Jaime9...
Please don't misunderstand, I'm not against voicing objection towards the endings, and if content is released that provides a further epilogue ala DA: Awakening, I'm down with that. I also appreciate that some people are genuinely willing to be civil and discuss things, both with Bioware and the rest of the fan community.
Unfortunately the rhetoric behind so much of this is embarressing, at least to me. Terms like; The Movement, holding the line and posts that read like someone is trying to write Sun Tzu's: The Art of Sticking it to Bioware just kill any interest I have in supporting it.
I do have some individual questions, if you want to answer:
What did you specifically dislike about the ending? For me it was that the final moments were presented by a character's likeness I had no attachment to. The child was un-necessary appeal to emotion that ended up dictating your Shepard's perspective on things; very un-Mass Effect. For me, having dead characters appear in the deams, and your LI or other significant character be the avatar of this moment would have had a great deal more resonance, and it would be an experience that related to your character specifically. I also think there are just basic continuity problems with Joker on the Normandy.
Is it a remake, or an extension of the ending that is being requested by the majority fans? For me, an epilogue from Hackett, stories about the first steps in rebuilding, or insights into the squadmates would be enough for me.
How many of these highlighted plotholes are actually genuinely that, as opposed to questions that fans are simply disinclined to discuss? I see mention of exploding relays = Arrival explosion, mass starvation, isolation, no hope of rebuilding etc. These are used as weight behind the argument for change, but I personally think most of these examples don't hold up under scrutiny. There is very little discussion going on about them though, because those who want to express their dislike of the endings, seem invested in making the outcome of the game seem as grim as possible.
If this change were to be achieved, what do you expect the attitude of those involved to be? I'd like to think that if a positive change is affected, it will be seen as an example of fan/devloper collaboration. As it is, though, from what I've read I'm half-expecting banners to appear, saying: 'We fought the enemy. We Endured. We made a difference.' That kind of stuff is just 
to me.
Anyway, thanks for responding, Jamie9.
Fair enough
What did you specifically dislike about the ending?: I think you covered the most of bigger points. Joker running away with the crewmates, and the starchild being introduced out of nowhere and Shepard not questioning his obviously flawed logic. There's also the whole relay thing but i'll address that later. I think one of the biggest issues is how despite what had been claimed earlier, there was no meaningful way your choices throughout the series affected the ending, and that we only got a single 2 minute ending with a color of your choice when we were told it was varied. Bioware's statements, as I'm sure you've seen, seem to be vague enough to not technically be lies, but I think you can agree that at best they seem to be intentionally misleading you.
Is it a remake, or an extension of the ending that is being requested by the majority fans?: This isn't something I can very well say with any certainty. For me, it'd need to be a partial remake of the ending. Having a sort of DA:O ending tacked on would be nice, but still leaves every plot hole in the ending as is. For me, they'd have to at least rework the starchild ending so it makes sense, not just add an epilogue as is.
How many of these highlighted plotholes are actually genuinely that,
as opposed to questions that fans are simply disinclined to discuss? The whole supernova thing wouldn't of bothered me if I had actually been told in-game that the explosion didn't cause the reaction with the relay established lore said it did. What annoys me more about this is that having to make anyone assume or infer that you've made a change to canon, especially in the last couple minutes, is in my opinion just sloppy writing.
Now I'm going to go on a bit of a rant here so forgive me. You say that most of our examples here don't hold up to scrutiny, but I've yet to here any reasonable assumption about how the destruction of the mass relays won't create a very bleak future. Again, I'm not attacking you here I'm just fleshing out my argument. I've thought about it a lot (more than I should) and I still can't see any way it works out well. No one knew that the mass relays, the galactic shipping lanes, were going to be destroyed until shepard did it, they had no time to prepare countermeasures. With refugees pouring in from the reaper wars you can assume that most planets are already pushed to the breaking point like the citadel, and their resources are already strained. Now let's assume that all imports cease suddenly without explanation, the mass relays are gone, and there is no word about what happened because everyone who knows something is still stuck at earth. Now combine an overpopulation of already scared and displaced people with the sudden realization that they are stuck in the system coupled with the realization that supplies are/will be running short. Not even getting into the racial tensions, you can at the very least expect that there'll be riots when food starts to run out if not full blown civil war. That's just for the big colonies as well, if you are out on one of the many research centers/mining stations on hostile planets and aren't within spitting distance of a colony/garden world you're even worse off. I've also heard that "Well they have normal FTL, it's just a lot slower", that's true but even assuming they don't starve there's one other thing they'd need, fuel. Think about how much gas it took from you tank to reach systems that were very close to a mass relay, ship fuel reserves are still based around the Mass Relays existing and are designed around using the relays to cover big distances and letting the fuel tank handle the negligible ones. With the relays gone, to reach any part of the galaxy you can't cover in one tank (i.e. almost all of it) you'd need an unbroken fuel depot chain from your starting point to your destination or you'll be dead in the water trying to reach your destination. We already had a bunch of fuel depots destroyed as seen in ME3, and there are still large swathes unexplored that you can bet don't have them either, therefore any system that isn't reachable by the nearest fuel depot is essentially cut off. You
could potentially build those fuel lines, but it'd be hard to start up such a monumental project with the aforementioned civil unrest, and even then it'd take decades at the least, once again assuming you have the supplies to last that long. I'd also just like to point out that the fleet at earth came for an all or nothing battle, not a seige so you can bet they didn't pack extra supplies/fuel to begin with. Ok sorry about that, I'll stop my rant now.
If this change were to be achieved, what do you expect the attitude of those involved to be? Assuming we do win yes they'll probably be a lot of pats on the back. One of the things I keep see people posting is that they were relieved to look on the internet and find so many other people dissatisfied with the ending, the sort of camaraderie you see expressed by many people is a reflection of likeminded people. I think it's clear at this point, had we not raised a fuss BW would of just let the ending stand (they still might), so as a group we would have achieved something. I don't think we're going to go around bragging "Oh yeah we saved Mass Effect all by ourselves, GO TEAM", but we could be proud because we influenced a change, nothing more, nothing less.
Hope that gave you some insight into what I think about this situation, though the feelings of the group may vary.
Modifié par Hydralysk, 19 mars 2012 - 04:07 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Guest_Paulomedi_*
Retour en haut
