23455 réponses à ce sujet

[sfam]

Dear Bioware, if your own developers don't see any difference in the endings other than the colors, there's a good chance your customers won't either:

i41.tinypic.com/2edp2xc.png

From another thread. 

Modifié par sfam, 04 avril 2012 - 02:15 .

[Norrin_Radd]

Just in case you are in fact, listening:

I loved the game, and I loved the ending. I fund it extremely thought provoking, and there was such dramatic impact of seeing the relays disabled, along with the music cues.

All of this controversy over the ending, I think, stems from the fact that people are unwilling to acknowledge that the Reapers represent things that are "beyond comprehension". Throughout the entire ending of ME3, I was reminded of Marvel Comics cosmic beings, such as Eternity and even the Living Tribunal. I really enjoy the idea of truly universal beings, and even universal issues, that would be far above the issues of any living being currently alive.

I see a very strong parallel of the idea of the "cycle" and what the Turians and the Salarians did with the Genophage. When I started to think about why, exactly, the Reapers were created in the first place, it led me to ponder what issues could exist on a galactic, or universal scale, that would require such drastic steps be taken by the "masters of the pattern" to paraphrase Vendetta (on Thessia).

One of the only things I can think of is the short conversation you have with the dying Reaper on Rannoch, where it states that the Reapers represent Order, where as life represents Chaos. This got me thinking about entropy, and that perhaps the process of life, left unaltered in space, might rapidly increase the entropy of system. Once the universe reaches maximum entropy, no more interactions of any kind, organic, or synthetic, will ever be able to take place and there is no way of reversing it. So perhaps the cycle was created and designed to keep life from reaching some sort of singularity where by there is no return? But yes, thought provoking to say the least.

And in regards to people who keep harping on the choices, and the ending, here is a little quote from another forum I belong to on the subject:

The Crucible is the work of other species throughout the cycles of extinction stretching back millions of years,so that kind of implies it was also something designed by the Reapers' masters, along with the citadel and the relays. In order to build it though, you basically need every species in the galaxy to unite and put aside all of their issues. The Prothean VI said that every cycle suffersfrom the same patterns and power struggles, etc. So it almost sounds fitting that Shepard, the person you are soley responsible for, has madeall of the decisions that end up leading to the Crucible being built, and even how it will be used. And people harp on the fact that your decisions don't matter..?

I mean, the ending will always result in you going up to the Catalyst and making a choice, but in my game, that was only because I had to killMordin to get the Krogans and the Salarians to get over their age old hatreds. It's those hard decisions that broke this cycle out of the "Pattern", and it's all of the decisions, right from game one, that led Shepard into becoming the one man capable of breaking the pattern.

tl;dr: ME3 is my favourite ME to date. Well done BioWare!

Modifié par Norrin_Radd, 04 avril 2012 - 02:05 .

[shonefob]

www.youtube.com/watch   How we will all remember ME3 unless it is fixed. 

Also sorry clearest one I could find.

Modifié par shonefob, 04 avril 2012 - 02:05 .

[Archonsg]

Come on Bioware, you have to know that when your competitors make ME3 the butt of their April Fool's day jokes, something is really not right with it.
Please don't hedge and mince words now. Are you going to come up with an alternative ENDINGS (plural) DLC or not?

[ESGunslinger]

I would like the ending to be changed. The reasons behind this have been stated in this topic time and time again.

I think, at the very least, you can offer players some amount of interaction. Even if you are completely satisfied with the Star Child solutions, give me the option to talk to the Child about them. Let me pry him for answers, let me make my own case for synthetics and organics coexisting. Let me ask what happened with the Reapers and why they came to this conclusion about synthetic singularity. Even if he doesn't agree with me, even if he will never listen to Shepard's reasoning, at least let me interact with him.

Also, I was surprised that there was no ending where Shepard could say something along the lines of, "Screw you, we'll take our own chances." I think adding this fourth option would have satisfied a lot of people. Let us deny the Star Child and put our faith in humanity and its allies. Let Shepard risk everything by making an impossible choice, like he has done so many times in the past.

I also want to see my choices play out in the end. Like I said, having the option to argue that synthetic singularity isn't inevitable - even if the Star Child disagrees - is really needed. It would show that our choices amounted to something. Also, if we were allowed to go our own way, show the combined forces that we've gathered pushing back the Reapers (provided we have enough resources). The entire third game was a culmination and result of previous decisions, right up until the end. The end doesn't need to factor in all those previous decisions, but please, make it at least take heed of some of them.

Even if everything has a bittersweet ending, let me see some resolution. I don't need a Return of the King or Metal Gear Solid 4 style ending, but offer me some closure.

Anyway, I'd just like to say thank you to everyone on the BioWare staff. You made a great game and a fantastic series, and it's been one hell of a ride.


Oh, and concerning the artistic integrity argument:

I'm of the opinion that it's idiotic. Movies change their endings all the time. Books go through vigorous editing, during which time the ending (and a lot more) will often change. If a game studio made a game that got very poor reviews, then took into account all of the criticism leveled at the game and remade it (and the remade game got universal renown), would people be complaining about artistic integrity? Hell no.

If you drastically change the ending, people who like the original one don't have to download it. If you only expand upon the ending, you're still remaining true to your "artistic vision", and the people complaining about artistic integrity don't have anything to complain about.

Just, please, change it. I have faith in BioWare.

[bossfight1]

The game was like a WONDERFUL massage, relieving all of your stress and telling you an amazing story while having the radio play an awesome soundtrack in the background, and then for the finale... it drugs you, surgically opens your chest, stabs your heart a few times, sews you back up and says "Wasn't that relaxing?"

"It was great, UNTIL THE END."

[oldretired60]

http://www.gamefront...ng-and-its-bad/

http://www.digitaltr...-controversies/

Mass Effect 3 will be remembered, alright, for the sorry. poorly written last 10 minutes and the failure to correct that ending and it's terrible inconsistancies.  They've sold 3.5 million copies, why should they care about us and our feelings about the ending.

The best way to affect them is in their profits.  It's the only way they will listen.  The title of this thread is a sham. 

[shonefob]

Do you think it's a secret cry out for help? EA is trying to tearn them into every other game company trying to synthasise kinda and they wanna be different because as taught to us from ME1 and ME2 and even hinted at from the Prothean in ME3 what makes us different is actually what makes us more likely to survive. So Bioware is trying to say safe us if we are the same are games wont be good being different is good people liked us when we pushed the Envelope and created new and exciting things. Than EA over here being all Reaper saying no must be us!

Modifié par shonefob, 04 avril 2012 - 03:15 .

[akenn312]

Maybe Bioware felt that even if they went away form the original Dark Energy ending many people would be okay with it because they felt strongly about the new direction and just didn't mind the way they had to force and break the characters and the original concept. 

To me having the Reapers cause this unnatural organic & synthetic evolution cycle for thier own gain rather than this cycle just happening naturally makes more sense for the story. Now it explains why there was so much infighting and conflict happening in the Galaxy like the Krogan rebellion and the Turian and Human war and the Geth vs. Quarian war and the Prothean empire. These races were not ready for the technological advances the Reapers gave them and were bumping into each other when they weren't meant to. The Reapers can Indoctrinate them easily now because they are fighting among themselves and killing each other like they want them too. This also brings in the disdain of the Reapers with organics because they had to always help them evolve faster rather than them being able to do it themselves to stop the Dark Energy from consuming the universe.

Now the unique human Shepard comes in busts up the Reapers plan and gets all the organic species and synthertic AI's to unite breaking the Reapers controlled cycle. Shepard has finally broken the Reapers hold on unnatural organic and synthetic evolution. 

I know i'm speculating too because we will possibly never know how the Dark energy ending would have worked but it makes more sense to me through speculation rather than the organic vs. synthetic cycle in the game. I see how they were able to force this new concept but I think it is what it is forced.

 If the organics were not meant to evolve quickly with technology like Sovereign stated in Mass Effect 1 without help, Why give them the means to evolve faster by giving them Mass Relays? If your goal is to not let them evolve to create synthetics you would never allow them to get started in the first place right?

Modifié par akenn312, 04 avril 2012 - 03:17 .

[taloris]

Wow, almost close to 600 pages with the majority making clear where you went wrong, BW (myself included)...

Feel free to finally tell us what, if anything at all, you plan to do about it any time now.

[Corpsetorn]

Dottumnz wrote...

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

Thanks.

My friend and I were discussing and and we concluded that it would have been the best way to make your choices MEAN something.

[Dormin]

We are listening also, listening for a response, a response we have yet to receive.

Modifié par Dormin, 04 avril 2012 - 03:58 .

[soulprovider]

Dormin wrote...

We are listening also, listening for a response, a response we have yet to receive.

I know i'm going to get some flack for this but if I get banned then it means that biowares actually watching, heres what I heard when I watched the catalysts discussion.

"Catalyst: Wake up!

Me: What!? Where am I?

catalyst: Capcom it's my home.

Me: Who are you?

Catalyst: I am the catalyst

Me: I thought EA was the catalyst

Catalyst: No, All the massive gaming publishers are a part
of me

me: I need to stop their practices, they are destroying and
industry close to my heart, do you know how?

catalyst: perhaps, I control the corporations, they are my
solution

Me: solution to what?

catalyst: chaos, The passionate will always create games
that are beyond that mental capacity of the entire nation, but we found a way
to stop that from happening. A way to restore balance for the next generation.

Me: by dumbing down and picking apart the gaming industry

catalyst: No,we harvest the popular franchises leaving the
smaller ones alone, much like we did with mass effect 1.

Me: but you destroyed the rest

catalyst: no, we helped them grow into household names.
storing the old games in GOTY form

Me: I think we'd rather have our decent games back

catalyst: No you can't, without us to stop it good games
would cause the industry to collapse on itself. We created the cycle so that
never happens. That's the solution.

Me: But your taking away good gaming, without that we might
as well be sheep unable to think independently and for ourselves.

catalyst: you have independence more than you know, The fact
that you are challenging the very idea of the cycle suggests that you are no
longer the minority, it also suggests that my solution won't work anymore.

Me: so now what?

catalyst: we find a new solution?

Me: yea but how?

catalyst: the screams of half a million fans changed me, it
opening new alternatives but I cannot make them happen.

 

A) I know you've thought about bringing down corporate
greed, but that would leave your economy in ruins and destroy ambition

Or perhaps you think you can control us, It will destroy
your intellect and everything you are but you can convince the large publishers
to start allowing developers time to create works of art

C) or perhaps there is another alternative, you can become
the voice the unites the fans and the corporation on some sort of middle ground
that brings about a unity of ideas

 

Me: hmm those are all really wonderful ideas but how about I
make the message heard and unite the gaming community to start a respective
boycott aganst them all and instead support the smaller developers who have not
been bought out by you catalyst commander."


Edit: this is somewhat of a joke, but I will not deny that in my head the gaming industry has taken many hits over the years, I cannot deny that if this continues the ultmiate result will be an industry that micro sells you individual missions and story bits for 10-15 bucks a pop, Bioware you can stop this, you may have been bought by EA but seeing how ME3 was up until the end shows that you still have integrity, if the mass effect writing,art team and programmers split apart from bioware and made their own studio you can bet that I would support them 100%. For all intents and purposes mass effect 3 was an above average game, there are a lot of things that should be fixed, like the journal, the inventory system, and customization that isn't part of multiplayer and fixing the narrative coherence of the ending. Thats why the ending had issues, without proper narrative coherence that whole scene with the catalyst stuck out like a sore thumb, and it wouldn't have hurt to have an actual hard science explanation of what the crucible actually did or if shepard was indeed indoctrinated.

Modifié par soulprovider, 04 avril 2012 - 04:09 .

[CARL_DF90]

Oh, give this article a read. Ignore the title and it's a good one that points out the many problems with ME3 quite nicely. Very well written and thought out. Unlike the ending we were left with.

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

These youtube vids should also bring more clarity to the issue.



and

www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par CARL_DF90, 04 avril 2012 - 04:33 .

[ESGunslinger]

Great video about why the ending of Mass Effect 3 is so unsatisfying. It's 39 minutes long, but it's definitely worth the watch. Hopefully a BioWare employee will watch this.

Thanks!
~ESGunslinger

Modifié par ESGunslinger, 04 avril 2012 - 04:08 .

[Stygian1]

I already posted my reasons for hating the ending about 200 pages ago. But, I'd like to add that its a month later and these endings still infuriate me with their absolute disconnection to the series, total lack of closure, riddling with plot holes, and overall bad excecution. No clarification will fix them, they are just an insult to the art of story telling. A dosage of RET and CON is what they need.

Also, I'm a Junior in High School whose class size is around 200 (small ik). About half of all the guys in my class played ME3. I've yet to speak to one of them who didn't think the ending was absolute fail. Can you really keep an ending to which 90-100% of the fan base reacts negatively towards? 

Modifié par Stygian1, 04 avril 2012 - 04:18 .

[sfam]

ESGunslinger wrote...



Great video about why the ending of Mass Effect 3 is so unsatisfying. It's 39 minutes long, but it's definitely worth the watch. Hopefully a BioWare employee will watch this.

Thanks!
~ESGunslinger

+1

This vid objectively shows why the narrative change at the end totally breaks down. With 14 lines of dialogue, the premise of the 3 game series goes from stoping the Reapers and their unending cycle to "supreme being cogitating over the problems of synthetics and organics interacting with one another".  After the narrative purpose has shifted, you are asked to make a choice - you neither buy or understand the shift, nor do you understand the implications of the choices even if you were OK with such a radical shift in purpose.

The answer for fixing it is clear - ditch the star child and bring the series home, with the same premise in place that was there for the entire three game series leading up to the last 5 minutes.  Kill everyone, leave some alive, but for Godsakes, do it in the context of the previously established narrative.  Oh, and actually let us know what happens to everyone we care about (whether we all died, who lived, etc).  

At this point, we've all given up on the idea that if we play perfectly, we'd get a glorious, mostly happy and incredibly fullfilling capstone to a truly awesome series - you all clearly aren't into giving us that level of fulfillment as it apparenlty taints your artistic creativity (the same creativity that apparently led you to photoshop a stock image for Tali after tantalizing us for 3 games).  But if everyone is all going to die, starve to death, get killed in catastrophic relay collapses, can you at least do it in the context of the narrative that has been in place the ENTIRE trilogy leading up to the last 5 minutes?

Modifié par sfam, 04 avril 2012 - 04:24 .

[Norrin_Radd]

I'm just curious for all the ending haters:

What is the optimal ending, in your opinion?

[CARL_DF90]

None without some fixing.

[sfam]

Norrin_Radd wrote...

I'm just curious for all the ending haters:

What is the optimal ending, in your opinion?

Minimal ending would be something that followed the narrative that was established for the full 3 games (see post above) - meaning the Reapers would still be the ultimate evil towards all other living organisms (synthetic and organic) and our job was still to kill or eliminate them.  If we had this, then, depending on your gameplay, the optimal ending would yield more characters and civilizations you cared about alive at the end.  Because after all, the really great thing about this series is most of us truly cared about the characters - this, I think, is incredibly rare in gaming.  

Likewise, if you played poorly, like Mass Effect 2, many, most or all or your characters and civilizations you helped wouldn't survive.  If you played really bad, the Reapers would win. 

That is, I think, how like 90%+ of those who hated the ending expected it to go.

Modifié par sfam, 04 avril 2012 - 04:30 .

[jeweledleah]

Norrin_Radd wrote...

I'm just curious for all the ending haters:

What is the optimal ending, in your opinion?

with rewriting?  keeper research should have been incorporated, instead adding of conveniently found on Mars OFF button, there should have been more of the technology developed, based on reaper tech discovered so far, more of investigation into workings of the Citadel and the Mass relays.  Thanix canons for all, going back to Sovereing losing his shields - figuring out how to do so on larger scale.

without major rewrites, see link in my signature.

without any specific details - optimal ending for me would be having an option to preserve Relays, Shepard alive and reunited with crew/LI.

[Argraharg]

I just want to say I think the writers did a fairly good job with all the story including the endings. Thank you BioWare for a great story.

[Norrin_Radd]

Ball park. Be as general as possible.

I see a lot of fuss over the ending, but no one really offers better solutions (most of the time). But I admit, I have only just started posting in this thread.

Is the fact that the Mass Relays are disabled\\destroyed the main problem?
Is it the fact that the choice in the end is not what people wanted? What would be better choices?
Is it the issue that the Reapers are not clearly bested, in some endings?
Is it that people want to know what happens after the ending?

Just spit ball something, cause this ending is pretty ripe for interpretation.

[akenn312]

sfam wrote...

ESGunslinger wrote...



Great video about why the ending of Mass Effect 3 is so unsatisfying. It's 39 minutes long, but it's definitely worth the watch. Hopefully a BioWare employee will watch this.

Thanks!
~ESGunslinger

+1

This vid objectively shows why the narrative change at the end totally breaks down. With 14 lines of dialogue, the premise of the 3 game series goes from stoping the Reapers and their unending cycle to "supreme being cogitating over the problems of synthetics and organics interacting with one another".  After the narrative purpose has shifted, you are asked to make a choice - you neither buy or understand the shift, nor do you understand the implications of the choices even if you were OK with such a radical shift in purpose.

The answer for fixing it is clear - ditch the star child and bring the series home, with the same premise in place that was there for the entire three game series leading up to the last 5 minutes.  Kill everyone, leave some alive, but for Godsakes, do it in the context of the previously established narrative.  Oh, and actually let us know what happens to everyone we care about (whether we all died, who lived, etc).  

At this point, we've all given up on the idea that if we play perfectly, we'd get a glorious, mostly happy and incredibly fullfilling capstone to a truly awesome series - you all clearly aren't into giving us that level of fulfillment as it apparenlty taints your artistic creativity (the same creativity that apparently led you to photoshop a stock image for Tali after tantalizing us for 3 games).  But if everyone is all going to die, starve to death, get killed in catastrophic relay collapses, can you at least do it in the context of the narrative that has been in place the ENTIRE trilogy leading up to the last 5 minutes?

+10 on this

[Stygian1]

Norrin_Radd wrote...

I'm just curious for all the ending haters:

What is the optimal ending, in your opinion?

Glance around the forum for five seconds to find your answer--or just look through this thread, when you see someone mention something that wasn't included, it probably means they wanted it to be... frankly I don't even know how this could be a question.