23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Malditor]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...

What if the EC shows more discussion between the two, more arguing and convincing before each of the decisions? Would that help you?

*edit* Sorry, I didn't touch on this, you say he IS evil then by association so would WE be in my scenerio. Thinking you are or aren't isn't relevant to whether you truly are. But no, we are not evil for killing insects, of course not. Protecting something worthwhile is never evil, at least not in my opinion, be it life, love, home, family, friends, etc.

Now you are just making things up to be argumentative.  I read what you write, please be respectful and do the same for me.  I never said killing something that is out to hurt you is evil.  I specifically said that there are bugs we kill to protect things.  I also said the bugs don't have true sentience, but that many are killed needlessly which ultimately may be detrimental to us.

I also said that nowhere within ME is there any hint that the reapers are sent to kill advanced organics in order to protect themselves.  In fact, this is a silly analogy because all the reapers have to do is stay away and no one would try to hurt them at all.

Please don't try and make up things you think I've said, but that I didn't.  And then explain to me just exactly how the reapers and the kid are just protecting themselves by killing people they don't have to.

I said he is evil because he wants to destroy what Shepard cares about-read your own words you just made my point.  Shepard would want to protect that stuff from not just the reapers but the kid as well.

I didn't say they were protecting themselves, so you aren't reading what I wrote. They are protecting the overall safety of organics. Even if it's only to protect they're cycle. It makes them just like farmers then. And some people do think farmers are evil for killing livestock. And actually, my point worked both ways.

[Jackal13th]

i have played mass effect 1 mass effect 2 and now mass effect 3 i would have liked to see Shepard  and Liara at the end together .like when  Liara gave Shepard a gift  like going out in space or what ever it was . ( Blue Babies ) in the seen .

[Jackal13th]

Malditor wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...

What if the EC shows more discussion between the two, more arguing and convincing before each of the decisions? Would that help you?

*edit* Sorry, I didn't touch on this, you say he IS evil then by association so would WE be in my scenerio. Thinking you are or aren't isn't relevant to whether you truly are. But no, we are not evil for killing insects, of course not. Protecting something worthwhile is never evil, at least not in my opinion, be it life, love, home, family, friends, etc.

Now you are just making things up to be argumentative.  I read what you write, please be respectful and do the same for me.  I never said killing something that is out to hurt you is evil.  I specifically said that there are bugs we kill to protect things.  I also said the bugs don't have true sentience, but that many are killed needlessly which ultimately may be detrimental to us.

I also said that nowhere within ME is there any hint that the reapers are sent to kill advanced organics in order to protect themselves.  In fact, this is a silly analogy because all the reapers have to do is stay away and no one would try to hurt them at all.

Please don't try and make up things you think I've said, but that I didn't.  And then explain to me just exactly how the reapers and the kid are just protecting themselves by killing people they don't have to.

I said he is evil because he wants to destroy what Shepard cares about-read your own words you just made my point.  Shepard would want to protect that stuff from not just the reapers but the kid as well.

I didn't say they were protecting themselves, so you aren't reading what I wrote. They are protecting the overall safety of organics. Even if it's only to protect they're cycle. It makes them just like farmers then. And some people do think farmers are evil for killing livestock. And actually, my point worked both ways.

In me1 the reaper was a vanguard  and was tring to open up the mass relay .at that time was the  Citadel witch was the Mass relay to bring in the reapers in from the dark space . 

Modifié par Jackal13th, 19 mai 2012 - 06:34 .

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...

I most certainly could accept someone I've never seen at the end of a movie, given sufficient explaination. Though I can understand the rejection of said figure if there is no explaination. You are very fixed in what you demand, inflexible. I can admire that, however being that way will almost certainly lead you to disappointment in this case. I'm sure you'd be very upset if they put in the option to defy the being and by doing so he all was lost, that it was the absolute wrong decision. You'd maybe even be more upset about it than what you have as options now.

Again you have not even read what I said and are making things up.  I specifically have said all along 800 pages of posts as have many other inflexible (to use your words of high praise) people that Shepard needs at the very least a rejection option.  We've all stated in even more visceral terms the desire to shoot the kid and move past him to fight the reapers.

The ending is done badly.  The insertion of the star kid, who is ambiguous at best was ridiculous.  I've never been fixed in my wishes, and have never demanded anything.  I've expressed what I'd like to see.  I don't care for your admiration because I know you mean it sarcastically.  You've said as much by continually twisting and mischaracterizing what I have said.  You don't know me nor do you apparently care to even be respectful enough to have an honest debate.  Good luck to you, may you continually get the diluted game quality you so desire.  The kind where you have to make up whole parts in order to make sense of what you've been given.  Those of us, the learned and the passionate and those less so alike, wish for far more, in quality and substance.  We just want the kind of ending the ME stories deserved-the kind that upholds the kind of care that was previously in them.  And I am inflexible about that.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 mai 2012 - 06:36 .

[3DandBeyond]

Jackal13th wrote...

In me1 the reaper was a vanguard  and was tring to open up the mass relay .at that time was the  Citadel witch was the Mass relay to bring in the reapers in from the dark space . 

Yes and one of the first things the reapers supposedly would do when they infested a galaxy was to shut down the relays to strand the races.  But that doesn't happen.  There's a lot that gets retconned in the games.

[Jackal13th]

just on the hi point i play mass effect for a reason ( i like it ) have make wright choise  in the game to make it  right ( eather Blue or red ) some times i made the wrong choice . had to put it in reverse go back and fix it . lol but that is just me .

Modifié par Jackal13th, 19 mai 2012 - 06:45 .

[3DandBeyond]

Jackal13th wrote...

just on the hi point i play mass effect for a reason ( i like it ) have to shat in the game right ( eather Blue or red ) some times i made the wrong choice . had to put it in reverse go back and fix it . lol but that is just me .

Well I think it is a main point like what you said earlier that we make a choice and then, boom it's over.  You just sit there and wonder what happened.  So for me, it was thinking maybe I made the wrong choice, but then they aren't terribly different.  Supposedly they mean different things, but we don't need to see it.  The best those that want some sort of victory can get is an ash laden chest with dog tags that gasps once.  That is awesome.  Wow.  I think I'll throw a victory party now.  Ugh.

[Jackal13th]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Jackal13th wrote...

In me1 the reaper was a vanguard  and was tring to open up the mass relay .at that time was the  Citadel witch was the Mass relay to bring in the reapers in from the dark space . 

Yes and one of the first things the reapers supposedly would do when they infested a galaxy was to shut down the relays to strand the races.  But that doesn't happen.  There's a lot that gets retconned in the games.

yes that was a tough one battlen the geth .  fun

[Jackal13th]

i played me1 not knowing that the citadel was a mass relay . lol

[Athlonix]

Bioware if i'm to accept your current ending you need to add full closure on the outcome.

First, knowing whether  you live or die would be good. IF you do die, I believe closure of your Funeral should be shown in cinematic with your team in it. If you survive I definitely think Shepard deserve retirement like him and Garrus talked about, obviously with your LI too.

Second, your ground team appear dead, in my case my Love Interest. are they? You've always said the characters were the story, and the plot was almost secondary... I'd like to know whether my battle ensured there future. whether I finally live out my days with my LI or I die in battle, if I do again I don't want a fade to black I want to see a cinematic with the ground team, anderson gathered around me with my LI heart broken.


Thirdly what the hell happened to earth and the rest of the galaxy, from what I understand the Mass Relays are gone, so what's the deal, if this is a the dark ages, and we truly have destroyed them i wanna know how the hell everyone rebuilds there future.

Sidenote I really wanna know where the hell the Normandy was off to, currently thats a real WTF.
One reason this is such a wtf is the crew is on Earth, then magically on the Normandy, please explain yourselves.



The bottom line Bioware is your current ending isn't making any sense, and even a dialogue from Admiral Hackett say that there was no way to beat the reapers, or that Cmdr Shepard gave his life to save the galaxy would have helped (I expect more than two sentenaces mind)


If you really want to save yourselves from a massive backlash in current games, and future sales I suggest your EC turns into a completely new ending, and that ending has to have WIN OR LOOSE no three choice craziness. the two choice will just have reference to your alignment, nothing more.

The game right up to Harbinger was fine by me, the Romances and Death truly got to my core, and I came away feeling genuine emotion towards the characters, yet the current ending doesn't show anything of the crew which i care about, nor the galaxy i've been fighting for.

Make it a simple WIN OR LOOSE and focus on the characters, you should have enough room to put the new universe in the background if your short on budget.

Modifié par Athlonix, 19 mai 2012 - 06:54 .

[Jackal13th]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Jackal13th wrote...

just on the hi point i play mass effect for a reason ( i like it ) have to shat in the game right ( eather Blue or red ) some times i made the wrong choice . had to put it in reverse go back and fix it . lol but that is just me .

Well I think it is a main point like what you said earlier that we make a choice and then, boom it's over.  You just sit there and wonder what happened.  So for me, it was thinking maybe I made the wrong choice, but then they aren't terribly different.  Supposedly they mean different things, but we don't need to see it.  The best those that want some sort of victory can get is an ash laden chest with dog tags that gasps once.  That is awesome.  Wow.  I think I'll throw a victory party now.  Ugh.

yes that happened to me in me1 the last fight i got killed time and time tring to win lol after about the 5 or 6th time i got to talk him into shoting his slelf . i didnt see that one comming 

Modifié par Jackal13th, 19 mai 2012 - 06:55 .

[Malditor]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Malditor wrote...

I most certainly could accept someone I've never seen at the end of a movie, given sufficient explaination. Though I can understand the rejection of said figure if there is no explaination. You are very fixed in what you demand, inflexible. I can admire that, however being that way will almost certainly lead you to disappointment in this case. I'm sure you'd be very upset if they put in the option to defy the being and by doing so he all was lost, that it was the absolute wrong decision. You'd maybe even be more upset about it than what you have as options now.

Again you have not even read what I said and are making things up.  I specifically have said all along 800 pages of posts as have many other inflexible (to use your words of high praise) people that Shepard needs at the very least a rejection option.  We've all stated in even more visceral terms the desire to shoot the kid and move past him to fight the reapers.

The ending is done badly.  The insertion of the star kid, who is ambiguous at best was ridiculous.  I've never been fixed in my wishes, and have never demanded anything.  I've expressed what I'd like to see.  I don't care for your admiration because I know you mean it sarcastically.  You've said as much by continually twisting and mischaracterizing what I have said.  You don't know me nor do you apparently care to even be respectful enough to have an honest debate.  Good luck to you, may you continually get the diluted game quality you so desire.  The kind where you have to make up whole parts in order to make sense of what you've been given.  Those of us, the learned and the passionate and those less so alike, wish for far more, in quality and substance.  We just want the kind of ending the ME stories deserved-the kind that upholds the kind of care that was previously in them.  And I am inflexible about that.

You misunderstand, I wasn't being sarcastic in the least. It just appears that way because you've let yourself get emotionally involved in this discussion.
You are right about one thing, there is no point in this debate. Your inflexibility is that you refuse to accept anything but an added option for the ending. Which is what is going to lead you to disappointment.
You even said it yourself, you wish to have an ending where you blast away at the being and try to go on fighting the reapers. But I say that if they made that ending and it were the wrong choice causing all to be lost and everyone to die then you'd be even more upset than you currently are. Perhaps I'm wrong and you'd accept that though, because, like you said, I don't really know you well enough to acertain that.

[Jackal13th]

me3 with the Quarian and the Geth i never knew that a peace would work i thought it would be like steeping in front of 2 bulls charging at each other .lol

[akenn312]

Malditor wrote...

What if the EC shows more discussion between the two, more arguing and convincing before each of the decisions? Would that help you?

I think that may pacify some, but honestly I think the main issue could also be that the Catalyst is the creator of the Reapers and is really the one ending the threat. Through all of these games there has not been one moment where the Reapers were made to be anti-heroes until the last ten minutes. There has not been one part of this trilogy where the Reapers could be hinted to be the actual saviors of the universe rather than Sheapard. There was foreshadowing that people within Cerberus could be anti-heroes and the Geth could be anti-heroes but never the Reapers.

I think deep down what bothered me with the choices is that the leader of the enemy is magnanimously giving us choices that if you look close enough to their meaning are what the Reapers are trying to do in the first place. Lets not haggle over specifics of each Space Magic choice, but look at the main concept of each one. All three give the Reapers exactly what they want and has the organics compromising to the Reapers way of thinking not the other way around. Synthesis is making organics and synthetics merge without organics having any say in it. Just because the player chooses it does not mean this is okay. Shepard may be the symbol of humanity & the Alliance or even peace and galactic union but he is not the Galaxy's representative on changing everyones DNA or their way of life. 

Since Mass Effect the Reapers and Collectors have been trying to achieve this main goal, if we don't bog this concept down with arguments like this "They were dominating the organics with Indoctrination and harvesting rather than merging." you can see how this unnatural merge is basically what the organics were fighting against. The organics wanted to stay organics even if they were using cybernetics they wanted the free will to choose cybernetics or stay organics. So where is the compromise in this choice? It's still the organics giving in and allowing themselves to merge across the board with machines. percentage of the merge does't matter it' still making me as a human merge with a Geth without my free will to do so or my knowledge even if I don't wish to have sythetic parts

Control, The Reapers still need someone to control them to keep existing and keep them on their path of controlling order in the galaxy. So all Shepard does is give them this very thing. Again this is a compromise to what the Reapers want rather than what the organics wanted. The galaxy wanted the Reapers gone for good. The Reapers just get a new leader.

Destroy. Yes this does end the Reaper threat, but also all synthetic life. So rather than allowing synthetic life and organics to have a chance to exist without the Reaper threat this again succumbs to the Reapers philosophy that there will always be chaos, this again has organics doing something the Reapers want not what they want. They want to live in peace with synthetics the Reapers won't allow that and force organics to destroy them. 

My problem with this is the true evil in the galaxy is telling me what to do. I've proved synthetics and organics can live in peace, but still the Reapers get what they want in the long run. 

Also it bothers me that Walters and Hudson wanted this ending to be 'Matrix like" if that rumor is true. The Matrix ending was not considered a good ending and was panned almost universally in the Sci-fi movie genre. Why pick that course of action and think people won't be upset again? 

I say if you are going to bring in a Deus ex machina to solve this issue make it one that has no relation to either side and points to something bigger in the scheme of the universe or conflict. If your going to force me to accept Space Magic make it at least a good Space magic concept. But again hopefully they have a good plan to get at least some of us back on board again.

Modifié par akenn312, 19 mai 2012 - 07:05 .

[Malditor]

akenn312
I think there are reasons behind them refusing to change the ending choices that we aren't aware of. I do agree it could/should have been done in a more comprehensive fashion as most people won't make their own connections/conclusions on what it all means.
It seems society as a whole is rejecting ambiguous endings all together. This is evidenced by movies being made without the "happily ever after" endings that don't really tie anything together. It seems people prefer even to see an end where the evil couldn't be defeated as opposed to some crazy ending where the hero gets the superhuman ability to kill it off when whole groups of cops/fighters were unable. If nothing else, only because it give continuity to the story.

[Jackal13th]

Malditor wrote...

akenn312
I think there are reasons behind them refusing to change the ending choices that we aren't aware of. I do agree it could/should have been done in a more comprehensive fashion as most people won't make their own connections/conclusions on what it all means.
It seems society as a whole is rejecting ambiguous endings all together. This is evidenced by movies being made without the "happily ever after" endings that don't really tie anything together. It seems people prefer even to see an end where the evil couldn't be defeated as opposed to some crazy ending where the hero gets the superhuman ability to kill it off when whole groups of cops/fighters were unable. If nothing else, only because it give continuity to the story.

well i never thought of it that way
i would like to see shepard and the team giveing there life to save all . still i would like to see Liara ans shepard sitting on a beach somewhere watching the sun go down .

Modifié par Jackal13th, 19 mai 2012 - 07:26 .

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...

You misunderstand, I wasn't being sarcastic in the least. It just appears that way because you've let yourself get emotionally involved in this discussion.
You are right about one thing, there is no point in this debate. Your inflexibility is that you refuse to accept anything but an added option for the ending. Which is what is going to lead you to disappointment.
You even said it yourself, you wish to have an ending where you blast away at the being and try to go on fighting the reapers. But I say that if they made that ending and it were the wrong choice causing all to be lost and everyone to die then you'd be even more upset than you currently are. Perhaps I'm wrong and you'd accept that though, because, like you said, I don't really know you well enough to acertain that.

Sorry, you have no idea what you are talking about here.  To a person everyone here that has spoken up about the endings has said they want the ending to reflect their choices all along the games they have played.

We have wished for endings that if we totally screwed up would reflect our screw ups.  We've also wished that if we did well that an ending that reflected that would ensue.

What the devs did is insert artificial choices that wedge all players into the same types of endings-the only thing is there is some minor variance of the degree to what is basically not a satisfying outcome.  And if someone totally screwed up they may get less than 3 choices, as if the 3 are better than 1.

I did not even say that just being able to blast away at stuff would be all that satisfying.  I said that is a wish that many have expressed here, wanting to defy the choices the idiot kid gives one.

My real desire would be no choices-they exist for no other reason than to limit the outcomes.  It was needed in ME1 and ME2 in order to funnel people into the next game, but the end game in a series can have more variance-it does not need to lead to anything else (except a true ending DLC, that may have been initially intended). 

My desire is no choices, but endings that reflect your decisions made in ME1,2,3 up till the end point and then some other tangential things that occur based upon what you do in the final part of the game.

I've said I wish the game had allowed your war assets to matter-the more you accrued, the better the odds of defeating (and achieving a victory) the reapers.  Fewer assets could mean less of a clear cut victory or even defeat.  I've said that I wish the game allowed for some unspoken loyalty consequences (better friends or happier friends might have more chance to survive).  But maybe someone that you didn't help so much or treated poorly might die, just as in ME2.  But I don't mean loyalty missions that are specifically for loyalty.

I've said I wish equally for the game to have meant these things could happen-Shepard probably dies, possibly dies, possibly lives, and probably lives, but that neither of these equal a certain reaper defeated victory.  As I saw it Shepard could live only to see his/her friends and LI die and the reapers win-then Shepard too dies.  Or Shepard could die and everyone else live and the reapers are defeated-Shepard is honored posthumously.  Or there's just all out defeat and all out victory.  But all of this I wanted to be based upon what Shepard did throughout the game AND at the end. 

There's no way the star kid can take into account what was done throughout the game and it doesn't even matter what Shepard does on the Citadel.  Shepard still only gets the choices the kid gives him/her-I get the same 3 everyone else does.  Shooting the kid in the head only partly would make me feel better and I have never uttered those words "shooting the kid in the head" in any positive light before this game.

I've never been inflexible except in the stance that the ending is awful, irrational, unacceptable, childish, moronic, cookie cutter, non-contextual, unfathomable, and utterly ridiculous.  Far more educated minds than mine have said far worse about it. 

I have loved these games and it took the devs 5 minutes out of at least 100 hours to cause me some hatred towards them.  I demand nothing, expect nothing, wish for a lot.

There's more than just one item or one bit of minutiae that's wrong with the ending.  What it achieves is what no game should-it takes the player on a wild ride of imagination, thought, and emotional connection like no other before it and then it drops the player off a cliff and the devs have said we just aren't smart enough to "get" it.  Yet they do little and show us nothing to elucidate us.  Instead because we are so stupid we need clarity.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 mai 2012 - 07:35 .

[Richard 060]

Richard 060 wrote...

Re-posting from another thread, because I feel it's relevant:



'Clarity' would be a good start with the Extended Cut - there's a lot of stuff in the ending that isn't very well-explained. Considering that there's been genuine surprise from BioWare over things like 'the fleet are stranded at Earth without sufficient supplies', 'the Mass Relays are destroyed', 'all the NPCs we know on the Citadel are dead', etc., the implication is that the outcome of the ending should have been a lot clearer then it ended up being. That's a failure in execution, so adding extra material to 'fill in the blanks' and 'connect the dots' more adequately is definately a positive step. 

And a greater sense of 'closure' wouldn't hurt, either - showing how the final outcome affects the galaxy at large and the characters of the story in particular. After all, what's the point in making a choice in a game when the specific effect of that choice is never realised on-screen? Remember, this isn't a movie or a book - the interactive element is an integral part, and should count for something. Never mind "when you press a button, something awesome has to happen. Button - awesome." - how about "when you press a button, something happens. When you press a different button, something different happens"?


However, both of those are improvements to the execution of the ending. Neither deals with (or even acknowledges) the intrinsic problem - as it stands currently, the ending either undermines or outright contradicts crucial plot elements and story arcs from all three games.


I'll probably post a 'laundry list' of some of the less obvious ones and add it to this thead at some point, when I can drum up the constitutional fortitude to do so (it's an arduous task, and no mistake...). Just for the record, I'm not talking about things that aren't clear - I'm talking about cases where something the Catalyst says directly conflicts with an important plot point from earlier in the trilogy.


[EDIT] Oh, alright - here are just a few examples of what I'm talking about... [/EDIT]

And they do exist, which leads to the crucial question: which version is right? Do we now have to ignore the validity of what Sovereign says in ME1, because it doesn't mesh with what the Catalyst tells us in the final scenes? Or does the original version carry the greater weight, because it's what lays the foundation for the entire story and indeed setting of the Mass Effect universe?


I think most people would agree that it's a 'cardinal sin' of any storyteller to negate/invalidate crucial elements of their story, simply for the sake of a contrived plot twist later on. Yet this has yet to even be acknowledged by the team at BioWare, which is troubling - you'd think that a company that prides and markets itself on the strength of 'story-based games' would be able to tell when they'd made an elementary mistake, especially once people had pointed it out to them. But there's been nothing, other than the implication that any such issues are simply a lack of understanding on the part of the audience.


To conclude: the very effort of the Extended Cut is an implied admission that the ending as-is doesn't work, and could be improved. If it were 'fine', it wouldn't need any additional content. The concern is that it ends up being a waste of time and money, if the fundamental flaws in the storytelling aren't fixed. Again, BioWare has said repeatedly that they're "not changing the ending".

But if this also extends to 'not correcting contradictions' and 'ironing out continuity issues', then it means the creative team can't tell that they've made what most writers worth their salt would consider 'rookie mistakes'.

And if a company selling itself on the quality of it's games' stories and storytelling can't tell the difference between 'good' and 'bad' writing, that's a damning statement about the current state of BioWare.

Modifié par Richard 060, 19 mai 2012 - 07:36 .

[Noelemahc]

. It seems people prefer even to see an end where the evil couldn't be defeated as opposed to some crazy ending where the hero gets the superhuman ability to kill it off when whole groups of cops/fighters were unable. If nothing else, only because it give continuity to the story.

Even discounting the fact that they PROMISED us a complete and unambiguous ending originally; the point here is precisely that ambiguity played against BioWare in this case. The leap of logic to "extinction event no matter what we do because relays blew up" wasn't that difficult to make, why it surprised the BioWare people is beyond my understanding, frankly.

I think there are reasons behind them refusing to change the ending choices that we aren't aware of.

Sequels seem to be the most popular idea, AFAIK.

We have wished for endings that if we totally screwed up would reflect our screw ups. We've also wished that if we did well that an ending that reflected that would ensue.

There was this dude, ran a total-failure Shepard playthrough from ME1 to ME3. His EMS was 830-ish by the ending. Sure, he only got the Destroy Bad final cutscene... but there was no impact on Priority: Earth AT ALL, discounting the dead characters being missing from the FOB. No gameplay impact, no nothing. The most major difference besides character deaths? "25% of Hammer made it through the blockade" instead of the 50% you hear in the best possible outcome. NOTHING ELSE CHANGED.

Modifié par Noelemahc, 19 mai 2012 - 07:38 .

[3DandBeyond]

@ Richard 060,

Excellent post. I can forgive others that see the pretty colors and go, "yippee, explosions" and then care little about the consequences, but then those are not the people that ME was ever directed toward. The games were meant for those that wanted context, choice, and meaning and that wanted their decisions with other characters to matter. Hell, they were meant for people that thought the characters mattered. Why else make me cry to lose Mordin or laugh when he sang?

ME was about nuance, emotion, and thought. It was also about a cohesive narrative thread that tied everything together. The thread was ripped out at the end and clarity and cutscenes can't put this back together. The inclusion of the elements that made ME great could, but they have said they aren't doing that. The fatal mistake is that they either will not or cannot see where they went wrong. I have a hard time believing that, but so far that's what they've said.

[Malditor]

Perhaps you don't understand what I mean about inflexible about wanting another option for the ending. By wanting anything other than what was already there for an ending you want another option, even if that option is no options at all.
The problem with any ending they could have come up with is that it would be impossible for them to make it fit everyone's choices along the way. They would have to categorize them, full paragon/renegade and a mix of both. People would still say those endings didn't fit how they played, and they would be right. I don't dispute that the ending could have been done another/better way. But you seem to insist that if people like it then they are accepting a substandard game. That's not a fair assessment, because the quality of the game is subjective.

Probably, in the end, the rift is there are those of us that played the game as a game. And while we really liked the depth and breadth of the game, we didn't become emotionally envolved in it. Therefore when it ended how it did we didn't have anything to get upset about really.

[Malditor]

Noelemahc wrote...

. It seems people prefer even to see an end where the evil couldn't be defeated as opposed to some crazy ending where the hero gets the superhuman ability to kill it off when whole groups of cops/fighters were unable. If nothing else, only because it give continuity to the story.

Even discounting the fact that they PROMISED us a complete and unambiguous ending originally; the point here is precisely that ambiguity played against BioWare in this case. The leap of logic to "extinction event no matter what we do because relays blew up" wasn't that difficult to make, why it surprised the BioWare people is beyond my understanding, frankly.

I think there are reasons behind them refusing to change the ending choices that we aren't aware of.

Sequels seem to be the most popular idea, AFAIK.

Not everyone agrees that it's an extinction event regardless of choice. The relays blew up makes it so everyone dies? I don't see that.
Sequel or spin off is what I figure to be honest, perhaps already in production which prevents any major change to the ending.

Modifié par Malditor, 19 mai 2012 - 07:51 .

[Jackal13th]

Chris Priestly wrote...

We appreciate everyone’s feedback about Mass Effect 3 and want you to know that we are listening. Active discussions about the ending are more than welcome here, and the team will be reviewing it for feedback and responding when we can. Please note, we want to give people time to experience the game so while we can’t get into specifics right now, we will be able to address some of your questions once more people have had time to complete the game. In the meantime, we’d like to ask that you keep the non-spoiler areas of our forums and our social media channels spoiler free.
 
We understand there is a lot of debate on the Mass Effect 3 ending and we will be more than happy to engage in healthy discussions once more people get to experience the game. We are listening to all of your feedback.

In the meantime, let's give appreciation to Commander Shepard. Whether you loved the ME3 ending or didn't or you just have a lot of questions, he/she has given many of us some of the best adventures we have had while playing games. What was your favorite moment?

Shepard getting reenlisted  the quarens and geth side by side in the war the the Krogans get cured genophage

the ai gets a body    Illusive man gets put down .liara gets shepard a gift  gets into her mind shows up in space light at the end giveing each other a kiss and hug .

[3DandBeyond]

Malditor wrote...

Perhaps you don't understand what I mean about inflexible about wanting another option for the ending. By wanting anything other than what was already there for an ending you want another option, even if that option is no options at all.
The problem with any ending they could have come up with is that it would be impossible for them to make it fit everyone's choices along the way. They would have to categorize them, full paragon/renegade and a mix of both. People would still say those endings didn't fit how they played, and they would be right. I don't dispute that the ending could have been done another/better way. But you seem to insist that if people like it then they are accepting a substandard game. That's not a fair assessment, because the quality of the game is subjective.

Probably, in the end, the rift is there are those of us that played the game as a game. And while we really liked the depth and breadth of the game, we didn't become emotionally envolved in it. Therefore when it ended how it did we didn't have anything to get upset about really.

The fact that you didn't get that involved emotionally is part of the point here.  Stories do involve you emotionally.  They are supposed to.  It explains why you don't care about the kid being there instead of Harbinger.  You are exactly not the kind of person such games are geared to-they want players to be emotionally invested on some level.  That doesn't mean you should love everyone or everything, but that you care for bad or good about things.  Even action movies intend for you to be emotionally involved and you are not the main character making choices.

And it's not impossible to create a variance for the endings that does not seem contrived.  There are not a lot of complaints about ME2's ending (there may be some) and it was a set ending with one main choice.  The major impact the player had on it was as to who might die and what happened to the base.

ME3 shouldn't have an open ending, but could have had more variety.  I don't say an endless one, but at the very least some different cutscenes (though not a real fix).

I will state it simply you can create many variables that lead to some cutscenes that would work and still provide enough variety.

Reapers destroyed totally
Reapers not destroyed

And shades of gray in between

Friends survive
Friends die

And shades of gray in between

Love Interest survives
Love Interest dies

Shepard survives
Shepard dies

The galaxy/Earth survives
The galaxy/Earth destroyed

And some shades in between

War assets intact
War assets decimated

Shades of gray in between

In my opinion you can rotate these as choices are made and one happening doesn't mean another can't or won't.
For instance the galaxy could be saved, but the fleets/assets totally destroyed.  Earth destroyed/reapers destroyed.  Shepard survives long enough to see galaxy destroyed and reapers win.

And what I've also said is that they did run out of time, but could have made and awesome epic ME3 in 2 parts-the race to build up forces and then the race to save the galaxy.

I know this won't happen and all, but I am just saying that it could be done.  It just needed more time and a bigger game. I would have gladly paid for that.

[Noelemahc]

The relays blew up makes it so everyone dies? I don't see that.

You didn't play Arrival, did you? It seemed that its purpose was twofold: to establish Harbinger as the Ultimate Big Bad of the trilogy (hah, fat chance) and to show to us what exactly happens when a relay explodes. Okay, also why Shepard is on Earth in ME3's beginning, except that if you didn't play Arrival, you're on Earth in ME3's beginning anyway. Good job, BioWare!

Sequel or spin off is what I figure to be honest, perhaps already in production which prevents any major change to the ending.

Spinoff more likely at this point, IMHO.

Probably, in the end, the rift is there are those of us that played the game as a game. And while we really liked the depth and breadth of the game, we didn't become emotionally envolved in it. Therefore when it ended how it did we didn't have anything to get upset about really.

While I accept the existance of your viewpoint and its validity, it also contains an interesting Catch 22.

If you play it as a game, it's not art, and therefore the ending can be changed, but those who play it as a game generally don't care if the ending is changed or not.

If you play it as a story, it IS art, so the ending cannot be changed (by BioWare's logic, at least), but those who play it as a story generally want the ending to be changed or replaced.

Oops.

Also, what he ^ said, the fact that you didn't get emotionaly invested is the root here. You don't care what happens to the galaxy? Fine. To the characters? Blasphemy, BioWare repeatedly stated that the whole shebang is about the characters and their lives and their stories. Which they then proceeded to ignore and abandon with bizarre enthusiasm once you enter the No Man's Land.

You know, like the fact that every one of your crew members would've opted for a different colour choice? That Javik will most likely kill himself and everyone he can reach if you used Synthesis? That Kaidan, Liara and Tali would really mind if Shepard was alive, but couldn't reach them, ever? {Why them? The game goes out of its way to establish that no matter who you actually romance, these three are in love with you ANYWAY, regardless of your gender}

Modifié par Noelemahc, 19 mai 2012 - 08:08 .