23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Archonsg]

LiarasShield wrote...

For making your own personal stories for mass effect or making the ending make sense and less plot holes you can create your fan made stories of mass effect here

[url=http://www.fanfiction.net

www.fanfiction.net[/quote[/url]]

Perhaps I should revive that account of mine. I feel bad having abandoned one of my stories there and but maybe its about time I went back and repost a few of my own endinds. There's one that I was working on that I had to stop because my work colleagues kept asking if I was alright. (had red puffy teary eyes )

Modifié par Archonsg, 22 avril 2012 - 03:27 .

[darthoptimus003]

OK
1st the game was awsome up till i got to earth, what was the point of assets if we dont see them in action
2nd the whole earth mission seemed like it was half assed
3rd there are a lot of holes that dont make any since what so ever IM for 1 and a whole lot of others
4th starbrat? wtf? seriously that made no damn since at all
5th shepard became a pannsy, what happen to our badass that would stop at nothing to win (this is what pissed me of the most) shep would NEVER agree to what that starbrat was saying just like that
6th mp is fine but i go out of town alot and the GR always lowers itself, what happens when yall start removing servers for other projects
7th this "ending dlc" is suppose to fix this? HOW? this ending is broken beyond repair imho
im all for art but this is BS this ending is the worst thing i have ever seen. look keep the endings but make a new better one for those of us who want it. id pay for it as long as it got fixed the right way. truthfully the whole earth mission needs to be redun in some places.
like i said the first 95% of the game is EPIC but the last has got to go and no amount of extra content will change this abomanation of an ending.
if yall were really listining yall would see that this would really help yall out in the long run, busniess wise and from YOUR fans. when something is broke its up to the people who made it to fix it thats all we are asking, not make it worse by adding to it but FIX it. and the only way is to redo the ending.
thanks
oh dont make shep a little bi*** cause THAT WASNT COOL

[improperdancing]

ed87 wrote...

Graius wrote...


Let's not liken this to a Picasso. Picasso's work has a technical adeptness, philosophical and internal consistency that this ending sorely lacked.  You may subjectively dislike a Picasso, but objectively speaking his art is coherent, consistent and makes sense in its context.  You can respect it without liking it. The problem with this ending though is that it falls apart at the objective level, rather than simply being unpopular as a matter of taste.

I think Bioware are having a hard time wrapping their heads around that, which is normal i guess.

I was the top art student back in high school, but years later after looking at all my work i cant help but see all the flaws and things i could have done better. At the time, i would have been defensive like Bioware.

The difference is that the people who work at BioWare are professionals.  They're supposed to be able to take criticism, not get all defensive like a high school student suffering it for the first time.  Criticism is what turns mediocre writing into great writing.  If no one tells you your work sucks, your work is never going to get better.  And if you never listen to the people that tell you your work sucks, you'll never get better either. 

You'll never be able to please everyone, but generally speaking, when a giant portion of your fanbase hates what you've done, it's probably on your end.  Until BioWare realizes that and admits they did wrong, the ending will never be corrected.  And sadly, BioWare seems to have no intention of admitting they were wrong, so it's more likely that the people within the company who didn't like what happened to Mass Effect 3 will leave for other companies, and BioWare will just become another company shuttered by EA.

[Thanatos144]

improperdancing wrote...

ed87 wrote...

Graius wrote...


Let's not liken this to a Picasso. Picasso's work has a technical adeptness, philosophical and internal consistency that this ending sorely lacked.  You may subjectively dislike a Picasso, but objectively speaking his art is coherent, consistent and makes sense in its context.  You can respect it without liking it. The problem with this ending though is that it falls apart at the objective level, rather than simply being unpopular as a matter of taste.

I think Bioware are having a hard time wrapping their heads around that, which is normal i guess.

I was the top art student back in high school, but years later after looking at all my work i cant help but see all the flaws and things i could have done better. At the time, i would have been defensive like Bioware.

The difference is that the people who work at BioWare are professionals.  They're supposed to be able to take criticism, not get all defensive like a high school student suffering it for the first time.  Criticism is what turns mediocre writing into great writing.  If no one tells you your work sucks, your work is never going to get better.  And if you never listen to the people that tell you your work sucks, you'll never get better either. 

You'll never be able to please everyone, but generally speaking, when a giant portion of your fanbase hates what you've done, it's probably on your end.  Until BioWare realizes that and admits they did wrong, the ending will never be corrected.  And sadly, BioWare seems to have no intention of admitting they were wrong, so it's more likely that the people within the company who didn't like what happened to Mass Effect 3 will leave for other companies, and BioWare will just become another company shuttered by EA.

Was just skiming my email and I read this and laughed.........What ever makes you think you abnd the 12 others in this thread whining are a giant portion of the fan base? I am thinking someone has a bit of a ego going on.

[3DandBeyond]

Voodoo-j wrote...

So, I've thought about this quite a bit, logically.
This just doesn't make sense.. Only one of the endings to me is even feasible.


5000+ War Assets

Choice - Earth - Squadmates - Shepard

Destruction - Saved - Squadmates survive - Lives
Control - Saved - Squadmates survive - Dies
Synthesis - Saved - Squadmates survive, but are "synthesized" - Dies

(The missing ending)
First off.. I've brought peace with organics and synthetics already in the current cycle, therefore all other endings are obsolete.
The Geth ?? Why is this not realized in the ending?
GAME OVER the reapers leave... AI construct say WOW you accomplished what hasn't been done ever! They go back to their hiding hole and monitor the peace as long as it lasts, with the threat of returning should it end.

The "perfect ending" WHY would I destroy the Geth and all human biotics??
Again, I've brought peace to the galaxy?? This goes against all plot lines dealing with biotics, Grissom Academy, saving the Geth, EDI. (exorbitantly idiotic ending choice)

How do I control the reapers if I'm dead?? (again really not a logical ending)

The synthesis ending, similar to what Legion did for the Geth.
OMG I actually get this, this ending makes sense.

So.. Change the other 2 endings so they make sense..
And for the absolute blinding truth of already bringing peace to the organics and synthetics, this needs to be tied into the end. It needs to be discussed with the AI Construct.


This is without going into how the destruction of the Mass Relays affects life afterwards.
A whole mess of idiocy on how that causes the same if not more issues than the reapers for the sol system.

Actually all the endings make no sense because they are the starkid VI's adaptation from the one solution (reapers destroy all advanced organics) to 3 choices, all because Shepard made it to the top.  Ok, WHAT???!!!!  So what?  If this one solution that the catalyst had adhered to for unknown cycles was considered infallible, then why was it all of a sudden changed by it to 3 non-choice choices, that still basically mean destruction (even synergy/synthesis destroys what is).  It's kind of like saying, "well, you don't like the idea of being destroyed?  Here, let me fix that.  Now, you have a choice for how you want to be destroyed.  Better?"  It's like the witch doctor's choice, death or bunga bunga.  You choose bunga bunga, so you are bunga bungaed to death. 

The logical choice, since it's been the driving force behind all of Shepard's actions, is Destroy, but that means destroying EDI, Geth, and so on.

The most illogical choice is Control, since Shepard resoundingly rebuked TIM for thinking he could control them and asserted TIM was being controlled.  Shepard never wanted to play god and so wouldn't want to control anything.  But, so what?  If you choose Control Shepard's dead, anyway.  So, who is in control?

Then there is Synergy/Synthesis.  This is another seemingly logical choice, that isn't logical at all.  In magically uniting all synthetic and organic life into one mish-mosh, you might think to be strengthening them, but in essence you also weaken them both.  You destroy what makes a human, human, taking away the self of the sentient organic life form.  That's not to say that inorganics don't have a sense of self, but it is the way they determine it that is different.  The inorganic had to tell itself that it was unique.  The organic lifeform KNEW it.  This is the sense of self.  It's an unforced view of what you are.  The synthetic is weakened in that there would naturally be a decay within-age, wear, intake and output would be far more present concerns.  And there would be this omnipresent sense of sameness amongst all life.  Individuality might exist, but in order to be expressed it often needed an organic to point it out.  The Catalyst even states that this means the end of evolution.  And that means the end of learning, knowledge, adaptation, growth, progress, development of higher ideals (yes, along with some lower motivations).  It means the end of life and the onset of stagnation.  Since the organic part of such a synthesis would eventually have to die, it ultimately seems to me to eventually lead to the all synthetic race. It's possible they could procreate, but that seems unlikely since evolution comes along with procreation-the mix of DNA changes things. 

So, none of the choices make sense.  And all 3 choices are irrelevant and not applicable given what the quoted poster and others have said.  The Geth rebelled, but my Shepard allowed them to adapt to a different way.  The Geth are supposedly a lesser lifeform than the Catalyst, so how did they adapt (with a reaper program), but the Catalyst could not?  How could the Catalyst adapt from one totally wrong idea to 3 totally wrong choices, but not adapt and see one really viable solution that was staring it right in the face.  Shepard.  Shepard changed how Geth and Quarians felt, how Turians, Krogan, Salarians, Batarians, and etc. felt.  It was the human (organic) quotient entered into the equation that destroyed the flawed, circular logic.  But, the ending insults all that and denies players that kind of choice.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 22 avril 2012 - 04:06 .

[Archonsg]

Ericus wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

But that is just it. Synthesis does not in any way broker peace. What it does is make every single being in the Galaxy, a single race, technological singularity, but it does not change ideas, ideaology, religion, prejudices.

 

This exact issue has been bugging me about the Synthesis ending right from the moment the starchild mentioned it.  If the starchild is just some simplistic AI (less advanced than EDI or the Geth), I suppose we could accept that it's programming is limited to seeing & addressing organic vs. synthetic conflicts.  But as we see with the genophage (let alone the real world), organics are more than capable of wiping each other out due to "ideas, ideaology, religion, prejudices." 

Goes back to the core issue that the ending gets the entire theme of the ME saga confused...

Right.
The sad part is, a good many "supporters" of the ending, those who said "its beautiful" were those who bought the self sacrifice ascension spiel and don't or won't see beyong it. And when asked, why they think it's a "good" end they can't come up with anything.

Worse, when asked, if they think the Krogan, Turians, Rachni will now sit at a campfire singing "kumbaya" they will assert that such a question is ridiculous but can't seem to connect it with the reasoning that there will be peace because of Synthesis.

Synthesis, is a lie. It is ridiculous for a number of reasons but most of all, unless that option mind wiped every single race, which in itself is rape, it wants the player to accept the myth of sacrificial ascension in lieu of logic.

Bioware, fix your ending. Give us the option to say no, we'll win this war, we'll see Shepard alive, save both Citadel and the Relays.

 

[Graius]

Sacrifice, if done properly, could have been a fitting and proper ending to the series. Bittersweet could have been done well. I'd have loved an ending that did that concept justice. But instead we got assertion, hand-waving and muddle.

[3DandBeyond]

Archonsg wrote...


Right.
The sad part is, a good many "supporters" of the ending, those who said "its beautiful" were those who bought the self sacrifice ascension spiel and don't or won't see beyong it. And when asked, why they think it's a "good" end they can't come up with anything.

Worse, when asked, if they think the Krogan, Turians, Rachni will now sit at a campfire singing "kumbaya" they will assert that such a question is ridiculous but can't seem to connect it with the reasoning that there will be peace because of Synthesis.

Synthesis, is a lie. It is ridiculous for a number of reasons but most of all, unless that option mind wiped every single race, which in itself is rape, it wants the player to accept the myth of sacrificial ascension in lieu of logic.

Bioware, fix your ending. Give us the option to say no, we'll win this war, we'll see Shepard alive, save both Citadel and the Relays.

 

I think that many just accept the ending because they erroneously believe that what we find flawed is that it only is about Shepard dying.  They think we take issue with this sacrifice, when that's not the truth.  In fact, Shepard need not die, and the scene that points to it is one of the most unbelievable things about the ending.  If that was the most important part we should all be happy, right?

The flaws are attached to the thought that any and all sacrifices and choices/decisions along the way meant nothing.  And the choices are all hinging on flawed logic from an antagonist that we have not been fighting for 3 games.

The "logic" of the Catalyst is easily disproven by what it must surely see as lesser lifeforms-Geth, Quarian, Krogan, Turian, Salarian.  They all proved that organics and synthetics have a great propensity to screw things up, but that they also have a great propensity to see the error of their ways and make it right, or try to.  And Shepard, of all people, would know that, would assert that, and would not let all life go quietly into that great goodnight.  "Does this unit have a soul?"  One of the most profound utterances of all 3 games and the core question that defies the synergy option, and in fact all 3 options.

"The unit does indeed have a soul", Shepard might say because the unit sacrificed all for an ideal, and for the greater good.  No one could see that sacrifice and just run off and destroy Legion's children.  No one could talk to EDI about love and go off and destroy that love and EDI.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 22 avril 2012 - 04:31 .

[LiarasShield]

besides this being sort of a catchy song I thought the end of the video was funny and made my day

[AkaXan]

My reasons the ME3 Endings are broken:

1) Well rounded Characters and their storys are what make Mass Effect great. Good characters that we feel for is why we care about saving the Mass Effect universe. With little or no sign at the end, that any of the great characters, love interests or team mates are genuinely safe, after getting to know them and sort out their issues, its no wonder players feel hard done by as it all seems a bit pointless when all 3 endings seem to embarce all life dying in some fashion.
Great characters also extends to the villians. The Reapers work best as an unknowable force, it made things more intense knowing that, something so bad was coming to destroy everything and there would be no reasoning with it. Then the God/Reaper child showed up with his stupid, I invented sythetics to kill all organic life, to prevent organics inventing synthetic life, which in turn will kill them. The god child killed the Reapers as villians and killed player interest.

2) Lore and logic, dont spend 3 games building up story and backgrond, with a solid logic that works within the series, only to break lore, logic and story when it suits. Its cheap, insulting to players who have taken the time to invest in this world and most importantly never works. The high standard of writing throughout the games with the Genophage cure mission being a true highlight only serves to further expose how badly lore, logic and story are treated at the end.

3) Player interaction/choice. When the god child/reaper leader is introduced it signals the death of player choise and interaction within the Mass Effect world. The player no longer has control over how things play out, regardless of the work the player put in. Whats worse is that it kills Shepard as a leading force for the Mass Effect series. Shepard is no longer the games guiding focus.
Instead Shepard (much like the player) is told by the god child that he will be allowed to chose one of 3 outcomes the god child sees fit to grant. The second this happens Shepard no longer holds any narrative importance, its not Sheps story anymore its the stupid Reaper/God child story as they are the only one with any control over what happens.

It's sad that Bioware have simply chosen to ignore their fans/customers vaild issues with ME3 end and the complete lack of basic story telling techiques that those awful endings exibit.

Bioware can continue to hide behind "Artistic Ingegrity" to protect their egos from futher battering, but its going to cost them more in the long run. As what fan/customer can ever take Bioware at thier word again, especially if its Casy Hudson or Masuka do the talking.

ME3 should have been a great end to the trilogy instead all this mess has damaged the brand and Bioware's rep. By all means cobble togather that extended cut. It wont matter, the ending will remain the same and any reason for the player to replay the games to see how thier choices matter will remain dead.

[LiarasShield]

well like what has been mentioned you can explain all the errors and the problems that hurt the ending but the even more close minded people who think we are can't even really give decent reasons for why the ending is so good other then entitlement this or rage comment this instead of decent logical retorts that may at least add onto their arguement of how the ending is fine

[Voodoo-j]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Voodoo-j wrote...

So, I've thought about this quite a bit, logically.
This just doesn't make sense.. Only one of the endings to me is even feasible.

Then there is Synergy/Synthesis.  This is another seemingly logical choice, that isn't logical at all.  In magically uniting all synthetic and organic life into one mish-mosh, you might think to be strengthening them, but in essence you also weaken them both.  You destroy what makes a human, human, taking away the self of the sentient organic life form.  That's not to say that inorganics don't have a sense of self, but it is the way they determine it that is different.  The inorganic had to tell itself that it was unique.  The organic lifeform KNEW it.  This is the sense of self.  It's an unforced view of what you are.  The synthetic is weakened in that there would naturally be a decay within-age, wear, intake and output would be far more present concerns.  And there would be this omnipresent sense of sameness amongst all life.  Individuality might exist, but in order to be expressed it often needed an organic to point it out.  The Catalyst even states that this means the end of evolution.  And that means the end of learning, knowledge, adaptation, growth, progress, development of higher ideals (yes, along with some lower motivations).  It means the end of life and the onset of stagnation.  Since the organic part of such a synthesis would eventually have to die, it ultimately seems to me to eventually lead to the all synthetic race. It's possible they could procreate, but that seems unlikely since evolution comes along with procreation-the mix of DNA changes things. 

I was looking at it as option where it didn't conflict with what had already ocurred and an actual possibility.  As it was already pointed out that was discussed earlier and had issues as well :/

But yeah none of the endings fit within the story in any explainable way that doesn't contridict the storyline that we have played since ME1. 

And that is outside of explaining how they are plausible and the effects.. just that they contridict the ME plot in of itself.

[DrScientistPhD]

     A few days ago, I completed my playthrough of Mass Effect 3.  Like many other fans, I am completely disappointed by the way this otherwise fantastic trilogy concluded.  Two of the most appealing aspects of the series are a compelling, story driven narrative and the concept that a player’s choices have consequences.  I feel that these elements, which were highly promoted by Bioware, were completely disregarded in the finale of the game.  I am aware that there are currently plans to supplement the ending with the release of DLC, but I am extremely skeptical that said DLC will address my criticisms given what Bioware has indicated the DLC will and will not include.
     I strongly believe that the creative team behind the Mass Effect story has every right to dictate how their story concludes, and should not have to change any of that based off of fan reaction.  That said, I also believe that as a consumer, I have the right to criticize serious flaws in the products I choose to buy.
     My overall dissatisfaction with the conclusion of Mass Effect 3 makes me doubt the quality of future Bioware games.  As such, my extreme disappointment makes me believe that I will not be purchasing future Bioware games, and also makes me extremely reluctant to recommend Mass Effect 3 to other gamers.

Modifié par DrScientistPhD, 22 avril 2012 - 05:17 .

[3DandBeyond]

The ending just provides us with a depressing thought-that all you do is futile.
The real villains of three games are distilled down into this kid that I dislike as a character. I dislike the reapers, too, but in a different way. The reapers are awesome, loathesome, hate and fear-inducing characters that I want to utterly destroy. I want so much to face them and watch as their realization of their ultimate demise at my hands hits them. They are like any antagonist in any story-the finest moments in defeating any such foe is when the foe just realizes you killed them. But, we don't get that.

We get a stand in that we hate, not because he represents what we have fought against, but because he's stupid, insignificant, unrelated to the story. He's filler. The player initially has the urge to say, "get outta my way, I'm fighting reapers here, kid." But, he won't leave and he then has the nerve to control the rest of MY story. This story was never about him, it was about me (Shepard). It wasn't even fully about the reapers, except that they were used as the backdrop for all that I did in MY story. They sought to stop me, to keep me from getting the ending I wanted, but even the reapers couldn't do that. Nope, it took some see-through, illogical "advanced" intelligence to do that. And, he does it unfairly. He's immune to attempts to kill him. He allows me no dialogue choice. He allows for no real dialogue. And, he continually asserts things that insult my intelligence and my hard work. He tells me I have choice more than I know, but gives me bland, similar choices. Hell, the choices I knew (or figured I had) were more varied than that, so I actually have choice LESS than I know.

But, since it's all futile why doesn't the kid just stick with his original plan. It doesn't matter, anyway.

[Graius]

The Reapers are an opponent you fear and respect. The kid is just baffling.

But yes, a significant problem is that the sacrifice feels entirely pointless. This is, I suspect, why so many people are put off replay value - you put all that effort into designing Shepard, building him and watching him grow, and he just snuffs it for no good reason. Why would you go through all that for such a poor reason? It's not bittersweet, just annoying.

And that in turn is because the ending on its own terms make no sense, for the reasons I and many others have already given. You just kill off the protagonist you have spent hours crafting and rearing, for a purpose that makes no sense, with no idea what the consequences are. Going back to when I did this as a degree, people are willing to accept loss of life in war when they understand the cause for which they are dying. Here, because people just can't understand what on earth they're sacrificing Shepard for, they're annoyed.

If we could understand why Shepard had to die, if we could get a good reason, then the ending could work.  It would genuinely be bittersweet and respectable.  You could walk away sad that he had to die, but respecting its inevitability.  [spoiler to MW3]Without giving too much away, Modern Warfare 3 managed to achieve something similar with Soap's death: shocking, upsetting but acceptable.[/spoiler]

Modifié par Graius, 22 avril 2012 - 06:16 .

[3DandBeyond]

Yes, and the point being that I can assert any and all theories as being behind their reasoning for the ending, but it doesn't make for a great game.

If you just consider one of the most thoughtful story lines within the game (filled by the way with real world and classical SF allegory), you will see how badly they failed. The Krogans and the genophage, a fictional holocaust that has a basis in a real world experience. The introduction of the spark of advancement into a Krogan world that was not ready for such advancement-a classical SF theme. It's the obelisk of 2001. It's the reason for the Prime Directive in Star Trek.

In a very short few scenes the pathos and passions that recur in themes within the real and imagined world are played out and we "get" it. The struggle over whether to keep Maelon's data or destroy it (since it was gotten through the torture of Krogans can it really be kept or would destroying it mean that all that sacrifice was in vain?) A concern not unlike that that occurred after WWII-data from "tests" (really torture) done on concentration camp victims was retained and used to help form a basis for some modern medicine. The struggle over whether or not to cure the genophage or fake a cure, because the Krogan genie is still out of the bottle. It's a decision of whether or not to allow a species self-determination and it's about trust and all that. And we understand it all. It is a great story of tragedy and redemption.

This story alone deserves a redemptive game ending as well.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 22 avril 2012 - 06:07 .

[Graius]

Which reminds me; Mordin is an example of the sacrifice theme done very well.

[Grammarye]

What irked me about the ending was the lack of choice, zero meaningful reflection of preceding choices, the entire plot from Harbinger's beam onward either contradicting established ME lore or just being plain illogical, an introduction of a main character at the last second, and that Shepard, having fought against the odds for three games, is happy to just pick A, B or C like a lab rat because some flickering child says so. Why didn't Shepard stand up for what he/she believes in? Why, once again, did the game provide no dialogue choices worth a damn, railroading the player?

(I really hated that child by the way. Every 'dream sequence' I just wanted to find the exit portal that said 'screw this, we've got more important things to do than Baywatch running'. I don't recall Shepard being forced to lose sleep over blowing up Kaidan/Ashley or their ME2 squad, arguably a more personal psychological experience..., and those deaths I as a player cared about)

After we've chatted interminably with the flickering child and he's explained that due to 2 x 2 = 5, 5 must therefore equal 2 x 2, and thus wiping out all advanced life in the galaxy is ok, Shepard just says 'ok' and goes and pushes a button. Never mind that he's just spent some time getting two major representations of synthetic life to play nice. Never mind that any idiot AI who had the capabilities of the Reapers could just use that to.. wait for it.. destroy all other synthetic life and thus defend the organics apparently so precious to them, in a guardian role. Lets' ignore that the red ending, a capability that Starchild has apparently known about and had for millenia, that destroys all synthetic life everywhere, would be a perfect defense mechanism for the very problem that the Reapers' extinction cycle is aimed at solving. Lets' trip the light fantastic past that and proceed to the blue/red/green flashy bit.

We're left with cutscenes that are out of character for any of the established protagonists (sure, a love interest who has professed love and a desire for children wouldn't want to be there by Shepard's side rather than, say, running off), an absolutely devastating long term effect on the galaxy (probably far worse than the Reapers themselves) and yet Shepard doesn't even blink. Yep, ok sir, you said it Starchild, I'll just push one of these here buttons. Regardless of choices, the same bunch of humans fight in London, watch some Reapers fall over/wave their tentacles with happiness, and then the Normandy, apparently having left the most critical battle for the galaxy ever, along with its commander, far behind, crashes. Perhaps the most bizarre and stupid point of the ending is that one option can have Shepard survive and yet inexplicably tells us nothing of what happens next. What is this, the Matrix Reloaded?

Meanwhile the player is left in frustration and annoyance feeling like their efforts over the past few years have gone to waste, that playing the game was an exercise in futility, that none of their decisions had any value, and their faith in Bioware is severely shaken. Perhaps Bioware genuinely didn't realise that they'd created a sci-fi opera that had captured hearts & minds? It's not even like it had to be a happy ending, although I'd liked to have thought that a happy-ish ending would have been feasible if extremely hard to achieve (you know, choice?). I was ok with Shepard dying if there was a point to it - he/she has already been prepared to do so on numerous occasions. However even that doesn't work as a concept, because one option has Shepard implied to survive and leaves the audience hanging for... what exactly?

What did I like about the ending? The scene running into Harbinger's beams I think summed up Shepard perfectly - diving into the fray, as Liara put it. It's also an insanely stupid thing to do, charging a 2km dreadnought with giant particle beams on foot, and neatly summed up the desperation.

What should have happened? If we must have the flickering child deus ex machina instead of any ending that would feel worthwhile?

If Shepard survived, then I would expect to see him being pulled from the rubble, as Reaper and Geth platforms are strewn about the place, organic survivors taking stock, recovering, medics seeing to the wounded, and then perhaps the love interest coming around the corner, hugging Shepard, and then a nice fade to black. Then a sequence of cutscenes as to how screwed up the galaxy got after all your decisions ala Fallout - although since the mass relays exploded, maybe almost everyone is vapourised...

If Shepard died, then the least that could be done is a memorial of some form. The Control option leaves the galaxy entirely as it was at the start of the big battle, and so life must presumably go on (though, again the mass relays exploding bit puts a damper on anyone surviving...). Cutscenes as above can follow.

The rest of my constructive criticism is available as DLC.

Modifié par Grammarye, 22 avril 2012 - 06:49 .

[sbricca]

i think if they insist supporting this ending, EC doesnt resolve any of the problems written here...
Or they going to changing it deeply, or they have to continue the Shepard's story in ME4...but i dont think so, i think they are already working on that without Shepard
I dont know how can they fix this mess...i cant imagine a movieclip (EC) that makes the ME3 ending acceptable...

[Voodoo-j]

In case anyone doesn't catch it, the biscuit represent ME.

[liveinabin]

I seriously don't have a problem with the ending. Went for the synthesis option. There was enough inferred there for decent closure, at least for me. Might be fun to see the extended ending they have planned which, no doubt, will just roll call the various characters/races and tell you how they got on in this brave new galaxy. I don't really need it though - feels a bit like the voiceover in Blade Runner to me.
I was overall very impressed with what I felt was a mature ending to a mature (in the proper sense) RPG; an RPG that, from the get go, was strongly concerned with nice big sci-fi questions: What is life? What rights do suitably intelligent machines have?
Given that, the synthesis option (although fed by a great big mcguffin in the crucible) was a nice finish.

[Ralph The Wonder Llama]

chemiclord wrote...

Ralph The Wonder Llama wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

Ralph The Wonder Llama wrote...

Unfortunaly something great was taken away from us, the fans. 

See, this is what I inherently disagree with.

EA can't take what isn't yours to begin with.  The fans owned absoutely jack s*** of this IP, narrative, characters, etc.  EA screwed themselves over, but ya know what... it was entirely their right to do so.  You have every right to not like it, make your displeasure clear, and eventually walk away if you don't feel your concerns were addressed, and you should.

But you have absolutely no right to claim ownership of anything.  Because it's not yours, and it never was.

Then please refund my money.

It ain't mine either.  Otherwise I'd be glad to give you your money back just to get you to shut up about how YOU own the story.  Because you don't.  Never did.  And never will.

Too funny.

[Voodoo-j]

liveinabin wrote...

I seriously don't have a problem with the ending. Went for the synthesis option. There was enough inferred there for decent closure, at least for me. Might be fun to see the extended ending they have planned which, no doubt, will just roll call the various characters/races and tell you how they got on in this brave new galaxy. I don't really need it though - feels a bit like the voiceover in Blade Runner to me.
I was overall very impressed with what I felt was a mature ending to a mature (in the proper sense) RPG; an RPG that, from the get go, was strongly concerned with nice big sci-fi questions: What is life? What rights do suitably intelligent machines have?
Given that, the synthesis option (although fed by a great big mcguffin in the crucible) was a nice finish.

With complete respect to your view, I'm curious if you played ME 1 and 2?
The reason I ask, if I had picked up ME 3 never playing the previous ones, I might agree.  Not having put forth the time and emerssing myself in the ME universe by experiencing the previous games, I wouldn't have the understanding of what others are talking about that are upset.

[Chrislo1990]

The truth of the matter is that no amount of clarification dlc can salvage the garbage that is ME3's endings. Player choice is thrown out the window along with story cohesion and rationality, all fundamental aspects of the franchise. Bioware knows this guys and yet they refuse to acknowlwdge and correct their mistakes on the grounds of "artisitic intergrity." Are you kidding me? Since when is completely ruining an otherwise brilliant and masterful franchise in only ten minites considered art? Since when is lying to your fanbase, and yes I say lying because no matter how you look at it they deceived us with their empty promises, considered art? It is just baffling how egotisitical Bioware has become as a company.

First they create this thread and invite us to provide feedback on the endings. This thread has grown to about 726 pages filled with well written suggestions on what needs to be done about the endings. The majority despises them and want them changed. We've provided various reasons as to why this needs to be done, all of which are grounded in logic, but what does Bioware do? Not only do they waste our time but they have also have the guts top say flat out that they will not change the endings at all! That is just insulting! How dare you Bioware? First you sell us a product that fails to meet specifications and then lack the decensy to properly rectify the issue? Is this how you hope to retain an audience with which to deliver your "art"? Is this what you define as humility? Sounds like greed and selfishness to me.

Modifié par Chrislo1990, 22 avril 2012 - 07:42 .

[oldretired60]

social.bioware.com/forum/Mass-Effect-3/Mass-Effect-3-Story-and-Campaign-Discussion-Spoilers-Allowed/Concerns-about-Bioware-and-other-issues-with-the-game-that-are-overshadowed-by-the-endings-11499397-1.html


This link says it all.  The author of the link says exactly how it is.  And, no, Bioware, you are NOT listening.   I have most of the games you did, you even tried to fix NWN to play on WXP.  You were one of my favorite companies, but since teaming up with EA you have lost something fundimental.  Most of us know what that is, so there is no need to explain it here.  It is so sad.  You have lost my trust and the trust of many, many more.  As I have said before, how the mighty have fallen.  Goodby, Bioware.