23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Archonsg]

CaptFrost wrote...

I'm sorry, but unless the Indoctrination Theory folks are right (in which case, BRILLIANT on BioWare's part), the ending doesn't deserve to be protected as artistic integrity/quality or somesuch silliness.

Why do people keep saying that if Bioware "punked" us by not including a "complete" ending via IT that its "brilliant?" 

I personally find it repugnant that any company intentionally or not, sold a product that does not have what it advertised to have, and instead played a "practical joke" just so to get a rise out of their customers. Even if this wasn't the intention, it implies that the customer would then have to either buy (if it's not clearly stated that it is free) another product to complete the original product he or she paid for, or, wait and hope that said "complete product" becomes available for free. 

Either way, you GOT AN INCOMPLETE product that you paid for and you are applauding the people who sold you the way it is?
I just don't understand the thought process some of you have.

[nategator]

Archonsg wrote...

CaptFrost wrote...

I'm sorry, but unless the Indoctrination Theory folks are right (in which case, BRILLIANT on BioWare's part), the ending doesn't deserve to be protected as artistic integrity/quality or somesuch silliness.

Why do people keep saying that if Bioware "punked" us by not including a "complete" ending via IT that its "brilliant?" 

I personally find it repugnant that any company intentionally or not, sold a product that does not have what it advertised to have, and instead played a "practical joke" just so to get a rise out of their customers. Even if this wasn't the intention, it implies that the customer would then have to either buy (if it's not clearly stated that it is free) another product to complete the original product he or she paid for, or, wait and hope that said "complete product" becomes available for free. 

Either way, you GOT AN INCOMPLETE product that you paid for and you are applauding the people who sold you the way it is?
I just don't understand the thought process some of you have.

Because for some or even most folks, the only people who are brilliant are the ones that agree with them.

[Voodoo2015]

Any release date yet?

[AmstradHero]

Holger1405 wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...
Holger1405 - you seem to like the ending and think it is good. Can you please give a literary explanation of why it is good, without either:
A) Citing "artistic integrity" (or words to that effect)
Citing other (science) fiction works as support for the meaning of the ending.

If it is a well written ending, it should be simple to do that in an easily defensible manner.

But why not refer to different works of fiction? There is, especially in our times, always a correlation between fiction works, in particular in Science Fiction.

Any work should be able to stand on its own for the purposes of literary criticism. If it is not possible to indicate the thematic or literary value of a work without explicitly relying on other works, then the work is derivative at best. Most likely, it's derivative as well as poorly structured and executed, as I believe is the case with Mass Effect 3's ending.

Holger1405 wrote...
I like the ending because it gives a explanation for the Reapers and their actions, a explanation which is, at least imho, sound, thereby not taking away any achievements of Shepard in the three Games and leave the door open for another ME Game, in a different setting.

Fair enough. Personally, I found that the explanation for the purpose of the Reapers completely undermined the persona and place in the universe that had been created for them by the rest of the series. For a race of beings who repeatedly insisted that they and their purpose were beyond our understanding, they were merely an embodiment of a extremely common and mundane science fiction trope. Again, this means that the ending feels terribly derivative and out of place.

Holger1405 wrote...
I like it precisely because it didn't answers all questions, leaves something to the imagination of the Player. I think I don't have to tell you how many great works of fiction with open endings are out there.

Effectively you're saying that "the ending is good because it leaves questions to be answered". While I understand this sentiment and agree that open endings are not objectively bad, there has to be a specific reason they are created. Stories that allow people to interpret and postulate about future possibilities and effects can be great, but this needs to be done from a sense of a meaningful thematic closure.

What literary purpose does an open-ending serve that fits thematically with the rest of the series? The endings either dictate:
A) The rise of organics, and the potential for their destruction at the hands of synthetics (destroy)
The rise of organics, through the irrevocable subjugation of synthetics (control)
C) The rise of a new super-species through "synthesis". (lucky door number 3)

The problem is that these offer little open ended thematic discussion of value based on the context of the entire three series:

Destroy renders reconciliation with the Geth/EDI moot, which many considered an emotional and thematic high point of the series.
Control merely maintains a status quo under a new controller, but sparing the current inhabitants of the galaxy (for now)
Synthesis is a new unknown state of existence, which offers no meaningful value or insight for the player because there is no information on which to base a decision/discussion.

The problem is that there is no overriding message, theme, or premise that is espoused by any of the endings that has been set up in any meaningful way by the rest of the series. This is what I mean by a literary explanation of why something is good. The ending says "robots will kill non-robots", but this is not established in a meaningful fashion by the series except by the antagonists themselves, so to suddenly have them exist to prevent that very thing from happen is an inconsistency that renders that premise worthless.

The endings don't offer a meaningful discussion or premise on which extrapolation can occur, despite this apparently being the entire intent of the endings as created. The fact that the Extended Cut will "answer questions" by adding clarification and epiloguse just undermines the open-ended nature of the endings as provided, taking away what little literary meaning they may have possessed.


I would state that I 'm glad you're willing to engage in reasoned debate, but so far I'm still left with nothing more of praise for the ending apart from "it explained the Reapers but then left everything afterwards up to my imagination." For me, that's hardly a satisfying ending on a superficial level, and certainly not satisfying on a literary level. Still, you've at least tried, which is more than I can say for any game journalist, or most disappointingly, any employee from BioWare.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 07 mai 2012 - 07:42 .

[daveyeisley]

I do just want to say I totally agree with Paulomedi and others who have expressed hatred for Lieutenant Bastard "I am basically Immune to Biotics" Kai leng.

The mechanical changes to biotics in ME3 from ME2 were one of my favorite parts of the system. mainly because of the combo explosions, they are just fricking awesome. The cooldowns were shortened so that Shepard didnt have to rely on squadmates to get his combos off (provided he didnt have cooldown issues from weapon weight), which also allowed for more rapid combos if you chose biotic squadmates (which again, is just awesome).

You get to kai leng, and its like somehow.... he was designed to just pee all over Adepts....

You're like, "Ok, I bet his shields are strong, and he probably dodges projectiles even better than regular phantoms. So... lemme whip out the big gun and stasis him so I can get some hits in."

"Well, crap.... he is totally immune."

"OK, lemme try a throw, warp, throw sequence to make him blow his dodge and then combo detonate on his shields. That should net me some good damage and keep him at a distance...."

"Well...double crap... the warp didn't detonate. Maybe It just missed him, or maybe he dodged twice in a row?"

[does a throw, throw, warp, throw sequence]

"Son of a B----!!!! He is immune to detonations!?? Thats like, the whole payoff for being an adept!!!! God damnit!!!!"

[sighs and then proceeds to slowly wear down the shields with Throw spam]

"Fine... at least tell me now that his shields are down I can freaking disable his punk arse with a Pull or Singularity...."

[uses both Pull and Singularity on the now defenseless Shepard-Wannabe, to no effect]

"Ok, seriously? Why even bother making this an actual combat? Why not just show me a video of Shep getting his butt kicked until his squadmates save his arse? Cuz that would suck? What, so being punished for choosing Adept is supposed to be better? Who designed this fight.... and why didnt QA chastise them?"

[Shevar]

Bioware shouldn't hide behind artistic integrity.

Argument: Jessica Chobot a.k.a. Diana Allers

To me, that looks like a new form of bribing gaming websites. Include one of their "journalists" in the cast.
If she could act, I could forgive them, but alas it is not so.

[Redbelle]

chomicze wrote...

Actually, Bio employees are saying that even Citadel isn't destroyed, and people there were protected by some kinetics barriers. He said, that we should made assumption, that anyone plot related being on Citadel is alive. So, we have to wait, and hopefully we will see in the EC, that we didn't cause massive destruction of everything with our choices. Or we did, if our EMS was horribly low. Don't know.

Really, theorizing now is just pointless, because we simply have none informations about anything after "godchild meeting". Bio is trying to calm us down, saying that there is no system destruction, noone is starving to death, and even Citadel isn't fully destroyed. So, we will wait and we will see.

I heard this too......... but c'mon BW! The citadel blows up 2 times out of 3. And when it does it looks terminal. Lets not forget that the citadel is one of the highest massing structures in ME lore so if the ppl on board survive........ who you never implied were there, how can a kinetic barrier stand up to the destruction of the citadel? The Normandy was given the best barriers in ME2 and even so a flight through destroyed ships beyond the Omega 4 relay nearly took them down.

A better explanation would be that the safe zones doubled as life pods to be ejected in the event of catastrophic collapse of the citadel. They would then be free of the citadel structure, only have to withstand the explosions and run less risk of having the citadels mass collide with them.

[AmstradHero]

Kinetic barriers on giant structures: now protecting people inside those structures even if the structures themselves blow up!

The Mass Effect relays "overloading" was a galling enough handwave... but that... I was just stunned when I read it. It was like saying "It's okay - the citadel blew up, but the kinetic barriers protected everyone inside it! We found some of Kai Leng's leftover plot armour and applied to the main characters of the story."

Ugh.

There's a point where the people responsible for writing the ending (whomever they are, since as far as I know, we don't know for certain), need to grow a quad and admit they made an absolute mess of the ending. I don't know how much more proof is needed to demonstrate that time has well and truly passed.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 07 mai 2012 - 11:10 .

[darkway1]

Archonsg wrote...

CaptFrost wrote...

I'm sorry, but unless the Indoctrination Theory folks are right (in which case, BRILLIANT on BioWare's part), the ending doesn't deserve to be protected as artistic integrity/quality or somesuch silliness.

Why do people keep saying that if Bioware "punked" us by not including a "complete" ending via IT that its "brilliant?" 

I personally find it repugnant that any company intentionally or not, sold a product that does not have what it advertised to have, and instead played a "practical joke" just so to get a rise out of their customers. Even if this wasn't the intention, it implies that the customer would then have to either buy (if it's not clearly stated that it is free) another product to complete the original product he or she paid for, or, wait and hope that said "complete product" becomes available for free. 

Either way, you GOT AN INCOMPLETE product that you paid for and you are applauding the people who sold you the way it is?
I just don't understand the thought process some of you have.

The whole Mass3 experience has been quite an eye opener to be honest,from game review sites that have obviously produced bias game scores,the false sales pitch regarding "choice" in the game,the blatant money shop in multiplayer,the DLC pitch at the end of the game,the sloppy ending it's self,the complete lack of communication with Bioware and after the endless pages of feedback,survey's and questionnaires, Bioware simply chooses not to acknowledge any of it.............in fact If it wasn't for Bioware/EA's desire to sell DLC then I doubt they would even bother producing the extended cut.

What a terrible way to finish the franchise.

[3DandBeyond]

ME3 actually does bear out the reality of review sites and reviewers. Most of them don't even finish a game before stating it is all out awesome or just plain bad. The latter is far easier to see right away sometimes. But there have been games that need to be experienced for awhile in order to understand them.

The problem is the line between product and advertiser or even ownership of some media outlets is truly blurry. The inclusion of Chobot in the game is one that makes it a lot less blurry.

There's such a disconnect here. I've even watched game review site video debates on the ending and some that say they "like" it do so with an attitude not unlike a food critic whose mother just made rotten fish pudding. There's the look on the face, the shrugging, and the higher pitched voice, right before the pro guy say, "I don't know. I liked it." These are tells. He's lying.

The saddest part in all of this is the missed opportunities. What a fun ride it all could have been for the company and fans. I think again if they ran out of time, room on disks, and so on, it would have been far better to have created some sort of ending in London, getting ready for the big push and call it ME3, part 1. Then create part 2, maybe where that includes more battles with your teammates, a push to the Citadel, the Crucible causes reaper shields to drop, and then the story continues with fights on Earth and other worlds to get rid of them once and for all.

This is just one possible way I think they could have fixed it and they would have had some time to do it, they'd get more money from it, and we'd get a lot of what we'd like to see. Fighting with teammates, use of war assets, a chance to survive, or not, no star kid, and so on. There are a lot of other ways to do it. But, basically anyway you look at it as it is now we basically got and ME3 part 1.

[AmstradHero]

Archonsg wrote...

CaptFrost wrote...

I'm sorry, but unless the Indoctrination Theory folks are right (in which case, BRILLIANT on BioWare's part), the ending doesn't deserve to be protected as artistic integrity/quality or somesuch silliness.

Why do people keep saying that if Bioware "punked" us by not including a "complete" ending via IT that its "brilliant?" 

I personally find it repugnant that any company intentionally or not, sold a product that does not have what it advertised to have, and instead played a "practical joke" just so to get a rise out of their customers. Even if this wasn't the intention, it implies that the customer would then have to either buy (if it's not clearly stated that it is free) another product to complete the original product he or she paid for, or, wait and hope that said "complete product" becomes available for free. 

Either way, you GOT AN INCOMPLETE product that you paid for and you are applauding the people who sold you the way it is?
I just don't understand the thought process some of you have.

There's no need to be so harsh.  I understand where you're coming from, but there's not quite the need for this level of vitriol. If BioWare had intended IT to be the "true" ending, and made the real ending available by a free DLC, then they would have effectively set up a deliberate and intentional extension of the game directly to the player rather than their character.

This would have been like an alternate reality game that occurred as a meta-game as part of the gaming experience itself. Despite the backfire of this in terms of people who can't download DLC or the like, and outrage similar to yours, this would have been an undeniably superb representation of the insidious nature of indoctrination. It would have been a clear indication of the magnitude of self-deception and internal rationalisation that could occur within the mind of an individual under the effects of indoctrination. This would allow players to fully realise the struggle Saren and The Illusive Man, and see the ease with which they could undergo a delusion that would force them to come to the sole conclusion that the Reapers offered the only possible source of salvation.

The player would literally see themselves become the villain - Shepard's heroic tale suddenly is undone by a lack of awareness and the inability to realise the subtle clues of indoctrination, despite knowing so much about it and seeing its effect's firsthand.

You have to devoid yourself of the outrage of "being punked" and the fact that you've been (temporarily) given an ending that does not match what you were promised, for an experience that ultimately would have demonstrated in a manner potentially unmatched in any storytelling to date that "the villain is the hero of their own story". In IT, a Shepard picking control or synthesis believes themselves the hero, that they have saved the galaxy (well, albeit in a fairly unsatisfactory manner), but instead actually ensured its doom.

But, as we know, IT is not BioWare's choice. Sure, there would have been issues with IT, but it would allow for an utlimately satisfactory resolution to the series. That will almost certainly not be provided by the extended cut because of the inherent and systemic shortcomings of the ending that cannot in any way be redeemed by "clarification."

Modifié par AmstradHero, 07 mai 2012 - 12:40 .

[MaxGwenesef]

Completely agree 3DandBeyond. This could work the same with IT, Shepard resists (destroy ending), the fight continues and in the end you have different endings according to EMS and choices made in all 3 games. This could still be possible so please BW, you still have a chance to fix it if you care about fans.

[3DandBeyond]

That's the thing, the biggest problem with IT. It's not an ending, it's an explanation for the one we have, which we shouldn't have. It makes more sense than anything as an explanation for the current mess, because it has actual things within the 3 games that it can point to as a basis.

Oily shadows, there swirling around them when they meet TIM.
Suspension of reality, there.
Headaches, buzzing, noises, there.
Dreams, there.
Control (by someone else, not TIM), there.

And much more. But, what it does more than anything else is explain why Shepard would do what Shepard did and the vision of the star kid.

The problems with IT are varied but tangible as well. It does mean they purposely released an unfinished game without saying it was unfinished (but many of us feel that is what we have even without indoctrination), and that they've needlessly created or helped foster animosity between themselves and some fans. The thing is if it was that we were being punk'd, they needed to let us in on the joke within an appropriate amount of time and in no uncertain terms. That time and chance has passed. No matter what they intended to do, and that end blue "buy more DLC" indicates there was always something planned, they should have come out with that "gotcha" moment before now.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 07 mai 2012 - 12:54 .

[Thanatos144]

The ending isn't changing people....Thought I would just remind you all.

[Archonsg]

@amstradhero
I am not being harsh. You see, I am looking at this from the point of a consumer. Did you pay xxx amount of dollars, being told specifically what said product will have "Endings vastly different, being dependant on the choices you have made and a finale that will close this chapter of the Mass Effect story arc, with most of the important questions answered."

I posted that particular post based on that view simply because this is a consumer / vendor relationship issue. You paid for something. Vendor gives you a product. Did you get what you paid for?
In the case of ME3, this issue is compounded because it effects 2 other products and the time you have spent in investment on those products. It must be looked upon as a whole.

Bioware, seems more then willing to write off the value of their fan's investment. How much is 5 years, or 120+.- or more hours worth to you?

Modifié par Archonsg, 07 mai 2012 - 01:05 .

[darkway1]

Archonsg wrote...

@amstradhero
I am not being harsh. You see, I am looking at this from the point of a consumer. Did you pay xxx amount of dollars, being told specifically what said product will have "Endings vastly different, being dependant on the choices ai have made and a finale that will close this chapter of the Mass Effect story arc, with most of the important questions answered."

I posted that particular post based on that view simply because this is a consumer / vendor relationship issue. You paid for something. Vendor gives you a product. Did you get what you paid for?
In the case of ME3, this issue is compounded because it effects 2 other products and the time you have spent in investment on those products. It must be looked upon as a whole.

Bioware, seems more then willing to write off the value of their fan's investment. How much is 5 years, or 120+.- or more hours worth to you?

Heres a concept......I pay half the money now and the other half when the game is finished....sounds fair.

[Thanatos144]

Archonsg wrote...

@amstradhero
I am not being harsh. You see, I am looking at this from the point of a consumer. Did you pay xxx amount of dollars, being told specifically what said product will have "Endings vastly different, being dependant on the choices you have made and a finale that will close this chapter of the Mass Effect story arc, with most of the important questions answered."

I posted that particular post based on that view simply because this is a consumer / vendor relationship issue. You paid for something. Vendor gives you a product. Did you get what you paid for?
In the case of ME3, this issue is compounded because it effects 2 other products and the time you have spent in investment on those products. It must be looked upon as a whole.

Bioware, seems more then willing to write off the value of their fan's investment. How much is 5 years, or 120+.- or more hours worth to you?

Huge misconception.....You were promised nothing more than a game. You
assumed that is was going to be more than what it was....The fault falls solely on you,

[AmstradHero]

@Archonsg
I understand that, but I contend that you're only looking at it from a single perspective. Had Bioware released the game, waited a month, then announced "The Truth" ending DLC for free as a hint that IT was in fact correct, then released it one month more later, it would have been a triumph of storytelling.

That would not by any means change the fact that it would have been a rather rude stunt to pull on players and robbed those without good internet access the ability to experience the "real" ending. I am not denying that from an advertising vs product and consumer point of view, that many customers would (rightfully) be annoyed.

However, with the ending we have been given (and will be given), those promises about choice and vastly different endings will still not be met, and we'll be left with an unsatisfying and inconsistent ending. Indoctrination Theory is NOT BioWare's ending, and thus all the errors in the current ending will not be fixed.

Indoctrination Theory would have offered a viable solution to the poorly written ending in a fashion that would have been a brilliant move from a literary and storytelling perspective. I would have been annoyed at being hoodwinked, but the impact of that reveal and the associated meaning would have been more than worth it.

If you disagree, then by all means, you are entitled to that opinion, but again, I contend that from a storytelling perspective (and that's the primary reason I played the series), it would have been sublime.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 07 mai 2012 - 01:15 .

[Redbelle]

Thanatos144 wrote...

The ending isn't changing people....Thought I would just remind you all.

I wish Chuck Norris were here. He'd know what to do.

[darkway1]

Thanatos144 wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

@amstradhero
I am not being harsh. You see, I am looking at this from the point of a consumer. Did you pay xxx amount of dollars, being told specifically what said product will have "Endings vastly different, being dependant on the choices you have made and a finale that will close this chapter of the Mass Effect story arc, with most of the important questions answered."

I posted that particular post based on that view simply because this is a consumer / vendor relationship issue. You paid for something. Vendor gives you a product. Did you get what you paid for?
In the case of ME3, this issue is compounded because it effects 2 other products and the time you have spent in investment on those products. It must be looked upon as a whole.

Bioware, seems more then willing to write off the value of their fan's investment. How much is 5 years, or 120+.- or more hours worth to you?

Huge misconception.....You were promised nothing more than a game. You
assumed that is was going to be more than what it was....The fault falls solely on you,

It does not matter,the game does not sit well with a lot of people who bought the game........happy people buy DLC etc .......unhappy people don't........if you want to make crazy money,then do something people like.

[AmstradHero]

Please ignore the person who insists on repeating themselves ad nauseum and adding nothing of value to the discussion. Without attention it will go away.

[Thanatos144]

darkway1 wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

@amstradhero
I am not being harsh. You see, I am looking at this from the point of a consumer. Did you pay xxx amount of dollars, being told specifically what said product will have "Endings vastly different, being dependant on the choices you have made and a finale that will close this chapter of the Mass Effect story arc, with most of the important questions answered."

I posted that particular post based on that view simply because this is a consumer / vendor relationship issue. You paid for something. Vendor gives you a product. Did you get what you paid for?
In the case of ME3, this issue is compounded because it effects 2 other products and the time you have spent in investment on those products. It must be looked upon as a whole.

Bioware, seems more then willing to write off the value of their fan's investment. How much is 5 years, or 120+.- or more hours worth to you?

Huge misconception.....You were promised nothing more than a game. You
assumed that is was going to be more than what it was....The fault falls solely on you,

It does not matter,the game does not sit well with a lot of people who bought the game........happy people buy DLC etc .......unhappy people don't........if you want to make crazy money,then do something people like.

Then dont buy the DLC. Thats capitalism at work they way it should be. I happen to think you are going to be surprised at how many buy the DLC when it comes out though.

[Thanatos144]

Redbelle wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

The ending isn't changing people....Thought I would just remind you all.

I wish Chuck Norris were here. He'd know what to do.

sell me a exercise machine? LOL

[Thanatos144]

AmstradHero wrote...

Please ignore the person who insists on repeating themselves ad nauseum and adding nothing of value to the discussion. Without attention it will go away.

Then you would be ignoring yourselves.

[Gably]

This game is full of sacrifice, fatalistic scenes already. The whole reaper attack is brutal. Ending a story with another fatalistic scene will just make it worse. It's not a matter of who can accept what ending or whatever. Its about finishing the Shepard story. And not by making another stupid sacrifices.