23455 réponses à ce sujet

[jeweledleah]

Theronyll Itholien wrote...

I read almost all comments here. What I see is people actually saying they have lost their trust in Bioware and stuff like that. Don't forget that they failed in the ending alone. Most agree that the resf of the game was absolutely FANTASTIC!

But damn.. I keep seeing Casey's face. It's like I feel his hatred toward us. It's a delusion I'm sure. But thqt first reaction from Bioware to our criticism was just.... very bad. It also defies logic that the Indoctrination Theory is correct, and that a true ending was already planned as a DLC.

Argh. Bioware! Time to leave a message in this thread, I beg!

oh Casey probably does hate us.  after all, we are hating on his "baby"

as for losing trust in bioware?  to me, I've come to expect the games from them, that leaving feeling better when i finished, then when I started.  games that provide varying degrees of uplifiting even when the times are darkest.  DA2 shook that trust.  ME3?  I can no longer be sure that I won't pick up bioware game, fall in love with the characters and the world and then won't have my heart crushed and danced on.  I don't like that feeling.  I cannot just buy blindly from bioware anymore and just know I'd be happy when I'm done.  they broke my trust.

[Phaelducan]

You get those choices played out immediately. The payoff for the Tuchanka mission is in your scene with Mordin, followed by the Krogan interaction. The whole point of that mission was progression, that's why it's in the first act. You literally can't get further in your mission until the Turians and Krogan make peace. The end-game implications are that you have to have X amount of resources before you can even go to the Cerberus base (not as in a set number, but that by doing the missions you generate some number of assets that in metagaming terms allow you to progress the plot).

Beyond that, the ending IS an issue for me. If they don't release DLC that actually gives us one I'm done as a customer. I said that more than once. What I'm saying is that your expectation for a completely unique experience is silly. Furthermore, your examples of the Suicide Mission have nothing to do with whether you win or not. You are GOING to win ME2 by finishing it. Lots of games of consequences, that isn't the issue. You were saying you want the chance of literal failure to be built into the game's successful completely. That's also silly.

Lots of games feature people dying on the road to victory. Remember Aeris being gutted by Sephiroth? How about Dom buying it in Gears3? More recent and relevant? You can literally murder your squad in Kotor1. That changes nothing.... IN THE END you fight and defeat Malak. That's the game winning moment. The protagonist defeats the antagonist.

You are asking for something which doesn't exist, has never existed, and I make the argument shouldn't exist. We don't play games to lose (again, also said that previously). Kotor would suck if by losing, Malak wins, and that's the successful completion of the game. Instead, if you lose, you reload until you get it right.

[Phaelducan]

jeweledleah wrote...

Theronyll Itholien wrote...

I read almost all comments here. What I see is people actually saying they have lost their trust in Bioware and stuff like that. Don't forget that they failed in the ending alone. Most agree that the resf of the game was absolutely FANTASTIC!

But damn.. I keep seeing Casey's face. It's like I feel his hatred toward us. It's a delusion I'm sure. But thqt first reaction from Bioware to our criticism was just.... very bad. It also defies logic that the Indoctrination Theory is correct, and that a true ending was already planned as a DLC.

Argh. Bioware! Time to leave a message in this thread, I beg!

oh Casey probably does hate us.  after all, we are hating on his "baby"

as for losing trust in bioware?  to me, I've come to expect the games from them, that leaving feeling better when i finished, then when I started.  games that provide varying degrees of uplifiting even when the times are darkest.  DA2 shook that trust.  ME3?  I can no longer be sure that I won't pick up bioware game, fall in love with the characters and the world and then won't have my heart crushed and danced on.  I don't like that feeling.  I cannot just buy blindly from bioware anymore and just know I'd be happy when I'm done.  they broke my trust.

I think they broke a lot of people's trust, but that's not to say it can't be mended. They took a big risk by going this route, and it's a lot to ask of their customers to accept their decision while we wait for a real conclusion. If the ending DLC is good, and they don't charge for it, all is forgiven (at least from me and some other customers). I'll consider ME3 a great piece of gaming history, will play it again, and give props to the writers for doing something daring and innovating with their product.

If it sucks, but is free. I'm done, won't buy another Bioware game.

If it's great, but isn't free, I'm done paying launch-day prices, pre-ordering, collector's editions, all that crap. I'm not enough of a knucklehead to pass on good games just on principle, but I definitely will buy used/trade with friends, etc. I'm into ME for $200 bucks not including day-1 DLC, so it's a big investment. IF they charge me more now, just to see the actual ending for the game, I won't be giving them any more cash. I'll give my money to the used market, and online-passes be damned.

[Jared Shepard]

Here's my take on things for what it's worth. The Mass Effect series has been the sci-fi epic series that I had always wanted to interact in. George Lucas has lost his mind in the last decade and the Star Wars series that I grew up loving in the 70's and 80's was destroyed. It's ruined. I mean, the man put aliens in an Indiana Jones movie. It was time to move on and leave that nonsense for the children.
But in Mass Effect, I found that "fix" that I had been missing. A universe so full of lore and interesting characters that I cared about. And my Shepard was just the way that I wanted him to be because of my choices. When the ending finally came (my Shepard lived in the end) I felt numb. I just sat there and listened to the piano playing in the final scenes and I felt numb.
I talked about it with friends and read about the discussion on the internet and I felt like I had made the only real choice I could make. Destroy the Reapers. Any other choice seemed ridiculous.
And after some time, I'm okay with it. What happens from here is my interpretation. While I want to see Bioware make more DLC and find out what happened to Liara, Joker, Garrus, and the rest, I guess to me, I don't want to force anyone's hand. I don't want to be Kathy Bates in "Misery" and I believe that a lot of people are acting just like that.
This is Bioware's world. Not mine. I was just allowed to play in it for the last 5 years. And if it was my creation and my piece of artwork. I wouldn't want anyone to tell me that I should change it.
Thanks Bioware for this series, these characters and this experience. I demand nothing. But I will eagerly await any more news of the crew of the SSV Normandy should it come around. It's been a hell of a ride.

[NotAnotherDisplayName]

Phaelducan wrote...

If it sucks, but is free. I'm done, won't buy another Bioware game.

If it's great, but isn't free, I'm done paying launch-day prices, pre-ordering, collector's editions, all that crap. I'm not enough of a knucklehead to pass on good games just on principle, but I definitely will buy used/trade with friends, etc. I'm into ME for $200 bucks not including day-1 DLC, so it's a big investment. IF they charge me more now, just to see the actual ending for the game, I won't be giving them any more cash. I'll give my money to the used market, and online-passes be damned.

I get losing blind trust that what they've made is gold (I got that with Dragon Age 2, not bad, but not what I wanted).  And to that I also get not paying launch day prices or taking pre-orders or collector's editions.  I try to always look at games in the grand scheme of entertainment in general- a movie costs what, $10 for 2 hours of enjoyment?  A (legal) dvd costs $10-15 for the same two hours but I can watch it over and over again...with or without pants.  Each Mass Game cost me $60 (or more in the case of 2 and 3), but I got 50 or more hours of entertainment out of each game. 

Writing off a company because of what some consider a bad decision in an ending seems...over the top.  Broken trust I understand, suspicion I get, but what amounts to a boycott I don't think I get.

[jeweledleah]

Phaelducan wrote...

I think they broke a lot of people's trust, but that's not to say it can't be mended. They took a big risk by going this route, and it's a lot to ask of their customers to accept their decision while we wait for a real conclusion. If the ending DLC is good, and they don't charge for it, all is forgiven (at least from me and some other customers). I'll consider ME3 a great piece of gaming history, will play it again, and give props to the writers for doing something daring and innovating with their product.

If it sucks, but is free. I'm done, won't buy another Bioware game.

If it's great, but isn't free, I'm done paying launch-day prices, pre-ordering, collector's editions, all that crap. I'm not enough of a knucklehead to pass on good games just on principle, but I definitely will buy used/trade with friends, etc. I'm into ME for $200 bucks not including day-1 DLC, so it's a big investment. IF they charge me more now, just to see the actual ending for the game, I won't be giving them any more cash. I'll give my money to the used market, and online-passes be damned.

I don't think I could ever preorder another bioware game.  I would HAVE to read spoilers and reviews first.  right now I'm just deciding how much I'm willing to pay for them in a future.  if the ending remains?  then I won't spend more on future games if at all, then I'd spend for a slice of excelent red velvet cake from the bakery that I love.  aka $5 or less.  and definitely no more DLC content.

[DuncanId]

NotAnotherDisplayName wrote...

To me, and apparently in this particular thread I'm in the minority, the replayability for me is based on how things change, it's not all about the end.  It's not about if I get cut scene 1, or cut scene 10 in the last 10 mintues of the game.  How does me killing the salarian scientist in 2 impact the scenes in 3?  What happens if Thane, or Legion, or Mordin, are dead in 3?  What happens if I don't have enough paragon and can't keep Tali from killing herself?  Those are the scenes I really enjoyed.

If you save Tali, she dies anyway, if legion or mordin are dead en ME2, they just reapear en ME3, if you kill the rachni in the first, the rachni is still there.

So, just because the relays were destroyed doesn't mean everyone in the galaxy dies.  There are a lot of systems with no mass relays in them, right?  And when the crucible wave passed over people, it didn't kill them.  From my perspective the galaxy would be dramatically changed, but life goes on- you even see it with your crew setting down on mystery planet x or whatever, not everyone is dead.  Your sacrifice in theory saved organic life.

All mayor planets are devastated, the fleets are stranded in the solar sistem, FTL travel is insufficient to travel except within nearby clusters, turians and quarians can't eat human food and the krogan homeworld is a wasteland incapable of sustaining long term life. Just because the multicolored light didn't kill them instantly doesn't mean they are not screwed. And Tali and garrus trapped in another planet without food? Yeah, very dead.

And I'm talking about the logical consecuences of what we got.

So, I'm curious, how would you have combined the choices of your 3 games into an ending?  Apologies if you've covered this before, these threads are amazingly long and I have to admit I'm too lazy to read the whole thing.  I thought, mechanically and thematically, the transitions between the games worked.  When I finished two I really wondered how leaving the reaper base intact would change three without throwing it way out of whack, but they turned it into war assets, which kind of worked for me.  And you know your renegade and paragon points through the whole series are all points to- if you don't have x points you don't get dialog options x or y.  But again, it's the scenes where my choices let up to Ashley killing Wrex, or Jack hating me and not leading the biotic kids, or letting Cerberus keep their reaper tech.

That has been discussed a lot os times already. There is a very complete graphic that shows how to take into account al mayor choices in all three games.

And at least they could have shown us the different species helping in the final battle, in space and in the ground. What about the rachni, the elcor or the drell? If you didn't save the rachni queen in the first game but you do in the third, the rachni betray you, but as it is only a number that most of the time you can't see, it doesn't have any impact. And what about Udina? I chose Anderson because it was clear that Udina was a xenophobic bastard who would try to seize power given the chance. How does that ends? Udina is the counselor because bioware says so. Great. Why giving us the choice in the first place?

Well, I woudln't call it BS- I know a good number of folks that played the game, about half of them hated the end and the other half didn't.  But none of them said all replayability is gone, because they liked the things I liked about it. 

In your example of a trip to Europe, I'd still have enjoyed a trip to Europe, and after I got home I wouldn't be thinking that I'd never go to Europe agaon, and I'd probably mostly talk about the trip that didn't involve the accident.  I might be mad for a day or two after the accident, but hey, I was in Europe.

Yes, it's BS, becaus "enjoying the ride" doesn't excuse a broken bad written ending of 10 minutes that looks like a 12 year old kid fanfiction. They change things without explanation, they don't give any closure and they undo all your previous decisions by making you choose between three endings so similar that you have to watch a few times to notice the diferences. You can't compare the ending of this game, wich is the end of a trilogy, with the ending of the two previous games. That just doesn't work. Compare it with the ending of the lord of the rings, star wars or even the matrix.

And yes, to me it breaks al replayability. Whatever I choose, a light of space magic, the relays explode and normandy crashes with Tali and Garrus starving to dead, all fleets stranded on a system that can't maintain all those creatures and a interstela travel economy dependant civilization destroyed. Actually I consider dying in any of the games a better ending. At least that way the future civilizations have a chance. And don't even get me started with the green ending, there's a limit to the disbelief I can suspend...

Another thing is that I never mentioned Europe. I can't even see how that relates to my example. Last time I checked Europe wasn't a desert. And I should know, I live here. I mean, this last few days have been hot, but not that much...

Modifié par DuncanId, 28 mars 2012 - 03:54 .

[NotAnotherDisplayName]

Jared Shepard wrote...
 And my Shepard was just the way that I wanted him to be because of my choices. When the ending finally came (my Shepard lived in the end) I felt numb. I just sat there and listened to the piano playing in the final scenes and I felt numb.

<snip>
I don't want to be Kathy Bates in "Misery" and I believe that a lot of people are acting just like that.
This is Bioware's world. Not mine. I was just allowed to play in it for the last 5 years. And if it was my creation and my piece of artwork. I wouldn't want anyone to tell me that I should change it.
Thanks Bioware for this series, these characters and this experience. I demand nothing. But I will eagerly await any more news of the crew of the SSV Normandy should it come around. It's been a hell of a ride.

 +1

[jeweledleah]

about the whole argument of destination, not the journey.. you are missing something very crucial. in real life, there are no guarantees. so say you go to an amusement park and fall off the last rollercoaster of the day. you would probably go again, becasue hey - freak accidents happen.

in Mass Effect? you know you will be getting this ending. beyond any shadow of a doubt. so if we compare it to amusement parks and rollecoasters - its like going to the park and knowing that you will fall off that rollercoaster. every. single. time. 100% certainty.

so why would I keep going there if I know I'll be falling off the rollercoaster and then be in pain for days afterwards. the journey becomes... not worth it.

and I'm sorry, but unless fans bodily kidnap Mass Effect writing team, break everyone's legs and then hold them hostage untill they rewrite the ending - comparisons to mysery are incredibly insulting.  we're doing NOTHING of the sort.  we're merely telling them what it would take to KEEP us as costumers.  if Kathy Bates acted the way fans do, at most she'd tell the writer (in writing)  that if he doesn't change the ending, she'd never buy another one of his books again.

Modifié par jeweledleah, 28 mars 2012 - 04:00 .

[Phaelducan]

DuncanId wrote...

NotAnotherDisplayName wrote...

To me, and apparently in this particular thread I'm in the minority, the replayability for me is based on how things change, it's not all about the end.  It's not about if I get cut scene 1, or cut scene 10 in the last 10 mintues of the game.  How does me killing the salarian scientist in 2 impact the scenes in 3?  What happens if Thane, or Legion, or Mordin, are dead in 3?  What happens if I don't have enough paragon and can't keep Tali from killing herself?  Those are the scenes I really enjoyed.

If you save Tali, she dies anyway, if legion or mordin are dead en ME2, they just reapear en ME3, if you kill the rachni in the first, the rachni is still there.

So, just because the relays were destroyed doesn't mean everyone in the galaxy dies.  There are a lot of systems with no mass relays in them, right?  And when the crucible wave passed over people, it didn't kill them.  From my perspective the galaxy would be dramatically changed, but life goes on- you even see it with your crew setting down on mystery planet x or whatever, not everyone is dead.  Your sacrifice in theory saved organic life.

All mayor planets are devastated, the fleets are stranded in the solar sistem, FTL travel is insufficient to travel except within nearby clusters, turians and quarians can't eat human food and the krogan homeworld is a wasteland incapable of sustaining long term life. Just because the multicolored light didn't kill them instantly doesn't mean they are not screwed. And Tali and garrus trapped in another planet without food? Yeah, very dead.

And I'm talking about the logical consecuences of what we got.

So, I'm curious, how would you have combined the choices of your 3 games into an ending?  Apologies if you've covered this before, these threads are amazingly long and I have to admit I'm too lazy to read the whole thing.  I thought, mechanically and thematically, the transitions between the games worked.  When I finished two I really wondered how leaving the reaper base intact would change three without throwing it way out of whack, but they turned it into war assets, which kind of worked for me.  And you know your renegade and paragon points through the whole series are all points to- if you don't have x points you don't get dialog options x or y.  But again, it's the scenes where my choices let up to Ashley killing Wrex, or Jack hating me and not leading the biotic kids, or letting Cerberus keep their reaper tech.

That has been discussed a lot os times already. There is a very complete graphic that shows how to take into account al mayor choices in all three games.

And at least they could have shown us the different species helping in the final battle, in space and in the ground. What about the rachni, the elcor or the drell? If you didn't save the rachni queen in the first game but you do in the third, the rachni betray you, but as it is only a number that most of the time you can't see, it doesn't have any impact. And what about Udina? I chose Anderson because it was clear that Udina was a xenophobic bastard who would try to seize power given the chance. How does that ends? Udina is the counselor because bioware says so. Great. Why giving us the choice in the first place?

Well, I woudln't call it BS- I know a good number of folks that played the game, about half of them hated the end and the other half didn't.  But none of them said all replayability is gone, because they liked the things I liked about it. 

In your example of a trip to Europe, I'd still have enjoyed a trip to Europe, and after I got home I wouldn't be thinking that I'd never go to Europe agaon, and I'd probably mostly talk about the trip that didn't involve the accident.  I might be mad for a day or two after the accident, but hey, I was in Europe.

Yes, it's BS, becaus "enjoying the ride" doesn't excuse a broken bad written ending of 10 minutes that looks like a 12 year old kid fanfiction. They change things without explanation, they don't give any closure and they undo all your previous decisions by making you choose between three endings so similar that you have to watch a few times to notice the diferences. You can't compare the ending of this game, wich is the end of a trilogy, with the ending of the two previous games. That just doesn't work. Compare it with the ending of the lord of the rings, star wars or even the matrix.

And yes, to me it breaks al replayability. Whatever I choose, a light of space magic, the relays explode and normandy crashes with Tali and Garrus starving to dead, all fleets stranded on a system that can't maintain all those creatures and a interstela travel economy dependant civilization destroyed. Actually I consider dying in any of the games a better ending. At least that way the future civilizations have a chance. And don't even get me started with the green ending, there's a limit to the disbelief I can suspend...

Another thing is that I never mentioned Europe. I can't even see how that relates to my example. Last time I checked Europe wasn't a desert. And I should know, I live here. I mean, this last few days have been hot, but not that much...

Don't know what you are smoking...

My Tali was alive and well, and any squaddie who dies in 2 doesn't make it to 3. Pics or it didn't happen.

Also, there were always more examples of Rachni then just the queen. You find them in the listening post quest series and on at least 1 ship. Not a big logical jump to assume that more made it to ME3 even if you nuked the Queen.

You are projecting a lot of things which aren't true. Not saying you should love the ending as is (I certainly don't) but at least be fair. Hell for all we know the ending sequence is completely in Shep's head and none of it will matter once the DLC drops (again, not saying that's right or fair business practice from Bioware), but again... let go of your hate.

[akenn312]

[quote]Bjursan wrote...

[quote]Sc2mashimaro wrote...

 This, so much this: 
[/quote]

This vid is great! This sums up the problem perfectly; the ending just doesn’t make sense and doesn’t follow the Mass Effect formula at all. ME 1 & 2 and even the events in ME 3 up to the final battle all made sense and follow the ME formula that we all know and love... then things just get out of the formula for no apparent reason. As soon as you hit the "Death Run" everything starts to unravel and completely gets off track like it’s been written by an entirely new person that doesn’t understand the formula or doesn’t respect it, which I guess from what I have been reading here is the case. There has never been a point in Mass Effect that Shepard has not had an opportunity to gather information from an antagonist to make a final decision and make a Paragon or Renegade choice that effects the outcome differently, All three choices have the basic same result, Also out of the blue they add a new choice that is obviously the one that the people that are pushing the new formula want so you to pick. So they dump the orignal Good & Evil concept. There is no intelligence in this method. It’s obvious the synergy green choice is the “preferred choice” in the new direction writers perspective.

Also there has never been a moment when Shepard and his team don’t fight the last battle, again why change now when that part of the game works so well? That is what people like about Mass Effect you gather all information  to find out how to defeat the villian then you battle the final antagonist or boss using teamwork with the two characters best customized to fight the last scenario or with different ones just to see what happens. The ending completely ignores that fun and intelligent part of the game and completely dumbs it down to a quick and simple three choice way to end the game. In past games there were unlimited ways to defeat the Human Reaper or Saren to get to the end. But only three ways to end the Reaper menace? Actually if you think about it the Reapers win anyway. Don’t they want to make humans and machines merge into a form they choose? Yeah…never mind that. You can even have Shepard die, but why rob the players of that final confrontation?

They should just have a do over and I think that’s okay. It’s a video game not Homer’s Iliad. I personally would applaud them doing this because that at least it will tell me they care about the true formula of Mass Effect and the story and not letting these new creatives hijack it trying to make it some game that try’s to get you to spend more money to get the answers. The Javik part was something to overlook but this bad ending and changing the whole concept has me really down on ME now that I really think about it. This ending really moves Mass Effect into something I’m not sure I like at all.  So if everyone is a machine no reason to have VI's, AI's, Geth or mechs or Omi-Tools Biotc implants ect…Just not Sci-Fi in my opinion and what makes Mass Effect 1 & 2 good is it was well thought out Sci-Fi before.
 
Why do they keep trying to dumb down the Mass Effect’s formula? If it’s not broken why try to change it?

Modifié par akenn312, 28 mars 2012 - 05:54 .

[darkway1]

Phaelducan wrote...

jeweledleah wrote...

Theronyll Itholien wrote...

I read almost all comments here. What I see is people actually saying they have lost their trust in Bioware and stuff like that. Don't forget that they failed in the ending alone. Most agree that the resf of the game was absolutely FANTASTIC!

But damn.. I keep seeing Casey's face. It's like I feel his hatred toward us. It's a delusion I'm sure. But thqt first reaction from Bioware to our criticism was just.... very bad. It also defies logic that the Indoctrination Theory is correct, and that a true ending was already planned as a DLC.

Argh. Bioware! Time to leave a message in this thread, I beg!

oh Casey probably does hate us.  after all, we are hating on his "baby"

as for losing trust in bioware?  to me, I've come to expect the games from them, that leaving feeling better when i finished, then when I started.  games that provide varying degrees of uplifiting even when the times are darkest.  DA2 shook that trust.  ME3?  I can no longer be sure that I won't pick up bioware game, fall in love with the characters and the world and then won't have my heart crushed and danced on.  I don't like that feeling.  I cannot just buy blindly from bioware anymore and just know I'd be happy when I'm done.  they broke my trust.

I think they broke a lot of people's trust, but that's not to say it can't be mended. They took a big risk by going this route, and it's a lot to ask of their customers to accept their decision while we wait for a real conclusion. If the ending DLC is good, and they don't charge for it, all is forgiven (at least from me and some other customers). I'll consider ME3 a great piece of gaming history, will play it again, and give props to the writers for doing something daring and innovating with their product.

If it sucks, but is free. I'm done, won't buy another Bioware game.

If it's great, but isn't free, I'm done paying launch-day prices, pre-ordering, collector's editions, all that crap. I'm not enough of a knucklehead to pass on good games just on principle, but I definitely will buy used/trade with friends, etc. I'm into ME for $200 bucks not including day-1 DLC, so it's a big investment. IF they charge me more now, just to see the actual ending for the game, I won't be giving them any more cash. I'll give my money to the used market, and online-passes be damned.

I totally get where people are coming from with regards to DLC etc......I've always had the impression that Bioware releases the core game with the intention of compleating it as intended via DLC......MASS2 was good but when you add all the DLC it's a monster of a game,same can be said for the Dragon age series,if you add all the DA2 DLC you end up with a superior game compared to it's core release.

As far as MASS3 goes I pretty much expected more of the same but on a bigger scale,Bioware games in general though are with out doubt the BEST gaming has to offer and for that reason alone I will never walk past a Bioware title,supporting the DLC side of things however is a matter of choice but in the case of Mass3 DLC It will be interesting to see how people react if DLC presents us with a continued ending.......the DLC would no longer represent game extra's but will in fact be a vital part of the game...an ending you must pay more for.

[TweekCVVox]

 Firstly, let me say to BioWare: thanks for listening.  We really do appreciate it.

Secondly, to the fans: your argument is certainly valid.

Lastly, for your consideration (both BioWare and my fellow players), I present my points against the ending of Mass Effect 3:

1. While the Mass Effect plot is based on the magnificently overwhelming onslaught of the Reaper menace, the relationships that we, the players, as Commander Shepard develop with our crew are the heart and soul of the franchise.  I bought the first game because I heard it was an interesting and refreshing sci-fi story.  I bought the second and third because I wanted to see how Shepard developed as a character, in reference to both the over-arching plot and the personal narrative.  These relationships are what kept the players coming back for more, and garnished the series such loyal and passionate fans.  We cry when Mordin dies curing the genophage because it hurts us.  That's our friend dying in there, and we don't take it lightly.  Shepard's defeat of Kai Leng is so poetically just, we can feel it in our bones; how dare that "son of a ****," as Shepard so perfectly puts it, have killed our friend Thane, who wanted nothing more than to atone for the sins of his past.  When Liara visits us before the attack on the Cerberus Base, we feel the bittersweet pangs in our hearts, because we know that despite the love between them, the odds are slim that they will both survive the fight against the Reapers.  We feel these things because we have invested the time in who these characters are, how they interact with Shepard, and what their sacrifices and friendships mean to us.

The ending offers no closure on these relationships.  Everything is left out in the open, perhaps to the interpretation of the viewer, but without any kind of closure nonetheless.  The crew is left stranded on some distant, tropical planet, the mass relays destroyed, and with no way to repair the Normandy to try to get back to Earth and Shepard.  There is no discussion on who lives or dies, whether or not anyone in the crew stayed behind on Earth, or if Shepard's LI ended up raising his child alone, imparting his legacy.  These things bother us because, while we can both accept and expect Shepard's self-sacrifice, we cannot abide not knowing what has happened to our friends and loved ones.

2. Mass Effect's narrative gameplay is all about choices, and the third installment presents perfectly the consequences of our actions in the first and second games.  Nearly every decision in every conversation that Shepard has from the moment the Normandy leaves Earth to the moment the crew is racing for the new Conduit  could be altered, affected, or changed based on dialogue choices we made, side quests we completed, or crew members who survived the previous two adventures.  The gathering of all the different war assets, the establishment of peace between the races, and the final moments of preparation for battle against the Reapers are all exceptionally different, based solely on our words.  To have that freedom of choice, that ability to change our fate taken away from us, feels like all of our choices beforehand have been robbed of us, leading up to a moment not of defiance in the face of unbelievable tyranny, but of acceptance of fate.  Shepard's whole character is built on defiance: of the Council, of Cerberus, and most especially of the galactic genocide of the Reapers.  For Shepard to accept the Reaper's options for their own defeat flies in the face of everything we've done over the course of these three games.

3. Throughout Mass Effect 3, we are pushed in a direction of a final confrontation with the Reapers.  The Crucible, we believed, was supposed to simply assist in that confrontation, whether that would be disrupting the Reapers' powerful kinetic barriers, or strengthening our gathered fleets' own weapons.  Perhaps even because the Citadel is a Reaper creation, Shepard would have to fight something like a Reaper construct in order to get the Crucible to work before the fleets could effectively fight the Reapers.  Regardless, the first two games in the series had epic final battles, where the end of the third presents us with nothing more than a conversation.  And not even that, but a conversation that we can't even affect.  We wanted battle, war, combat and strife, not being told what to do by a manifestation of the child that has been haunting us since our departure of Earth.

These are only my observations as a player and fan of all 3 games and everything involving Shepard and the Mass Effect universe.  They may either be valid or not to both other fans and BioWare themselves, but I felt I would be doing a disservice to myself if I did not share them.  Again, to BioWare, thank you for making such an amazing game, and hopefully we Shepards out here can have an ending that validates our struggle.

[thefallen2far]

Just a quick note that convinced me of IDT was that TIM was looking to control the reapers which was the blue option and then was reminded that Saren wanted to merge synthetics and organics to form a new organic species which was the green option.

Modifié par thefallen2far, 28 mars 2012 - 04:34 .

[mcgreggers99]

Jared Shepard wrote...

Here's my take on things for what it's worth. The Mass Effect series has been the sci-fi epic series that I had always wanted to interact in. George Lucas has lost his mind in the last decade and the Star Wars series that I grew up loving in the 70's and 80's was destroyed. It's ruined. I mean, the man put aliens in an Indiana Jones movie. It was time to move on and leave that nonsense for the children.
But in Mass Effect, I found that "fix" that I had been missing. A universe so full of lore and interesting characters that I cared about. And my Shepard was just the way that I wanted him to be because of my choices. When the ending finally came (my Shepard lived in the end) I felt numb. I just sat there and listened to the piano playing in the final scenes and I felt numb.
I talked about it with friends and read about the discussion on the internet and I felt like I had made the only real choice I could make. Destroy the Reapers. Any other choice seemed ridiculous.
And after some time, I'm okay with it. What happens from here is my interpretation. While I want to see Bioware make more DLC and find out what happened to Liara, Joker, Garrus, and the rest, I guess to me, I don't want to force anyone's hand. I don't want to be Kathy Bates in "Misery" and I believe that a lot of people are acting just like that.
This is Bioware's world. Not mine. I was just allowed to play in it for the last 5 years. And if it was my creation and my piece of artwork. I wouldn't want anyone to tell me that I should change it.
Thanks Bioware for this series, these characters and this experience. I demand nothing. But I will eagerly await any more news of the crew of the SSV Normandy should it come around. It's been a hell of a ride.

Beautifully said. I absolutely agree 100%.

[NotAnotherDisplayName]

DuncanId wrote...
If you save Tali, she dies anyway, if legion or mordin are dead en ME2, they just reapear en ME3, if you kill the rachni in the first, the rachni is still there.

Tali lived in my game, fwiw- she doesn't kill herself, whether or not she was on the normandy is left unclear.  If legion is dead in ME2, he's replaced with a VI in 3, if he's sold to Cerberus in ME2, he shows up as an enemy.  If you kill the rachni queen in 1, a weird cyber-queen is there.  The missions exist still, but they have a different flavor.

DuncanId wrote...
All mayor planets are devastated, the fleets are stranded in the solar sistem, FTL travel is insufficient to travel except within nearby clusters, turians and quarians can't eat human food and the krogan homeworld is a wasteland incapable of sustaining long term life. Just because the multicolored light didn't kill them instantly doesn't mean they are not screwed. And Tali and garrus trapped in another planet without food? Yeah, very dead.

And I'm talking about the logical consecuences of what we got.

So I don't know the detailed food consumption facts surrounding Turains and Quarians, and I will grant you that the universe was just ended, but it's kind of an apocalypse story, no?  Rebuild?  The whole time you're on tuchanka they're talking about how life is returning.  Normandy landed on magic planet X, which I'll give you was odd, wasn't a wasteland.

DuncanId wrote...
And at least they could have shown us the different species helping in the final battle, in space and in the ground. What about the rachni, the elcor or the drell? If you didn't save the rachni queen in the first game but you do in the third, the rachni betray you, but as it is only a number that most of the time you can't see, it doesn't have any impact.

True, and that would've been cool, but would having a couple of the cut scenes with fighting that contained a rachni or elcor have really satisfied?  I agree I'd have liked a few more of the minor races interacting with me as well.

DuncanId wrote...
And what about Udina? I chose Anderson because it was clear that Udina was a xenophobic bastard who would try to seize power given the chance. How does that ends? Udina is the counselor because bioware says so. Great. Why giving us the choice in the first place?

Well, this is a point I made previously- to me, the endings of all 3 games were partially pre-determined anyhow.  I chose Anderson too, but wasn't particularly pissed or surprised when I picked up ME 2 and he wasn't the boss.  They only have so many primary quests to deliver, and there is only so many ways your choices can impact them.

DuncanId wrote...
Yes, it's BS, becaus "enjoying the ride" doesn't excuse a broken bad written ending of 10 minutes that looks like a 12 year old kid fanfiction.

Well, we're not going to agree, and as I said that sucks that you feel this way, I feel bad that you can't enjoy the games anymore.  Hate the ending or not, I can watch movies, read books, or play games for the fun parts.  Maybe I'm just not invested quite enough for it to ruin it for me.

DuncanId wrote...
Another thing is that I never mentioned Europe. I can't even see how that relates to my example. Last time I checked Europe wasn't a desert. And I should know, I live here. I mean, this last few days have been hot, but not that much...

Apologies, that was in response to a different post and I crossed the streams on accident

Modifié par NotAnotherDisplayName, 28 mars 2012 - 04:42 .

[Iberius]

Bioware Please...

1. Show/Tell me what happened to all the major squad members
2. Let me pick a choice that doesn't mean everyone is stranded, dead, or a hybrid.
3. Explain to me why Joker and the rest of the very "dedicated and loyal" was leaving Commander Shepard behind.
4. Get rid of the Glowmeister kid.
5. Answers....which, yes, I believe I am entitled to after 5 years of dedicated gameplay and financial investment.

Mass Effect 3 was pure gold up until that kid. You all did an amazing job but I think you should redo the end. Thanks for listening.

Modifié par Iberius, 28 mars 2012 - 04:51 .

[NotAnotherDisplayName]

jeweledleah wrote...

in Mass Effect? you know you will be getting this ending. beyond any shadow of a doubt. so if we compare it to amusement parks and rollecoasters - its like going to the park and knowing that you will fall off that rollercoaster. every. single. time. 100% certainty.

so why would I keep going there if I know I'll be falling off the rollercoaster and then be in pain for days afterwards. the journey becomes... not worth it.

You go to the park because you love the tilt-a-whirl and the elephant ears, then...don't get on the rollercoaster?

You know, I think I'm biased because I am not as angry at the ending as so many in this thread, though I'm drawing this line of questioning from other disappointments I've had.  I've played Fallout 3 again sans Broken Steel, and that ending, IMO, was worse than MEs.

[jeweledleah]

NotAnotherDisplayName wrote...

jeweledleah wrote...

in Mass Effect? you know you will be getting this ending. beyond any shadow of a doubt. so if we compare it to amusement parks and rollecoasters - its like going to the park and knowing that you will fall off that rollercoaster. every. single. time. 100% certainty.

so why would I keep going there if I know I'll be falling off the rollercoaster and then be in pain for days afterwards. the journey becomes... not worth it.

You go to the park because you love the tilt-a-whirl and the elephant ears, then...don't get on the rollercoaster?

You know, I think I'm biased because I am not as angry at the ending as so many in this thread, though I'm drawing this line of questioning from other disappointments I've had.  I've played Fallout 3 again sans Broken Steel, and that ending, IMO, was worse than MEs.

I'd say Fallout 3 ending sans broken steel was about even when it comes to ME3 endings, unless you didn't recruit your super mutant companion like someone I know, in which case the ending made more sence.

and yeah, I've been poking my head in and enjoying the tilt-a-wirl.  but i want a full experience of the amusement park.  i want to experience my favorite part, the rollercoaster and I if I fall out of the rollecoaster, I wanted it to happen becasue I didn't strap myself in properly, not becasue its just does, no matter what i do, not to mention - a choice between different rollercoasters would be nice.

instead, I just do different rides here and there...  and it feels a little hollow

Modifié par jeweledleah, 28 mars 2012 - 05:10 .

[Thanatos144]

I dont understand why you guys have a hard time with the AI as a the catalyst.....It isnt a star child it is a ghost in the machine. That was obvious. You can hate that the relays get blown up or that joker takes off leaving his dead commander or that bizarrely members you were with were on the Normandy even though we dont know how long Shepard was out. Yet Finding it odd that machines would be controled by a AI? Thats not far fetched that's logical.

Modifié par Thanatos144, 28 mars 2012 - 04:57 .

[Calem]

Hello,

I finished my first ME3 playthrough yesterday and am also quite dissatisfied with its ending.

I’ve played both ME1 and ME2 twice, ultimately going the paragon/get along/keep everyone alive route and generally importing for the perfect to-my-taste ending in ME3. Still I kept an open mind without pre-set  expectations, thinking you’d be able to come up with good storytelling either way. The demises of Mordin and Thane, though regrettably, were both inscened extremely well as they tied into the storyline perfectly and were properly kathartic emotionally, supporting such hopes.

Legion’s exit was already less sound, as his explanation having to go in person was rather thin to non-existant given the software/digital nature of Geth. Reaper code or not, Legion contained no organic parts. It was forgivable though as the Quarian/Geth reunion was otherwise well-orchestrated.

Good points about why ME3's ending blew were already made here:

http://www.gamefront...fans-are-right/



What I would personally like to see is an ending option that

 - keeps the mass relays intact (you pretty much want those for future content anyways) AND so the krogan/turians/asari can get home (really)

 - keeps Anderson alive – there’s no emotional return whatsoever on having your buddy die in the end for no reasons at all. It just made me wonder whether I messed up on a dialogue choice, unnecessarily ruining immersion in that part

 - terminates the reaper threat, but spares the Geth, Edi/Normandy and normal tech – why build all that AI sympathy and then force the player to destroy ‘em OR keep the reapers in some form? Who thought it'd be fun to subject the player to that choices? Helloo?

 - is more detailed about the consequences of your choice – prior to having to make it. Paragon blue for the control choice and red for destroying the reapers seem switched. I had to break the spoiler wall at this point and look for clarification on the 'net since there was just too much of a lack of explanation ingame. It’s highly annoying having to tab out of game inmidst the final scenes due to a lack of coherency. The whole thing was just confusing.

Another detail I found rather underwhelming was the Rachni comeback. ME2 hinted at ships of unknown make in some citadel news, leading me to believe they’d get a cool surprise entry in ME3 to save whomever's (maybe some krogan's) day. How come no artist jumped at the chance to animate a cool-looking rachni fleet? Not to mention their sound-based ways of communication basically screamed for artistic fleshing out. Ah, potential wasted.

I appreciate one of the Doctors coming out and stating they're listening. I know you guys can get things done. The artistic freedom bit I couldn't really buy though; as illustrated above you can get away with killing off characters easily and even get praise if it's done properly. I would've even accepted a lot more carnage to the characters I grew attached to had you just embedded it in proper context and fleshed out what exactly those sacrifices were made for. ME3's ending failed on a much more basic level, it's like miscrafted with things not fitting together or missing and extra holes in between and after. It would be nice to see a patch.
 
Gotta be fair though. ME3 is an extremely good game for its first 95% (which I couldn't say of DA2, but let's not beat that reaper horse), it's just the last 5% that didn't live up to the former and all the things said they would be.

Best, Calem

[Macbaen]

I do appreciate that Bioware is rethinking the ending of the game, and not to jog there elbow too much, but I would like at least ONE ending where Shepard and the LI re-unite, even if its just a death scene( though I would prefer a happy ending possiblity more) with an epilogue of what happened to all the team members, the major characters you ran into(i.e. Primarch Victus, Wrex-if alive in ME3, etc.), and the events 6 months after the final battle at Earth(new homeworld for the Asari, Elcor, Volus, Krogans, and Turians maybe). And scrub out the Normandy running for the hills and the desruction of the Mass Relays, though I think the Citadel should still be blown up, to get rid of the Catalyst once and for all.

[Akugagi]

Just let the original writers do the ending and I'm happy.

[Beanstalk]

Thanatos144 wrote...

I dont understand why you guys have a hard time with the AI as a the catalyst.....It isnt a star child it is a ghost in the machine. That was obvious. You can hate that the relays get blown up or that joker takes off leaving his dead commander or that bizarrely members you were with were on the Normandy even though we dont know how long Shepard was out. Yet Finding it odd that machines would be controled by a AI? Thats not far fetched that's logical.

I think Starchild absorbed a lot of misdirected wrath. It's not the AIs that's the problem in that scene, it's Shepards!

First, Shep would never be satisfied with the rudimentary explanations Starchild offers. In any other conversation, he'd have a bazillion "Investigate" convo options.

And second, Shep would never simply pick between 3 crappy options offered merely on Starchilds say-so, without so much as  a "but!". He'd try to charm, intimidate or blow stuff up to find a better way, and only take one of Starchilds options if it makes a convincing case that they are no better alternatives.

Modifié par Beanstalk, 28 mars 2012 - 05:12 .

[Thanatos144]

Beanstalk wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

I dont understand why you guys have a hard time with the AI as a the catalyst.....It isnt a star child it is a ghost in the machine. That was obvious. You can hate that the relays get blown up or that joker takes off leaving his dead commander or that bizarrely members you were with were on the Normandy even though we dont know how long Shepard was out. Yet Finding it odd that machines would be controled by a AI? Thats not far fetched that's logical.

I think Starchild absorbed a lot of misdirected wrath. It's not the AIs that's the problem in that scene, it's Shepards!

First, Shep would never be satisfied with the rudimentary explanations Starchild offers. In any other conversation, he'd have a bazillion "Investigate" convo options.

And second, Shep would never simply pick between 3 crappy options offered merely on Starchilds say-so, without so much as  a "but!". He'd try to charm, intimidate or blow stuff up to find a better way, and only take one of Starchilds options if it makes a convincing case that they are no better alternatives.

Why not????? its not like through out the game Shepard wasnt forced to make choices out or two or three crappy choices.