23455 réponses à ce sujet

[OverNine-kznd]

It would have been better if it was more clear

[danbish]

If you lot at Bioware are still reading after this many posts, I'd like to say that I've never, ever been sucked into and experienced a game world like Mass Effect before. I can't tell you all how much I've enjoyed every installment of it and it'll always remain a gaming favourite of mine. Congratulations to you all on such outstanding work and looking forward to more from the ME universe! (maybe ME4 pretty please?)

But the ending to ME3 left me clueless with so many questions that nothing seems to make sense. It feels like there's no closure to the story and the last few minutes of it just doesn't fit in with the rest of the game/series. I get the creation of something different and unique, I really do, but I like many others want the story to conclude in a way that does the rest of the game/s justice. Can't help but feel a bit let down by those final few minutes...

[Rane7685]

 This is going to be a fairly long winded post but hopefully it answers a lot of questions but more importantly gives some perspective. This post should serve as a useful reference point about the endings and the response to it.

First and foremost everyone seems to be very happy with the game up until Shepard collapses at the console. At this point Shepard is elevated to some unknown area of the citadel that appears to be in open space and meets the catalyst who informs Shepard of the reapers motives and gives Shepard a choice; control the reapers, destroy them or synthesise all organic and synthetic life. The game ends with the Normandy crash landing, Shepard dying (with one exception) and the relays exploding.

The remaining discussion with centre on the issues fans have had, counterpoints to these and some further discussion on the theories.

Plot Holes

The first issue is the plot holes; Fans have expressed issues with a number of points here; Firstly it is the reapers logic. According to the catalyst the reapers represent a safeguard. If organic life continues to advance beyond a certain threshold the technological advances in synthetic life that will result  will bring organics and synthetics into conflict resulting in the complete eradication of all organic life. The reapers act essentially as a reset button for technology and as a result organic life endures. There are numerous issues with this;

Some fans have argued that your experiences with the geth and quarians invalidates the catalysts argument. This is not an adequate counterpoint as te geth-quarian conflict could very easily reignite. Alliances shift and old friends can eaasily become enemies. A good real world example of this is Iran. Pre 1978 Iran was one of Americas closest allies forming one of its twin pillars policy. Fast forward to today and the situation is very different. It is fine to disagree with the catalysts premise and good arguments can be made that synthetic and organic life wont inevitably come into conflict but it is not an illogical argument. It is a contentious one. I believe that this is what the writers intended when they spoke of wanting an ending people would talk about.

Some people also feel it is inconsistent with the tone of the games given the geth/quarian outcome but I would argue it is actually consistent. The entire mass effect series has been about organics vs synthetics and remember the reapers are fallible. EDI mentions for all their purported power it was killed by a worm. People were angered principally that they couldnt disagree with the catalyst and that is a valid concern but I will come back to that later.

The other minor point is that it takes place in the vacumn of space and this is a valid point. There are reasons that could be given for this (say a mass effect field encasing them) but that it is not given is poor execution. 

Joker flying through the mass relay has been addressed by Jessica Merizan (he was ordered to retreat) but that he happens to land on a jungle planet with squadmates who with with you at the conduit is a concern. Firstly the jungle planet; anyone who knows anything about planets and space know that habitable planets are incredibly rare. Randomly landing on a planet that even has ground is an achievement but one that is flush with life is a 1 in 1 billion chance but we typically grant some poetic license in this regard. What is inexplicable is how the squadmates got there and this should be addressed. 

In all honesty this could be ordering them back after you calibrate the missile to help coordinate the attacks while you and Anderson go on ahead. This essentially covers the plotholes. To reiterate the reapers reasoning is not illogical but it doesnt mean it is accurate and you could easily argue that such conflicts can be resolved and even cite the geth/quarian resolution as a counterpoint but this counterpoint has its own limitations. It illustrates the possibility of cooperation not a continued peaceful equilibrium.

Player Agency

The next issue fans have is the lack of choice. I saw one post asking which ending you chose and saw this as a reply (paraphrasing); "I chose the one where the reapers were stopped, Shepard died, the mass relays blew up and the Normandy crashed on a jungle planet." All endings (except maybe one) end this way which has led to complaints about the lack of choice or rather agency. The real issue is the illusion of choice, the player is provided with three choices that are essentially the same and this is a poor decision. Either give no choice at all or give choices that represent a material difference.

To clarify it is actually ok to have no choice at the end. This was intimated throughout the game. There would be nothing wrong if Shepard died pressing something on the console activating the crucible and destroying the reapers. The whole game was building to this end and it could simply be left to the player how they got there. The decisions they made throughout the game could factor into an epilogue (more on that later) but the actual physical ending could be the same. 

If you want to give players choice the choices need to be more distinct. For example one ending could be for Shepard to opt out and condemn the galaxy (a dark ending), another could be to argue with the catalyst so the catalyst calls them off etc etc. I dont really want to speculate

A happy ending

The next issue is a lack of a happy ending. This is hard for me to be objective about because I am vehemently against this. I truly believe Shepard needed to die. The game has been about sacrifice and loss and it is in keeping with this theme that Shepard should die. This has been marketed as the end of Shepards story and it is fitting that he makes the ultimate sacrifice to save the galaxy. For me this serves the narrative best. The reason Shepard really shouldnt live however is it trivialises his death in the other endings. If Shep can beat the reapers and walk off with his/her LI then why in gods name did I die in the others. If Shepard lives it should be at a cost. For example give up jet off somewhere isolated like Ilos let the galaxy die and live out your days with LI. The other alternative is get your war assets to an extreme level which leads me to my next point.

There is a happy ending potentially. In one of the endings it is indicated that Shepard is still alive and can presumably be reunited with his/her LI and live happily ever after. However without an epilogue this remains poorly executed.

The epilogue and closure

This is the issue I am most passionate about and it would solve a lot of the ending issues. This is the finale, it is meant to tie up the loose ends and give closure but it doesnt. This is particularly strange as Bioware has typically provided epilogues (Dragon Age as an example). Fans of the series want to know what will happen with Liara, Garrus, Vega etc etc. Will Tali and Garrus be together and live on Rannoch, will Vega become an N7, will Liara stay as Shadow Broker. These are issues fans want answered. 

The reason Bioware overlooked this is I beleive they thought closure was provided when you spoke to your troops before the earth battles. This is a mistake. That speech provided closure for the squadmates. This was the squadmates chance to say their peace before Shep left to what was probably going to be his death. The squadmates werent going to die or at least not all of them. They are going to have lives and as fans we want to know what that future holds for them. This epilogue can be extended beyond just the squadmates. What will happen to the krogan, will they get a place on the council, does the geth/quarian truce hold. With the citadel gone is there even a council and where is its seat of power etc etc. The only closure we kind of get is EDI/Joker in synthesise ending

Also the ending cutscene showing death of reapers could reflect your war assets in some way (not every single asset but numbers could be bigger and the faces could change krogan or salarian etc etc)

Stranded

With the relays destroyed is everyone stuck in Sol. The answer is no. The ships have FTL drives and should be able to leave. Transit times will be vastly increased (months or years as opposed to instant traversal) but they wont be stuck

Indoctrination

This is a popular theory that I wont go into detail on there are other threads for this but basically the whole catalyst ending part was an attempted indoctrination and you basically failed if you picked anything other than destroy. Whilst this theory has merits I personally hope it isnt true because if it is it is poorly executed. If this is to be the ending this possibility needs to be articulated. It is not readily apparent that this is a possible explanation. 

To elaborate take inception; the ending is ambiguous but there is a certainty in that ambiguity. It is clear that either it is still a dream or it is the real world. There is no ambiguity in the available theories. What is debatable is which is correct. In ME3 however this theory was divined be some able minded individuals it is not clear that everyone who played this realised this was even a possibility and that is a significant flaw. The point of contestation needs to be enunciated clearly even if you dont resolve it one way or the other

Gaming jounalists are bought by EA

I understand where this sentiment comes  from as gaming journalists almost universally oppose any ending change but this is simply not true. It would be prohibitively expensive for EA to buy all the reviews and the credibility lost over time would be countereproductive. However there is a writers prejudice endemic in gaming journalists. Gaming journalists consider themselves writers and are typically very protective of their artistic integrity. Its my work of art like it or hate it and the thought of changing art to appease the masses clearly evokes a very defensive reaction in them. This is why they dont engage with the issues with the ending. They refuse to, they cannot be objective on this issue it is too sensitive to them.

Should an artist change an ending and dangerous precedents

Parallels between computer games and other media (films and books) have been made but these are unfair particularly in a RPG.  The game was marketed as your story not bioware's. That you are limited in dialogue choices is an unfortunate necessity but you cant have Mark Meer visiting every players house saying what you want him to say. 

The other side of this is the precedent it sets. This has almost no merit because this precedent has already been set. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle changed the ending of his Shelock Holmes story and  Bethesda changed the ending to Fallout.

Bioware did not set out to make a bad ending and I believe them when they said they were  genuinely surprised. Muzyka even saiid his knee jerk reaction was to defend it. But with so many voices it gives you pause. Bioware can look at the feedback and if they determine that there are in fact problems then why not fix them. Games benefit from being changeablle (patches etc). If the writers themselves recognise that they overlooked issues why on earth would you not change them. If you realised your ending was poor why would you leave it for the sake of leaving it and preeserving artistic integrity. If anything a stubborn attitude to your work undermines you as you seem to regard the ending as good

My ending

This is the ending I wouldve loved but I have no expectations that this will happen (and thats fine). 

Shepard dies activating the crucible which destroys the reapers. The reapers motives remain unknown (or incomprehensible) and a cutscene plays showing broadly some war assets (geth and quarian fleets, krogan charges etc). Finally an epilogue slideshow rolls telling me what my squadmates did for the rest  of their lives, and the new state of the galaxy

[Catastrophy]

I have already shared my first impression here, but since I finished the game 4 days ago I have been often thinking about it.
I'm totally OK with the game up to the end, it's the finale that's occupying my mind constantly. And that's very unsusal - normally I'd mark it off as: "Another game finished, next!"
There are a lot of demands being made at the forums, explanations why things are good or not, but neither of these put me at ease. Nor do the partly brilliant ideas for alternative endings.

No, it just seems I'm not very quick in getting over it. Getting a few days distance might have helped here and I can see that the stock endings offer interesting aspects of ending the story.
You definitely need some distance for that, but it's very difficult for a player to come to this point. I even question if a dedicated player is willing to do so, because I can say that I felt myself deeply involved to the story.

Now from a distance I'd say the finale is something of a tragic resolution. There's a great hero, big sacrifice, things are solved.
As it comes with a tragedy there is hybris (in the classic sense) and a fall of the protagonist. It is said, that, the deeper the fall, the better the tragedy / reception of the audience. But, and here comes the difference, I am not just audience, I am also participating in Shepard's experiences, because of the outstanding way you pulled me into this epic adventure.

I tried to figure out what was happening when I finished the game and so I looked back recalling what I did. I played the series from the beginning. I pulled "Ginger" Shepard through all three parts going the badass way - or renegade, as it is termed. I played in English, though it's not my native language, the VA is just too great to get spoilt by translation.

I'm not recounting everything of the finale, I was shocked and moved several times during the finale sequence. I will refer to just the part that happens after speaking to the "catalyst" (the child).

OK, now there were three possiibilities. Like a Monty Hall dilemma. Putting Monty Hall aside I really experienced a dilemma, trying to figure out what Shepard would do. What she needed to do.
First, there is the destruction opption. Shepard preferred this throughout the series, but here it's not an option, because she is not a ruthless and cold bastard. She took considerable effort saving the Rachni Queen and coming to terms with the Geth and others. Killing is an option, Genocide is not.

"OK, what's that on the left? Did I get that right? What did that guy tell? I didn't expect this. Control? What did he say about a third option?"
Shepard is trying to find a means to end the reaper threat, and if possible save Earth. Sacrifice is acceptable if the result justifies so. But each of the decisions comes with its drawbacks, the most notable being the destruction of the mass relays which effectively dooms a lot of people to stay for a considerable time in the sol system. Shepard rejects these solutions, she came here to end it in another way.

I tried to figure out the feeling I had during this sequence, while I had Shepard limping to and fro and frantically rejecting and reassessinig the options. I think "dismay" and "despair" are the words that actually hit the nail on the head. I became increasingly dismayed, because I realized: Whatever I chose, Shepard would fail. And she would be totally alone with this decision, only me witnessing this very private moment.

I picked the synthesis option the first time and watched Shepard disintegrate. She jumped in hope to achieve the best but utterly defeated and reduced to a humble pawn. This is indeed a great tragic fall.

I became very sad seeing my hero perishing so wasted. I had to cry. She would never know whether her sacifice had an effect. She'd never know if she wasn't just tricked. And I wasn't very sure either - the cutscene left open a couple of things. The stargazer sequence should have helped alleviating the grief, but it didn't because I was still with Shepard who was not only dead but disintegrated. No ease, no remedy, no "Erlösung".

I put aside my feeling quickly, but they kept nagging. I can't speak for others, because what I feel are naturally very personal and subjective experiences.

But consider this: Aside from whatever objective quality can be attributed to the finale, a player who got immersed and invested emotionally into the game is only able to consider the finale objectively with an effort. It's not easy to let go if you are deeply involved to the success of Shepard. You did well in integrating players into the story, exceptionally well. You did not very well in pulling us out of it.

I'm not saying that I feel being actively hurt or trampled on - i can let go of it and focus on other things. but I'm not so sure everyone else can.
So if "closure" as being mentioned in some of your statements means to commit some assistance in helping players to alleviate elements of frustration that might have been experienced, I would strongly and urgently endorse and recommend it.
It's one thing to offer quite new ways of experiencing entertainment - and it is another to deny that it might take influence on us.

I don't know what might be the best way to do so. Try to take a players perspective, I know that working on a big thing causes often a narrow view on things. I narrowed my view also, I narrowed it to Shepard's quest of success.

Rage, anger, frustration might be reactions to the emotion that was experienced by some players. Please take this seriously. And if you ever consider to have a game character take a deep fall, offer a way for people to be pulled out of that experience. They might not take this lightly.

Keep it up
Thomas (39ys, Germany)

tl;dr:
Emotional involvement in story and protagonist causes players to experience a very personal defeat and failure. Missing closure, means of "pulling players out" of this experience might cause strong emotional reactions. Empathic approach to this strongly recommended.

[martolives]

http://immaletyoufin...s-effect-3.html

[jasonxxsatanna]

For me the endings are ok . . . . I say that because BW is not done with ME3 or Shep yet. . .why wpuld they go out of the way and inform the game player at the end to look for DLC to Sheps saga. . . Im betting all the questions us fans have will be in the form of DLC. . . You still have Illium, Omega . . .and who are the Reapers and Starchild. . . You actual think they will let things just end this way. . . This is hype for whats to come . . . .good press or bad press , its making news and keeping ppl talking. . .

[darkelightnx01]

 First of all would like to say thank you to Bioware, for a game that in many ways beat everything that came before it. Mark Weer, Seth green, Martin Sheen and Keith David were all amazing as was everyone else to be honest. Gameplay was blinding. But I like so many others, just feel the ending did not work in the context of your previous choices. I can't think why Shepard would consider an option that kills the Geth after saving them. If I could have my own perfect ending it would have also had harbinger there in some way, also a choice to keep the relays. Or perhaps even step makes his own choice and if his war assets and choices are their to escape by the skin of his teeth like Me1 and Me2. The way it all ends seems too messianic in tone. A fourth option where he can refuse seems realistic, where the reapers gain control of themselves and it could have been Shephard against Harbinger for the fate of the galaxy. I also kinda liked the indoctrination theory as a lead in to a new ending. Maybe as a DLC that if you want the heroic ending you can purchase that seems like a good compromise to me. So those who happy with Me3 don't have to download it.

[mafb1993]

To all the Bioware development team members,
I truly enjoy the games that you have made over the years.  Mass Effect has been a great story that I think has been great for all 3 games.  When I got to the end of ME3 the ending choices were somewhat confusing.  I can live with the choice that I make but I think what really has the fans upset was the fact that you have no idea where everyone ended up, who died, who lived (except Joker and EDI).  If it is explained in additonal DLC then I can understand, I'm just curious where everyone ended up.  Thank you for listening to the fans and keep making great games.

[Tashash]

Hmmm, favourite moments of ME 3? Gosh, theres a lot....

Kaiden rejoining the Normandy crew, and FemShep checking out his butt!
Liara writing Shepherd in the stars.
Legion's sacrifice.
Tali, drunkenly babbling to Javik.
The ''terminally ill Drell'' beating the $%^& out of Kai Leng.
''That was for Thane!'' buh-bye Kai Leng.
Kasumi's mission, especially the end!
Thane and Kolyat's prayer - That scene made me cry.
Liara sharing memories to say goodbye to Shepherd.
Javik's pep talk at the Citadel.
Catching Garrus and Tali....So cute.
Mordin singing.
Eve and Wrex.
Thresher Maw V Reaper.
Mordin - ''Had to be me, someone else might've gotten it wrong''.
Joker and EDI.

And I could go on and on...But I have to say - The ending/s? (I chose the middle) Not really happy....Why does Shepherd HAVE to be sacrificed? I know it rounds out as a sort of - look at this person, they gave everything but when you've invested as much time and effort into a character...It left me feeling hollow, I wanted Shepherd to be able to reap the benifits of all her/his efforts - to live a life after it all.

I wanted a happy ending...And I find the ones we get are all bittersweet.

[EnforcerWRX7]

Bioware,

I am not to happy with the art versus gameplay argument you are trying to put forward.

Art doesn't make sense when it conflicts with the gameplay. For example: the ending you gave us was artistic but that fails in the face of gameplay and story telling.

[Seleya_LL]

Remembering all the great moments on my long journey with Commander Shepard is nearly impossible for me - there were simply so many. Regarding ME3, I'd pick the conclusion of the Tuchanka and Rannoch plots for an imported pure-paragon (or high-morality) Shepard, and the romance plot lines that really deserved the term 'romance'. Wonderful moments in a wonderful game.

But: It has been a long journey, and, sadly, no one has has come out without scars. I am one of the relatively lucky ones who enjoyed the game immensely, right up until the ending. But that is probably the main reason the final 20 minutes hurt that much. I really don't want to imagine how those people feel who were interested in the (romance) plot of Jacob, or (to a lesser degree) Thane.

I, too, wanted a happy ending. Not too easy to achieve, okay, but if you manage to unite the whole galaxy, including batarian terrorists and former mortal enemies - I felt that Shepard deserved better than choosing the colour of a weird energy beam. What probably hurt most were the conversations down in London, before the final run through the ruins. If I had gotten a couple of "ending screens" with some text in DA-O or BG-II-style, stating the fate of the races and people around, including a happy end for Shepard, I would not be writing this post now but be out there somewhere in space, teaching a bunch of rachni songs about BioWare's brilliance.

[Wobba]

dr_random wrote...


I have already shared my first impression here, but since I finished the game 4 days ago I have been often thinking about it.
I'm totally OK with the game up to the end, it's the finale that's occupying my mind constantly. And that's very unsusal - normally I'd mark it off as: "Another game finished, next!"
There are a lot of demands being made at the forums, explanations why things are good or not, but neither of these put me at ease. Nor do the partly brilliant ideas for alternative endings.

No, it just seems I'm not very quick in getting over it. Getting a few days distance might have helped here and I can see that the stock endings offer interesting aspects of ending the story.
You definitely need some distance for that, but it's very difficult for a player to come to this point. I even question if a dedicated player is willing to do so, because I can say that I felt myself deeply involved to the story.

Now from a distance I'd say the finale is something of a tragic resolution. There's a great hero, big sacrifice, things are solved.
As it comes with a tragedy there is hybris (in the classic sense) and a fall of the protagonist. It is said, that, the deeper the fall, the better the tragedy / reception of the audience. But, and here comes the difference, I am not just audience, I am also participating in Shepard's experiences, because of the outstanding way you pulled me into this epic adventure.

I tried to figure out what was happening when I finished the game and so I looked back recalling what I did. I played the series from the beginning. I pulled "Ginger" Shepard through all three parts going the badass way - or renegade, as it is termed. I played in English, though it's not my native language, the VA is just too great to get spoilt by translation.

I'm not recounting everything of the finale, I was shocked and moved several times during the finale sequence. I will refer to just the part that happens after speaking to the "catalyst" (the child).

OK, now there were three possiibilities. Like a Monty Hall dilemma. Putting Monty Hall aside I really experienced a dilemma, trying to figure out what Shepard would do. What she needed to do.
First, there is the destruction opption. Shepard preferred this throughout the series, but here it's not an option, because she is not a ruthless and cold bastard. She took considerable effort saving the Rachni Queen and coming to terms with the Geth and others. Killing is an option, Genocide is not.

"OK, what's that on the left? Did I get that right? What did that guy tell? I didn't expect this. Control? What did he say about a third option?"
Shepard is trying to find a means to end the reaper threat, and if possible save Earth. Sacrifice is acceptable if the result justifies so. But each of the decisions comes with its drawbacks, the most notable being the destruction of the mass relays which effectively dooms a lot of people to stay for a considerable time in the sol system. Shepard rejects these solutions, she came here to end it in another way.

I tried to figure out the feeling I had during this sequence, while I had Shepard limping to and fro and frantically rejecting and reassessinig the options. I think "dismay" and "despair" are the words that actually hit the nail on the head. I became increasingly dismayed, because I realized: Whatever I chose, Shepard would fail. And she would be totally alone with this decision, only me witnessing this very private moment.

I picked the synthesis option the first time and watched Shepard disintegrate. She jumped in hope to achieve the best but utterly defeated and reduced to a humble pawn. This is indeed a great tragic fall.

I became very sad seeing my hero perishing so wasted. I had to cry. She would never know whether her sacifice had an effect. She'd never know if she wasn't just tricked. And I wasn't very sure either - the cutscene left open a couple of things. The stargazer sequence should have helped alleviating the grief, but it didn't because I was still with Shepard who was not only dead but disintegrated. No ease, no remedy, no "Erlösung".

I put aside my feeling quickly, but they kept nagging. I can't speak for others, because what I feel are naturally very personal and subjective experiences.

But consider this: Aside from whatever objective quality can be attributed to the finale, a player who got immersed and invested emotionally into the game is only able to consider the finale objectively with an effort. It's not easy to let go if you are deeply involved to the success of Shepard. You did well in integrating players into the story, exceptionally well. You did not very well in pulling us out of it.

I'm not saying that I feel being actively hurt or trampled on - i can let go of it and focus on other things. but I'm not so sure everyone else can.
So if "closure" as being mentioned in some of your statements means to commit some assistance in helping players to alleviate elements of frustration that might have been experienced, I would strongly and urgently endorse and recommend it.
It's one thing to offer quite new ways of experiencing entertainment - and it is another to deny that it might take influence on us.

I don't know what might be the best way to do so. Try to take a players perspective, I know that working on a big thing causes often a narrow view on things. I narrowed my view also, I narrowed it to Shepard's quest of success.

Rage, anger, frustration might be reactions to the emotion that was experienced by some players. Please take this seriously. And if you ever consider to have a game character take a deep fall, offer a way for people to be pulled out of that experience. They might not take this lightly.

Keep it up
Thomas (39ys, Germany)

tl;dr:
Emotional involvement in story and protagonist causes players to experience a very personal defeat and failure. Missing closure, means of "pulling players out" of this experience might cause strong emotional reactions. Empathic approach to this strongly recommended.

Thanks. I can totally relate to this post. I'm kinda getting over the whole thing by remembering the good and funny times. I also believe we will see a future for 'The Shepard'.

[M2S SOLID JOSH]

this is the first time an ending impacted me so much. i feel like it destroyed the trilogy itself (my opinion) in those few minutes of...whatever u want to call that ending. when i was going to finish me3 i was gonna go right back me1 and go through the series again. now its not even worth it

[Lord Atherios]

M2S SOLID JOSH wrote...

this is the first time an ending impacted me so much. i feel like it destroyed the trilogy itself (my opinion) in those few minutes of...whatever u want to call that ending. when i was going to finish me3 i was gonna go right back me1 and go through the series again. now its not even worth it

Yeah,  this is like those "Make your own story" books (You had to choose f.e. to run into the forest (go to page 30) enter the cave (go to page 5) or go to the town (go to page 10)). Imagine that no matter which way you pick, you'll end in the same page. Whats the point then? 

I feel exactly the same. Im not going to play again the whole trilogy, no matter which way you'll take, you will end in the same page.

Modifié par Lord Atherios, 22 mars 2012 - 01:30 .

[Tezzajh]

O yes you are really listning but not to us, in every statement that comes from bioware there is constant mentioning of how great the critics have claimed it to be but why? we all know it was a good game no one said it was rubbish, we say the ending is rubbish which effects the whole game.

and for God sake stop calling yourselfs artists, artists are people who use a paintbrush who express passion. You are being paid to write a script . money does not create true art

[cedgedc]

Le0n1 wrote...

cedgedc wrote...


There is a big flaw in the indoctrination theory.. atleast the timeline involved.

When Shepard is talking to the Prothean VI on Thessia, the VI talks to him openly. However, when Kai Leng arrives, it immediately reports "Indoctrinated presence detected, activating security protocols."

If shepard was becoming indoctrinated from as early as the Arrival DLC, he would have been more or less as far along as Kai Leng, and the VI would in all likeliness have picked up on this.

I may have missed some critical information during my playthroughs, but there's something about that VI being able to detect indictrination on organic beings that I find odd.

In ME1, when Shepard is talking to the Prothean VI on Ilos, at one point it says that small pockets of Prothean survivors were able to remain hidden and, from time to time, more refugees would arrive at their camps. The problem is that some of these Protheans were already indoctrinated, unleashed by the Reapers to detect and eliminate them, and that's precisely what happened according to Vigil

The thing is, if the Protheans had the technology to detect indoctrination on organics, then why didn't they use it to protect their hideouts and kill those that were already lost? Wouldn't that be your first priority when setting up a refugee camp? Put in place a series of security measures to prevent that kind of thing from happen?

It's important to keep in mind the fact that the Prothean extinction took place over centuries. People were born, grew up, and died before it ended. I think the implication was that many of those tricks worked on them early on, but that they adapted over time.

They managed to create their own relay to access the citadel, to create beacons which could use their natural empathic abilities to convey emotions and memories, and eventually they were able to develop some means of detecting indoctrination, all through the course of this war.

Frankly the last one is the least of those developments because their natural abilities allow them to read so much about the people around them. (This you learn if you have played the ME3 DLC)

[M2S SOLID JOSH]

Lord Atherios wrote...

M2S SOLID JOSH wrote...

this is the first time an ending impacted me so much. i feel like it destroyed the trilogy itself (my opinion) in those few minutes of...whatever u want to call that ending. when i was going to finish me3 i was gonna go right back me1 and go through the series again. now its not even worth it

Yeah,  this is like those "Make your own story" books (You had to choose f.e. to run into the forest (go to page 30) enter the cave (go to page 5) or go to the town (go to page 10)). Imagine that no matter which way you pick, you'll end in the same page. Whats the point then? 

I feel exactly the same. Im not going to play again the whole trilogy, no matter which way you'll take, you will end in the same page.

....youre goin to make me cry again . but seriously y slap us in the face with a "artistic" ending? if we wanted that we'd go play shasow of the collouses or journe, they knew art and that was the basis of their games. ME3 was not based on art like those games but in a story driven way that the writers just pissed all over

[Deliquesce]

Bioware,

I love my Shepard, my Shepard is an extension of my being. Her choices are my choices, and everything she does, I feel the weight of the consequences. I've nursed my Shepard since the first Mass Effect way back when, making sure everything she did sat comfortably with me. I was so attached to her because you did a great job at developing her in a way I could control.

Everyone on the Normandy and beyond, even down to minor characters, all had an affect on my Shepard, and in turn, myself. Remembering back, even the suicidal girl on the Citadel had me empathic and sympathetic, feeling real emotions, hesitant to do anything that might trigger an unfortunate event. Shepard was attached to all of her crew, as was I, talking to them at every viable opportunity and learning as much as possible about them. As a consequence, Virmire took it's toll on me, from the intense talking down of Wrex, to having to make the choice on who didn't survive. I didn't really like Ashley, not up until I played through the whole game with her later with a different Shepard, but killing her was a hard choice my Shepard, and I, had to live with.

The series continued on this note through the first, second, and third games, excelling in character development done well enough that I'd tear up when I lost those closest to me (Mordin, Thane and Legion was an emotional roller coaster!) I enjoyed the whole ride, even starting to respect Javik when I had first dismissed him as a complete jackass. The last chat I had with him hit home, and you know, I wanted to salute the guy myself!

My Shepard's LI was Kaidan, she'd been faithful to him all the way through the second game, even at the expense of getting the Paramour achievement, because my Shepard just wasn't the type of woman who gave up on people, even if they acted like an ass to her on Horizon. The love scene was done really well, but when meant more to me was that last chat on Earth. I really felt it when he told Shepard he couldn't lose her again, I wanted to jump through my screen and hug the guy, but I'm glad my Shepard did it for me!

I really have to commend Bioware for such work on your characters, your story lines (up til the ending), and how hard you worked on making sure that Shepard felt like a character everyone could be proud of. Whether renegade or paragon, Shepard kicked ass, and will always stand as an influential fictional character in my life.

However, all that loving work by developers and gamers alike was unravelled by endings that just didn't cut it. The games lost all replay value, because I'm not going to go through all that again for those endings. Even if Shepard did die, or was Indoctrinated, where is my crew? Where is the culmination of all those hours I spent nursing relationships with Shepard's squad mates and crew? Am I to believe that Joker, who stood with Shepard all those years hotfooted it in the last minute of the battle with all those I cared about, even the ones who were previously on the ground with me? I watched them run to that beam with me, Bioware. Did Joker see me lying on the ground after the laser struck and decide to evacuate my squad and leave Shepard?

The endings just didn't fit with anything. Why couldn't I question that star-child or whatever more? Why did Shepard just take all of his information as if it was gospel? The indoctrination theory could work, or a dream sequence, but we shouldn't be left with more questions than answers in an ending that we all anticipated for five long years.

There are videos on youtube, the Jeremy Jahn or Angry Joe ones put our questions and points of view without me having to go into more. You already know by now why everyone is so saddened and hurt by your lack of polish and work on the ending. I didn't come on here to bullet point everything, just simply put that I loved 2.99 Mass Effect games, and now I'm skeptical.

I hope whatever you do restores my faith. I don't want to be the type who raises my brow every time DLC, or new games come out. I don't want to be bitter.

- L

[heathxxx]

Something akin to this, would be the "perfect" ending...

Modifié par heathxxx, 22 mars 2012 - 01:44 .

[cedgedc]

Tezzajh wrote...

O yes you are really listning but not to us, in every statement that comes from bioware there is constant mentioning of how great the critics have claimed it to be but why? we all know it was a good game no one said it was rubbish, we say the ending is rubbish which effects the whole game.

and for God sake stop calling yourselfs artists, artists are people who use a paintbrush who express passion. You are being paid to write a script . money does not create true art

You sir, are short sighted.

[DarkFaerie316]

I really didn't enjoy the ending. It really felt to me like none of the choices that I made were taken into account and they were not reflected at all in the ending. It was very generic and no real difference, the same ending with different coloured beams. I was very disappointed that no matter what you choose, the relays are gone, joker crash lands the ship and thats about it. You have done wonders Bioware, Mass Effect is an astounding game (I never got to play ME1 as I have just a PS3) but I was never interested in shooters until ME2. ME2 got me hooked and I was eagerly awaiting ME3 to see how things went. I was amazed, astounded and totally immersed until the ending, then I just felt very let down. I hope we get some more answers as I'm still left wondering "wth just went on?" Thanks for listening

[Atraiyu Wrynn]

Need to add my 2 cents on Greg's statement from yesterday. When you combine it with Casey's earlier one, I fear that Bioware is going to make things worse.

If the plan is to not alter the ending at all, but simply to add somethings on to it to explain things better, Bioware is probably better off doing nothing at all. Unles you plan to redo the first 2 games, nothing you have the catalyst say will make the reaper motives make more sense with additional explanation.

Having a mission where you go save the Normandy crew sounds like a good step, but you only survive in the destroy ending and that requires you to sell out EDI and the Geth. If you don't plan on altering this then what is the point?

I don't see how this works out without at least some ALTERATIONS to the existing endings, or the addition of entirely new ending options.

[Seeeg]

however, it is obvious that the final act it's been cut from the game.
i mean, the final sequences are too separated from each other.
- spoiler alert -
there are toooo many details:

child that no one sees (and ghostly presence of his in the end, see 'indoctrination' on codex).
shepard shoots anderson and later have a wound in the same spot.
if you look closer in the CONTROL and SYNTHESIS ending he has husks skin and the same eyes of the illusive man.
only DESTRUCTION ending shows an alive shepard.
when shep wakes up before entering into the beam, look around, you will see trees, like from your dreams seq.
and many, many other details are there..

it was intentionally cut from the game so people can talk about it, create a big fuss and only then release dlc that fills the plot holes.
shep will wake up, finish the battle someway, citadel explode, running normandy, bla bla, bla..
that is your next downloadable content.
my bet is on april FOOLSday, ahah

however, hell of a game!
love everything.. except sub-quests.. feels so unreal!

[Polat995]

Yeah, I'm sure you are listening, Bioware. That's why you complicated statements and give news about Dragon Age 3: TO DEFLECT OUR REACTIONS BUT YOU CAN'T!

[Peregrin25]

Tezzajh wrote...

O yes you are really listning but not to us, in every statement that comes from bioware there is constant mentioning of how great the critics have claimed it to be but why? we all know it was a good game no one said it was rubbish, we say the ending is rubbish which effects the whole game.

and for God sake stop calling yourselfs artists, artists are people who use a paintbrush who express passion. You are being paid to write a script . money does not create true art

That is where you are wrong, writing is a form of art design is art, CGI is art, video games are artistic and need artistic minds to create them. Most those people that design write and everything in video games has a bachelors or masters degree from an art institution.

Saying it isn't art is just naieve. Next I guess you will say music or photography isn't art and that cooking isn't art. Art isn't just charcoal, pencils, pens, paints, brushes and canvas.

I am an artist, I draw with charcoal and pencils mostly, black and white very rarely colors and paints. I do CG stuff on occation. Dose CG characters I create not art? Is the Graphic Novel I been attempting to write and draw not art?
I am writing a story for my graphic novel according to you that isn't art. Infact writing is the most expressive form of art than paints.

And money doesn't create true art? Well to some extent I agree but here is where that statement makes no sence. First they create a story, script re-writes etc... story boards, mockups, then they start the concepts and design, then they start environment desin and cg and themn mgame mechanics etc... you get the picture. at the start of that tpo the end, they do not make any money from it until it is released to the public. According to your way of thinking they get paid before they make the game. Yeah they do get funding, bud like movies they get a budget and they have to fall inside that budget anc chances are they make more than the budget they got. That in my eye is success, not failure. So yeah, money doesn't create true art. The artists do.

Chances are it isn't about the money. Hell, most art schools are expensive as hell. The good ones atleast. Most kids spend the first 10 years paying off their loans with their pay checks if they are lucky to actually get employed.

Next time before you try to sound smart and feel like just bashing because it makes you feel good. Stop and think before you type anything or just don't do it at all. Your remarks are flaigrant and hurtfull. I don't care if no one else cares what you think or what ever the case my be, but that just isn't right!

Modifié par Peregrin25, 22 mars 2012 - 02:03 .