Ce sujet est fermé
If BW releases fully fleshed out DLC that fixes the plot holes and provides "wildly different endings" in April (perhaps at PAX) then we will know this "ending" was pre-planned.(ME:Truth DLC rumor)
If it takes 3 months....too depressing how far they've sunk.
On the Mass Effect 3 endings. Yes, we are listening.
Débuté par
Chris Priestly
, mars 15 2012 02:55
Retour en haut
#12477
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 01:34
Cant Planet
-
- Members
- 395 messages
It's from this:Chrislo1990 wrote...
Hmmm where did you get that analysis Lordambitious? Could make a good read for us and Bioware. Perhaps a link?
I recognized it because I've watched it twice.
Which is once more than the number of times I've finished Mass Effect 3.
Which is funny, because it's two or three times as long as the ending.
And by funny, I of course mean terribly sad.
Modifié par Cant Planet, 31 mars 2012 - 01:54 .
#12478
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 01:38
TigerHeart55
-
- Members
- 24 messages
As I am sure you have heard more than enough about, I am also bitterly disappointed in the ending. The vast majority of the game was fantastic, but the ending left me feeling very upset. It was pretty clear throughout that Shepherd was going to die, given all of the good-byes he went through repeatedly. I am sure it doesn't really matter, but I feel moved to list my issues.
1. There is only 1 ending. No matter what you choose to do, Shepherd dies, and you destroy the galactic civilization. Maybe the races survive, (Maybe not, given the fact that when you destroyed the relay in ME2, you wiped out the associated star system), but even if the relays don't wipe out all associated systems, you destroy the means by which the galactic civilization was able to exist. So, we now have some number of civilizations who no longer can work together or even see each other any more.
2. The only thing that differs in all the "potential" endings is the status of EDI. While I really like EDI, making her the only variable struck me as odd. Joker was happy with one of the choices obviously.
3. Anderson was gratuitously killed. It seems to me that the only reason he died was to clear the way for everyone else to die or to keep him from dying even more randomly when the Citadel bit the big one. Just doesn't seem right.
4. While I suppose I understand that you wanted Shepherd to die so that you could bring closure to the game, it seems you could have brought closure while still letting the good guy win. I know that's not always realistic, but still, we are as invested in the game as you all, and sometimes it's nice for the good guys to win.
I think for the most part (98% of all the ME games you have done a wonderful job, and I completely understand how hard it is to bring a franschise to a close, especially one with such scope and depth. I just don't think the ending lived up toi the rest of the game. It seems like such a poor set of ending choices to such a magnificent game. I wish it could have lived up to the rest of the game
Jim
1. There is only 1 ending. No matter what you choose to do, Shepherd dies, and you destroy the galactic civilization. Maybe the races survive, (Maybe not, given the fact that when you destroyed the relay in ME2, you wiped out the associated star system), but even if the relays don't wipe out all associated systems, you destroy the means by which the galactic civilization was able to exist. So, we now have some number of civilizations who no longer can work together or even see each other any more.
2. The only thing that differs in all the "potential" endings is the status of EDI. While I really like EDI, making her the only variable struck me as odd. Joker was happy with one of the choices obviously.
3. Anderson was gratuitously killed. It seems to me that the only reason he died was to clear the way for everyone else to die or to keep him from dying even more randomly when the Citadel bit the big one. Just doesn't seem right.
4. While I suppose I understand that you wanted Shepherd to die so that you could bring closure to the game, it seems you could have brought closure while still letting the good guy win. I know that's not always realistic, but still, we are as invested in the game as you all, and sometimes it's nice for the good guys to win.
I think for the most part (98% of all the ME games you have done a wonderful job, and I completely understand how hard it is to bring a franschise to a close, especially one with such scope and depth. I just don't think the ending lived up toi the rest of the game. It seems like such a poor set of ending choices to such a magnificent game. I wish it could have lived up to the rest of the game
Jim
#12479
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 01:39
Chrislo1990
-
- Members
- 323 messages
Cant Planet wrote...
It's from this:Chrislo1990 wrote...
Hmmm where did you get that analysis Lordambitious? Could make a good read for us and Bioware. Perhaps a link?
I recognized it because I've watched it twice.
Which is once more than the number of times I've finished Mass Effect 3.
Which is funny, because it's two or three times as long.
And by funny, I of course mean terribly sad.
haha I like your sense of humor!!
Thanks!
#12480
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 01:50
Lordambitious
-
- Members
- 102 messages
Chrislo1990 wrote...
Hmmm where did you get that analysis Lordambitious? Could make a good read for us and Bioware. Perhaps a link?
I agree with this guy, the ending needs to be REPLACED, not "clarified"
The ending is broken on a multitude of levels, and this dude does a fantastic job explaining it.
He explains how the ending takes Mass Effect from a talky-techie science fiction that was character driven, and had a complex and well detailed universe that for the first two games was consistent with it's own rules as to what was and was not possible, and that this was abandoned in the Ending. Introducing a new device that could somehow alter the Citadel to manipulate all life in the galaxy at the molecular level is inconsistent with the technology explained in the game. Moreover, the reason ME1 and 2 were so great is because they gave us characters we could care about, the ending in ME2 is a great example of this, we cared about who lived and died, we wanted to know how they ended up. ME3's ending completely abandons this chracter based narrative.
Moreover, the catalyst kid is completely unncecessary. He introduces a new plot and conflict in the ending, and there was no need to replace the main antagonist (harbinger). Even worse, he replaces Shepard as a protagonist, Shepard has nothing to do in that end scene beyond flip a switch.
The ending collapses at the end, because there are so many inconsistencies with the rest of the series, lore-wise and theme-wise. A few inconstincies are ok. He uses Legion sacrificing himself as a good example of this. Legion has dissolve his consciousness into the Geth consensus, and gloss over the actual reason why he does so. However, that's cool because it worked within the narrative and provided an emotionally tense moment. That was beautiful. The ending tho does this a thousand fold, to where the are so many plot and continuity inconsistencies that the narrative coherence is lost. How did they move the citadel? Why did the catalyst need the keepers and sovereign to call back the reapers in ME1 if it lives in the Citadel? If they have the citadel, why didn't the reapers shut down the relays like they did in ME1, and deny the fleet access to Earth in the first place? These and dozens of other plot holes destroy the ending.
The video is a bit long, but it's an excellent analysis, and I hope Bioware takes a look.
#12481
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 01:56
MikeVanBordt
-
- Members
- 1 messages
Disclaimer 1: Too long.
Disclaimer 2: Personally, I don’t view the after-game scenario as dire. The “detonation vs. the destruction of a nuclear weapon” analogy has probably already been used to explain why, most likely, the mass relay-owning systems aren’t obliterated, despite the events depicted in Arrival. Also, in my opinion, the only circumstances in which alien races die of starvation or…whatever…exist in the realm of player speculation. I can use imagination to remedy in the same manner that others can use it to destroy. Though, each is obviously entitled (uh-oh…that word) to his or her unique interpretation. (I’m not trying to bait anyone.)
Setting that aside, I’m writing this as somewhat of a therapeutic exercise. My initial reaction to the game’s final portion was akin to, “Oh…I must have done something wrong.” It’s why I’ve been lurking in other areas of the forums for the last week and why, finding no true resolution, there, I’m posting my thoughts.
I believe the perceived quality, or lack thereof, in regard to the “ending” is strictly a result of two issues: the failure of the final mission, post-FOB, to reflect gathered galactic assets (race-support, fleet strength, etc.) and the interchangeable nature and oddity of the last cinematic sequences.
As for London, the scene in which Anderson produces a diagram of the attack plan and tells Shepard to choose his/her squad wisely reeks of: “This is where the suicide mission-esque portion of ME3 is supposed to go.” Unfortunately, it’s a tease.
I refer to the prior game because, when we discuss the ending of ME2, we typically don’t discuss the choice to preserve/destroy the Collector stronghold. We discuss the assignment/presence of assets (squad personalities/ship upgrades) and the effect of each in regard to how the final mission plays out. The final mission becomes the “ending,” which consequently is not limited in scope to the final choice. Opinion: It’s one of the most satisfying conclusions in electronic gaming I’ve experienced and although it’s obviously an “if x, then y” scenario, it feels like…accomplishment. The player experiences the thrill of victory or the agony of defeat, given a precarious situation, collecting the rewards of, or receiving punishment derived from, a game-built strategy.
In ME3, Shepard’s final mission doesn’t stir, in the participant, anything of the sort. It’s a fast-paced, “Let’s just get this over with” progression; it’s restrictive…in a series of games in which just about everything else is decidedly not.
It is not very memorable and, given the distraction that follows, it is even less so.
The distraction: Truth be told, I don’t take issue with the final choice offered to Shepard. It makes sense in a “he/she doesn’t have all the details, is close to death, and, yeah, the reapers’ motivations are supposed to be somewhat incomprehensible”-sort of way. Ultimately, this is BioWare’s story. Player contribution is limited; it’s a scripted game. As participants, players make key decisions in the story universe along the way, but, ultimately, the show must go on and there are only so many branches that can be implemented without creating total chaos, from a design/available resources perspective.
In this case (some speculation involved), we’re presented with an AI that is programmed to monitor/control a purge cycle such that the technological advancement of civilizations-to-be-purged does not destroy organic life in its entirety. A device has been constructed, enhancing this AI’s capabilities, allowing it to entertain additional options in regard to fulfilling its purpose, as it now can reach all corners of the galaxy, instantly, via a mass-relay energy-distribution. The device, depending on build quality, provides the AI with 1-3 options, alternative to its current methodology. As a command directive, an organic life-form, mentally untainted by the AI’s minions, must enact one of these options.
In defense of the writing staff: I’m ok with this scenario.
The source of my disappointment, the item I find perplexing/frustrating, is the set of cinematic sequences presented, post-decision. The visual depictions of Shepard’s choices are, for the most part, indistinguishable – this has been mentioned repeatedly. However, more off-putting is the bit in which the Normandy crash-lands and Shepard potentially survives; it’s the ultimate pulled-punch.
You can file this one under “cool story, bro,” but it seems as if someone came late into the development process and demanded “a happier ending.” I can imagine the motivation-kill this could be for the writers if they were fully committed to the ramifications of the final choice: why bother fleshing-out the implementation of the desired endings if they have to tack on some “maybe Shepard didn’t die and everyone is ok”-nonsense to the narrative? I would have preferred the immutability of Shepard’s sacrifice or even a Sopranos-style, “once Shepard is dead, there is no more story”-conclusion, when given the existing, “Don’t like that? Here’s a puppy!”-bit.
Whatever the case, I feel the final portion of London is pedestrian and the ending cinematics are disposable, at best, and nonsensical, at worst. If the game’s end, and by that, I mean “the last mission,” was fully-developed in the same manner as ME2’s conclusion, I believe we’d be discussing it in a different tone. As it is, the only thing to discuss is the final choice, at face-value, which, as implemented, is devoid of meaning.
The important thing to take from all of this, speaking in EA’s language, is that I would have happily waited another 6 months and spent 100 USD at retail to purchase this game if the time required to fully implement a worthy ending to the series dictated such a delay and price. Instead, I have no interest in DLC and will wait until reviews are published before purchasing future games.
On a positive note, I think the game’s other segments were, for the most part, well-orchestrated. I never felt, in the context of the fiction, I had time to wander the galaxy, nonchalantly, getting into adventures and sh*t, as the atmosphere is a constant reminder: elsewhere, millions are being killed. I think Kai Leng is a great, although short-lived, addition to ME as well. I love the final bit on Thessia; Shepard cannot win. It’s one of the few moments in the series I remember that play out that way and I hated Leng for it. When “help a kitten out of a tree”, paragon Shepard defeated Leng in Cerberus headquarters, I didn’t even think about pulling right-trigger for renegade interrupt; it just happened.
In short (to BioWare): clarify, add closure, but, most importantly, finish the game. Chances are: I’ll pay for it. If my silly hypothesis is totally off-base and this is simply the result of time constraints then, next time, push back a little harder when faced with unrealistic deadlines. PR isn't going to convince me that adequeate time was dedicated to the ending's implementation. Again, I'm not looking for a new ending...only complete versions of the endings as originally conceived.
Lastly, from the “unintentionally humorous and not game-breaking” desk: Please, if possible, adjust the initial Shepard dialogue at the communications console, when the player is presented with the option of saying final goodbyes. When Shepard says, “I want to talk to Jack,” I half-expected the console operator to respond, “Jack who?” Instead, this guy seems to be the most well-connected man in the galaxy and knows all of Shepard’s friends on a first-name basis. The galaxy's a pretty big place. It's a little odd.
Disclaimer 2: Personally, I don’t view the after-game scenario as dire. The “detonation vs. the destruction of a nuclear weapon” analogy has probably already been used to explain why, most likely, the mass relay-owning systems aren’t obliterated, despite the events depicted in Arrival. Also, in my opinion, the only circumstances in which alien races die of starvation or…whatever…exist in the realm of player speculation. I can use imagination to remedy in the same manner that others can use it to destroy. Though, each is obviously entitled (uh-oh…that word) to his or her unique interpretation. (I’m not trying to bait anyone.)
Setting that aside, I’m writing this as somewhat of a therapeutic exercise. My initial reaction to the game’s final portion was akin to, “Oh…I must have done something wrong.” It’s why I’ve been lurking in other areas of the forums for the last week and why, finding no true resolution, there, I’m posting my thoughts.
I believe the perceived quality, or lack thereof, in regard to the “ending” is strictly a result of two issues: the failure of the final mission, post-FOB, to reflect gathered galactic assets (race-support, fleet strength, etc.) and the interchangeable nature and oddity of the last cinematic sequences.
As for London, the scene in which Anderson produces a diagram of the attack plan and tells Shepard to choose his/her squad wisely reeks of: “This is where the suicide mission-esque portion of ME3 is supposed to go.” Unfortunately, it’s a tease.
I refer to the prior game because, when we discuss the ending of ME2, we typically don’t discuss the choice to preserve/destroy the Collector stronghold. We discuss the assignment/presence of assets (squad personalities/ship upgrades) and the effect of each in regard to how the final mission plays out. The final mission becomes the “ending,” which consequently is not limited in scope to the final choice. Opinion: It’s one of the most satisfying conclusions in electronic gaming I’ve experienced and although it’s obviously an “if x, then y” scenario, it feels like…accomplishment. The player experiences the thrill of victory or the agony of defeat, given a precarious situation, collecting the rewards of, or receiving punishment derived from, a game-built strategy.
In ME3, Shepard’s final mission doesn’t stir, in the participant, anything of the sort. It’s a fast-paced, “Let’s just get this over with” progression; it’s restrictive…in a series of games in which just about everything else is decidedly not.
It is not very memorable and, given the distraction that follows, it is even less so.
The distraction: Truth be told, I don’t take issue with the final choice offered to Shepard. It makes sense in a “he/she doesn’t have all the details, is close to death, and, yeah, the reapers’ motivations are supposed to be somewhat incomprehensible”-sort of way. Ultimately, this is BioWare’s story. Player contribution is limited; it’s a scripted game. As participants, players make key decisions in the story universe along the way, but, ultimately, the show must go on and there are only so many branches that can be implemented without creating total chaos, from a design/available resources perspective.
In this case (some speculation involved), we’re presented with an AI that is programmed to monitor/control a purge cycle such that the technological advancement of civilizations-to-be-purged does not destroy organic life in its entirety. A device has been constructed, enhancing this AI’s capabilities, allowing it to entertain additional options in regard to fulfilling its purpose, as it now can reach all corners of the galaxy, instantly, via a mass-relay energy-distribution. The device, depending on build quality, provides the AI with 1-3 options, alternative to its current methodology. As a command directive, an organic life-form, mentally untainted by the AI’s minions, must enact one of these options.
In defense of the writing staff: I’m ok with this scenario.
The source of my disappointment, the item I find perplexing/frustrating, is the set of cinematic sequences presented, post-decision. The visual depictions of Shepard’s choices are, for the most part, indistinguishable – this has been mentioned repeatedly. However, more off-putting is the bit in which the Normandy crash-lands and Shepard potentially survives; it’s the ultimate pulled-punch.
You can file this one under “cool story, bro,” but it seems as if someone came late into the development process and demanded “a happier ending.” I can imagine the motivation-kill this could be for the writers if they were fully committed to the ramifications of the final choice: why bother fleshing-out the implementation of the desired endings if they have to tack on some “maybe Shepard didn’t die and everyone is ok”-nonsense to the narrative? I would have preferred the immutability of Shepard’s sacrifice or even a Sopranos-style, “once Shepard is dead, there is no more story”-conclusion, when given the existing, “Don’t like that? Here’s a puppy!”-bit.
Whatever the case, I feel the final portion of London is pedestrian and the ending cinematics are disposable, at best, and nonsensical, at worst. If the game’s end, and by that, I mean “the last mission,” was fully-developed in the same manner as ME2’s conclusion, I believe we’d be discussing it in a different tone. As it is, the only thing to discuss is the final choice, at face-value, which, as implemented, is devoid of meaning.
The important thing to take from all of this, speaking in EA’s language, is that I would have happily waited another 6 months and spent 100 USD at retail to purchase this game if the time required to fully implement a worthy ending to the series dictated such a delay and price. Instead, I have no interest in DLC and will wait until reviews are published before purchasing future games.
On a positive note, I think the game’s other segments were, for the most part, well-orchestrated. I never felt, in the context of the fiction, I had time to wander the galaxy, nonchalantly, getting into adventures and sh*t, as the atmosphere is a constant reminder: elsewhere, millions are being killed. I think Kai Leng is a great, although short-lived, addition to ME as well. I love the final bit on Thessia; Shepard cannot win. It’s one of the few moments in the series I remember that play out that way and I hated Leng for it. When “help a kitten out of a tree”, paragon Shepard defeated Leng in Cerberus headquarters, I didn’t even think about pulling right-trigger for renegade interrupt; it just happened.
In short (to BioWare): clarify, add closure, but, most importantly, finish the game. Chances are: I’ll pay for it. If my silly hypothesis is totally off-base and this is simply the result of time constraints then, next time, push back a little harder when faced with unrealistic deadlines. PR isn't going to convince me that adequeate time was dedicated to the ending's implementation. Again, I'm not looking for a new ending...only complete versions of the endings as originally conceived.
Lastly, from the “unintentionally humorous and not game-breaking” desk: Please, if possible, adjust the initial Shepard dialogue at the communications console, when the player is presented with the option of saying final goodbyes. When Shepard says, “I want to talk to Jack,” I half-expected the console operator to respond, “Jack who?” Instead, this guy seems to be the most well-connected man in the galaxy and knows all of Shepard’s friends on a first-name basis. The galaxy's a pretty big place. It's a little odd.
Modifié par MikeVanBordt, 31 mars 2012 - 01:57 .
#12482
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 02:00
Chrislo1990
-
- Members
- 323 messages
Totally agree with him as well. Thanks so much guys for sharing this link. I'm watching it right now and I am baffled with how well he does his analysys. Very intelligent guy.Lordambitious wrote...
Chrislo1990 wrote...
Hmmm where did you get that analysis Lordambitious? Could make a good read for us and Bioware. Perhaps a link?
I agree with this guy, the ending needs to be REPLACED, not "clarified"
The ending is broken on a multitude of levels, and this dude does a fantastic job explaining it.
He explains how the ending takes Mass Effect from a talky-techie science fiction that was character driven, and had a complex and well detailed universe that for the first two games was consistent with it's own rules as to what was and was not possible, and that this was abandoned in the Ending. Introducing a new device that could somehow alter the Citadel to manipulate all life in the galaxy at the molecular level is inconsistent with the technology explained in the game. Moreover, the reason ME1 and 2 were so great is because they gave us characters we could care about, the ending in ME2 is a great example of this, we cared about who lived and died, we wanted to know how they ended up. ME3's ending completely abandons this chracter based narrative.
Moreover, the catalyst kid is completely unncecessary. He introduces a new plot and conflict in the ending, and there was no need to replace the main antagonist (harbinger). Even worse, he replaces Shepard as a protagonist, Shepard has nothing to do in that end scene beyond flip a switch.
The ending collapses at the end, because there are so many inconsistencies with the rest of the series, lore-wise and theme-wise. A few inconstincies are ok. He uses Legion sacrificing himself as a good example of this. Legion has dissolve his consciousness into the Geth consensus, and gloss over the actual reason why he does so. However, that's cool because it worked within the narrative and provided an emotionally tense moment. That was beautiful. The ending tho does this a thousand fold, to where the are so many plot and continuity inconsistencies that the narrative coherence is lost. How did they move the citadel? Why did the catalyst need the keepers and sovereign to call back the reapers in ME1 if it lives in the Citadel? If they have the citadel, why didn't the reapers shut down the relays like they did in ME1, and deny the fleet access to Earth in the first place? These and dozens of other plot holes destroy the ending.
The video is a bit long, but it's an excellent analysis, and I hope Bioware takes a look.
#12483
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 02:11
Lordambitious
-
- Members
- 102 messages
Chrislo1990 wrote...
Totally agree with him as well. Thanks so much guys for sharing this link. I'm watching it right now and I am baffled with how well he does his analysys. Very intelligent guy.Lordambitious wrote...
Chrislo1990 wrote...
Hmmm where did you get that analysis Lordambitious? Could make a good read for us and Bioware. Perhaps a link?
I agree with this guy, the ending needs to be REPLACED, not "clarified"
The ending is broken on a multitude of levels, and this dude does a fantastic job explaining it.
He explains how the ending takes Mass Effect from a talky-techie science fiction that was character driven, and had a complex and well detailed universe that for the first two games was consistent with it's own rules as to what was and was not possible, and that this was abandoned in the Ending. Introducing a new device that could somehow alter the Citadel to manipulate all life in the galaxy at the molecular level is inconsistent with the technology explained in the game. Moreover, the reason ME1 and 2 were so great is because they gave us characters we could care about, the ending in ME2 is a great example of this, we cared about who lived and died, we wanted to know how they ended up. ME3's ending completely abandons this chracter based narrative.
Moreover, the catalyst kid is completely unncecessary. He introduces a new plot and conflict in the ending, and there was no need to replace the main antagonist (harbinger). Even worse, he replaces Shepard as a protagonist, Shepard has nothing to do in that end scene beyond flip a switch.
The ending collapses at the end, because there are so many inconsistencies with the rest of the series, lore-wise and theme-wise. A few inconstincies are ok. He uses Legion sacrificing himself as a good example of this. Legion has dissolve his consciousness into the Geth consensus, and gloss over the actual reason why he does so. However, that's cool because it worked within the narrative and provided an emotionally tense moment. That was beautiful. The ending tho does this a thousand fold, to where the are so many plot and continuity inconsistencies that the narrative coherence is lost. How did they move the citadel? Why did the catalyst need the keepers and sovereign to call back the reapers in ME1 if it lives in the Citadel? If they have the citadel, why didn't the reapers shut down the relays like they did in ME1, and deny the fleet access to Earth in the first place? These and dozens of other plot holes destroy the ending.
The video is a bit long, but it's an excellent analysis, and I hope Bioware takes a look.
Thanks for quoting, this thing needs to be spread, and the line held lol
#12485
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 02:35
JackLaVaporiera
-
- Members
- 58 messages
Chrislo1990 wrote...
Yes indeed!! Hold the line!!!
And we will hold the line.
But this, for hilarious as it can be, is a thread dedicated to ours "suggestions", thus I'll go to the point.
Here's mine:
I have to specify that this wont be a religious talk even if I need to refer a bit...
Having said that God could like to play just as a child does, why not, I'm pretty sure that neither Him could like this crappy ending, thus my main suggestion is : get rid of that goddamnit annoying kid or I'll avoid every EA product, not Bioware only, for the rest of my life and I will hold the line.
Cheers.
#12486
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 02:40
LvxWolf
-
- Members
- 4 messages
shnellegaming wrote...
Brokering peace between Quarians and Geth
All things Garrus!!!!! Garrus Smoochin!!!!
Grunt covered in blood.
"you are a sister to me" from Wrex
Staring down and blowing up a Reaper on Rannoch
Tali and Ashley Drunk
Waking up next to Aria
Being punched by Jack
Space Hampster chase
Blasto the Hanar Spectre
"I'm Garrus Vakarian and this is my favorite spot on the Citadel"
Thresher Maw vs Reaper
Liara writes your name in the stars
Heroic Mordin curing the Genophage
Punching Han Gerrill
"This is for Thane you SOB!!!" *STAB*
"I'll be back for you and I'll bring every fleet I can. Good luck."
"welcome to the crew Edi"
Liara's Dad
Firstly I want to thank the Bioware Develpment team for 4 years (2008 - 2012) of wonder, anger, fury and triumph at the ending of both installments of Mass Effect 1 & 2 up until now, a spectactular and blazing triumphant ending.
Thank you giving an old gamer something to believe in again. Some of us have been playing video games for most of our lives and in that time we get jaded, bored and decide to give up gaming and go and pursue other things, with Mass Effect you gave us back our will to rule ourselves, our self respect, (not that in Real Life, we lost these things, no) simply that the quality of gaming has come forward in ways unanticipated by us only10 years ago. Games like Deus Ex 1 & 2, even maybe 3, IWar2 EOC, are just 2 that come to mind, all have gone into giving the gamer far reaching emotional experiences that wake us up. Even the Crysis series, all have contributed in giving our young people and the adults too who play games, far more than gratuitous violence, but depth and even the need to soul search. Mass Effect 1, 2 & 3 do this in ways I have never seen before. You started giving the fans a deep and meaningful journey with Dragon Age 1 & 2 as well as the numerous DLC's, for which I am deeply grateful,
I can see the enhancements from Dragon Age in Mass Effect. The eyes are simply lifelike and realistic, I can recall a couple of Mods for DA that were made by fans. So a great deal of our input for the games that Bioware have given us are built on fan input too, this is blatantly obvious to the gamers 50yrs and older, who like the extremely perceptive teenagers, who like us see more than surface reality.
With all the above in mind why use the starchild in the last moments of the game. such an immature exposé, to simply and oddly say throughout ME3 that synthetics are a threat when you give us the opportunity to see both sides of the Quarian/Geth conflict and to resolve the issue and reconcile 2 opposing agendas, was a stroke of pure Genius..Why then use the synthetic arguement at the end of the game in such a way as to be nonsensical??? We have seen that synthetic life can evolve into human like consciousness, by your own rule of gameplay (ie: EDI)????
I only ask that you finish this game, this beautiful series of Mass Effect in a way that you the Developer is far more than simply proud, but make Mass Effect the game that all others are based on for dialogue quality, wisdom of choices, graphics and Soundtrack, the 1st one was staggering, the song at the end of ME1, brought tears to my eyes as we saved the council and the Destiny Ascension.
That magic ingredient so hard to produce in truly great games like Mass Effect, the Emotional Inspiration to overcome any negative reality and transmute uourselves and the darkness confronting us in ways that give Joy to all that Exist.
Thank you for giving me many tearful moments of despair and inexpressible joy, for this alone Bioware you have my loyalty.
Mass Effect 3 is not a failure in any way, but a roaring triumphant success up until we get to the Citadel via the beam. You already had a true ending for the game (in my opinion anyway) Use it, 8 years of your life and ours has been invested in making the most pre-eminent game in all gaming history, reach out and up, and take the prize Bioware you deserve to win too. You have helped many people to WAKE UP.
With deepest respect and gratitude thanks for the wildest ride of my gaming life. I have never seen the like as good as Mass Effect 1, Mass Effect 2 & Mass Effect 3, all of these games have fired my blood like never before. I roared in triumph when the reaper died wrapped in a Maws death grip even louder when the reaper dies on Rannock, what a fight I had gettin him down in Insanity mode too, unholy hell was unleashed that day.
There you have it people, this is why I followed Mass Effect for me, 4 years now, 4 years of expressing every emotion that a human being has, I have invested into Mass Effect, Honour Us and Honour yourselves by giving us an ending that is worthy of the Entire Series. you deserve it, not for any monetary gain, purely a spiritual fulfillment of having told a saga that stirs the deepest in human Consciousness.
Mass Effect did not start out that way, we simply bought a game that looked interesting and found to our surprise, a journey through the depths of our souls too. Well done people, a few games in the past have done this as well. I have mentioned a few that have done this for me, but none have done it so well as the Mass Effect Trilogy. Get rid of the starchild, dump the synthetic arguement of the reapers, they themselves are synthetic/organic combinations, pure hypocrisy in their arguements, they make no sense. As for the rest of ME3, perfect,I wouldn't change a thing in any of the games. Just the last few minutes after one enters the reaper reality on the citadel, we all need true and genuine closure when so much emotional input has been manifested into something. The red green & blue endings make no sense.
Thank you for listening. I did not want to be negative, I don't believe you have lied to us, you did not I don't care what even angry fans say even if evidence exists to the contrary, You have a magical team there @ Bioware don't loose them for god's sake, you need them and we need brilliant developers like YOU.
I Salute You.
Thank you for making an old gamer come back to life again. Illness is not a pleasant way to live.
Modifié par LvxWolf, 31 mars 2012 - 02:42 .
#12487
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 02:49
Chrislo1990
-
- Members
- 323 messages
Just finished watching that vid. It got me thinking a little more. See I think that deleteing the catalyst scene just outright won't cut it. In order to preserve story coherence, Bioware is going to have to expand the ending and incorporate the indoctrination theory. This way the whole story won't just fall apart. Keeping it simple won't cut it now. Providing clarity DEFINITELY won't. I think they dug themselves to deep to implement an alternative simple ending. The end ending must take into account our decisions, moral inclinations, EMS, etc and provide us with the option to survive the war, whether we're paragon or renegade. It must also provide closure and allow to us to see the consequences of our actions. Bioware's job is not easy now.
A simple fix won't cut it for them.
To put it simply, what ME3 needs is a COMPLETE ENDING that molds to our individual playstyles. It should include happy endings, bittersweet endings, and bad endings, each with variations. This is the end of Shepard's story we're talking about here. We deserve to see the fruits of his labor.
Hold the line!
A simple fix won't cut it for them.
To put it simply, what ME3 needs is a COMPLETE ENDING that molds to our individual playstyles. It should include happy endings, bittersweet endings, and bad endings, each with variations. This is the end of Shepard's story we're talking about here. We deserve to see the fruits of his labor.
Hold the line!
Modifié par Chrislo1990, 31 mars 2012 - 02:55 .
#12488
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 02:53
DarkKnightCuron
-
- Members
- 72 messages
Hold the Line! Want Better Endings!
#12489
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:02
Dessalines
-
- Members
- 607 messages
I do like when you get talk to all of your squadmate before the final battle I played the game three times now, and I still feel the final goodbye scene, but you are right the final mission is not the same as in Mass Effect 2. I still have false hope that tomorrow they are going to announce it was an April Fool's joke. 
They give a code for PS3 users and everyone else is going to get the "true" ending during this multiplay thing. I
If not than I am thinking that perhaps you should stop doing things that might look like you are cutting corners.
1)Instead of graphics for unmaskedTali, how about just a photo?
2)IInstead of creating a lot of environments, how about just have Citadel and everyone stays in the same ares.
I am trying to understand if the Reapers controlled TIM, then why did they attacked the Cerebus base?. Did they not controll him yet? The VI stated that the those that wanted to controll the Reapers were indoctrinated. He wanted to control them in the beginning of the game.
There too many questions left unswered that did not exist until the final moments of the game.
They give a code for PS3 users and everyone else is going to get the "true" ending during this multiplay thing. IIf not than I am thinking that perhaps you should stop doing things that might look like you are cutting corners.
1)Instead of graphics for unmaskedTali, how about just a photo?
2)IInstead of creating a lot of environments, how about just have Citadel and everyone stays in the same ares.
I am trying to understand if the Reapers controlled TIM, then why did they attacked the Cerebus base?. Did they not controll him yet? The VI stated that the those that wanted to controll the Reapers were indoctrinated. He wanted to control them in the beginning of the game.
There too many questions left unswered that did not exist until the final moments of the game.
Modifié par Dessalines, 31 mars 2012 - 03:04 .
#12490
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:05
skippies1984
-
- Members
- 2 messages
I feel that this game was a masterful work of art, and killing Shepard and destroying the relays brings the story to a finality, but there are a few points that maybe should've been addressed. Like why was the Normandy in the relay before it was destroyed? I heard the call for a retreat when Shepard gets fried, but I'm not sure I buy them getting all the way to the relay. Or when the relays explode it's supposed to be like a supernova... I'd say the sol system and many others are in total ruin after that. Or we don't all get killed by this nova, and now there are no relays and a whole bunch of other species... In war ships... In the solar system... With no way to get back to their homes... Hmmm... Don't get me wrong, i love these games, and am in fact starting back all the way at the beginning for another go round, but I feel the ambiguity was a bit much. Some was needed and welcome, but I think it just left too many unanswered questions.
One thing I'd like to touch on briefly is that I've seen many people saying that the last choices are supporting the indoctrination theory because killing the reapers was bad and controlling them was good... What i think some may have forgot was that killing the reapers also would kill all synthetic life, Geth and Edi included, which you just fought though two game (ME2-Me3) to save (depending on your decisions) It's Red because it represents Shepard's willingness to do anything, or kill anyone to save Earth, including his friends... That seems like a pretty bad decision to me (still picked it on my first play through though) As per TIM's choice of controlling the reapers being good, I'm not sure i buy that either since the construct said he would lose who he was... Now the construct, god child as some have come to call it, was a projection, was it not? If the reapers can control people, whats to say the construct that controls them cant take a form familiar to Shepard? And did any one stop to think that the kid he sees, that no one else seems to see, might be him? In his dreams he see this kid burning and at one point sees himself and the kid burning... Maybe its his minds way of coping with the fact that, as he knows, he's likely going to die... which could explain the voices of the construct if the end happened to be a dream sequence... Male Shep, Fem Shep, and maybe kid Shep? Dunno. Another frequent is the unlimited ammo gun. Granted it hasn't been this way for Me2 or 3, but all weapons had unlimited ammo in the first one... Just don't over heat or you're screwed.
Main complaint: endings were all the same save the color of the explosion, and that there was no real closure... Too many unanswered questions. 98% of the game was one of the very best games I've ever played.
Also I don't like the idea of Shepard being controlled by the reapers or indoctrinated. It makes him a failure and diminishes all of his accomplishments. I think everyone just loves the me universe so much they don't want to see it end. I know I don't. Dream sequence maybe. Indoctrinated, hell no. If we get dlc I'd like see an aftermath episode that explains all the stranded aliens in the sol system, and the possible survival of Shepard, or reaper fleet Shepard, or coexisting cyber people... Or maybe a stranded Normandy crew episode Any way you go it's likely Shepard wouldnt be playable in those cases, so maybe a new finally for Shep, and more answers.
Last few thoughts... If reaper tech indoctrinates... What about all the species on the citadel, which is reaper tech? Or tech of the creators of the reapers? And why in the hell would they create such things as the reapers... I just feel like there is much for the me universe to still offer us.
One thing I'd like to touch on briefly is that I've seen many people saying that the last choices are supporting the indoctrination theory because killing the reapers was bad and controlling them was good... What i think some may have forgot was that killing the reapers also would kill all synthetic life, Geth and Edi included, which you just fought though two game (ME2-Me3) to save (depending on your decisions) It's Red because it represents Shepard's willingness to do anything, or kill anyone to save Earth, including his friends... That seems like a pretty bad decision to me (still picked it on my first play through though) As per TIM's choice of controlling the reapers being good, I'm not sure i buy that either since the construct said he would lose who he was... Now the construct, god child as some have come to call it, was a projection, was it not? If the reapers can control people, whats to say the construct that controls them cant take a form familiar to Shepard? And did any one stop to think that the kid he sees, that no one else seems to see, might be him? In his dreams he see this kid burning and at one point sees himself and the kid burning... Maybe its his minds way of coping with the fact that, as he knows, he's likely going to die... which could explain the voices of the construct if the end happened to be a dream sequence... Male Shep, Fem Shep, and maybe kid Shep? Dunno. Another frequent is the unlimited ammo gun. Granted it hasn't been this way for Me2 or 3, but all weapons had unlimited ammo in the first one... Just don't over heat or you're screwed.
Main complaint: endings were all the same save the color of the explosion, and that there was no real closure... Too many unanswered questions. 98% of the game was one of the very best games I've ever played.
Also I don't like the idea of Shepard being controlled by the reapers or indoctrinated. It makes him a failure and diminishes all of his accomplishments. I think everyone just loves the me universe so much they don't want to see it end. I know I don't. Dream sequence maybe. Indoctrinated, hell no. If we get dlc I'd like see an aftermath episode that explains all the stranded aliens in the sol system, and the possible survival of Shepard, or reaper fleet Shepard, or coexisting cyber people... Or maybe a stranded Normandy crew episode
Any way you go it's likely Shepard wouldnt be playable in those cases, so maybe a new finally for Shep, and more answers.Last few thoughts... If reaper tech indoctrinates... What about all the species on the citadel, which is reaper tech? Or tech of the creators of the reapers? And why in the hell would they create such things as the reapers... I just feel like there is much for the me universe to still offer us.
#12491
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:33
Chrislo1990
-
- Members
- 323 messages
Guys I found this very informative youtube video that supports why the indoctrination theory may be what Bioware is holding back foi future dlc.There are a lot of valid points that not even I had picked up on. Please feel free to view it:
Perhpas this can help explain the ridiculouness of the current endings.
Perhpas this can help explain the ridiculouness of the current endings.
#12492
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:34
akenn312
-
- Members
- 248 messages
How about this suggestion on how to fix the ending and make both sides happy you can actually still have Hologram kid stay in the story changes and additions like this.
Make the war assets and in-game choices matter in the final battle.
Just like Mass Effect 2 add quick cut scenes where obtaining a war asset or not affects your teammates survival and yours. For example the choice to take along Dr. Chakwas or Dr. Michelle should impact the game if they are considered war assets maybe if you take Dr. Michelle one of your friends dies or maybe if you bring Chakwas they live or switch it. if you take the Salarians rather than the Krogan again have it impact your battle cut scens again. Let's actually make a person that gets a 4000 or 5000 war asset score actually have the best possible ending that is different and unique.
Give us an actual final Boss battle.
I don't care how you do it but the game needs a final showdown with Harbinger or something. Fighting waves of small Reapers is tough but it never feels like a final battle and that's one of the reasons the game leaves the player hanging. That is not a way to end the action of a massive game like this there needs to be a final Boss that you can fight & defeat. You can still even let Shepard get blasted by a Reaper beam but he needs to fight an epic one on one battle.
Explain why your two squad members leave you.
This is an easy fix and here is an easy example how to do it. Somehow the Normandy is being overrun by Reaper stuff and needs help. "Shepard turns to Garrus and Ashley and says. "Looks like you can't come with me on this one." Go back to the Normandy they need your help." Garrus and Ash protest, Shepard makes a little speech about sacrifice and how important it is for the Normandy to not be destroyed for the morale of the fleet and now you have a good reason they are not going down on the "Final Reaper Charge".
You don't have to completely remove hologram kid or the machine just change them a little and the plot hole sorta goes away.
Now this one is pretty hard to pull off the Catylist and the Space Magic Machine are a major plot hole but I feel all problems have a solution. Instead of making the kid the end scene focus and the person with the solution make Sheppard have a tree of dialog choices that convinces this AI to tell you how to stop the Reapers. Don't let the kid stop the Reapers let Shepard figure ou thow to do it. Which brings up the machine. DO NOT I repeat do not say the Catalyst just made this machine for a new solution say it was made by his creator or something else and he can't use it because he knows it will cause his destruction. Do not empower this kid to a god like entity just make him the misguided flawed AI that he is. Now the machine comes into play and now the reason for the three choices make more sense. It's just the way it has been to really stop the Reapers cycle. There is probalby a better way to do this but again something like this can be belived in my opinion.
Finally reward the player with unique different ending scene concepts.
The promise was16 but now I'll just take three unique endings. If you played like a Paragon then reward the players for staying on the straight and narrow. A cut scene where we see Shepards friends survive and end up well and the Galaxy is saved and working together for now. If you played Rengade have a cut scene where he maybe pays for his evil deeds or is running some crime syndicate on Omega now or the galaxy is in turmoil. I don't care just something that give the characters closure and the way you played Shepard closure. Dump the Normandy running through a Mass relay concept. Unless you can give a good reason for something don't show it. You can show the Normandy crashed but have it be a part of earth that the Reapers didn't touch that would make sense. Shepard can even die in some of these but just show a emotional reaction from the LI in the cut scenes and what happend to his friends.
These maybe more hope than suggestions, I'm really hoping thats whats already in production and that wil be in the DLC. So now the people dissatisfied get what they want, the people that like the first ending and want it to stay the way it is can just not download it, problem solved. Although I think you would be crazy not to download a free DLC with these fixes.
Make the war assets and in-game choices matter in the final battle.
Just like Mass Effect 2 add quick cut scenes where obtaining a war asset or not affects your teammates survival and yours. For example the choice to take along Dr. Chakwas or Dr. Michelle should impact the game if they are considered war assets maybe if you take Dr. Michelle one of your friends dies or maybe if you bring Chakwas they live or switch it. if you take the Salarians rather than the Krogan again have it impact your battle cut scens again. Let's actually make a person that gets a 4000 or 5000 war asset score actually have the best possible ending that is different and unique.
Give us an actual final Boss battle.
I don't care how you do it but the game needs a final showdown with Harbinger or something. Fighting waves of small Reapers is tough but it never feels like a final battle and that's one of the reasons the game leaves the player hanging. That is not a way to end the action of a massive game like this there needs to be a final Boss that you can fight & defeat. You can still even let Shepard get blasted by a Reaper beam but he needs to fight an epic one on one battle.
Explain why your two squad members leave you.
This is an easy fix and here is an easy example how to do it. Somehow the Normandy is being overrun by Reaper stuff and needs help. "Shepard turns to Garrus and Ashley and says. "Looks like you can't come with me on this one." Go back to the Normandy they need your help." Garrus and Ash protest, Shepard makes a little speech about sacrifice and how important it is for the Normandy to not be destroyed for the morale of the fleet and now you have a good reason they are not going down on the "Final Reaper Charge".
You don't have to completely remove hologram kid or the machine just change them a little and the plot hole sorta goes away.
Now this one is pretty hard to pull off the Catylist and the Space Magic Machine are a major plot hole but I feel all problems have a solution. Instead of making the kid the end scene focus and the person with the solution make Sheppard have a tree of dialog choices that convinces this AI to tell you how to stop the Reapers. Don't let the kid stop the Reapers let Shepard figure ou thow to do it. Which brings up the machine. DO NOT I repeat do not say the Catalyst just made this machine for a new solution say it was made by his creator or something else and he can't use it because he knows it will cause his destruction. Do not empower this kid to a god like entity just make him the misguided flawed AI that he is. Now the machine comes into play and now the reason for the three choices make more sense. It's just the way it has been to really stop the Reapers cycle. There is probalby a better way to do this but again something like this can be belived in my opinion.
Finally reward the player with unique different ending scene concepts.
The promise was16 but now I'll just take three unique endings. If you played like a Paragon then reward the players for staying on the straight and narrow. A cut scene where we see Shepards friends survive and end up well and the Galaxy is saved and working together for now. If you played Rengade have a cut scene where he maybe pays for his evil deeds or is running some crime syndicate on Omega now or the galaxy is in turmoil. I don't care just something that give the characters closure and the way you played Shepard closure. Dump the Normandy running through a Mass relay concept. Unless you can give a good reason for something don't show it. You can show the Normandy crashed but have it be a part of earth that the Reapers didn't touch that would make sense. Shepard can even die in some of these but just show a emotional reaction from the LI in the cut scenes and what happend to his friends.
These maybe more hope than suggestions, I'm really hoping thats whats already in production and that wil be in the DLC. So now the people dissatisfied get what they want, the people that like the first ending and want it to stay the way it is can just not download it, problem solved. Although I think you would be crazy not to download a free DLC with these fixes.
Modifié par akenn312, 31 mars 2012 - 05:00 .
#12493
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:39
Lordambitious
-
- Members
- 102 messages
In other words, "Be sure to drink your ovaltine"
#12494
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:45
sputnixyz
-
- Members
- 1 messages
It's sad to have "Downloadable Content" be the LAST words of ME 3, and for any game for that matterLordambitious wrote...
In other words, "Be sure to drink your ovaltine"
#12495
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:52
Sweet Dirge
-
- Members
- 33 messages
I really really really really liked the ending. A lot actually.
#12496
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:52
Chrislo1990
-
- Members
- 323 messages
Hahaha nice one lolLordambitious wrote...
In other words, "Be sure to drink your ovaltine"
#12497
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:54
skippies1984
-
- Members
- 2 messages
Chrislo1990 wrote...
Totally agree with him as well. Thanks so much guys for sharing this link. I'm watching it right now and I am baffled with how well he does his analysys. Very intelligent guy.Lordambitious wrote...
Chrislo1990 wrote...
Hmmm where did you get that analysis Lordambitious? Could make a good read for us and Bioware. Perhaps a link?
I agree with this guy, the ending needs to be REPLACED, not "clarified"
The ending is broken on a multitude of levels, and this dude does a fantastic job explaining it.
He explains how the ending takes Mass Effect from a talky-techie science fiction that was character driven, and had a complex and well detailed universe that for the first two games was consistent with it's own rules as to what was and was not possible, and that this was abandoned in the Ending. Introducing a new device that could somehow alter the Citadel to manipulate all life in the galaxy at the molecular level is inconsistent with the technology explained in the game. Moreover, the reason ME1 and 2 were so great is because they gave us characters we could care about, the ending in ME2 is a great example of this, we cared about who lived and died, we wanted to know how they ended up. ME3's ending completely abandons this chracter based narrative.
Moreover, the catalyst kid is completely unncecessary. He introduces a new plot and conflict in the ending, and there was no need to replace the main antagonist (harbinger). Even worse, he replaces Shepard as a protagonist, Shepard has nothing to do in that end scene beyond flip a switch.
The ending collapses at the end, because there are so many inconsistencies with the rest of the series, lore-wise and theme-wise. A few inconstincies are ok. He uses Legion sacrificing himself as a good example of this. Legion has dissolve his consciousness into the Geth consensus, and gloss over the actual reason why he does so. However, that's cool because it worked within the narrative and provided an emotionally tense moment. That was beautiful. The ending tho does this a thousand fold, to where the are so many plot and continuity inconsistencies that the narrative coherence is lost. How did they move the citadel? Why did the catalyst need the keepers and sovereign to call back the reapers in ME1 if it lives in the Citadel? If they have the citadel, why didn't the reapers shut down the relays like they did in ME1, and deny the fleet access to Earth in the first place? These and dozens of other plot holes destroy the ending.
The video is a bit long, but it's an excellent analysis, and I hope Bioware takes a look.
Long but very good. I think this guy is on the money with his argument.
#12498
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 03:55
Dakota Strider
-
- Members
- 892 messages
Favorite moment? Realizing that since I only played ME3 and not the first two of the trilogy, I did not have as much emotionally invested into the characters of the game, so that the terrible ending, and poor plot choices during the game, would not affect me as much as those that played the whole series.
#12499
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 04:06
Chrislo1990
-
- Members
- 323 messages
Yeah you see it was Bioware's plan from the very beginning to target new players, not the loyal passinate fans had already played ME1 and ME2 countless times. They knew that no matter what we would purchase ME3 just to see end of Shepard's story. It ended blowing up in their faces. Guess they underestimated how passionate we are over Mass Effect. It all comes down to wanting to extract as much money as possible in my opinion. I mean implementing co-op pretty much gave it away. It was completely unneccessary
Modifié par Chrislo1990, 31 mars 2012 - 04:11 .
#12500
Posté 31 mars 2012 - 04:24
jeweledleah
-
- Members
- 4 043 messages
Chrislo1990 wrote...
Yeah you see it was Bioware's plan from the very beginning to target new players, not the loyal passinate fans had already played ME1 and ME2 countless times. They knew that no matter what we would purchase ME3 just to see end of Shepard's story. It ended blowing up in their faces. Guess they underestimated how passionate we are over Mass Effect. It all comes down to wanting to extract as much money as possible in my opinion. I mean implementing co-op pretty much gave it away. It was completely unneccessary
well.. I don't completely agree. I mean, amount of fanservice in ME3 is staggering. I feel like they just tried to sit on too many chairs at once and spread themselves too thin. its pretty hard to both please the returning players and make it accesible for new players, try to make the game work for people regardles of their playstyle, add in the "hot thing of the decade" - the multiplayer, figure out how to write themselves out of several corners they wrote themselves into, work despite several key people from different teams leaving (from writing, to gameplay design, to heck, one of the produsors).
now that i'm no longer as angry, hollow, depressed as I was when I just finished ME3, I can look back and say - they really did try to do their best. sadly, its not always good enough. and that's ok, dear people of Bioware. the good news is? this is still fixable.
