23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Njald]

Dear Bioware. I know you are tempted to "explain" away the current ending so it would please parts of the fans. Plotholes can be covered up with some "off camera" work. Splashscreens could explain what happened to the universe and our companions and LI like an Animal House montage.
But Please don't do that.
For once I would like to see a developer buck the trend of simplyfying, dumbing down and cutting corners just to make short term money. You tried building something with DA:O and ME1. What changed? Why did you decide you no longer wanted the fanbase you built? Why did you think that you should rush, paste/copy and just present shoddy work?
No matter what new, Interactive, endings you put in the only thing that matters is whether you put effort on it or not. We Can tell when you fake it btw. No amount of PRspin can repair the damage you cause your own fanbase with the unfinished game you sold us.

As to telling you what to put into the ending. Indoctrination, closure, explaination, Marauder Shields flying backwards around the globe until time went backwards. That's not for the fanbase to dictate. They only thing we are "entitled" to is quality and consistency. Neither of that is delivered in the current Ending. (singular). You Have to know that by now. There simply isn't any way anyone working on this project can have missed it without being functionally blind and deaf.

So go back. Get your Entire team together and make something worthwhile. If not ME3 ending then atleast a DA3 that doesn't make ALL the mistakes EVERY game the last 5 years have done. You don't skip on the hard parts if it's the hard parts that sells the product. That's like making an luxury sports car with a crappy engine. It's not the product you made money on and it's not a future for your enterprise.
If you insist on that drivelous path then you really are just strining this fanbase along for pure evil enjoyment. Stop that, it will never serve you in the long run and it should make your more moral coworkers lose sleep. (maybe not the horrible monsters in charge of the really really illconstructed deadlines you seem to have set up for yourselves)

If you after all this time need to see more text from Fans on How,Why,When,Where you F*cked up then I feel no sympathy for your coming transformation into a dead brand or a producer of quick,sh*tty content with no purpose and no quality.

I really hope I will not have to tell Bioware employees "I f*cking told you so!" when you all hate your jobs in a couple of years time. When you are worn out from the constant retooling into producing shoddier and shoddier work, into faster and faster crunch times and less and less time doing something worthwhile.
Because it will happen if you don't start changing right now. No amount of mindless twitterdrones, or corporate fake smiles from PR guys spouting stuff about the products that isn't true, will save you in the end.

Modifié par Njald, 04 avril 2012 - 12:00 .

[Nigeta]

Why Bioware,

I have been loyal to you since the days of Knights Of the Old Republic. I sacrificed so much game time by playing your games for years. Then your best product to date comes along in 2007

The Mass Effect franchise.

This to me this was gaming heaven. I purchased an xbox 360 just to play Mass Effect like I did with KOTOR.
From that moment on I only played Mass Effect 1, 2 and now 3. While other franchises like Gears of War are collecting dust on my shelf.

For me and so many others like me the journey was long and full of decisions and choices that ultimately made no significant impact on the ending of the trilogy or as you like to call it Commander Shepard's story.

What went wrong Bioware? After Mass Effect's 1 and 2 I was ready to "Finish the Fight" as another populair franchise would call it. Was the devil of the industry by wich I mean EA that is currently in the finals alongside the Bank Of America to becoming the worst company of 2012 responsible for the last few moments of Mass Effect 3 so that they could force you to sell the real ending (look up the indoctrination theory) to us for 560 or 800 MP like what happened with Javik.

[Chrislo1990]

I'd like to refer you guys to this post which examines the psychology behind our disatisfaction of ME3's ending. It was actually written by a psychology professoir, go figure:

http://social.biowar...8283/1#10468283

I won't bore you with the details, but he makes avery good point when he says that when it comes in remembering a good event as opposed to bad one, we are more likely to remember the bad event. I think he calls it negativity bias. Now when it comes to ME3, sure the game was great, but the ending really screwed up the overall quality of the game. We went in expecting to end Shepard's journeys on our own terms from a variety of different endings. Well it's quite obvious the endings we received completely disregardered our past decisons , moral inclinations, EMS, etc. and we're not much different  from each another. This leads to diappointment and our perception of the game changes. No longer do we prasise the game because what resonates more in our heads now are the very negative aspects, tsuch he endings, as opposed to the very positive ones.

[Zenyattaa]

Njald wrote...


So go back. Get your Entire team together and make something worthwhile. If not ME3 ending then atleast a DA3 that doesn't make ALL the mistakes EVERY game the last 5 years have done.

*In a sten voice* "No." If they do not fix utter travesty they dare to call an ending... Not explain but fix, I'm done.
They flushed 90+ hours of play time down the toliet with an ending they ripped off Dues EX and couldn't even be bothered to get it right.

So no. Don't release half-assed crap to me then in the same breath claim artisic integrity.If you had any integrity at all, you would do what Todd Howard did. Admit your mistake, your horrible, horrible mistake and then fix it.

If your collective ego's are too large to allow you to do that, then enjoy going the way every other brand EA's bought out.

[Chrislo1990]

Nigeta wrote...

Why Bioware,

I have been loyal to you since the days of Knights Of the Old Republic. I sacrificed so much game time by playing your games for years. Then your best product to date comes along in 2007

The Mass Effect franchise.

This to me this was gaming heaven. I purchased an xbox 360 just to play Mass Effect like I did with KOTOR.
From that moment on I only played Mass Effect 1, 2 and now 3. While other franchises like Gears of War are collecting dust on my shelf.

For me and so many others like me the journey was long and full of decisions and choices that ultimately made no significant impact on the ending of the trilogy or as you like to call it Commander Shepard's story.

What went wrong Bioware? After Mass Effect's 1 and 2 I was ready to "Finish the Fight" as another populair franchise would call it. Was the devil of the industry by wich I mean EA that is currently in the finals alongside the Bank Of America to becoming the worst company of 2012 responsible for the last few moments of Mass Effect 3 so that they could force you to sell the real ending (look up the indoctrination theory) to us for 560 or 800 MP like what happened with Javik.

You know I think EA's influence has made Bioware gradually stray from their core values and that has me extrememly worried. It seems the company is now more concerned with making money than it is in satisfying their loyal fanbase. It's obvious to me that the endings were rushed. In now way or form do they offer any closure, depite the devs promises. In addition any fan who has played ME1 and ME2 will noticehow far more simplistic ME3 is compared to its predecessors. Just look at how dumbed down the dialogue wheels are. Even in full conversation mode, you have very little control over Shepard's dialogue and when you do, most often you can tonly choose from two, maybe three lines max!

I don't know where Bioware is headed, but from the looks of how badly they messed up with the ndings, I don't think reputation will be restored anytime soon, unless they come out and acknowledge their mistake and actually fix the endings.

[Archonsg]

Legion is Skynet wrote...

I'll freely admit that I haven't read all 536 pages on this forum, but I've read a whole lot of them. The overwhelming sense that I get is extremely negative, and almost ALL of it has to do with the last ten minutes of the game.

Granted, I was pissed about the ending. I felt it was hand-waving and sloppy. After over 100 hours of gameplay and story development, to introduce the final overarching "bad guy" AND the grand solution in the last ten minutes is quite simply bad writing. However I have a very difficult time blaming the writers of the game for this, because it is so incredibly inconsistent with the rest of the narrative. I feel that the game was rushed, and the creative and wonderful minds that gave us so much awesome story were simply boxed into a corner in the interest of shipping the game on time.

That being said, how great was this story? The final minutes of the game are certainly open for debate, but why doesn't anybody consider the other 25+ hours of this game? Why does everyone seem to say "yeah that was good, but the ending KILLED the entire franchise"?The ENTIRETY of Mass Effect 3 was an ending, not just the final scene. The whole game tells the story of each character and what their ultimate fate will be, and believe it or not, our choices actually DID matter in that regard, just not in the binary way some people think.

I've talked with people who couldn't understand why they weren't able to save the Quarians, even after making all the "right" choices in ME3. Turns out it was because of something they did/didn't do in ME2. The fate of Kaiden/Ashley has an arc that begins in ME1 and doesn't end until ME3. Same thing with Wrex.

Take Mordin for another example. His story in ME3 has a very simple arc where his options are 1) he dies curing the Genophage, 2) he dies because you kill him in his attempt to cure the Genophage, 3) he lives, but Eve dies (not clear on the details of this one), or 4) he dies in ME2 during the suicide mission. Really doesn't seem too complicated on the face of it. Actually, it seems pretty simple to write.

But I personally couldn't do it. Even on my Renegade playthrough, I absolutely could not betray Mordin, let alone kill him. This isn't because I'm some altruistic, awesome person. It's because they made me care about the character. All logical signs pointed to deceiving the Krogan. It's quite simply the most pragmatic choice to take in both the short and long term. But I didn't do it because I felt like I knew Wrex, and I knew Mordin, and I knew all the progress they were both making. I couldn't betray that.

The same applies for Tali vs. Legion, or Grunt vs. the Rachni Queen. We can all bemoan it now because we all know the results, but think about before that, the first time you played the game. When you had to make the call about whether you should reinforce Grunt and lose the Rachni Queen, or leave him to die to protect the her. Or when you were faced with the decision of who to support when the Geth faced off against the Quarian Fleet. Or the fact that a lot of us got Miranda killed because we didn't give her a heads-up. Same with Kelly Chambers.

So what if my decision to let someone live on a side-quest in ME1 didn't translate to some awesome revelation in ME3. The narrative was based around the characters all along, and in that regard this game succeeded on a level I have never seen any other game produced (final ten minutes aside, obviously). And that narrative wasn't necessarily based around "what option will you choose to save everyone", and more about "how much do you care about this person?"

As I said before, I get the criticism people are leveling about the ending. But can we not just take a minute to appreciate what these writers, programmers, actors, and staff have done? Just a minute? Or is absolutely ALL of it wiped away because we didn't find the ending satisfactory?

Your reasons are why I am up at arms about the ending. It is because, of the obvious quality, the dedication the writing team must have had to pull off these situations that the ending was so out of sync with the entire game itself, spoke of sloppiness that did not do the rest of the game justice.

Worst, those last 10 minutes, took every hard work, every emotion investment by, and I want to stress this, the PLAYER AND THE TEAM THAT CREATED the series, and essentially crapped on it.

I do not know if you have noticed, but there are posters with signatures that say "Shepard, Tali, Miranda, Kaiden ....and all the cast we love, DESERVE BETTER"

Not the players themselves, but characters in a game. To come to care about these characters is a testament of the power and quality of the writing past. It would be a real shame to have all that be remembered not at all, but for an ending that really should never have been added to the game.

[Benchpress610]

Corpsetorn wrote...

Okay, I may be alone in this, but feel free to tell me if you agree or disagree.

I feel there should be NO final choice in the ending.

Let me explain my opinion concisely.

I believe that having an ending choice makes most of what you did irrelevant. If you got to choose how it all ended from the getgo, why even play the other games?

To me, the ending should be determined by all the choices you have already made, every path you took, and every one you didn't. I realize ME is a choice-based series, and perhaps BW felt that the ending should really drive that home. But it would have been more effective to let your entire story do the determining for you. If you did "blank" but not "blank" this is what would have happened. However, if you did "blank" AND "blank," the outcome is different.

Having a final choice may seem like an important factor, but I'd argue that not having a final choice, instead having the outcome be determined by how you lived, what you already chose, etc. has a much greater impact than getting 3 options and making everything you did pointless.

Just my opinion of course.

Sir...this is one the best statements I've read in this forum.  

[akenn312]

The more I think about Drew Karpyshyn's Dark Energy ending the more the conversation with Sovereign in Mass Effect 1 makes sense about what the Reapers were. When Sovereign says "Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays. Our technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we desire. We impose order on the chaos of organic life. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it." Then the response from one of the squad members is "They're harvesting us! Letting us advance to the level they need, then wiping us out!" 

Now the reason of the Reapers purpose would make sense because they are trying to unnaturally force organic life to evolve quickly in the way they want so they can harvest it for their purpose. This would make them even more evil and would explain why they speak down to Shepard the way they do. They see us as insignificant playthings. 

But for some strange reason the current creative team decided to focus on only this part of that sentence " We impose order on the chaos of organic life." Which is not the right understanding of what Sovereign is saying here. Without the Reaper technology organics would be too unpredictable in how they evolved. So to speed it up and control the evolution the Reapers give them the Mass Relays making sure they evolve to the point to harvest at the right time. This would make the Reapers one of the sneakiest and worst guys in existence because they are messing with natural evolution just to save their own creepy metal skins. Playing god just to save themselves.

Now it would make sense for Paragon Shepard to
A. Believe in humanity and let natural evolution begin again and destroy the Reapers but start the Dark Energy. Now it would also make sense to destroy the Mass Relays or deactivate them. 

Or a Renagade Shepard to
B. let the Reapers destroy humanity so you could make the ends justify the means on not letting Dark Energy destroy everything but screwing humans and Earth. This would probably keep the Mass Relays intact.

This would have been pure genius. You could actually flip the two choices a person could see sacrificing humanity but not letting the Dark Energy be released as a Paragon move. 

Maybe it dosn't complelty end the 16 ending problem but it would end the plot holes and confusion at least.

This was what we should have had as an ending. This is what artistic integrity is all about. Not changing your vision to make more money. 

Modifié par akenn312, 04 avril 2012 - 12:43 .

[Chrislo1990]

Archonsg wrote...

Legion is Skynet wrote...

I'll freely admit that I haven't read all 536 pages on this forum, but I've read a whole lot of them. The overwhelming sense that I get is extremely negative, and almost ALL of it has to do with the last ten minutes of the game.

Granted, I was pissed about the ending. I felt it was hand-waving and sloppy. After over 100 hours of gameplay and story development, to introduce the final overarching "bad guy" AND the grand solution in the last ten minutes is quite simply bad writing. However I have a very difficult time blaming the writers of the game for this, because it is so incredibly inconsistent with the rest of the narrative. I feel that the game was rushed, and the creative and wonderful minds that gave us so much awesome story were simply boxed into a corner in the interest of shipping the game on time.

That being said, how great was this story? The final minutes of the game are certainly open for debate, but why doesn't anybody consider the other 25+ hours of this game? Why does everyone seem to say "yeah that was good, but the ending KILLED the entire franchise"?The ENTIRETY of Mass Effect 3 was an ending, not just the final scene. The whole game tells the story of each character and what their ultimate fate will be, and believe it or not, our choices actually DID matter in that regard, just not in the binary way some people think.

I've talked with people who couldn't understand why they weren't able to save the Quarians, even after making all the "right" choices in ME3. Turns out it was because of something they did/didn't do in ME2. The fate of Kaiden/Ashley has an arc that begins in ME1 and doesn't end until ME3. Same thing with Wrex.

Take Mordin for another example. His story in ME3 has a very simple arc where his options are 1) he dies curing the Genophage, 2) he dies because you kill him in his attempt to cure the Genophage, 3) he lives, but Eve dies (not clear on the details of this one), or 4) he dies in ME2 during the suicide mission. Really doesn't seem too complicated on the face of it. Actually, it seems pretty simple to write.

But I personally couldn't do it. Even on my Renegade playthrough, I absolutely could not betray Mordin, let alone kill him. This isn't because I'm some altruistic, awesome person. It's because they made me care about the character. All logical signs pointed to deceiving the Krogan. It's quite simply the most pragmatic choice to take in both the short and long term. But I didn't do it because I felt like I knew Wrex, and I knew Mordin, and I knew all the progress they were both making. I couldn't betray that.

The same applies for Tali vs. Legion, or Grunt vs. the Rachni Queen. We can all bemoan it now because we all know the results, but think about before that, the first time you played the game. When you had to make the call about whether you should reinforce Grunt and lose the Rachni Queen, or leave him to die to protect the her. Or when you were faced with the decision of who to support when the Geth faced off against the Quarian Fleet. Or the fact that a lot of us got Miranda killed because we didn't give her a heads-up. Same with Kelly Chambers.

So what if my decision to let someone live on a side-quest in ME1 didn't translate to some awesome revelation in ME3. The narrative was based around the characters all along, and in that regard this game succeeded on a level I have never seen any other game produced (final ten minutes aside, obviously). And that narrative wasn't necessarily based around "what option will you choose to save everyone", and more about "how much do you care about this person?"

As I said before, I get the criticism people are leveling about the ending. But can we not just take a minute to appreciate what these writers, programmers, actors, and staff have done? Just a minute? Or is absolutely ALL of it wiped away because we didn't find the ending satisfactory?

Your reasons are why I am up at arms about the ending. It is because, of the obvious quality, the dedication the writing team must have had to pull off these situations that the ending was so out of sync with the entire game itself, spoke of sloppiness that did not do the rest of the game justice.

Worst, those last 10 minutes, took every hard work, every emotion investment by, and I want to stress this, the PLAYER AND THE TEAM THAT CREATED the series, and essentially crapped on it.

I do not know if you have noticed, but there are posters with signatures that say "Shepard, Tali, Miranda, Kaiden ....and all the cast we love, DESERVE BETTER"

Not the players themselves, but characters in a game. To come to care about these characters is a testament of the power and quality of the writing past. It would be a real shame to have all that be remembered not at all, but for an ending that really should never have been added to the game.

Agreed! The ending to ME franchise is what we've all been fighting for ever since we picked up ME1 in 2007. It is completely unfair for us to be handed such a lazy and ridiculous ending just for the sake of ending it. Casey claimed that the ME franchise had been a work of love from the very beginning. Well what kind of love would have allowed for an ending that tarnished an otherwise masterful series. It stinks of carelessness to appease the fans and do justice to an award winning series.

[Chrislo1990]

akenn312 wrote...

The more I think about Drew Karpyshyn's Dark Energy ending the more the conversation with Sovereign in Mass Effect 1 makes sense about what the Reapers were. When Sovereign says "Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays. Our technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we desire. We impose order on the chaos of organic life. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it." Then the response from one of the squad members is "They're harvesting us! Letting us advance to the level they need, then wiping us out!" 

Now the reason of the Reapers purpose would make sense because they are trying to unnaturally force organic life to evolve quickly in the way they want so they can harvest it for their purpose. This would make them even more evil and would explain why they speak down to Shepard the way they do. They see us as insignificant playthings. 

But for some strange reason the current creative team decided to focus on only this part of that sentence " We impose order on the chaos of organic life." Which is not the right understanding of what Sovereign is saying here. Without the Reaper technology organics would be too unpredictable in how they evolved. So to speed it up and control the evolution the Reapers give them the Mass Relays making sure they evolve to the point to harvest at the right time. This would make the Reapers one of the sneakiest and worst guys in existence because they are messing with natural evolution just to save their own creepy metal skins. Playing god just to save themselves.

Now it would make sense for Paragon Shepard to
A. Believe in humanity and let natural evolution begin again and destroy the Reapers but start the Dark Energy. Now it would also make sense to destroy the Mass Relays or deactivate them. 

Or a Renagade Shepard to
B. let the Reapers destroy humanity so you could make the ends justify the means on not letting Dark Energy destroy everything but screwing humans and Earth. This would probably keep the Mass Relays intact.

This would have been pure genius. You could actually flip the two choices a person could see sacrificing humanity but leting the universe keep existing as a Paragon move. 

Maybe it dosn't complelty end the 16 ending problem but it would end the plot holes and confusion at least.

This was what we should have had as an ending. This is what artistic integrity is all about. Not changing your vision to make more money. 

Also if you think about it we never found out what happened with Haestrom's sun in ME3. It was postulated by Tali that Haestom's sun was dying prematurely due dark energy. I believe this is the first time the term is used in the entire series and the writers made sure we understood that concept becasue it was the reasonTali had been exploring the colony in the the first place. That and salvaging some geth thech here and there. As such It's obvious the writters planned on expanding upon the dark energy concept in the future, but upon ME3's release not once do we hear about it. Plot hole?

[akenn312]

Chrislo1990 wrote...

akenn312 wrote...

The more I think about Drew Karpyshyn's Dark Energy ending the more the conversation with Sovereign in Mass Effect 1 makes sense about what the Reapers were. When Sovereign says "Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays. Our technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we desire. We impose order on the chaos of organic life. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it." Then the response from one of the squad members is "They're harvesting us! Letting us advance to the level they need, then wiping us out!" 

Now the reason of the Reapers purpose would make sense because they are trying to unnaturally force organic life to evolve quickly in the way they want so they can harvest it for their purpose. This would make them even more evil and would explain why they speak down to Shepard the way they do. They see us as insignificant playthings. 

But for some strange reason the current creative team decided to focus on only this part of that sentence " We impose order on the chaos of organic life." Which is not the right understanding of what Sovereign is saying here. Without the Reaper technology organics would be too unpredictable in how they evolved. So to speed it up and control the evolution the Reapers give them the Mass Relays making sure they evolve to the point to harvest at the right time. This would make the Reapers one of the sneakiest and worst guys in existence because they are messing with natural evolution just to save their own creepy metal skins. Playing god just to save themselves.

Now it would make sense for Paragon Shepard to
A. Believe in humanity and let natural evolution begin again and destroy the Reapers but start the Dark Energy. Now it would also make sense to destroy the Mass Relays or deactivate them. 

Or a Renagade Shepard to
B. let the Reapers destroy humanity so you could make the ends justify the means on not letting Dark Energy destroy everything but screwing humans and Earth. This would probably keep the Mass Relays intact.

This would have been pure genius. You could actually flip the two choices a person could see sacrificing humanity but leting the universe keep existing as a Paragon move. 

Maybe it dosn't complelty end the 16 ending problem but it would end the plot holes and confusion at least.

This was what we should have had as an ending. This is what artistic integrity is all about. Not changing your vision to make more money. 

Also if you think about it we never found out what happened with Haestrom's sun in ME3. It was postulated by Tali that Haestom's sun was dying prematurely due dark energy. I believe this is the first time the term is used in the entire series and the writers made sure we understood that concept becasue it was the reasonTali had been exploring the colony in the the first place. That and salvaging some geth thech here and there. As such It's obvious the writters planned on expanding upon the dark energy concept in the future, but upon ME3's release not once do we hear about it. Plot hole?

Bingo! They just drop that like it never happened, I always thought the Dark Energy mention in 2 was something that would be important later on. Also this gives the Human Reaper constructon an actual purpose as well. Plot holes all gone with the Dark Energy ending.

Honestly this is kinda depressing, seeing that if they had just stayed the original course we would have had a great ending anyway.  Now we are here. ugggh.

Modifié par akenn312, 04 avril 2012 - 12:51 .

[Deganis76]

Chrislo1990 wrote...

akenn312 wrote...

The more I think about Drew Karpyshyn's Dark Energy ending the more the conversation with Sovereign in Mass Effect 1 makes sense about what the Reapers were. When Sovereign says "Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays. Our technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we desire. We impose order on the chaos of organic life. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it." Then the response from one of the squad members is "They're harvesting us! Letting us advance to the level they need, then wiping us out!" 

Now the reason of the Reapers purpose would make sense because they are trying to unnaturally force organic life to evolve quickly in the way they want so they can harvest it for their purpose. This would make them even more evil and would explain why they speak down to Shepard the way they do. They see us as insignificant playthings. 

But for some strange reason the current creative team decided to focus on only this part of that sentence " We impose order on the chaos of organic life." Which is not the right understanding of what Sovereign is saying here. Without the Reaper technology organics would be too unpredictable in how they evolved. So to speed it up and control the evolution the Reapers give them the Mass Relays making sure they evolve to the point to harvest at the right time. This would make the Reapers one of the sneakiest and worst guys in existence because they are messing with natural evolution just to save their own creepy metal skins. Playing god just to save themselves.

Now it would make sense for Paragon Shepard to
A. Believe in humanity and let natural evolution begin again and destroy the Reapers but start the Dark Energy. Now it would also make sense to destroy the Mass Relays or deactivate them. 

Or a Renagade Shepard to
B. let the Reapers destroy humanity so you could make the ends justify the means on not letting Dark Energy destroy everything but screwing humans and Earth. This would probably keep the Mass Relays intact.

This would have been pure genius. You could actually flip the two choices a person could see sacrificing humanity but leting the universe keep existing as a Paragon move. 

Maybe it dosn't complelty end the 16 ending problem but it would end the plot holes and confusion at least.

This was what we should have had as an ending. This is what artistic integrity is all about. Not changing your vision to make more money. 

Also if you think about it we never found out what happened with Haestrom's sun in ME3. It was postulated by Tali that Haestom's sun was dying prematurely due dark energy. I believe this is the first time the term is used in the entire series and the writers made sure we understood that concept becasue it was the reasonTali had been exploring the colony in the the first place. That and salvaging some geth thech here and there. As such It's obvious the writters planned on expanding upon the dark energy concept in the future, but upon ME3's release not once do we hear about it. Plot hole?

I have always wondered about the dangling Dark Energy plot device.  A shame it was not resolved (or even mentioned) in ME3.

[jeweledleah]

Chrislo1990 wrote...

Also if you think about it we never found out what happened with Haestrom's sun in ME3. It was postulated by Tali that Haestom's sun was dying prematurely due dark energy. I believe this is the first time the term is used in the entire series and the writers made sure we understood that concept becasue it was the reasonTali had been exploring the colony in the the first place. That and salvaging some geth thech here and there. As such It's obvious the writters planned on expanding upon the dark energy concept in the future, but upon ME3's release not once do we hear about it. Plot hole?

its not the first time.

first time is on freedom's progress.  Veetor mentions in when he talks about the readings he took of Collectors... aka reaper constructs.

then Gianna Parasini mentions it as something her bosses have her investigating.  I do believe there was another mention of dark energy, prior to Hailstrom, not 100% where though.

oh yeah, Alpha relay can be made to reach 16 other relays including the one leading to Citadel, with proper aplication of.... dark energy.  they were still concidering that subplot (and I'm guessing - the ending)  about a year before ME3's release.. and since the claim is, that the game is essentialy finished 3 months before actualy release?

interesting picture emerges, doesn't it

Modifié par jeweledleah, 04 avril 2012 - 12:55 .

[r3quinix]

I rarely provide feedback on the games I play, but in this case feel compelled to do so.

A few days ago I finished ME3. I originally bought an XBOX 360 in order to play the original mass effect and that game to this day remains my favourite game of all time. Mass effect 2, whilst different was such a rich experience I was still digesting parts of it by the time ME3 came around.

For the most part, the majority of ME3 was spectacular. From the cameos to resovling thus intractible conflicts the story was gripping. Then came the ending. I won't go into specifics; the plot, themeatic, philosophical  and game play issues have all been covered in this thread (from what I can tell) and on the internet at large. I will say however that I am severly disappointed. Bioware and mass effect have never let me down until this point. I know many are urging you to 'fix' the ending and I support this, however I do feel in some ways the damage has been done.

[CesarSan]

 AngryJoe take on the Indoctrination theory:   , he almost convinced me. =)

Still, I will be royally pissed off having to pay for the true ending. I would gladly pay for extra, addtional content but not for the ending of the game.

Man, if this indoctrination theory was true and then Shepard went on to kick Reaper ass for once and all (specially Harbinger. Bioware where's Harbinger ham?) that would be the most epic ending and game ever!

Modifié par CesarSan, 04 avril 2012 - 12:57 .

[eboshi12]

Finally, i can add my two cents after three weeks of agony (due to my ineptitude of forums). Honestly Bioware, I creid myself to sleep for three days after I finished ME3. I have never felt so empty or betrayed. 100 + hours of hard work, love and devotion detroyed right along with the galaxy I fell in love with. I can only rehash the same points everyone else has made about this lackluster ending and hope byond hope that a positive announcement will come from PAX about changing the ending. Otherwise, I just don't know. I guess I'll be taking my time, money, and devotion elsewhere.

[akenn312]

jeweledleah wrote...

Chrislo1990 wrote...

Also if you think about it we never found out what happened with Haestrom's sun in ME3. It was postulated by Tali that Haestom's sun was dying prematurely due dark energy. I believe this is the first time the term is used in the entire series and the writers made sure we understood that concept becasue it was the reasonTali had been exploring the colony in the the first place. That and salvaging some geth thech here and there. As such It's obvious the writters planned on expanding upon the dark energy concept in the future, but upon ME3's release not once do we hear about it. Plot hole?

its not the first time.

first time is on freedom's progress.  Veetor mentions in when he talks about the readings he took of Collectors... aka reaper constructs.

then Gianna Parasini mentions it as something her bosses have her investigating.  I do believe there was another mention of dark energy, prior to Hailstrom, not 100% where though.

oh yeah, Alpha relay can be made to reach 16 other relays including the one leading to Citadel, with proper aplication of.... dark energy.  they were still concidering that subplot (and I'm guessing - the ending)  about a year before ME3's release.. and since the claim is, that the game is essentialy finished 3 months before actualy release?

interesting picture emerges, doesn't it

We need to forget the Indoctrination theory, the Dark Energy ending is is the real thing that is missing. Dark Energy was mentioned many times in the first two games. Now I can see where this story was going. Heck you can even say the Reapers were causing the Dark Energy problem and just used harvesting as a way to stop it because they wouldn't give a flip if they were commiting galaxy wide genocide or not. They considered themselves the height of perfection and organics were meaningless pawns. 

Why would they try to force this noble AI synthetic vs. organic chaos theory now? They were in the home stretch all they had to do is bring it home.

[shonefob]

So besides all the complaints about the ending I actually have a question. You know how ME3 was suppose to answer all our questions well it kinda created a new one. Who made the Space Child?

[Dottumnz]

Benchpress610 wrote...

Corpsetorn wrote...

Okay, I may be alone in this, but feel free to tell me if you agree or disagree.

I feel there should be NO final choice in the ending.

Let me explain my opinion concisely.

I believe that having an ending choice makes most of what you did irrelevant. If you got to choose how it all ended from the getgo, why even play the other games?

To me, the ending should be determined by all the choices you have already made, every path you took, and every one you didn't. I realize ME is a choice-based series, and perhaps BW felt that the ending should really drive that home. But it would have been more effective to let your entire story do the determining for you. If you did "blank" but not "blank" this is what would have happened. However, if you did "blank" AND "blank," the outcome is different.

Having a final choice may seem like an important factor, but I'd argue that not having a final choice, instead having the outcome be determined by how you lived, what you already chose, etc. has a much greater impact than getting 3 options and making everything you did pointless.

Just my opinion of course.

Sir...this is one the best statements I've read in this forum.  

Agreed

[sfam]

akenn312 wrote...


Why would they try to force this noble AI synthetic vs. organic chaos theory now? They were in the home stretch all they had to do is bring it home.

+1
This is really the heart of the matter - they flat out changed the ENTIRE purpose of the series in the last 5 minutes. With no forwarning, the narative shifted from "Stop the Reapers, Stop the cycle" to "Supreme being cogitating over the difficulty of synthetic and organic lives living together". No warning, no build up - just 14 lines of dialogue to radically shift the narative driving the entire series. 

And then we're asked to choose which ending we like with this new purpose...


We are all struggling, trying to understand why they didn't just "bring it home".  Clearly from the leaks, they planned this.  But why? 

Why, Bioware, why?

Modifié par sfam, 04 avril 2012 - 01:29 .

[IgnosHeind]

i think i'l not pay (play) this franchise again..
I really want to forgot the trilogy, because the meaning of the endig was horrble.

if there is a real ending (bioware sold a HALF of a Game , but a payed a full of it).
or If this is the real ending... I HATE. so many plot holes...

[sfam]

shonefob wrote...

So besides all the complaints about the ending I actually have a question. You know how ME3 was suppose to answer all our questions well it kinda created a new one. Who made the Space Child?

I'm guessing the Reapers did, either that or its Shepard and EDI's love child (yes, Joker was pissed).  Considering how much they foobared the ending, why not add insoluble time paradoxes to the mix to destroy the idea of the cycle as well?  

[JJ436]

Krogan airdrop, and for this ME movie that comes out I want my Wrex sized container of popcorn.

[shonefob]

sfam wrote...

shonefob wrote...

So besides all the complaints about the ending I actually have a question. You know how ME3 was suppose to answer all our questions well it kinda created a new one. Who made the Space Child?

I'm guessing the Reapers did, either that or its Shepard and EDI's love child (yes, Joker was pissed).  Considering how much they foobared the ending, why not add insoluble time paradoxes to the mix to destroy the idea of the cycle as well?  

lol well one things for sure next Bioware game im not pre-ordering ill just wait a month and see if this happens again.  If it does think i'll let Bethesda take care of my RPGs for now on.

[radiomongo]

Sure to be drowned in the sea of posts but I actually didn't mind the ending very much. I can see why other people didn't like it though, but I wouldn't consider the game to be "ruined." I had a very good time playing through it and I feel that my choices were expressed in the way that the narrative played out to the end. Who lived, who died, my relationships with the characters, etc. To me it was more about the journey to the ending than the ending itself. I wouldn't mind seeing some more variations added if Bioware decides to do that though. It would probably make a lot more people happy.