23455 réponses à ce sujet

[daveyeisley]

Another thing about disparities in expectation leading up to the end of ME3....

Many fans, myself included, probably would not have had the level of expectations we had if it were not for the standards set by the previous two games... as well as the interviews, advertising, and official statements made about ME3 prior to its release that seemed to all share the singular purpose of driving up expectations for what the game would deliver, especially in its conclusion to the trilogy.

How someone might conclude that this ending delivered a satisfying conclusion based on expectations heightened by all the advertising and official interviews/statements is frankly beyond my comprehension, and most likely also beyond logical explanation as well.

[daveyeisley]

Dublinguy65 wrote...

Jeez people are still debating this? Get a life and move on. Yeah the ending sucked, but in the end it's just a friggin GAME. Small minds get disturbed by trivial things.

Does it bother you that people are discussing why they aren't happy with the ending of the game they bought, or trying to explain to the company that made it why they believe the ending should be changed and not clarified?

Is it wrong of people to persue satisfaction?

Oh, right... its just a game, so who cares.... well, apparently you do, else why are you here insulting so many other people you don't even know?

[Dublinguy65]

daveyeisley wrote...

Dublinguy65 wrote...

Jeez people are still debating this? Get a life and move on. Yeah the ending sucked, but in the end it's just a friggin GAME. Small minds get disturbed by trivial things.

Does it bother you that people are discussing why they aren't happy with the ending of the game they bought, or trying to explain to the company that made it why they believe the ending should be changed and not clarified?

Is it wrong of people to persue satisfaction?

Oh, right... its just a game, so who cares.... well, apparently you do, else why are you here insulting so many other people you don't even know?

I can understand disappointment in the ending, heck I am ME biggest fans have played the different games many times over, but in the final analysis no matter how much people complain, cry and wring their hands BioWare/EA really doesn't care. They have sold literally millions of copies and to me it's just hitting your head against a wall it doesn't do anything other than to give you a headache.  

[jayburn00]

Dubliner you are wrong. Enough complaints, and EA and Bioware will know that they screwed up big time. Constant complaints, they just might start thinking about doing something about it. Organized constant complaints, they might start thinking "This is not good, we need to resolve this issue or we will never live it down and it will hang like an albatross around our necks for the rest of our companies existence." Atleast, that is what they should be thinking. If not, well, there is always survival of the fittest.

[daveyeisley]

@dublinguy

Ok, thats not a reason to insult people. You are doing basically the same thing. We arent going to stop expressing our ideas because it bothers you.

There is still a chance, however small, that we may obtain that which we seek. It is up to us an no one else, to decide when to give up. If we get to that point, it will not likely be until after the EC DLC is released, and maybe even not then.

The sad fact is, it will be a dark day when the majority of dissatisfied fans decide to give up.... because BW will likely fall faster on the downward spiral at that point. We are here, expressing ourselves because we still feel they can get this thing right.

If you don't feel that way, no one is asking you to stay.

Modifié par daveyeisley, 09 mai 2012 - 04:42 .

[Archonsg]

Voodoo-j wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

Lets clear a few thing up, and Bioware I hope you are reading. 
You have already made a mess, and seems set to make up yet a larger mess but here's some sticking points you might want to address:


-Will long-distance superluminal travel still be possible post-Ending? (will Tali or Wrex or Garrus see their homeworlds again? Will everyone starve?)

Galactic civilization will rebuild. The mass relays were not necessary for interstellar flight. Remember, what does it say in the Codex about the speed of ships? That's right, 12 lightyears per (day? hour? minute?). And that's only the cruising speed, not the maximum speed.

People have never needed to research basic FTL improvements before because they have mass relays. With the relays gone, new technology will increase that speed. Additionally, the element zero cores of the dead/controlled Reapers can be used to improve FTL drives. Starflight will continue using conventional FTL. 


First off, the estimated size of our Galaxy from NASA :
imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/980317b.html

That's right, about 100,000 light years across.

Now how fast are current FTL technology?
masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:FTL

About 12 light years in a day cruising speed.

Now, it is also pretty important to point out that there is a codex entry in regards to fuel consumption and EZO drive core size in regards to speed, under Codex Secondary > Ships and Vehicles > FTL Drives  in that the amount of EZO and power required goes up exponentially to the Mass being moved. Thus very large or fast ships are prohibitively expensive. (you won't have a super freighters traveling at like speeds of the Normandy) 

So logically, what would be the theoretical "maximum" speed if the given cruise speed is 12 Light Years per day? Double? Tripple? Quadruple? Even if we say "10 x" that of cruise speed which is improbable, going at 120 light years per day, if you do not need to refuel, every ship in your flotilla travels at 120 lyd, travel in a straight line and going through the galactic core, you still will take a greater part of 2 years and a few months to get from one end to the other of the galaxy.

So the question now is how fast is reaper ftl?

Wasn't there a reference at the end of the Arrival about how much longer it takes the reapers to get here? 
If there was a way to figure it out..

Shepard then states that, given the story, she chose to destroy it and Kenson will confirm that. She says that would stop the Reaper’s invasion as it would take months or even years at standard FTL speeds to reach another relay. Kenson continues by describing what she and her team call “the Project”. The Project is a plan to crash a nearby asteroid into the Relay, thereby destroying it before the Reapers arrive. She finishes by saying that the resulting explosion could destroy the system. As the two take a seat, you can get some questions answered. 

What was the time line for ME3 - a year after the arrival?  how far is the next closest relay?

6 Months

[color=rgb(255, 255, 255)">Travel to the ] System in the [/color]Viper Nebula[color=rgb(255, 255, 255)"> ], Aratoht is the second planet.[/color] 

So closest relay is the exodus cluster - which looking at the map and a rough estimate, 2 1/2 to 3 years travel to cross the galaxy with reaper tech.

Need to research on that but there are several problems. Capturing an intact reaper, studying it and not falling prey to indoctrination. The problem is that the two previous games made it clear that reaper tech is best destroyed, Not salvaged and used. 

Even if we are to assume that it is now safe to use reaper tech, which is possible only in one choice (destroy) it would mean that the destroy option was the "right" one. 

Which again brings up the whole "control" option. Here Shepard can actually use the reapers to help. All in all, there's a whole Pandora's box of "why is this ..." questions with all three choices. 

Lastly, as anyone who can do math will immediately notice, even the "best" case scenario still needs TIME. 
For Wrex to take a year to get back to Tuchanka, for a year to get supplies and support, would mean a year where the planet is plunged into survival of the fittest barbarism at best. At worst he returns to a planet whose occupants invaded their nearest neighbors and the whole Krogan war starts again.

This is a game but it is still sci-fi, not sci-fantasy. 
Do the math Bioware.

[Voodoo-j]

Yeah that was the biggest roadblock in my mind, for the survivors in the sol system.

The Geth, if it was a lie (the destroy option) and live, well they won't have to much problems getting home, nor cause an issue sticking around for a bit.

The Quarians, well they are already setup for migratory space flight, nothing new to them.

The Solarians, completely all about logic, in the end would want to get back to their home systems.

The Turians, all about honor.

The Asari, would easily integrate while looking for solutions.

The Krogans on the other hand, very hard to say. Very big wild card.
Also during the ending was it Wrex that got blasted by a reaper? I seen a Krogan blasted off his feet, the fleeting second before I could have sworn had the scars on his face. If it was Wrex, did he survive? If not then all bets are off.

Modifié par Voodoo-j, 09 mai 2012 - 05:00 .

[Archonsg]

Dublinguy65 wrote...

daveyeisley wrote...

Dublinguy65 wrote...

Jeez people are still debating this? Get a life and move on. Yeah the ending sucked, but in the end it's just a friggin GAME. Small minds get disturbed by trivial things.

Does it bother you that people are discussing why they aren't happy with the ending of the game they bought, or trying to explain to the company that made it why they believe the ending should be changed and not clarified?

Is it wrong of people to persue satisfaction?

Oh, right... its just a game, so who cares.... well, apparently you do, else why are you here insulting so many other people you don't even know?

I can understand disappointment in the ending, heck I am ME biggest fans have played the different games many times over, but in the final analysis no matter how much people complain, cry and wring their hands BioWare/EA really doesn't care. They have sold literally millions of copies and to me it's just hitting your head against a wall it doesn't do anything other than to give you a headache.  

It is because people want to be able to want to replay a game. Companies know this and sell DLCs do keep us interested and unlike the original game actually make a huge profit from each DLC sold.

Why do you think the move for many companies, EA/Bioware including, to open their own digital delivery stores? Its certainly not just for our benefit.

On our part, we'd love to continue to throw money at our entertainment company of choice, and Bioware has this ability to actually make us care about the games we play.

ME3's ending however, instead had turn me off. Instead of instilling the desire to replay the game, and thus buy any DLC they throw at me to extend that replay value, killed any reason for me to do so. Why would I want to replay a game knowing that I have to choose one of three flavored suicide?

Lastly. Because I do not find any replay value in the game, I find myself asking why did I just spent $60 or more for those who bought a collector's edition, for a "one night stand?"

I don't think I am alone in feeling this way.

If you are happy with the game, *shrugs*, good for you. If you are happy with the direction EA/Bioware is going, good for you.

The rest of us would rather let them know that we want to still remain as their customers but only if they stop resorting to questionable tactics, such as false advertising.

[Xixion]

I just finished the game tonight and it prompted me to bother logging in for the sake of posting this--though I don't believe that any amount of complaining will change EA / Bioware's minds about just how terrible those endings were. They've already gotten the money, they don't really care if we liked it or not. Not buying the forced inevitable sequel and/or DLC is the only to communicate our collective dissatisfaction.

That said: I truly enjoyed Mass Effect 1, 2, and--until the ending--3. The disparity between the promises of "no A, B, or C style endings" and the story abortion they delivered should make the writers and anyone else that got to participate in the voting process ashamed. It was not only dishonest, but it flew in the face of their story-telling ability and the overall feel of the series.

They're thralls of EA now, so it's inevitable that this franchise will be forced to shamble on until they manage to not only manufacture ****ty endings--but entire games of ****. Sadly, I wouldn't mind anymore. It's not that they killed Shepard or didn't have a "happy ending"... it was just sloppy and, frankly, insulting to the time I put into all of my playthroughs in the series. Hell, I recently picked up SWTOR and between enduring that and seeing these endings I'm tempted to just swear off Bioware games in general. Nevermind saving the money--I'll be saving myself from the increasingly likely disappointment.

[darkway1]

Maybe further Mass3 development will also take a hit from this.

http://www.develop-o...loaned-to-SWTOR

[AmstradHero]

Holger1405 wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

Holger1405 wrote..
Second, the Reapers didn't kill everyone. They erase only advanced organic species, so this organic species can't create synthetic life that, in the end, according to Star Child's logic, will destroy every Organic species and in doing so, erase all organic live from the galaxy. 

So they're not killing organic life because they're only killing SOME organic life? Sorry, but that's illogical.

O fcourse the killing organic life, but only advanced Organic life. You stated that the Reapers "trying to kill everyone" and I contradict this statement.

Eventually, they kill everyone. Sure, they might spare primitive organics at some point (as they did humans in the last cycle), but they still intend to keep on harvesting any and every organic species until the universe ends. The timeframe is irrelevant, because they still kill ALL organics. For any given organic species, under the Reapers, that organic species will be killed. There is no contradiction.

Holger1405 wrote..
This is why your statement that the Repars are "the very cause of the problem that they claim to be fixing" is wrong, and, much more important, THIS is the whole Point of Star Child.

Star Child's logic determinate the action of the Reapers. In his logic, advanced Organic life must be "Harvested" so they will not create Synthetic life,because these Synthetics will ultimately rebel against their creators, and then wipe out ALL Organic live. The Reapers, only attacking advanced Organic civilization, are his "Solution."

I understand his logic just fine. It's just that the actions of the Reapers undermine this. They are they "control" that kills organic life to stop other synthetics from killing organic life. Yet we are given no proof or basis for this except a vague allusion that the Reapers were created to combat the first synthetics that verged on killing off organic life.

The only real examples we do have of synthetics are the Geth and EDI, and both of those are capable of living peacefully with organics. The series undermines the very premise on which the ending is based. The only
synthetic life (if it is actually synthetic life) that is systematically eradicating organic life is the Reapers. i.e. They are the problem. They kill organics. They are not solving anything.

Holger1405 wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

Holger1405 wrote...
Why do you think that synthesis is suppose to be the optimal ending? I think it is up to the Player to decide which ending is optimal for her/him.

By game mechanics and the dialogue presented to the player. Synthesis is the "hardest" ending to achieve, and is presented by the game as being "the best". Whether players believe that is something else, but that is the logic as provided by the game/designers.

In my Opinion is Destruction with Shepard surviving the hardest ending to achieve. Also I never got the feeling that the Game a.k.a Bioware pushed me in a direction regarding the final choice.

Given that ending is only possible as a sort of "Easter Egg" through playing MP, and BioWare insist that the "best ending" is available without playing multiplayer,  synthesis is presented as the "best" ending.  At every step in the
Catalyst's dialogue, it suggests this. It implies that Destroy will lead to the eradication of organics, Control will merely acts as a "protector" for when things go bad, but that Synthesis is the final evolution. The dialogue actively pushes the player towards the synthesis option when it is made available to them.

Holger1405 wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...
Control IS the status quo. Destroy is the state that led to the creation of the status quo. These are known abd states according to the child's logic.  The fact that they are offered is illogical based on the premise.

Again, only when you consider Star child's logic as fact and his predictions as inevitable. Imho the Cycle is the status quo, and Control as well as Destruction contradict this status quo. Destruction for obviously reasons, Control because the Controller is changed. 
 

The cycle exists as a result of the Control - the Reapers, which are the "protectors" so organics don't get wiped out by synthetics. The Star Child says his solution is flawed - but somehow justifies putting someone ELSE in control. Retaining the Reapers as synthetic "guardians" controlled by Shepard still means that there is a single overlord
presence responsible for taking care of the galaxy - a state which has just been proven to be flawed.

Offering this solution is pointless because it is a known flawed state according to the logic of the Catalyst.

No Reapers (which is what we get from Destroy) is what came before - which is what led to the creation of the Reapers/cycle. Something led to the creation of the Reapers, presumably from the little dialogue we are given, this came about as a result of the near eradication of organic life by synthetics. Thus the Reapers were created as a solution to this flawed state.

Offering this solution is pointless because it is a known flawed stated according to the logic of the Catalyst

Two of the three options I am being presented are illogical based on the logic of the Catalyst. (There is no logic behind the third option, so I'm not even going to go there) Why are they being offered?

I would like to agree that Destroy is my favoured option, but the problem is that it's still a shallow and worthless ending. This choice is the closest thing the player has to rejecting the premise provided by the Catalyst, but in doing so undermines that choice because they kill off the synthetic beings (Geth/EDI) that disprove it.  It is thematically inconsistent and thus as meaningless as either of the other two endings.

Again, I will reiterate that all three choices offered are illogical as presented, and thematically inconsistent with the rest of the series and ending.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 10 mai 2012 - 11:29 .

[AmstradHero]

Archonsg wrote...

Dublinguy65 wrote...
I can understand disappointment in the ending, heck I am ME biggest fans have played the different games many times over, but in the final analysis no matter how much people complain, cry and wring their hands BioWare/EA really doesn't care. They have sold literally millions of copies and to me it's just hitting your head against a wall it doesn't do anything other than to give you a headache.  

It is because people want to be able to want to replay a game. Companies know this and sell DLCs do keep us interested and unlike the original game actually make a huge profit from each DLC sold.

Why would I want to replay a game knowing that I have to choose one of three flavored suicide?

I do not find any replay value in the game

I too do not find any replay value in the game. I cannot bring myself to go play through ME3 again, because I know I'm going to get that horrible, sloppy, inconsistent and utterly worthless ending.

If you don't like the game, the solution is simple: vote with your wallet. I will not be buying any ME3 DLC. I strongly recommend that anyone who did not like the ending to do the same. Unless BioWare are willing to admit that the ending was poorly written and inconsistent (which it was), and are willing to release a free DLC with an ending that actually delivers what fans were told they would be given, I will not give them a cent more of my money.

No ME3 DLC. No ToR subscription. No Dragon Age 3 purchase. No BioWare store purchases.

As you say, BioWare/EA appear to not be listening. By withholding my money, I can talk in the only way that will force them to listen.

[przemko877]

The Mass Effect 3 game was very good till the very end. I would really like to see Harbinger destroyed by something before it hits Shepard. I don't remember if conduit was meant only for humans, but if it is then: If You're with Kaidan and Vega, they'll go with You to the last confrontation. If Kaidan is dead, Anderson will go in his place. If You had alien teammates, they'll stay behind and Anderson will go with You. After You enter conduit You'll find that place is crawling with Cerberus troops (becouse Illusive Man tipped of the Reapers and he went to the CItadel before Shepard). They'll try to stop You and finally after all enemies are dead You'll reach panel and see Illusive Man. Dialogue can be the same with the exception that Shepard has stronger will to opose him becouse he wasn't shot by a Harbinger. After that there is no Child VI. After You switch buttons on console The Crucible is docked and boom red explosion killing of all Reapers only in Solar System (becouse the majority of Reaper forces was there and after they are defeated, allied forces can deal with the rest of them in other systems). Mass relays are not destroyed, Joker didn't try to outrun explosion. Shepard lives, your squadmate asks what next and there could be 3 endings: Paragon - You're with your love interest on a beach (only if You had one), Neutral - party on earth and Renegade - epic alcoholic party with krogans on Tuchanka (but only if You cured the genophage).

Star Wars had a happy ending. Why not Mass Effect 3?

[dfdsgrgre]

przemko877 wrote...

The Mass Effect 3 game was very good till the very end. I would really like to see Harbinger destroyed by something before it hits Shepard. I don't remember if conduit was meant only for humans, but if it is then: If You're with Kaidan and Vega, they'll go with You to the last confrontation. If Kaidan is dead, Anderson will go in his place. If You had alien teammates, they'll stay behind and Anderson will go with You. After You enter conduit You'll find that place is crawling with Cerberus troops (becouse Illusive Man tipped of the Reapers and he went to the CItadel before Shepard). They'll try to stop You and finally after all enemies are dead You'll reach panel and see Illusive Man. Dialogue can be the same with the exception that Shepard has stronger will to opose him becouse he wasn't shot by a Harbinger. After that there is no Child VI. After You switch buttons on console The Crucible is docked and boom red explosion killing of all Reapers only in Solar System (becouse the majority of Reaper forces was there and after they are defeated, allied forces can deal with the rest of them in other systems). Mass relays are not destroyed, Joker didn't try to outrun explosion. Shepard lives, your squadmate asks what next and there could be 3 endings: Paragon - You're with your love interest on a beach (only if You had one), Neutral - party on earth and Renegade - epic alcoholic party with krogans on Tuchanka (but only if You cured the genophage).

Star Wars had a happy ending. Why not Mass Effect 3?

Because Star wars (The original trillogy) was a good moive where as ME3 was "ART"

[przemko877]

@dfdsgrgre
Right I totally forgot about that. Then I guess adding some Dalis melting clokcs would do the trick. Shepard would then look like a character from "The Scream" after seeing space battle between Reapers and the Clocks.

[Archonsg]

przemko877 wrote...

@dfdsgrgre
Right I totally forgot about that. Then I guess adding some Dalis melting clokcs would do the trick. Shepard would then look like a character from "The Scream" after seeing space battle between Reapers and the Clocks.

To be fair, ME3, for the most part is art. Tuchanka's story and mission arc is a work of art. Taking into consideration choices from ME1 (Wrex), ME2 (Maelon's data and Mordin's loyalty, to ME3, (interaction with Eve, the Dalatress and possible betrayal) it was amazing to see everything come together right at the end. Same with Rannoch.

Two different but wonderful work of gaming art. No one has EVER done anything like this. Which only helped to set us all up for the end. "The Ending" which was to be Bioware's magnum opus, to blow us all away with all our cumulative choices, the path we took whether Renegade or Paragon, an ending tailored to reflect those choices, while we kicked Reaper ass.

Instead, we got to choose one of three suicide choices.

To anyone who says " But Shepard HAD TO DIE."
I say "BS! No one has to anything! It. Is. A. Fracking. Game."

Shepard should die, if the player opt to choose that route and in the same vein, Shepard should be able to kick reaper's ass AND live to retire with love interest, IF the player so chooses to play and achieve that route.
 

Modifié par Archonsg, 09 mai 2012 - 10:41 .

[przemko877]

@Archonsg
I totally agree with You. I was just saying that ending was a total as*pull in comparison to everything that happened up to that point.

Gainax had to change Evangelion ending two times becouse of fandom and it was really a great piece of art and Bioware can't do it at least once? Come on guys You're just lazy and don't want to admit it.

[Holger1405]

daveyeisley wrote...

You're seriously asking why this makes the ending bad?

Yes, I seriously asking, and you seriously don't answer.

daveyeisley wrote...
While that brings a whole load of questions to mind about the value judgements going on in your mind.... the only thing that matters is.... why do you consider it anything other than bad?

Do me a favor, skip the attitude. Are you old enough to replay to a different Opinion without pity insults?

daveyeisley wrote...
Were you expecting and satisfied with the final content of such a well-thought-out and internally consistent story relying on shoving dislogic down your throat along with a choice that is based on said dislogic, without any exposition on the full consequences of the choice, or the ability to question and/or reject the choice based on this flawed logic?

Or do you enjoy being spoonfed poorly thought out, inconsistent logic as a basis for a choice you cannot reject, or even question the ramifications of?

The logic of the Star Child is just that, his logic. You, as the Player, are not bound to accept that logic, nor is the logic of Star Child the base for the choices presented to you. At least two of them clearly contradicts Star Child's logic.

daveyeisley wrote...

You know what, Holger... nevermind... I think it is safe to say, your expectations were simply much lower than a large majority of fans who played the whole trilogy. The ending worked for you, and thats your opinion.

My expectations were pretty high, and Mass Effect 3 did satisfy them almost completely.
As I stated before, I have my own issues with the ending, but only with the delivery.
As for the "large majority of fans", there is no way to know, or to proof, if People like you, who completely reject the endings, are the majority, especially since the ending is not well executed.

daveyeisley wrote...
I vehemently disagree and have a lot of reasons why I wasnt satisfied.... thats my opinion.

And you are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine.

daveyeisley wrote...
I dont think you will ever be able to offer an explanation for your satisfaction that will make sense to me. Feel free to try, but I really doubt it. We simply went into this with very different expectations.

I doubt that also, so I will not try.

daveyeisley wrote...
I was very, very disappointed... and even if there had been a mechanism to call the Catalyst on his BS, it wouldnt have improved things much. There was still no good reason to tack on genocide and murder to the destruction of the reapers. There was no good reason why shepard absolutely must die in every other choice. There was no good reason the ending cinematics left so many questions unanswered, and failed to personalize the resolution based on past player choices.

Im happy for you that these things didn't bother you. I expected a lot more from the storytellers who wove this epic.

I agree to the lake of closure in the end cinematic and I am bothered by other thinks too, still I think there is noting that Bioware can't fix with the DLC.

[Jusseb]

The ending of ME3 got me thinking about the Matrix, only in reverse.

"Do you want the blue pill or the red pill?" Euhmm, well you pick one and then...

Well nothing, **** just ends.

[Archonsg]

Holger1405 wrote...
nd ematic and I am bothered by other thinks too, still I think there is noting that Bioware can't fix with the DLC.

I hope you are right.
At the very least they need to retcon some cinematics to reflect what they say and use as canon, or cone up with something believable / acceptable within the ME universe genre.

I will be honest that because the current ending and statements / position taken by Bioware has prejudiced me against any real hope of a "good" ending, however, I will try to keep an open mind in hope that the EC DLC will fill up holes and lessen the sting of seeing out of character behavior from Shepard and team mates.

Knowing that the current ending will not be changed though, makes it harder for me, because while I am fine with Shepard dying, I'd prefer he go out in a heroic sacrifice and staying true to his principles. Not give up and pick a suicide "let it all end" choice.
 

Modifié par Archonsg, 09 mai 2012 - 12:41 .

[3DandBeyond]

jayburn00 wrote...

Dubliner you are wrong. Enough complaints, and EA and Bioware will know that they screwed up big time. Constant complaints, they just might start thinking about doing something about it. Organized constant complaints, they might start thinking "This is not good, we need to resolve this issue or we will never live it down and it will hang like an albatross around our necks for the rest of our companies existence." Atleast, that is what they should be thinking. If not, well, there is always survival of the fittest.

This is exactly right.  They are a business and sold us something that also impacts their ability to sell us anything more.  It isn't like they sold us a rotten apple and it's done.  It affects the 2 other games we bought and any other content purchased now or in the possible future that is related to this game.  In short, they want to sell us DLC.  We might have bought it.  Most would have.  A large segment now will not.

So far, they have done nothing to address the issues people have.  They have stated they will address it as they see fit with the EC.  EC has not been released, but as they describe it will not fix many of the things that people think are wrong if indeed it only provides clarity.  Clarity cannot make a flawed, goofy ending better.

But, I guarantee one thing; if we all stopped and just moved on without ever having complained, or if we stop and just move on now, then we will deserve the mediocre (at best) EC we will likely get.  Without fans speaking up and continuing to speak up, the unfinished EC has no, zero, zilch chance of being what most want.  At least if we keep saying what we don't want and suggest things we'd like to see, there's a chance (slim maybe) that they are and will listen.  If you don't speak up, they have nothing to listen to.

[Jusseb]

Here's what i think will happen.

This whole ending discussion of ME3 is huge, probably one of the biggest complaints about a videogam.. correction, an experience and story in recent history.

I believe that the expectations about the Extended Cut are so high, that it only can fail. The expectations are to high because of all the discussion and attention.

There are also so many lose ends that i believe cannot be fixed with a few cinematics.

Modifié par Jusseb, 09 mai 2012 - 12:47 .

[dr888]

daveyeisley wrote...

Catalyst Logic -

1. If organic civilization is allowed to develop unchecked, they will create a synthetic intelligence that will wipe out all organic life permanently.

This is such a broad, generalized assumption that even a rudimentary VI would spot the flaw. Nevermind an advanced entity with untold millennia to process this premise.

Nothing anywhere could possibly prove that:

a) Organic civilization would always create synthetic intelligence.
Any synthetic intelligence would inevitably conclude that organic life must be eliminated.
c) Any synthetic intelligence would always surpass the capabilities of organic life and gain the ability to eliminate its creators.

These are absolutes. They canot be proven, and force the dismissal of other possible outcomes. Hence any conclusions based on them also fail to account for other outcomes.

2. The solution to preserving organic life is to harvest advanced civilizations before they can create a sufficiently advanced synthetic intelligence.

Really? This is the 'best' solution that the Catalyst could come up with?

To me both control and synthesis  sound as created   by a VI/synthetic -I mean something that cannot think creatively only processes gathered information-like Geth. IF my assumption if true than maybe  Reapers were built by organics who then released control of galaxy over to them , after programming them to "protect /preserve life", with Citadel as a Control station (pun intended),  but something went wrong along the way , and kept on countless cycles because they were too powerfull to be stopped and as a machines were just not able to find new solution-like the Geth before Legion gave them free will. Maybe creators are now a Harbinger. 
New  solution-I stronly believe it was Destruction -  was introduced only by Shepard.I do not think that Catalyst would have this option "by default". So both blue and green endings are "good" but only for Reapers/Calatyst.
"Destroy" is  the complete reverse to what Reapers are doing now (as they see it). I will stress again that red/blue choices we see are not absolute-only Shepard  sees them as good/evil. Remember how many choices along the way were "red" but were NOT  ACTUALLY evil (even first talk to TIM on Mars). I did not see a single red option when Sheprad agrees with TIM on controlling Reapers- only his attitude (aggressive/ calm) changes. Sheppards intention is clear along the way-his methods may vary (as we choose it) but Reaper destruction was never put to question. Even leaving Collector base was a mean to learn more about Reapers. I believe Shepard is true catalyst, or rather his willpower combined with Citadel become Catalyst.

[3DandBeyond]

Archonsg wrote...

przemko877 wrote...

@dfdsgrgre
Right I totally forgot about that. Then I guess adding some Dalis melting clokcs would do the trick. Shepard would then look like a character from "The Scream" after seeing space battle between Reapers and the Clocks.

To be fair, ME3, for the most part is art. Tuchanka's story and mission arc is a work of art. Taking into consideration choices from ME1 (Wrex), ME2 (Maelon's data and Mordin's loyalty, to ME3, (interaction with Eve, the Dalatress and possible betrayal) it was amazing to see everything come together right at the end. Same with Rannoch.

Two different but wonderful work of gaming art. No one has EVER done anything like this. Which only helped to set us all up for the end. "The Ending" which was to be Bioware's magnum opus, to blow us all away with all our cumulative choices, the path we took whether Renegade or Paragon, an ending tailored to reflect those choices, while we kicked Reaper ass.

Instead, we got to choose one of three suicide choices.

To anyone who says " But Shepard HAD TO DIE."
I say "BS! No one has to anything! It. Is. A. Fracking. Game."

Shepard should die, if the player opt to choose that route and in the same vein, Shepard should be able to kick reaper's ass AND live to retire with love interest, IF the player so chooses to play and achieve that route.
 

Well, the funny thing is there are a lot of people out there that "like" the ending that will tell you and me that it's just a game, but when you start to talk about the ending and say it makes no fracking sense, they will then start acting like it's meaning had some significance that was far beyond our meager abilities to understand.

It is a game, which is what you said and it isn't "just" a game.  It's a game that has been artfully done, artistic in so many ways in the stories that it told and captivated us with.  It's often very nuanced in the messages that it tries to deliver.  Consider all the things people had to overcome within themselves in order to work together.  Within the game, you are constantly solving the things that divide them, no matter how you choose to do this.  You are confronted with issues that would make other people just give up. 

Just look at things said and done within ME2, where you really are involved in shaping your teammate's attitudes.  I happened to save Ashley instead of Kaidan and on Horizon she tells the mechanic that Shepard is a god.  Well, no, but Shepard is always seen as more than others, everyone says so even when being sarcastic.

So, back to the idea of this being a game or not being a game and being some psychotic, hateful, depressing commentary on the futility of attempting to achieve and survive.  Well, if given the choice of where to spend my entertainment dollars, I choose to have a game that has a story that it tells well and that gives me some chance to feel good, to feel hope, and to win.  I don't think it's more artistic to impart doom and gloom as the only or main choice and chance.

The one main thing that the devs should have paid attention to when creating an ending was something they said themselves.  They knew people were going to be sad because this is the last of Shepard.  But, knowing that they did have some responsibility to the story and to the character and to the fans.  The statement about fans being sad was what they used to explain why people don't like the ending, which is not true.  But the fact that this ME3 is the last of Shepard means people were already prepared to be sad.  The ending isn't so much sad as it is appallingly bad.  It does make you wish for more of Shepard, but only as a way to try and wash the crap that is this ending out of your head and memory.  It isn't meaningful and deep, it's rather infantile and shallow.  It's an old theme.  It's a done theme.  It's an annoying theme.  It's a very anti-Shepard theme.

ME was always about the ability of the individual to learn and to overcome or to wallow in ignorance and just barrel through things.  But, mainly it was about how great communities of people came together despite significant reasons not to, and how they tried to overcome extreme adversity.  And it was about the one person that was tasked (by others and by her/himself) with doing the impossible.  The ending should reflect this, all of this, and not the will of some see-through god-like imp that is dictating the future and masking it in the appearance of choice.

Shepard should have that real chance, that real possibility to attain the thing that s/he worked so hard to give to others.  And the ending should return to being about the people in this galaxy doing the impossible, not about some other being's gift of ridiculous choice.  It's a game, after all and one that had a very simple direction that was fleshed out with meaning throughout.  The ending clouded a very honest, straightforward, gut level, downtrodden-rise-up, uplifting story. 

I would have been far happier if Harbinger and the reapers had been merely motivated by the need to regenerate by using organic material.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 09 mai 2012 - 01:14 .

[Archonsg]

@3dandbeyond
That and the fact that if we allow companies to keep exploiting shoddy business practices such as false advertising, we consumers will keep getting a raw deal.
The computer gaming industry has grown to rival that of Hollywood in entertainment, and earnings aren't something to be sneezed at. Just so, its we consumers who with our spending habbits chart the course of what and how these companies go out to make their profit.

Simply keeping quiet because it's "just a game" is as wrong as silently eating chocolate coated dung.