23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Versidious]

akenn312 wrote...

Versidious wrote...

akenn312 wrote...

If the
original author who wrote the stories for Mass Effect 1 and 2 says he
had already written the ending concept of Mass Effect 3 for Bioware
before he left and now the current Bioware team goes completely against
it, that is changing the artistic integrity of the original concept. So
it is not stupid or childish for people to find the current ending weird
or out of place and dislike it or to actually want Bioware to stick to
the authors original concept that ties all three stories together like
they were originally planned.

That is the main issue with the
problems of the current ending it was not the intended resolution of the
story. It is obviously out of place. Bioware thought they could get
away with changing it because they gambled and thought the gamers that
really don't care about the previous plots built up in the story would
still like Mass Effect 3 and outnumber the ones that didn't.

Bit
of a misconception there. Karpyshyn was ONE of the lead writers to
begin with (The Director of the Mass Effect trilogy, Casey Hudson, has
been in charge since day 1) and floated the 'Dark Energy' idea as one of
several. He himself has said that there are lots of things he was fine
with in the final scene, that wouldn't have been different if he was
still one of the Lead Writers, and has supported the final team. His
actual quote turns up occasionally on forum threads, but I can't
remember where the interview was from, I'm afraid!

Although I
think his Dark Energy suggestion *was* better (Though still far from
perfect), I think there are rumours about his ending that are getting a
bit out of hand, and based on little but supposition about people that
we don't actually know much about other than that they write for
Bioware, and produced an ending we hate.   :-P

Yeah here is the article, I almost had hope there was a better ending somewhere already made
http://www.gameranx....ies-conclusion/

He says this "From what I hear, the basic concept of the original ending is there, though some details may have been tweaked,"

Which could mean anything on what was tweaked.

I think i'm just more surprised that they didn't really plan this ending out very well. The Dark Energy plot makes more sense because of all the forshadowing in Mass Effect 2. I still think if you start forshadowing some type of endgame climax in the middle of a trilogy heavly you should commit to that endgame. Just like I said you can't have Darth Vader say "Luke, I'm your father" in Empire, then in Jedi say "Nah just kidding."

But its weird, it seems they had the Dark Energy plan more thought out than what they do have now and really wished they would have gone with it instead. I still think it breaks the artistic integrity and characters of the story if you comit to a final resolution concept in the 2nd game then change it up at the last 5 minutes in the third.

It's a shame, I think it just comes out to they just had to throw something out there.

I agree with that, definitely. I would assume that Karpyshyn means that the catalyst/starchild scene was in his ending, etc, they just changed the Reapers' motivation (To something even more silly). I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I think that they had more of an ending planned, but had to cut it short and polish what they had completed to meet deadlines, and why there's so little dialogue or Harbinger goodness. This is why they resorted to a final-hour ABC choice instead of various endings decided by a panoply of variables. As I understand it, it was discarded in the end for being too left-field an idea! Obviously there is a limit as to how much space-magic Bioware can handle in one game.   :-P

[Theronyll Itholien]

Listening Bioware not listening.

[Thanatos144]

Versidious wrote...

akenn312 wrote...

Versidious wrote...

akenn312 wrote...

If the
original author who wrote the stories for Mass Effect 1 and 2 says he
had already written the ending concept of Mass Effect 3 for Bioware
before he left and now the current Bioware team goes completely against
it, that is changing the artistic integrity of the original concept. So
it is not stupid or childish for people to find the current ending weird
or out of place and dislike it or to actually want Bioware to stick to
the authors original concept that ties all three stories together like
they were originally planned.

That is the main issue with the
problems of the current ending it was not the intended resolution of the
story. It is obviously out of place. Bioware thought they could get
away with changing it because they gambled and thought the gamers that
really don't care about the previous plots built up in the story would
still like Mass Effect 3 and outnumber the ones that didn't.

Bit
of a misconception there. Karpyshyn was ONE of the lead writers to
begin with (The Director of the Mass Effect trilogy, Casey Hudson, has
been in charge since day 1) and floated the 'Dark Energy' idea as one of
several. He himself has said that there are lots of things he was fine
with in the final scene, that wouldn't have been different if he was
still one of the Lead Writers, and has supported the final team. His
actual quote turns up occasionally on forum threads, but I can't
remember where the interview was from, I'm afraid!

Although I
think his Dark Energy suggestion *was* better (Though still far from
perfect), I think there are rumours about his ending that are getting a
bit out of hand, and based on little but supposition about people that
we don't actually know much about other than that they write for
Bioware, and produced an ending we hate.   :-P

Yeah here is the article, I almost had hope there was a better ending somewhere already made
http://www.gameranx....ies-conclusion/

He says this "From what I hear, the basic concept of the original ending is there, though some details may have been tweaked,"

Which could mean anything on what was tweaked.

I think i'm just more surprised that they didn't really plan this ending out very well. The Dark Energy plot makes more sense because of all the forshadowing in Mass Effect 2. I still think if you start forshadowing some type of endgame climax in the middle of a trilogy heavly you should commit to that endgame. Just like I said you can't have Darth Vader say "Luke, I'm your father" in Empire, then in Jedi say "Nah just kidding."

But its weird, it seems they had the Dark Energy plan more thought out than what they do have now and really wished they would have gone with it instead. I still think it breaks the artistic integrity and characters of the story if you comit to a final resolution concept in the 2nd game then change it up at the last 5 minutes in the third.

It's a shame, I think it just comes out to they just had to throw something out there.

I agree with that, definitely. I would assume that Karpyshyn means that the catalyst/starchild scene was in his ending, etc, they just changed the Reapers' motivation (To something even more silly). I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I think that they had more of an ending planned, but had to cut it short and polish what they had completed to meet deadlines, and why there's so little dialogue or Harbinger goodness. This is why they resorted to a final-hour ABC choice instead of various endings decided by a panoply of variables. As I understand it, it was discarded in the end for being too left-field an idea! Obviously there is a limit as to how much space-magic Bioware can handle in one game.   :-P

They didn't change the reapers motivation. It was to cull all organic life who reached advanced civilization...... That was what sovereign told Shepard in the first game...That was  consistent.

[Shadowtirs]

This is my Mass Effect story... so here it goes..

I only picked up the Mass Effect series when the buzz about 3 coming out was at it's height.  Origins had super sales for both 1 and 2.  I picked up 1 first to give it a whirl.

I was a little taken back by how HUGE the universe was, (zomg the Citadel was gigantic back then) but almost IMMEDIATELY fell in love with the universe.  The story was compelling, the mechanics were great, I loved the melding of 3rd person shooter and rpg.  The characters, the characters were amazing.  It brought me back images of KOTOR and Final Fantasy II (or IV depending on who you ask).  Yeah my main character was awesome, but look at who he was palling around with.  THAT kept me in the game.  And again, the story just drags you in and holds on to you until you finish the game.  It was fantastic.  I didn't even hesistate in buying 2, and importing my character over (awesome mechanic).

ME2's mechanics overhaul was... ok, I missed the RPG elements, but alright games change so whatever.  But what the game lacked in RPG elements was more than made up with more character development and story.  ZOMG were the characters so strong in 2.  I mean when you think about it, 90% of ME2 is collecting your team, learning about them, seeing how they change due to Shepard's influence, and their growth.  This was an amazing character driven story.  Not to mention chill- inspiring moments in the game with new or old friends, (rescuing Garrus, Wrex's [if you saved him] greeting of 'Shepard, my friend!' still gives me chills, Legion's introduction and his title for you 'Shepard-Commander', turning Miranda from an ice queen to your boo) made this game AMAZING.  Again, it's not as RPG-y as 1 but it brought a whole other element into it.  The final mission and it's multiple parts were fantastic, emotionally gripping, cinematic, just drags you into the game where you are THERE.  And of course depending on your prep, you had a game with MULTIPLE ends.  (Real multiple endings)

So now we get to 3, and it starts off strong.  Alright, I didn't play Arrival, but I get the idea why Shepard is grounded.  How the Alliance would ground a Spectre anyway, whatever, I'll let that slide because the intro into 3 is just BAM, Earth under attack, and you're sucked in again.  And again, mechanics have changed, they actually went back a TINY bit to some rpg elements, but whatever, the story is compelling.  You see the foreboding, you see your Shepard for the first time really be stressed.  Now the real meat of 3 is revealed, Tuchunka and Rannoch.  HOLY WTF!  Have you ever had more emotional/gripping moments in a video game?  I haven't.  Unless you have a cold stone heart.  I have never cried at a video game, but when I nailed the paragon choice on Rannoch and I got through that whole thing, tears streamming down my face.  I'd be hard pressed to think of another scene from another game that hit me like that did.

So 3 builds you up and builds you up and they did SO MUCH RIGHT... and then.... Space God Child.

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH WHAT DID YOU DO!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
SO CLOSE TO A PERFECT GAME, PROBABLY THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME, ONLY TO PUNT IT RIGHT IN THE LAST 15 MINS OF A GAME THAT IS 25 hrs + LONG WHAT IS THE MATTER WITH YOU BIOWARE/EA!?!?!


You've all already highlight the nitpicky stuff, so I won't revisit that.  This is just another tale of a fan who was lured in to the Mass Effect Universe, only to be so rudely shown the door.  Please Bioware, I will not flame you, I will not be nasty, but please please please DO NOT let 15 mins ruin a WHOLE SERIES.  There has to be another way!!!  Ok, end the Shepard tale, you want to move on to different content, maybe an MMO, I get it, and I understand, but to do Shepard in like this!?

And no it's NOT OK to charge for a DLC to fix this.  Yeah this is your "artwork", but we are also consumers, and there is an agreement that you sell us goods with expectations, and we give you money in return to satisfy those expectations.  (A, B, C, yada yada you've heard this a million times already).  Please... come this friday at PAX, just please do us right.  It is not too late.  Don't just do it for us ME fans, do it for yourselves too.  Do it for the justice you need to give the universe that you created, one of the most compelling and addicting Sci Fi universes ever created.  


For the TL:DR version; 99% of your trilogy is amazing and one of the greatest of all time.  Please fix it so it's 100%.  Thank you.

[Eryri]

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

I'd like to add my vote to this too. Compare this to another otherwise great game with multiple endings - Deux Ex Human Revolution (SPOILERS FOLLOW)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The 4 possible conclusions to that game were all accessible right after your final save. You could watch an ending, reload the game and then see all the others, all in the space of 15 minutes. Consequently none of them felt like the real ending as it was so easy to change your mind. Much better to have your choices through out the game add up to radically different endings in a way that's not so obvious.

[Versidious]

Thanatos144 wrote...

Versidious wrote...

akenn312 wrote...

Versidious wrote...

akenn312 wrote...

If the
original author who wrote the stories for Mass Effect 1 and 2 says he
had already written the ending concept of Mass Effect 3 for Bioware
before he left and now the current Bioware team goes completely against
it, that is changing the artistic integrity of the original concept. So
it is not stupid or childish for people to find the current ending weird
or out of place and dislike it or to actually want Bioware to stick to
the authors original concept that ties all three stories together like
they were originally planned.

That is the main issue with the
problems of the current ending it was not the intended resolution of the
story. It is obviously out of place. Bioware thought they could get
away with changing it because they gambled and thought the gamers that
really don't care about the previous plots built up in the story would
still like Mass Effect 3 and outnumber the ones that didn't.

Bit
of a misconception there. Karpyshyn was ONE of the lead writers to
begin with (The Director of the Mass Effect trilogy, Casey Hudson, has
been in charge since day 1) and floated the 'Dark Energy' idea as one of
several. He himself has said that there are lots of things he was fine
with in the final scene, that wouldn't have been different if he was
still one of the Lead Writers, and has supported the final team. His
actual quote turns up occasionally on forum threads, but I can't
remember where the interview was from, I'm afraid!

Although I
think his Dark Energy suggestion *was* better (Though still far from
perfect), I think there are rumours about his ending that are getting a
bit out of hand, and based on little but supposition about people that
we don't actually know much about other than that they write for
Bioware, and produced an ending we hate.   :-P

Yeah here is the article, I almost had hope there was a better ending somewhere already made
http://www.gameranx....ies-conclusion/

He says this "From what I hear, the basic concept of the original ending is there, though some details may have been tweaked,"

Which could mean anything on what was tweaked.

I think i'm just more surprised that they didn't really plan this ending out very well. The Dark Energy plot makes more sense because of all the forshadowing in Mass Effect 2. I still think if you start forshadowing some type of endgame climax in the middle of a trilogy heavly you should commit to that endgame. Just like I said you can't have Darth Vader say "Luke, I'm your father" in Empire, then in Jedi say "Nah just kidding."

But its weird, it seems they had the Dark Energy plan more thought out than what they do have now and really wished they would have gone with it instead. I still think it breaks the artistic integrity and characters of the story if you comit to a final resolution concept in the 2nd game then change it up at the last 5 minutes in the third.

It's a shame, I think it just comes out to they just had to throw something out there.

I agree with that, definitely. I would assume that Karpyshyn means that the catalyst/starchild scene was in his ending, etc, they just changed the Reapers' motivation (To something even more silly). I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I think that they had more of an ending planned, but had to cut it short and polish what they had completed to meet deadlines, and why there's so little dialogue or Harbinger goodness. This is why they resorted to a final-hour ABC choice instead of various endings decided by a panoply of variables. As I understand it, it was discarded in the end for being too left-field an idea! Obviously there is a limit as to how much space-magic Bioware can handle in one game.   :-P

They didn't change the reapers motivation. It was to cull all organic life who reached advanced civilization...... That was what sovereign told Shepard in the first game...That was  consistent.

You are confusing motivation with action.
Action: Culling advanced organic species.
Motivation: Dark energy crisis/synthetics wiping out all organics/horrific reproduction/some sadistic enigma

[Dark_Rogue]

Jassu1979 wrote...

Stygian1 wrote...
Think BioWare forgot this--all of this. 

... provided that the current ending wasn't intended as a red herring all along. It's still hard for me to believe that the people who wrote the rest of the game should have failed so utterly within the last five minutes, especially considering how some odd details throughout the game do point in a different direction.
In short, I have not yet lost faith that we will be pleasantly surprised, and that the proponents of the Indoctrination Theory have divined the signs at least somewhat correctly.

Essentially how I feel about this whole mess too, I still have hope that they didn't completely screw over a franchise that has become overwhelmingly popular and have something up their sleeves.  But with all the backlash it sometimes feels like it's a grasp at straws...

I have faith BW, for the love of the millions of fans, for the love of all that is good in this world, please don't mess things up 

[James.Hegedusich]

Here is a thread to my blog simplifying to those who support the ending to the ME Trilogy why the majority of the fan base just does not like, nor want to sit there and have to speculate to justify it. The analogy is kinda wordy, but simplified to a real-life situation most us can relate to:

http://social.biowar...228/blog/212368

[akenn312]

Versidious wrote...

Blue Liara wrote...

YOU ARE NOT LISTENING. 
If this is true then all this "we value your feedback" and "we are listening" has been a nothing but a bunch of PR nonsense and lies. 
DLC will NOT CHANGE THE ENDING!! NOOOO!!
Don't know if this has been posted already but here is a link to an artcile by the International Buisness times saying that the DLC will NOT change the ending. Seriously Bioware WTF. Let the backlash begin. If they do this I will never give them another penny

www.ibtimes.com/articles/323947/20120404/mass-effect-3-ending-spoilers-dlc-review.htm

The Mexican PR chap who was interviewed was not only interviewed over a week ago, but it has since been announced that he's not responsible for any up to date press releases (at least, by the official ME3 account on twitter). He's simply toeing the initial line assumed by EA, and you can pretty much ignore what he's said. For now, at least.

Yeah but the poll number in this is interesting to me out of 5,000 people only 1.6% or 72 people actually said they loved the ending, and only 244 said they liked it. While 3,191 said they hated it and 1,412 just disliked it. with a 433 who didn't care either way.

That's 4,063 vs. 749 that's a huge swing of disaaproval.

I'm just wondering and after seeing that number that is obvious it's not just a issue of some people not getting the ending or just disliking it. Why would Bioware even want to follow through with this end concept or take it futher? That's going to really affect your sales if you try to continue the series if the new direction causes this much hatred. If I hate a game's end I usually don't buy the next copy if they make a sequel.

EA sports games can usually work that way, they can put out a game that has a bunch of glitches that people can't stand but they can ignore the complaints to a point because the know people will still buy because they basicaly own the sports game monoply. Bioware really should'nt be doing this type of stuff. They don't own a monoply on RPG's. It's a huge gamble. I mean what happenes when the DLC's to explain the ending come out and the numbers still stay the same? I'm not as upset about them choosing to go with a bad ending direction initially,  it's the want to keep going with it that just boggles the mind. It's such bad business.

Modifié par akenn312, 04 avril 2012 - 06:07 .

[ezln]

First post. I just figure that the ME community is made up of thousands of voices, so I'll add mine, even if what I'm saying only serves to reinforce sentiments that have already been expressed over and over again.

I love Mass Effect. I love the first one, the second one and 98% of the third one. Next to the original Silent Hill games, it's my favorite game series of all time. I've purchased all of the games at full retail as well as the DLC.

If the ending was not indoctrination, it's poor writing and is a huge disappointment. However, if the indoctrination theory is true, then I think it's a brilliant twist and I love the subtlety/ambiguity.

HOWEVER, my biggest problem with the indoctrination ending (again, if it's true) is that the game ends without actually ending. Of course, this can be remedied with free DLC. Even though I don't love the idea of having to wait to finish the game, part of me thinks it's brilliant for Bioware to create this discussion and controversy that wouldn't exist if the game just kept going.

I want my Shepard to wake up, being either indoctrinated, synthesized, or not-indoctrinated depending on the choice, and then finish the game accordingly. And by "finish" I want there to be a significant amount of endings with actual variety. Sad endings where the reapers win and the universe is doomed. Happy endings where the reapers lose and Miranda has your babies. And a bunch of in-between or just different endings depending on the choices you made.

I think it would be awesome to have an epic last battle, where you fight the Reapers and are aided by all of the fleets you recruited to help you. Or, if you're indoctrinated, you fight WITH the Reapers and fight against those fleets.

I want there to be an epilogue, that re-tells the story of my Shepard from the first game, goes over the choices I made, and shows what happened because of them.

I don't want the question to be "how did Mass Effect 3 end?" I want it to be "how did YOUR Mass Effect 3 end?"

[Jassu1979]

Versidious wrote...

You are confusing motivation with action.
Action: Culling advanced organic species.
Motivation: Dark energy crisis/synthetics wiping out all organics/horrific reproduction/some sadistic enigma

All the way back in ME1, Sovereign states that the Reapers created the mass relays and the Citadel in order to make civilizations evolve along the lines that the Reapers desired - like cultivating crops.
It does not elaborate any further - and I think it would have been perfectly acceptable (and in the light of the Star Child's hilariously hackneyed explanation, certainly preferable) to keep the Reapers' motivation a mystery.

Just how scary would Cthulhu be if it turned out that he's only intending to devour mankind to stop us from, oh, I don't know, creating immortal tentacle monsters that would kill us all?

And yeah, the Reapers are essentially Lovecraftian Old Ones from space. Inscrutable. Alien. Not to be grasped by mortal reason, yet undoubtedly menacing and horrifying.

Modifié par Jassu1979, 04 avril 2012 - 06:20 .

[Archonsg]

James.Hegedusich wrote...

Here is a thread to my blog simplifying to those who support the ending to the ME Trilogy why the majority of the fan base just does not like, nor want to sit there and have to speculate to justify it. The analogy is kinda wordy, but simplified to a real-life situation most us can relate to:

http://social.biowar...228/blog/212368

Interesting analogy. 

Still, I think the best solution is, let those who like this ending keep it.
Just do what Mass Effect 2 did.
An ending (yes, that one could be technically be considered just ONE ending) where the reapers are dealt with, but how they are dealt with and if Shepard survives is actually a reflection of what you have done in the game.

That "one" ending should have possibilities for Shepard to win the day in a "triumphant victory", that is he / she saves the day, lives on, doesn't destroy the Citadel and Relays and goes on to live happy life with his or her love interest. And like in ME2, everything else in betwen to the polar extreme of Shepard STILL saving the day but dies a heroic death, along with everyone else who came along to help.

And maybe someone, somewhere in some remote part of the galaxy where exploding relays didn't effect, some humans or whatever alien flavor bioware prefers, survives the galactic holocaust and talk about "The Shepard."

But the CHOICE should be there. 

[sammysoso]

Another great Gamefront article
http://www.gamefront...n-get-it-right/

To me, they have the best viewpoint on the endings, what went wrong and how to fix it. They haven't overloaded on articles (Forbes.) Give it a look.

Modifié par sammysoso, 04 avril 2012 - 06:40 .

[James.Hegedusich]

Archonsg wrote...

James.Hegedusich wrote...

Here is a thread to my blog simplifying to those who support the ending to the ME Trilogy why the majority of the fan base just does not like, nor want to sit there and have to speculate to justify it. The analogy is kinda wordy, but simplified to a real-life situation most us can relate to:

http://social.biowar...228/blog/212368

Interesting analogy. 

Still, I think the best solution is, let those who like this ending keep it.
Just do what Mass Effect 2 did.
An ending (yes, that one could be technically be considered just ONE ending) where the reapers are dealt with, but how they are dealt with and if Shepard survives is actually a reflection of what you have done in the game.

That "one" ending should have possibilities for Shepard to win the day in a "triumphant victory", that is he / she saves the day, lives on, doesn't destroy the Citadel and Relays and goes on to live happy life with his or her love interest. And like in ME2, everything else in betwen to the polar extreme of Shepard STILL saving the day but dies a heroic death, along with everyone else who came along to help.

And maybe someone, somewhere in some remote part of the galaxy where exploding relays didn't effect, some humans or whatever alien flavor bioware prefers, survives the galactic holocaust and talk about "The Shepard."

But the CHOICE should be there. 

Not gonna argue with you there. My personal opinion is that a bolt-on DLC that just adds more appropriate choices on the cruicible, or the IT, would make the ending a ton better. My analogy is based off the general consensus of what I have read since the week after the release concerning the endings, and noticed that people who are obnoxious about supporting the ending as is really don't grasp why people are frustrated about it. If people like the ending as is, fine, more power to them. But it's pretty obvious at this point that the majority of the ME fan base is livid about this, and should be taken seriously.

[Benchpress610]

Jassu1979 wrote...

Now, there is such a thing as a good twist ending - yet in order to pull that one off, you need to build it up all along, carefully placing the hints so that the audience can go back and see that the signs were there all along - they simply didn't notice them.

Ironically, the Indoctrination Theory would provide a pretty solid twist ending, as the odd boy was there right from the start, and the weird dream sequences persisted throughout the game.

Yeah…I’m doing a second play through taking my time exploring every conversation option and doing every single side mission and all. I’ve been noticing little hints here and there. Example: after Priority Citadel II when Shepard ask Ash to join the team, she marvels that Shepard hasn’t fallen victim of indoctrination being in contact with Reaper tech all the time. More and more IT is beginning to make sense.
 
I mean, I refuse to believe that the talented team of writers that gave us the most engaging and immersive story and gaming experience of this generation, can all of the sudden butcher the end of the story like this. That’s what I’m hanging my hopes on.

Edit: Grammar

Modifié par Benchpress610, 04 avril 2012 - 07:48 .

[Njald]

The people vehemently defending the ending and namecalling on anyone who disagree in the name of being "so brave to stand against the stream, for being different" are just plain wrong when it comes to the ending.
The ending is poorly executed. It has to be excessivly explained to make sense even within the story that contains it
The ending is narrativly confusing/illconstructed. It introduces themes and engimas either resolved earlier or totally new to the story.
The ending works poorly from a gameplay prespective. Your core mechanic of conversation is limited and the choices presented results in emotionally, visually and narrativly very similar results. I.e. the game aspect of the game is taken out of the equation.
It's artistically bad. This one os the hardest to explain to the people who liked it. It's bad because it's not something the audience wants to hear.
Telling a bad story that the audience doesn't want to hear is not artistically brave, it's rude. This one also ties into the all the former points. If you think you "got it" and ALL the other consumers didn't then you are in the wrong. Why? Because in the end, a restaurant can't serve food to the least discerning customer and netiher can a game company keep on serving poor products. In the end, all art and products are judged by the rest of us. No amount of artistic snobbery or elitism can justify products or artpieces that a crushing majority vehemently dislikes. 
It might still find an audience for the eclectic or outliers. But so can murder and torture.
With all that said: the cycle of aquiring titles and IPs and then milking them for worse and worse content will still be profitable for a while. Atleast as long as enough people fall in the trap of advertising and day one purchases.
If you, as a proender, at anytime feel the urge to disagree with me I would like to point to all the instances where you usually poll audience reactions. From player feedback, to polls, to Facebook groups, to consumer reviews all point to a massivly underperforming product. Even taken into account that it's easier for a consumer to make themselves know these days the pure number of disatsified customers hides a HUGE number of nonvocal ones.
This isn't up for debate, it's the rules of PR, of business of the very reality we work in. So many datapoints don't lie.
So go lie down, wait for the disastified customers to leave the franschise and then come back to your restaurant serving partially frozen steaks and melted desserts. I doubt they will cater to even you for long though. It'sa not like the total of 10 frequent posters on these forums who are "pro ending" will buy the next games in the numbers needed.

Modifié par Njald, 04 avril 2012 - 07:04 .

[T_elic]

It's probably been posted in this topic or about 5982131 others already, but i was wondering, why did they drop the entire dark energy ending?

Reading this article by drew karpyshyn, the ending that was originally planned would have made a lot more sense seeing how the dark energy was hinted at multiple times during ME2...

http://www.strategyi...ffect-3-endings

[James.Hegedusich]

rikbarla wrote...

It's probably been posted in this topic or about 5982131 others already, but i was wondering, why did they drop the entire dark energy ending?

Reading this article by drew karpyshyn, the ending that was originally planned would have made a lot more sense seeing how the dark energy was hinted at multiple times during ME2...

http://www.strategyi...ffect-3-endings

I think the November 2011 Campaign/Storyline/Demo(beta) leak had a LOT to do with it. But Mr. Karpyshyn also said that the dark energy plot line was one of many. However, seeing as how dark energy was built up a lot in ME2, despite the leak I agree with you that EA/Bioware should have just bit the bullet and kept the original story they had developed already rather than rush to change it the last 3(?) months of production.

[Segameister]

Benchpress610 wrote...

Jassu1979 wrote...

Now, there is such a thing as a good twist ending - yet in order to pull that one off, you need to build it up all along, carefully placing the hints so that the audience can go back and see that the signs were there all along - they simply didn't notice them.

Ironically, the Indoctrination Theory would provide a pretty solid twist ending, as the odd boy was there right from the start, and the weird dream sequences persisted throughout the game.

Yeah…I’m doing a second play through taking my time exploring every conversation option and doing every single side mission and all. I’ve been noticing little hints here and there. Example: after Priority Citadel II when Shepard ask Ash to join the team, she marvels that Shepard hasn’t fallen victim of indoctrination being in contact with Reaper tech all the time. More and more IT is making beginning to make sense.
 
I mean, I refuse to believe that the talented team of writers that gave us the most engaging and immersive story and gaming experience of this generation, can all of the sudden butcher the end of the story like this. That’s what I’m hanging my hopes on.

And yet in the final sequence the boy says that TIM couldn't control the reapers, "Because we already control him".  He gives Shep that option though, suggesting Shep isn't indoctrinated, and also suggesting this was a rushed ending, not some clever writing.  Besides, the indoctrination theory as an ending that isn't explained?  The ending in a 3 game series is essentially a dream?  That's still terrible writing.

Modifié par Segameister, 04 avril 2012 - 06:58 .

[RealStyli]

 
So my few cents:

I didn't hate the ending but I do agree that it makes no sense especially if there's going to be more games in the universe. Afterall, the Mass Relays are integral to the way the universe works.

We have the indoctrination theory, which explains the ending nicely but doesn't fit satisfactorally with the post-credits Stargazer and child sequence. If I hadn't seen that, I'd be content to believe the Indoctrination theory; it makes sense that the "Creator" would try to steer Shepard away from destroying the Reapers by suggesting that even Shep is "part synthetic" - but he didn't die in that ending if you got the full ending with Shep in the rubble. It also tries to convince him to pick the control option by suggesting that he wouldn't suffer the same fate as TIM - if Shep is indoctrinated, this could be a deception.

There's also the plothole with the control and synthesis choices that Shep doesn't survive so how could the Stargazer tell the story of Shep meeting the Creator and getting those choices unless Shepard survives the ending - or the Stargazer is making that bit up.

I'm not so bothered about my choices not being reflected in the ending - I viewed the whole game as an ending of sorts and I was happy that my choices from ME1 and ME2 were reflected throughout the game. However, I will confess that I've yet to do my Renegade playthrough where Wrex, Ash and Tali are dead so I don't know how much my EMS is affected by the previous games.

I'd just like to see an end to the trilogy that makes sense if BioWare, as they claim, are planning on continuing the series. As it is, there's just so much that doesn't make a lick of sense with any of the theories.

I liked the Synthesis ending but, again, if the relays are destroyed then I see it as a full-stop on the series without the relays and, if Shep dies, the previous Stargazer plothole I mentioned occurs.

tl;dr version: I'm very conflicted.

[Eryri]

Benchpress610 wrote...

Jassu1979 wrote...

Now, there is such a thing as a good twist ending - yet in order to pull that one off, you need to build it up all along, carefully placing the hints so that the audience can go back and see that the signs were there all along - they simply didn't notice them.

Ironically, the Indoctrination Theory would provide a pretty solid twist ending, as the odd boy was there right from the start, and the weird dream sequences persisted throughout the game.

Yeah…I’m doing a second play through taking my time exploring every conversation option and doing every single side mission and all. I’ve been noticing little hints here and there. Example: after Priority Citadel II when Shepard ask Ash to join the team, she marvels that Shepard hasn’t fallen victim of indoctrination being in contact with Reaper tech all the time. More and more IT is making beginning to make sense.
 
I mean, I refuse to believe that the talented team of writers that gave us the most engaging and immersive story and gaming experience of this generation, can all of the sudden butcher the end of the story like this. That’s what I’m hanging my hopes on.

+1

I really really like the indoctrination theory. But it HAS to be Free DLC. If Shepard wakes up in the rubble in London, then he hasn't defeated the Reapers and the main story hasn't ended, despite what was promised. Charging separately for ancilliary stuff like Javik is one thing. He's interesting, but not essential to the main plot. But "Taking Earth Back" definitely is.

If Bioware / EA really are daft enough to charge for ending DLC then I won't buy it. It'll kill me, but I'll just wait for some one else who made most of the choices I did to post his ending up on You tube. That will be it for me with EA games and maybe even computer games in general. I'll just take up a less stressful hobby, like free climbing, or lion taming.

If they release it for free, I'll cheerfully buy any story based dlc they come out with for the mid game.

Modifié par Eryri, 04 avril 2012 - 07:08 .

[Archonsg]

IT I think is a way out for Bioware. It has plotholes sure but at least its a more "plausible" explanation than any other and definitely better then the one they (Bioware) presented.

However I am not a fan of IT unless they inlcude a 4th option and that is to tell the star child holo thing to go frack off.
THEN wake up and do the London / Citadel portion in earnest.
Because I feel and know in my heart that if you accept ANY choice given by the star child, its Shepard surrendering his will, and accepting the AI's demands (he / she becomes fully indoctrinated) and that is definitely another can of worms.

Modifié par Archonsg, 04 avril 2012 - 07:08 .

[RealStyli]

And yet in the final sequence the boy says that TIM couldn't control the reapers, "Because we already control him".  He gives Shep that option though, suggesting Shep isn't indoctrinated

Unless the Creator is the Reapers trying to trick Shepard into thinking he can control them so he doesn't choose the destroy option.

[FS3D]

Thanatos144 wrote...

luci90 wrote...

 Wow, this is one committed troll.


Not a very good troll...but still, quite committed.

nIs evberyone you dont agree with a troll or just those who have the gumption to speak up?????

No... Just those who post inflammatory remarks and comments purely for the sake of getting a reaction out of other people.

In other words... Thanatos144.

[FairfaxLessee]

Because I have too much time on my hands, I have parodied the lyrics to Avenue Q's "I wish I could go back to College" to reflect my feelings on the ME3 endings.


I wish I could go back to ME 2.
The series was so good back then.
What would I give to go back and play a game with a good ending again?

I wish they would fix ME3’s ending
An ending the series deserves
I sit in my room and think “Oh my god!
There is nothing in this thing to preserve!”

Why won’t they just fix the ending?
I don’t know about these games anymore

I want to get into my car and return the damn game to the store.
Ohhh…
I wish I could just end the damn war
Without having to die
And keep the Mass Relays
And live with my LI!

They needed a script advisor to point the way!
I think they were
Sitting in their computer lab
4am before the final product was due
Cursing the world cause they didn’t start sooner
And seeing the rest of the team there too.

I wish they would just fix the ending.
Why won’t they just fix the ending?

Ahhhh…
I wish I had stopped with ME2.

And I bet if they don’t fix the ending
No one will preorder their game
They’d look at the stats
And think “Oh my god…”
We shouldn’t have made the ending that lame!