecularNetwork]

Bioware told us that they care about their fans, customers. I don't want to complain about why the endings are bad, or good. You can find plenty of explanations out there on the internet.

So I just want to share my thoughts about what I would consider a good ending for Mass Effect 3. (I am not a native speaker. If my english is weird sometimes, sorry )

Well, allow me to write it down. Just ideas. The game what Bioware created is awesome! Every single game what they created in the last decade is amazing! Ah you know what I just spit it out: MASS EFFECT 3 is their f*cking MASTERPIECE! If they decide not to change the ending, than it remains the same MASTERPIECE in my eyes.

But they asked our opinion regarding the ending so here is mine:

I think Mass Effect 3 need some vastly different and distinct endings.
So, I think at the END of the trilogy the game doesn't need that space kid. It's just destroys the lore of the Reapers exsistence entirely. So cut out everything after Anderson dies.
Oh yes, and that means Shepard doesn't have to choose anything at the end. That's the point!!!

Why? Because, our earlier choices will determine the actually ending of our saga. And that's it. No space kid, no last decisions. Just what Shep did in the last couple of hours. And YES If you want to see the other endings of Mass Effect 3 you have to play the game again, with a different Shepard. Not just quick load, and let's see the other one.. No. no.nonono... That would be too easy. You already made your choices, just like in the end of Mass Effect 2, here comes what happens next:

1, VERY BAD ending: What you guys at Bioware created. Minor tweaks of course would be necessary, but that shouldn't be a problem. First of all, cut out the Joker sequence. No need for that. Shepard dies alongside Anderson. The Citadel will blow up, the Reapers will die, Earth will be incinerated. And because every single Mass Relay in the galaxy is going to be destroyed, that means one thing. Every solar system, every species in the known universe is going to be completely destroyed. That's it. THE VERY BEST BAD ENDING.

2, BAD ending: Same scene. Shepard dies alongside Anderson. But the Citadel and every Mass relay will be intact. Of course the Reaper army will destroy the entire galactical armada, and they will finish what they started. The cyle of our destruction will continue. New scene: 50.000 years later: A new alien species discovers the memory box what Liara created. And when the Shepard VI tries to warn them about the Reapers, in that moment, they hear that terrible sound. They look up to the sky, but it's too late, the Reapers are already returned! (Admit it, it's a bad ending, but it's god damn epic!)

3, GOOD Ending: This is the hardest part. Because this is when you have to show what we did in the game mattered. In this ending Shepard will survive the war or not. And to survive the war, he/she needs two criteria. 1, High enough Paragon or Renegade score, and high enough EMS score. If the Paragon and Renegade scores are not high enough, he/she dies, but the good ending still plays if the EMS score is high enough. So here are the variations:

3/A: Shepard is dead. Now you have to show what he/she has accomplished. The major decisions are the most important.
1, Krogan-Turian conflict: cured Genophage, or not (peace or war)
2, Quarian - Geth conflict: peace, Geth survived, Quarian survived
3, Rebuilt Citadel, rebuilt Thessia
4, the crew! some minor things about what happened with them, Liara wrote a book about the protheans, Tali built a new home on Rannoch, James earned the N7 title, etc.... (the guys at Bioware know this better than me. I trust them, I always will!)

3/B: Shepard is alive. The first 4 are the same. And we have a 5th one!
5, Shep and his/her Love interest! Yes this is probably the hardest part. Because there are so many of them. That makes the story more exicting and adds replayability to it!

So there it is! My ideas, and opinion about what I consider a great, satisfying, most of all worthy ending of Mass effect 3.

Secret ending for New Game Plus: If Shep is alive: High enough paragon, or high enough Renegade score will determine his/her life after the war.
1, high enough Renegade score: He/She is a new Admiral in the Alliance fleet!
(Imagine the fans reaction... Yeah that's what I am talking about!)
2, high enough Paragon score: He/she is the new human represantative in the Citadel council!
(again... imagine the fans reaction! .... Yeah that's what I am talking about!)
Pure epicness, pure awesomeness!

I just wrote this down because Bioware doesn't deserve our hatred. They need our support, and new ideas! They worked hard to create an awesome experience. And I think they just did that.

[ArmyKnifeX]

zegota wrote...
And yes, I'm aware Doyle revived Sherlock Holmes so he could continue to make money. It was unfortunate he had to do it then, and it's unfortunate Bioware is going to have to do it now.

So you're really going to attack Sir Arthur Conan Doyle now, and call him a sellout?

Shame on you.

Modifié par ArmyKnifeX, 16 mars 2012 - 06:28 .

[JaciusCeed]

My favorite moments are the Tali moments.
Saving her people and bringing peace between the Quarians and the Geth warms my heart.<3



My thoughts on all this craziness.
jaciusceed.blogspot.com/2012/03/open-letter-my-thoughts-regarding-mass.html

Modifié par JaciusCeed, 16 mars 2012 - 10:02 .

[zegota]

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

And let's not even forget director's cuts of films!

That's a good example, actually. I would totally support a DLC ending that not only didn't supplant the original ones, but specifically says "This is not our desired ending, this is not at all the story we wanted to tell, but whatever. Enjoy."

[Dragoonlordz]

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

Your sarcasm tells me everything I need to know about you.

You're arguing that art like ME is infallible. I provided a counter-example. And you choose to make fun of me for pointing it out?

I'm not really that interested in your own argument with each other but I should point out that just because one artist caves in to pressure does not make it right for all artists to do so.

[GM Jaken]

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

GM Jaken wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

zegota wrote...
And as much as I disagree with you, that's fine. Telling your friends not to buy the novel/game, sure, go ahead.

Would you, however, organize a petition and swarm the author's message board in an attempt to make her change the ending, free-of-charge, to your preferred conclusion?

Did you know Sherlock Holmes died? Yes, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed him. The public was outraged. Then he retconned it and brought him back. Or what about any and all fan-based retcons in the comic book industry?

Any artist who makes a living selling entertainment knows that good business sense dicates that, if you ****** off your customers enough to the point where something like THIS happens to BioWare, you listen to them and try to do something for them that they will like and does not compromise your integrity.

Wait.  Sherlock Holmes' death was retconned?  Excuse me while I tilt out.  How the crap have I lived this long and not known that...?

Your sarcasm tells me everything I need to know about you.

You're arguing that art like ME is infallible. I provided a counter-example. And you choose to make fun of me for pointing it out?

Actually, no sarcasm there.  I seriously didn't know Holmes' death was retconned.  That ruins his final confrontation with his archnemesis, whose name i dare not attempt to remember how to spell.  Also, when did I say... like, anything within your second paragraph.

Easy, tiger.

Modifié par GM Jaken, 16 mars 2012 - 06:30 .

[jkflipflopDAO]

zegota wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

Did you know Sherlock Holmes died? Yes, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed him. The public was outraged. Then he retconned it and brought him back. Or what about any and all fan-based retcons in the comic book industry?

You mean the comic book retcons that are routinely derided as hacking away at the intergrity of the storytelling medium? Those retcons? Yes. I'm aware.

And yes, I'm aware Doyle revived Sherlock Holmes so he could continue to make money. It was unfortunate he had to do it then, and it's unfortunate Bioware is going to have to do it now.

So your point then is art is only art if it's locked into one unchanging state after completion? Because that's kind of silly.

[Omnike]

zegota wrote...

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

zegota wrote...

Himmelstor wrote...
We complain because we believe they did not follow their own established rules.

Complaining that it sucked is a time-honored tradition. Demanding it be changed -- OR ELSE!!! -- is not.

You can lay off the "Bioware Defense Force" angle for a while. You know this isn't even Bioware anymore, right? Doctor Ray and Doctor Greg no longer call the shots. Some slimey executive suit at EA headquarters runs Bioware now. Bioware has been indoctrinated by EA.

I couldn't care less who it is. It could be Hilbilly Joe What Lives Down By The River and I'd still defend him against people who think they're entitled to force him to create something contrary to his vision.

As you feed misconception. Not everyone is trying to force anyone to do anything. And I can assume that even if they did charge for an alternate ending, most people would pay for it. I know I would. Because I don't think it's their responsibility or duty to me or any other fan to change the ending. I just think out of respect for a fanbase and established lore that they would seek to uphold everything they created. The endings totally diminish it all. They also said that the ending would be completely shaped by player choice, and that there would be no A, B, C ending. They set that expectation in mind and failed to meet it. And like I said, it's not their duty to fix it, and I don't expect them to do anything for me, but voicing our discontent to persuade them to change it sounds like a good idea.

[ArmyKnifeX]

 

zegota wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

And let's not even forget director's cuts of films!

That's a good example, actually. I would totally support a DLC ending that not only didn't supplant the original ones, but specifically says "This is not our desired ending, this is not at all the story we wanted to tell, but whatever. Enjoy."

 

Because being snarky is going to make me be a continued customer.

Dragoonlordz wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

Your sarcasm tells me everything I need to know about you.

You're arguing that art like ME is infallible. I provided a counter-example. And you choose to make fun of me for pointing it out?

I'm not really that interested in your own argument with each other but I should point out that just because one artist caves in to pressure does not make it right for all artists to do so.

No, I agree, it doesn't. But it proves that it isn't a rule.

[Himmelstor]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

Your sarcasm tells me everything I need to know about you.

You're arguing that art like ME is infallible. I provided a counter-example. And you choose to make fun of me for pointing it out?

I'm not really that interested in your own argument with each other but I should point out that just because one artist caves in to pressure does not make it right for all artists to do so.

You say that like pressure is never justified. Such pressure has created new countries, caused laws we couldn't possibly live without.
The crowd is not poison. The crowd is the crowd.

[zegota]

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

zegota wrote...
And yes, I'm aware Doyle revived Sherlock Holmes so he could continue to make money. It was unfortunate he had to do it then, and it's unfortunate Bioware is going to have to do it now.

So you're really going to attack Sir Arthur Conan Doyle now, and call him a sellout?

Shame on you.

Uh, no. I'm going to call him an artist who realized he couldn't eat unless he gave the public exactly what they demanded. Which is, I'm sure, what EA is telling Bioware right now. So you win. Good job. That's definitely the world I want to live in.

[Billabong2011]

"Yes, we are listening."
No you're not.

[wook77]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

Your sarcasm tells me everything I need to know about you.

You're arguing that art like ME is infallible. I provided a counter-example. And you choose to make fun of me for pointing it out?

I'm not really that interested in your own argument with each other but I should point out that just because one artist caves in to pressure does not make it right for all artists to do so.

And the opposite is true as well - just because one artist doesn't cave in to pressure doesn't make it right for all artists to refuse to.

Both sides are viable. Can we now get back on topic? 

[ArmyKnifeX]

GM Jaken wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

GM Jaken wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

zegota wrote...
And as much as I disagree with you, that's fine. Telling your friends not to buy the novel/game, sure, go ahead.

Would you, however, organize a petition and swarm the author's message board in an attempt to make her change the ending, free-of-charge, to your preferred conclusion?

Did you know Sherlock Holmes died? Yes, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed him. The public was outraged. Then he retconned it and brought him back. Or what about any and all fan-based retcons in the comic book industry?

Any artist who makes a living selling entertainment knows that good business sense dicates that, if you ****** off your customers enough to the point where something like THIS happens to BioWare, you listen to them and try to do something for them that they will like and does not compromise your integrity.

Wait.  Sherlock Holmes' death was retconned?  Excuse me while I tilt out.  How the crap have I lived this long and not known that...?

Your sarcasm tells me everything I need to know about you.

You're arguing that art like ME is infallible. I provided a counter-example. And you choose to make fun of me for pointing it out?

Actually, no sarcasm there.  I seriously didn't know Holmes' death was retconned.  That ruins his final confrontation with his archnemesis, whose name i dare not attempt to remember how to spell.  Also, when did I say... like, anything within your second paragraph.

Easy, tiger.

My apologies. I think it's dealing with that flamer Zegota.

Moriarty I believe? I may be spelling it wrong as well, so no worries  That second paragraph was more directed at Zegota than you, I should have been clearer - also my wrong.

I suppose it kinda ruins the final confrontation, but at least that final confrontation wasn't what we got wtih ME3. Homles didn't go out like a punk after a child came up to the two of them and lectured on how he gave birth to Moriarty and raised and trained him specifically because criminals would get better forcing detectives to get better so every hundred years he releases a super criminal to outwit the best detectives and take them down so the police don't eliminate crime and make life boring.

[Himmelstor]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Himmelstor wrote...
Not in my opinion. But if it did ruin it for him, my opinion doesn't matter much, does it?
And I stil think the ending was bad enough compared to the epic journey that revision should be done.

I don't mind if you think that, at all. I don't mind if you ASK that, at all.

Just don't say "Because the ending sucked, everything sucked." Because we all know that isn't true.

(I know you personally haven't said that, but I'm speaking to everyone.)

*chuckles* It's alright.
For awhile there I was sitting in an indoctrination theory thread trying to keep either side from claiming they had the absolute right of it.
Uphill battle, a fight on the internet.

[Ions]

Getting Revengie on KL for Thane("I'm not crying, it's just raining on my face"). Recovering Space Hamster(I knew he had to be there somewhere!). Almost all the conversations with Garrus, Truly great writing and acting. Loved it.
The way Tali was developed as L.I. Particularly with allowing Legion to upload the Reaper code and convincing Gerrel to stop the attack, and the change in Tali's attitude. So awesome!

[GM Jaken]

Billabong2011 wrote...

"Yes, we are listening."
No you're not.

Hey, 'listening' and 'acting on' are totally different.  Jus' sayin'.  BioWare actually said something (albeit contextually nothing), so there are listening.

The question remains what they will do, if anything, about it.

[zegota]

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

zegota wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

Did you know Sherlock Holmes died? Yes, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed him. The public was outraged. Then he retconned it and brought him back. Or what about any and all fan-based retcons in the comic book industry?

You mean the comic book retcons that are routinely derided as hacking away at the intergrity of the storytelling medium? Those retcons? Yes. I'm aware.

And yes, I'm aware Doyle revived Sherlock Holmes so he could continue to make money. It was unfortunate he had to do it then, and it's unfortunate Bioware is going to have to do it now.

So your point then is art is only art if it's locked into one unchanging state after completion? Because that's kind of silly.

My argument is that it ceases to be art when the artist paints something, waits for a bunch of people to come in and tell him how he should change it, and then quickly slaps that up there for them.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

Idea: They could give the DLC away for free to those with the online pass. So buying the online pass as a used customer still nets them money and sells DLC.

[ArmyKnifeX]

zegota wrote...

jkflipflopDAO wrote...

zegota wrote...

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

Did you know Sherlock Holmes died? Yes, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle killed him. The public was outraged. Then he retconned it and brought him back. Or what about any and all fan-based retcons in the comic book industry?

You mean the comic book retcons that are routinely derided as hacking away at the intergrity of the storytelling medium? Those retcons? Yes. I'm aware.

And yes, I'm aware Doyle revived Sherlock Holmes so he could continue to make money. It was unfortunate he had to do it then, and it's unfortunate Bioware is going to have to do it now.

So your point then is art is only art if it's locked into one unchanging state after completion? Because that's kind of silly.

My argument is that it ceases to be art when the artist paints something, waits for a bunch of people to come in and tell him how he should change it, and then quickly slaps that up there for them.

That's a damn silly argument. Especially because that's exactly how mainstream video games are created. That bunch of people are called the Producers, Directors, and lead Xs of their departments.

Modifié par ArmyKnifeX, 16 mars 2012 - 06:35 .

[GM Jaken]

ArmyKnifeX wrote...

I suppose it kinda ruins the final confrontation, but at least that final confrontation wasn't what we got wtih ME3. Homles didn't go out like a punk after a child came up to the two of them and lectured on how he gave birth to Moriarty and raised and trained him specifically because criminals would get better forcing detectives to get better so every hundred years he releases a super criminal to outwit the best detectives and take them down so the police don't eliminate crime and make life boring.

You'll get no argument from me.