228 réponses à ce sujet

[Parmida]

The first time I played DA:O I was choking from the dose of excitement It had .
guess those days are over...

[Cloaking_Thane]

So I literally just finished....I accidentally took the "right" path and didn't know I could backtrack and also didn't know which one was which.........totally did not mean to make that decision, and the lack of guidance on that was a shame.

The endings didnt bother me too much, did anyone wait until the very end of the credits? I'msure you did but there was a nice little bit there

[accessd]

Good read. I'm sure BioWare still has employees with a similar view as the one quoted. The problem is that ignorant and clueless project leaders don't listen to them. This is often the case in more than software companies. The bigger the company - the more of those idiots you find.

[Ross42899]

Completely agree to the opening topic. Great post.

[Sidney]

I'm not sure I'd hold up DAO as having "choices that mattered". The one thing ME3 did was have different endings. DAO didn't. Well sort of.

There is a main story: stop reapers/kill arch demon in each.
There are a lot of secondary stories: Quarian/Geth, Salarian/Turian/Krogan, Orzammar, Elves/Werewolves in each.

In DAO there is one end state for every player for the main story (the AD is dead) nothing else you do changes that part of the story - to put it in whiny simpering BSN speak "Your choices didn't matter". In ME3 there are different end states for the main quest (they all suck IMHO but they are different). In both games there are different ends states by player for the secondary quests. ME3 actually has more "options" in how your game vs my game could end. That's a good thing, the execution was bad but they theory was right.

[goatman42]

Sidney wrote...

I'm not sure I'd hold up DAO as having "choices that mattered". The one thing ME3 did was have different endings. DAO didn't. Well sort of.

There is a main story: stop reapers/kill arch demon in each.
There are a lot of secondary stories: Quarian/Geth, Salarian/Turian/Krogan, Orzammar, Elves/Werewolves in each.

In DAO there is one end state for every player for the main story (the AD is dead) nothing else you do changes that part of the story - to put it in whiny simpering BSN speak "Your choices didn't matter". In ME3 there are different end states for the main quest (they all suck IMHO but they are different). In both games there are different ends states by player for the secondary quests. ME3 actually has more "options" in how your game vs my game could end. That's a good thing, the execution was bad but they theory was right.

Yes and No. Mass Effect 3 has no Reapers win ending. They always lose, just like the Arch Demon. The relays always blow up, that never changes ether.

Modifié par goatman42, 18 mars 2012 - 05:22 .

[4n4k1n]

I am still amazed at how some people still claim that the endings are fine and that they go well with the ideas of the mass effect universe.

I think using a fictional end to dragon Age: Origin would help showing how the endings were wrong.

Imagine going through the whole story, playing a female warden, killing Logain, sacrificing yourself to stop the archdemon and then watching the ending wiith your character marrying Logain who appears to be alive. You then think it might have been a bug and restart the whole game.
This time you play a male, still kill logain and sacrifice Alistair, doing everything to put anora on the throne and marry her, then in the Ending video you see your male character marrying Logain and even alistair breathing in the back while drinking some ale.
You decide that it would be good to try it with a male dwarf, you put Alistair on the throne with Anora, kill Logain again, sacrifice yourself to kill the Archdemon and the ending shows your bearded self marrying Logain becoming king, Alistair and Anora having fun drinking in the back but they re not king nor queen.

Now for the first ending the marriage decorations are blue, green in the second and red in the last.

End of the line why try to have your own warden and make him live like you want if at the end he gets stuck with Logain as a husband?

These are exactly what Bioware gave us with the ending of ME3 whatever choice you took, only decorations (color of the beam and explosion) really matter nothing else does.

And ya while the ending was pretty much based on the same thing (AD dead) your previous choices did matter at the end of DA:O

Modifié par 4n4k1n, 18 mars 2012 - 05:45 .

[DeinonSlayer]

I can't agree more with Mr. Knowles. I didn't play through three titles to run into a brick wall at the end.

[Manuel La Bor]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

frostajulie wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

"Congratulations, the galaxy is still doomed" is not a good way to end this trilogy. At all. Drama and loss I can accept. Hopelessness is something else entirely. That's what I felt watching the ending.

I have been trying for days to say exactly this and all that comes out is incoherant nerdrage.

This is it.
Thank you.

Why have you been trying to say something that isn't true?

The galaxy is alive. FTL still exists. The groups that went to Earth can still get off it and get home, if in years/decades rather than hours/days. The relays can be rebuilt.

Life continues. The galaxy is not doomed, it is changed. As it was always going to be severly changed.

(Note that for synthesis the following may not apply.)

The fleets orbiting earth brought supplies, but not for decades or even centuries of deep space travel. A decimated earth wouldn't be able to support the huge population of soldiers and suviving citizens. Since every relay was broken, rebuilding earth's wouldn't do anything unless another group rebuilt theirs at around the same time. Not to mention again that the availiable supplies wouldn't support the population during the rebuilding of said mass relay. Once the military leaders of each faction realize that supplies are limited... open war for survival breaks out. 

Out of all remaining fleets the geth (in my playthrough) would actually survive since they have no need of organic sustenance. They could travel decades or centuries back to rannoch and prosper.. Or they could destroy the remaining organics therefore fulfilling the reaper child's prophecy. 

On the ground, the krogan could quickly become dominant as turian numbers deteriorate. Eventually though, the krogan would probably die off as well (I doubt that they brough many females with them) leaving humans living in the world of fallout 3....

All major species homeworlds were under occupation/attack by reapers except tuchanka. Palaven is in ruins, Thessia is wrecked, The batarian homeworld is gone, even the hanar/drell, and elcor worlds weren't left untouched. Those worlds probably cannot sustain their remaining populations. Supply lines have been sundered, probably not to be repaired for quite a few asari genarations. Starship fuel is going to become - much like oil - the most valuable resource next to food and water. 


Severely changed doesn't even scratch what has happened to the galaxy. 

[Sidney]

goatman42 wrote...
Yes and No. Mass Effect 3 has no Reapers win ending. They always lose, just like the Arch Demon. The relays always blow up, that never changes ether.

I can't think of any games that have a failure state other than death which is unfortunate.

[AkiKishi]

Sidney wrote...

goatman42 wrote...
Yes and No. Mass Effect 3 has no Reapers win ending. They always lose, just like the Arch Demon. The relays always blow up, that never changes ether.

I can't think of any games that have a failure state other than death which is unfortunate.

Never played a JRPG then I take it ?

Some maybe more familiar ones

Planescape Torment-possibly the best interactive novel ever created.
Fallout

[Sidney]

BobSmith101 wrote...

Sidney wrote...

goatman42 wrote...
Yes and No. Mass Effect 3 has no Reapers win ending. They always lose, just like the Arch Demon. The relays always blow up, that never changes ether.

I can't think of any games that have a failure state other than death which is unfortunate.

Never played a JRPG then I take it ?

Some maybe more familiar ones

Planescape Torment-possibly the best interactive novel ever created.
Fallout

Never play JRPG's (ugh) but FO and PST I never hit a failure state at the end. I missed something.

[JunMadine]

Interesting I guess I now know why I liked DA:O so much. I agree OP.

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

Opsrbest wrote...
Thats my point. DA:O ending sthemselves have very little difference to them.

Yup, you are right.
Ending dead or ending king doesn't makes any difference.

[Midyin]

Zalbik wrote...


On that page he comments:




Thanks for the comment. Sadly us lowly designers don't get royalties on games
(Which is actually one of the reasons I'm not working for a developer anymore... far too much effort gets spent making games without the same long-term reward somebody would get in the book or movies industry)- Brent

Make me feel less guilty about the used games market

My thoughts too...

[Random citizen]

Opsrbest wrote...

The Executioner wrote...

Opsrbest wrote...

Ideological games create such vast amounts of trite uneducated pandering because the hero didn't win the day *ques Metallica Song Hero of the Day*. The basis of the endings based on the positive outlook of the game is only as imperative to the story as the intent to see the Character live and survive through the final ordeal. In ME3 those story elements are missing. You as the player actively chose to show them based on how you respond to the various dialogue choices made in the game. You can choose more dark and deep conversation choices that would actually lead anyone to believe that a Character has no intentions of surviving or will hero suicide in the final events and moments of the story. When characters question there own existence as a plot driving force it generally means that they aren't going to survive much longer. So to say that the outlook of the ending should always be "optimistic" or "pleasing to the player" is why in DA:O the ending was so limited. The DA:O endings weren't specifically the best endings that game could have had. They were used because they facilitated a concept of the story and character based plot device. So to say that the game should end on a positive note is irrelevent to the context of all the crying on the forums. The ending of the game is that the Reapers are defeated. That is positive. What happens to the "hero" character at the end of that story is irrelevant; as is represented even in DA:O. There is always another who would be Hero IE: Anderson making it onto the Citadel. So that fictitious attempt to use that argument, using the same game; which people should pay very close attention to on the similarities between the two stories, from former Bioware employee Brent Knowles has been proven invalid.

Let us return to the first point. In which the players choices should be representative through the game. And they are. All through the game in fact. There is actually an option to see an effect from ME1 in the main progression of the story; several infact. However the distinct point of "no return" for the ME3 story has everyone all hurt in the butt because the premise of what they want to see as the outcome for the Hero that they have created isn't available. Which is ireelevent to the ending of the game since the premise of the game is to defeat the Reapers and the story in which the player takes part in is the gathering of the forces to do so.

How the fight actually ends is entirely outside of what should be expected in the total story arch of ME3.

 What the hell are you talking about before the final mission Shepard says i plan to live through this, then Joker says i'm glad your in charge.  As for the rest of your arguement it doesn't hold water either the endings are the same regardeless of the decision you make.

Thats my point. DA:O ending sthemselves have very little difference to them. The OP used what a former Bioware employee thought to try and justify the insane excuse to cry on the forums that the endings aren't good enough. And for reference talking with Garrus before the last section of the final mission or your LI either of the dialogue options both infer that Shepard isn't going to make it through. In the art of writting when Characters talk about death generally that means they are going to die. Even choosing the "were both going to live through this option" with Garrus gets you a if I die before you do ill be looking down on you.

Do they not infer diffrent things? Is it not one option that is more like "l dont know how, but we will make it through this" and one that is "see you on the other side"? The whole damn game is filled with things looking bleak as hell. You know that someone you care about  is about to die, and often they do just that. But then suddenly, someone pulls through and you can feel yourself filled with hope.

[The Executioner]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

Opsrbest wrote...
Thats my point. DA:O ending sthemselves have very little difference to them.

Yup, you are right.
Ending dead or ending king doesn't makes any difference.

 Right there exactly the same with one exception there polar opposites. Knowles is right the ending should have had a path to end the trilogy on a high note. There's nothing profound or ground breaking about that ending,it doesn't make sense it's hopeless and it's terribly written. And as far as i'm concerened that ending doesn't exist nor will it ever exist.

Modifié par The Executioner, 18 mars 2012 - 09:12 .

[Breaker7]

Word up, OP!

[FixitBioware11]

Doofe2012 wrote...

http://blog.brentkno.../#disqus_thread

I read one recent blog post where the writer basically said "the ending was awesome because it was just like a movie" and I think she was missing the point. It is a game. Not a movie. And more specifically, its a role-playing game. The players are *part* of the game. Part of the process of building and experiencing the game, much more so than with most other forms of entertainment. Entitlement is really a right, for the gamer, because they have participated, actively, in the game itself. Again, I can't speak to the actual ending myself, because I have not
played it but in generally I'd say a Role-Playing Video Game Trilogy Ending should (try to) do the following:

1. Reward the player's choices throughout the series. The big stuff they did should be noted. They should *feel* like they had a unique impact on the world.

2. End on a positive note. This is really important for video games... life in general is full of ****ty stuff happening all the time. When I invest a hundred hours into a game I need to walk away feeling like a hero. When you waste a couple hours of a person's life with an artsy/depressing movie or short story or even a novel, it is more forgivable because the time spent is less. And presumably the consumer knew what they were going into when they started. Certain directors create certain styles of movie. Certain writers write specific types of fiction. On the other hand somebody playing an epic role-playing video-game trilogy is going to *expect* to be the hero and save the universe. That's why they are playing the game. When expectations don't match reality, disappointment is created. It might be an artistic/creative move to go with a different style of ending but I feel its the wrong choice, especially for a videogame *trilogy*. Make your middle game bleak if you want to, but end the series on a high note.

Pay attention here, Bioware. This man is everything that was right with the company. What he is saying is exactly how most of us players feel. DA:O was one of your most successful games, and the fact that its lead designer no longer works for you is a clear foreshadowing of why you will go downhill once people are done with ME3.

Wow what this guy is saying is what i thought bioware would deliver. Bioware this is exactly how i feel!

[bloodshed17]

Funny cause DA:O had a similar plotline. Unite races against common enemy. A shame they couldnt end ME3 the same.

[hawat333]

Good read, but I honestly disagree with parts of it.
The classic hero concept is something that Hollywood apparently wiped out from a lot of people's mind.
How does the main character become a hero? He makes a personal sacrifice.
That's the point. Otherwise he is 'just' a determined, lucky soldier. Not a hero.

That's why a dramatic hero has to die.

[Kakita Tatsumaru]

hawat333 wrote...

Good read, but I honestly disagree with parts of it.
The classic hero concept is something that Hollywood apparently wiped out from a lot of people's mind.
How does the main character become a hero? He makes a personal sacrifice.
That's the point. Otherwise he is 'just' a determined, lucky soldier. Not a hero.

That's why a dramatic hero has to die.

So you cannot roleplay your character the way you played it until ME3, you now are forced to play a hero?
Because you know, during the Liara cabin scene in ME2, I was able to choose the renegade answer to the question:"Why do you fight". And the answer was not like "Saving the Galaxy!", more like "My own survival."
Because unless you thinks there is something after death, sacrificing yourself is kinda stupid.

[Fred_MacManus]

Skelter192 wrote...

Too bad he's a former employee.

Probably explains why he's a former employee. He is the first person with any Bioware affiliation to express any understanding of why we're angry.

[Fred_MacManus]

4n4k1n wrote...

I am still amazed at how some people still claim that the endings are fine and that they go well with the ideas of the mass effect universe.

I think using a fictional end to dragon Age: Origin would help showing how the endings were wrong.

Imagine going through the whole story, playing a female warden, killing Logain, sacrificing yourself to stop the archdemon and then watching the ending wiith your character marrying Logain who appears to be alive. You then think it might have been a bug and restart the whole game.
This time you play a male, still kill logain and sacrifice Alistair, doing everything to put anora on the throne and marry her, then in the Ending video you see your male character marrying Logain and even alistair breathing in the back while drinking some ale.
You decide that it would be good to try it with a male dwarf, you put Alistair on the throne with Anora, kill Logain again, sacrifice yourself to kill the Archdemon and the ending shows your bearded self marrying Logain becoming king, Alistair and Anora having fun drinking in the back but they re not king nor queen.

Now for the first ending the marriage decorations are blue, green in the second and red in the last.

End of the line why try to have your own warden and make him live like you want if at the end he gets stuck with Logain as a husband?

These are exactly what Bioware gave us with the ending of ME3 whatever choice you took, only decorations (color of the beam and explosion) really matter nothing else does.

And ya while the ending was pretty much based on the same thing (AD dead) your previous choices did matter at the end of DA:O

You know, I hadn't thought to compare the game to DA:O, but in this, I think you nailed it on the head. This is EXACTLY like what we get in ME3's "ending".