23455 réponses à ce sujet

[wulfbur]

Fred_MacManus wrote...

How many people have seen this?

Great analysis - and he is right in very good point - loss of support for Bioware.  I even cancelled my subscription to SWTOR done by Bioware because of this garbage ending and the way they discounted the emotional involvement of us Shepards.  

I will never buy or support a Bioware product ever again unless they dramatically revise the end of this game if they just throw some sugar coating placating superficial BS content then I will do my part and never give them another dollar, not a quarter not even a penny.

They did not support the fan base so I will not support them.

Modifié par wulfbur, 27 mars 2012 - 09:11 .

[EnforcerWRX7]

wulfbur wrote...

Fred_MacManus wrote...

How many people have seen this?

Great analysis - and he is right in very good point - loss of support for Bioware.  I even cancelled my subscription to SWTOR done by Bioware because of this garbage ending and the way they discounted the emotional involvement of us Shepards.  

I will never buy or support a Bioware product ever again unless they dramatically revise the end of this game if they just throw some sugar coating placating superficial BS content then I will do my part and never give them another dollar, not a quarter not even a penny.

They did not support the fan base so I will not support them.

This is exactly how I feel.  The best way to vote is with your wallet.

The art defense is thin at best and bioware has used the art defense like art is impervious to criticism.  Art is the MOST criticized form of media.

The ending a pure letdown.  Plain and simple.  It felt tacked on, incomplete and bogus all the way around.  It didn't even fit in with the context of the series.  Its like the whole thing basically made sense right until the last 10 minutes and the whole thing went off the deep end.

Bioware could fix it but their PR stunts have told me they do not desire to.

I await for the April announcements but I am not holding my breath.

Modifié par EnforcerWRX7, 27 mars 2012 - 09:18 .

[AlterWanderer]

Greetings,
after readingparts of this threat here and there, I 've got the feeling some people complain about the fact, that they didn't get their happy ending.
I want to make sure, this isn't the real problem.
At my first run I thought (about 3500 points war asset): "This is a cruel scenario. Maybe I need those 5000 just to get a win with a party wipeout." The moment Shephard's head sunk on Andersons shoulder, I saw him bleeding to death. With the oice from the radio and a presumed dead hero, I had an awesome ending. But then it all went to hell!

Be well
AlterWanderedr

[Zork90]

I dont understand why they had to change that ending!!! The one by Drew was cooler, and it had a good connection with Mass Effect as it actually explained what Mass Effect was.

Meh... why did they rush this ending. To me, it doesnt matter what kind of DLC or crap they release. They killed this series in less than 10 minutes... and this is the only story in a game that I've ever cared about. Sigh.

[chevyguy87]

AlterWanderer wrote...

Greetings,
after readingparts of this threat here and there, I 've got the feeling some people complain about the fact, that they didn't get their happy ending.
I want to make sure, this isn't the real problem.
At my first run I thought (about 3500 points war asset): "This is a cruel scenario. Maybe I need those 5000 just to get a win with a party wipeout." The moment Shephard's head sunk on Andersons shoulder, I saw him bleeding to death. With the oice from the radio and a presumed dead hero, I had an awesome ending. But then it all went to hell!

Be well
AlterWanderedr

the argument is not that we did not get our fabled storybook ending its the fact that we did not have THE CHOICE to obtain said ending no matter what we did throughout the previous games no matter if we played full blown paragon all the way through or renegade, collected every war asset got everybody on our side but in the end we did not have the choice to live or die...... that is the real argument

Modifié par chevyguy87, 27 mars 2012 - 09:29 .

[Zork90]

The biggest issue that I've got (except that stupidass starchild) is that we didnt get an ending... that was not an end. I was left with ALOT more questions than answers, and that is not what I expected to get.

[Sybreal]

Balmung31 wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

We appreciate everyone’s feedback about Mass Effect 3 and want you to know that we are listening. Active discussions about the ending are more than welcome here, and the team will be reviewing it for feedback and responding when we can. Please note, we want to give people time to experience the game so while we can’t get into specifics right now, we will be able to address some of your questions once more people have had time to complete the game. In the meantime, we’d like to ask that you keep the non-spoiler areas of our forums and our social media channels spoiler free.
 
We understand there is a lot of debate on the Mass Effect 3 ending and we will be more than happy to engage in healthy discussions once more people get to experience the game. We are listening to all of your feedback.

In the meantime, let's give appreciation to Commander Shepard. Whether you loved the ME3 ending or didn't or you just have a lot of questions, he/she has given many of us some of the best adventures we have had while playing games. What was your favorite moment?

When I see Bioware give appreciation to Shepard by having an optional ending where he lives and can be reunited with his crew and LI, maybe I'll tell you. 

This, this, a thousand times THIS! I was so enthralled by ME3 that I went to sleep just because I cant think straight after 40 some odd hours awake. I was so amazed by the game all the way up until the final choices.
MFW the little kid told me the choices: At first I was like  but then I was like :happy: then I was like  then I was like  then I was like .

Modifié par Sybreal, 27 mars 2012 - 09:29 .

[Peregrin25]

chevyguy87 wrote...

AlterWanderer wrote...

Greetings,
after readingparts of this threat here and there, I 've got the feeling some people complain about the fact, that they didn't get their happy ending.
I want to make sure, this isn't the real problem.
At my first run I thought (about 3500 points war asset): "This is a cruel scenario. Maybe I need those 5000 just to get a win with a party wipeout." The moment Shephard's head sunk on Andersons shoulder, I saw him bleeding to death. With the oice from the radio and a presumed dead hero, I had an awesome ending. But then it all went to hell!

Be well
AlterWanderedr

the argument is not that we did not get our fabled storybook ending its the fact that we did not have THE CHOICE to obtain said ending no matter what we did throughout the previous games no matter if we played full blown paragon all the way through or renegade we did not have the choice to live or die...... that is the real argument

I agree completely. That was probably the biggest let down, but If the Indoctrination theory proves to be right then we still may get our choices.

But yeah I agree with you completely.

[xJNPSx THE WAGN]

While im on, ill chip in my two cents on how the game should end/be continued with dlc. I'm going on the indoctrination theory, which im sure you've all heard. Most ideas here are Shepard waking up from his indoctrination, then heading up the beam again and basically repeating the process with more choices and EMS effects. Doesn't that seem like the game is just saying, "oops lets try this again". Its insulting, and although I wouldn't mind a similar conclusion, it has to breathe new life in the game. I mean, if we want a decent size dlc, it can't be a rewritten last 10 minutes of the game.

Shepard wakes up from the rubble in the streets, and his squad and Anderson is either dead or alive depending on EMS. Seems pretty basic so far right? But the reapers have closed the beam to the citadel. Maybe because they arent stupid and just gonna leave the back door to their destruction open, again. So after some reaper troop fighting, or a cutscene, shepard makes his way back to the base. This could maybe be an opening to use Anderson as a squad mate if your died. He did have a lot of powers in the first level. Anyways, shepard returns to the Normandy and must make a new plan to get on the citadel. Liara, or someone who survived, remembers the conduit on illos from mass effect 1, the true back door to the citadel. I'm don't know if it was confirmed to be destroyed in mass effect 1, but im sure bioware could find a way to bring it back. I mean, they brought in a dang prothean. So Shepard could have a decent hourish long mission to illos, war assets could assist you, and a final battle with harbinger ect ect. basically, I just wanted to say that maybe Shepard should'nt just run through the beam in london. It just seems too obvious.

[improperdancing]

die-yng wrote...

I wanted to write something about the defense BW and many gaming journalists use, that the ednign has to stay, because of artistic integrity and because it is the writers vision:

Since this whole discussion started, there have been examples detailed, for almost every form of media and entertainment in existence, that has been reworked, because of customer/ fan/ readers demand.

Whole seasons of tv series have been retconned afterwards, comicbook heroes biographies change all the time to better fit the taste of todays readers.
Director's cuts for movies are almost standard by now, one example where the effort and demand of fans lead to it, were the original versions of the first three Star Wars movies being made available on DVD or the recut of Highlander 2, which led the movie a long way back to the original Highlander story and away from that stupid they are all aliens bs.

Not going to quote your entire post for the sake of not taking up a crapload of space, but another great example is the movie adaptation of Fight Club, which significantly changed the ending from the book.  However, even the author of the book (Chuck Palahniuk) has gone on record saying that the movie ending was better than the one he came up with.

There's no shame in changing an ending, and it doesn't sacrifice whatever ridiculous definition people have of "artistic integrity" (as if anything created and designed specifically for selling to largest demographic has much to begin with).  There is shame, however, in angering the majority of your customers, and then further alienating them by talking down to them and dodging their legitimate questions and concerns afterward.

[chevyguy87]

I agree completely. That was probably the biggest let down, but If the Indoctrination theory proves to be right then we still may get our choices.

But yeah I agree with you completely.

i too am placing faith in the indoc theory in all honesty its the only saving grace we have left of getting any sense of closure and satisfaction

Modifié par chevyguy87, 27 mars 2012 - 09:32 .

[Zubi Fett]

I did love the history and the game has a whole. About the ending , 50% yeas and 50% no.

For one hand, i like the reason why the Reapers do what they do. What i do not like is the outcome of the 3 endings which all of them end on a victory follow by sorrow in matter of history.

I would have like a more happy ending, where you go back to your crew and bone mate(lover). Something that left Mass Effect universe future more clear.

Has i say, an optional happy ending is what i want, will be nice to see a DLC that add this or a patch.

The unknown of the Normandy crew has the unknown of the galaxy is self because of the destruction of the mass relays is something i do not like.

[Chrislo1990]

Oh man same here. I really really hope this was just indoctrination. The Catalyst Ending is just so illogical. It even goes against established concepts. In Mass Effect 2: Arrival, Dr. Amanda Kenson states clearly that wiping out a mass relay would result in an explosion akin to a supernova, decimating an entire star system. How in the world would organics survive if the the realys are destroyed in the end? Also it is absoulutely infuriating that we are not allowed to save Shepard as a Paragon. We are litereally forced to have an EMS score of 4000, which you can only obtain by playing multiplayer by the way, and choosing the renegade option. we were promised a Perfect Ending without multiplayer. Bioware did not keep their promise.

[Shssay-san]

chevyguy87 wrote...

the argument is not that we did not get our fabled storybook ending its the fact that we did not have THE CHOICE to obtain said ending no matter what we did throughout the previous games no matter if we played full blown paragon all the way through or renegade we did not have the choice to live or die...... that is the real argument

Agreed.  Have an ending like ME2.  There was an option to beat the Collectors without any losses (aka the "happy ending"), there was an option to beat the Collectors but have everyone die (aka the "sad ending") and there were a number of variations in between the two extremes.  No matter what kind of ending you prefer, you're satisfied.  Having just one extreme is going to leave half of your audience feeling cheated.

[Menagra]

On the citadel with Garrus was my favorite moment! I would have liked to see all the characters and decisions I have along the way be featured in cutscenes during the final battle though. Like matyarch aethyta protecting Liara from a brute, shiala leading the noveria group in battle, a quarian dying trying to pull a geth down from the blast and the geth saying "creator? creator?" That sort of thing happening in God awful amounts of cut scenes and ambient conversations.

That would have made ME3 the best game in the history of games. In all honesty.

[Chrislo1990]

Shssay-san wrote...

chevyguy87 wrote...

the argument is not that we did not get our fabled storybook ending its the fact that we did not have THE CHOICE to obtain said ending no matter what we did throughout the previous games no matter if we played full blown paragon all the way through or renegade we did not have the choice to live or die...... that is the real argument

Agreed.  Have an ending like ME2.  There was an option to beat the Collectors without any losses (aka the "happy ending"), there was an option to beat the Collectors but have everyone die (aka the "sad ending") and there were a number of variations in between the two extremes.  No matter what kind of ending you prefer, you're satisfied.  Having just one extreme is going to leave half of your audience feeling cheated.

Yes. I just don't understand why Bioware would do away with a formula that worked in the masterpieces that are ME1 and ME2. I really think that the dev team just went in with them goal of reaching the casual player first and foremost rather than the loyal, passionate fans that have supported Mass Effect since the very beginning.

[Chrislo1990]

By the way guys here's a poll I found regarding the changes you'd like to see in the endings. It's quite popular!
http://social.biowar.../index/10133310

Oh and this one as well: http://social.biowar...06/polls/28989/

Modifié par Chrislo1990, 27 mars 2012 - 10:02 .

[AlterWanderer]

chevyguy87 wrote...

the argument is not that we did not get our fabled storybook ending its the fact that we did not have THE CHOICE to obtain said ending no matter what we did throughout the previous games no matter if we played full blown paragon all the way through or renegade, collected every war asset got everybody on our side but in the end we did not have the choice to live or die...... that is the real argument

Sorry, this wasn't ment to criticize anyone, but to say: "Even if you get the feeling this hole thing is about a happy ending, it's not!"

AlterWanderer

[Voodoo2015]

Please someone explain to me what The Star Child says becaurse it's so confusing and make no sense to me.

The artificial organisms will always rebel against their creators and kill them.
The organic life wouldn't whant to be killed by artificial life, so I created artificial life that would kill all organic life in the universe before the artificial life we created would kill us.

Still can't wrap my head around it.

I can not really understand the genius of it.

The more I think about it the less I understand it, this gives me a headache.

[wsandista]

Voodoo2015 wrote...

Please someone explain to me what The Star Child says becaurse it's so confusing and make no sense to me.

The artificial organisms will always rebel against their creators and kill them.
The organic life wouldn't whant to be killed by artificial life, so I created artificial life that would kill all organic life in the universe before the artificial life we created would kill us.

Still can't wrap my head around it.

I can not really understand the genius of it.

The more I think about it the less I understand it, this gives me a headache.

http://thewonderings...-Dawg-290846719

This explains everything.

[Peregrin25]

chevyguy87 wrote...

I agree completely. That was probably the biggest let down, but If the Indoctrination theory proves to be right then we still may get our choices.

But yeah I agree with you completely.

i too am placing faith in the indoc theory in all honesty its the only saving grace we have left of getting any sense of closure and satisfaction

Yeah, not to mention if you really really follow ME1-3 including the comics and novels the Indoctrination Theory makes a crap load of sense. It is the only logical reason for the current ending. I f it turns out to be true. I wish I could see the looks of the peoples faces that just keep backlashing Bioware for there lack of creativity to an ending and limiting it to only 3 choices that have the same outcome.

Kinda falls in lines of people that believe in creation and those that don't. If those that don't believe I wish I could see their faces when they find out creation is real. lol. Just one of those paradox kinda things I wish I could witness. Would be funny.

So much hate toward Bioware right now. I feel really bad for them, but if Indoctrination Theory proves true, those who be bashing them will and I hope feel like complete asses. lol That's just my personal feeling on the matter haha:lol:

[Shssay-san]

Chrislo1990 wrote...

Yes. I just don't understand why Bioware would do away with a formula that worked in the masterpieces that are ME1 and ME2. I really think that the dev team just went in with them goal of reaching the casual player first and foremost rather than the loyal, passionate fans that have supported Mass Effect since the very beginning.

That definitely could be true.  I'm not really sure why they threw out their winning formula.  It's one of the many questions that's been nagging at me since I finished ME3.  Instead of trying to reach the casual gamer, I think it's possible that the development team was trying to come up with an ending that would blow the players' minds.  But the majority of us (myself included) didn't want to have our minds blown.  We wanted closure.

[chevyguy87]

AlterWanderer wrote...

chevyguy87 wrote...

the argument is not that we did not get our fabled storybook ending its the fact that we did not have THE CHOICE to obtain said ending no matter what we did throughout the previous games no matter if we played full blown paragon all the way through or renegade, collected every war asset got everybody on our side but in the end we did not have the choice to live or die...... that is the real argument

Sorry, this wasn't ment to criticize anyone, but to say: "Even if you get the feeling this hole thing is about a happy ending, it's not!"

AlterWanderer

i understand where your coming from but the word "happy" doesnt necessarily mean we see a cutscene of everybody at the bar making out and getting drunk no "happy" can mean Anderson pulls shepard out of the rubble and together we nuke harbinger in the face and despite overwhelming odds we manage to succeed where Shepard Anderson and our crew make it through to see what life looks like without war that is the "happy" ending i would like to see

[chevyguy87]

Peregrin25 wrote...

chevyguy87 wrote...

I agree completely. That was probably the biggest let down, but If the Indoctrination theory proves to be right then we still may get our choices.

But yeah I agree with you completely.

i too am placing faith in the indoc theory in all honesty its the only saving grace we have left of getting any sense of closure and satisfaction

Yeah, not to mention if you really really follow ME1-3 including the comics and novels the Indoctrination Theory makes a crap load of sense. It is the only logical reason for the current ending. I f it turns out to be true. I wish I could see the looks of the peoples faces that just keep backlashing Bioware for there lack of creativity to an ending and limiting it to only 3 choices that have the same outcome.

Kinda falls in lines of people that believe in creation and those that don't. If those that don't believe I wish I could see their faces when they find out creation is real. lol. Just one of those paradox kinda things I wish I could witness. Would be funny.

So much hate toward Bioware right now. I feel really bad for them, but if Indoctrination Theory proves true, those who be bashing them will and I hope feel like complete asses. lol That's just my personal feeling on the matter haha:lol:

you sir or madam deserve a handshake for staying optomistic and seeing logic its nice to see others who still believe there is some good that can come from this

Modifié par chevyguy87, 27 mars 2012 - 10:24 .

[Srslydude01]

Voodoo2015 wrote...

Please someone explain to me what The Star Child says becaurse it's so confusing and make no sense to me.

The artificial organisms will always rebel against their creators and kill them.
The organic life wouldn't whant to be killed by artificial life, so I created artificial life that would kill all organic life in the universe before the artificial life we created would kill us.

Still can't wrap my head around it.

I can not really understand the genius of it.

The more I think about it the less I understand it, this gives me a headache.

The whole idea behind the Reapers seems unethical. I understand the need to make sure that synthetic doesn't take over and organic life ceases to exist, but from cycle to cycle, there has never been a real problem with synthetic life. So the Reapers just seem evil wiping out organic life for no reason. If they were so against synthetic life, why didn't they just destroy the Geth instead of attempting to take control of them. It is hard to wrap your head around it. They just want to play God.

Who created the Reapers, the Citadel and the Mass Relays?

I don't believe the Reapers themselves built the Citadel and Mass Relays. They just seem like they were meant for harvesting and destruction.

I personally loved the Trilogy. Although I would like an ending that feels like it goes more with what the trilogy built up to, I still love the game regardless.