407 réponses à ce sujet

[Bigdoser]

Total Biscuit wrote...

Both.

A selection of endings, including the happy ones that were foreshadowed right up to the last conversations with your crew, as well as loosing, and everything in between was what we'd been expecting and promised. Happy endings aren't unrealistic, or unpopular and they're certainly not badly written unless you write them badly.

Misery does not equal better stories.

But the endings we got, sorry, ENDING, is not only unrelentingly miserable, but also completely nonsensical and completely impossible in several places. It is appallingly badly written and completely out of keeping with the rest of he game.

The fact that it'd make far more sense to just be in Shepards head then really happening speaks volumes.

What this guy said. 

[Alamar2078]

I'll be honest and say that I didn't expect that. Honestly I don't like the endings, not because they are dark, but because Bioware led me to expect there would be "more" endings and we wouldn't have an ending like "Lost" and similar things.

While I hate to say it I was expecting the cliche ending where Shepard dies and I figured a war with the Reapers would require a LOT of casualties both personal and on a galactic scale so I was ready for something like that.

Honestly given the choice, if I were a dev, I would probably have at least one scenario where Shep lives and he might have a chance for the "happily ever after" thing because I'd like to push the idea that it's the player that [to a larger extent than we got] wrote their own ending. I would also give more closure .... I.E what impacts did my decisions have on the 5, 20, 100, 50,000 year cycle breaks.

[Verit]

It's a bit of both. ME2 offered a range from "dark" to "happy" endings, and people were definitely expecting that in ME3. The fact that the limited ending we got also makes no sense makes things even worse. Their "best" ending is a poor attempt at including a happy ending which really isn't one. Really, it's just a mess. Look at it this way: nobody would have been complaining if the ending made sense and they had offered the player the choice between Shepard dying or not.

[sanmar]

VLJ wrote...

sanmar wrote...
I want to have a choice (happy ending and an ending where the Reapers win).

I thought there was supposed to be an ending where they win?

They said it prior to the games release.

Really? I mean by winning, when Earth/Galaxy is completely destroyed and no one survives.

[Blind2Society]

Robhuzz wrote...

Blind2Society wrote...

This is an honest question. Who seriously wasn't expecting a happy ending? I would think that everyone who had played Mass Effect was expecting to able to choose no? Maybe your choices throughout the series and at the end wouldn't have led to a happy ending but did you honestly expect there not to be an option for one?

I thought about it. Then I figured with all the fanservice BioWare has given there was no way they'd make all the endings suck equally hard and remove any ending that can even remotely be called 'happy'. Shows you what I know:mellow:

At least one person saw that, thanks. I'm going to start a thread for this question and hope it does not fall to the back.

[Fuzzfro]

The ending made no sense and there was no sense of closure to the trilogy.
A happy ending is not essential but would be preferable.

[Dessalines]

I am in it does not make any sense, but I do believe people should get a choice to have a happy ending. too.

[Mandemon]

Bad ending for sake of bad ending is bad writing.

Bad ending because story can only logically conclude so is good writing.

[SgtSweatySac]

Mostly just the plothole-ridden, spaceboy magic BS that I hate. I mean, I fully expected Shepherd to die (we're in a galaxy spanning war against 2 kilometer long sentient spaceships that have wiped out empires for EONS), but how it ended up...the graphic that was already posted about reapers killing organics to prevent organics from being killed by synthetics...yeah, that kind of is it.

Shepherd making that sacrifice, for the good of the galaxy, to stop the reapers, at the end of it all. yeah, I could see that. Even my badass renegade just wants to get the job done.

....and a tiny part of me wouldn't mind if you could of had had adopted children with Tali on Rannoch.

I feel like such a pathetic nerd when I write that, but hey, you put 3 games into appreciating a relationship between two characters, seeing a little bit of happiness at the end isn't all bad.

[Baronesa]

Well, if you read most of the proposed endings on that big thread up there

Many people want a RANGE of different endings with absolute fail (Reapers win) to a perfect against all odds happy ending and many possibilities in between.

Any new ending that is made should have these variables, otherwise it would be just as flawed, if no matter what actions you take, everyone ends on a happy ending, it will be just as bad.

However, if you set a specific criteria (amount of EMS, in game decisions like curing the genophage, making peace for Quarians, and I would take that even to a more extreme position, limiting the perfect ultra good ending by linking it to decisions made on ME1 and 2)

The real problem is, that right now the current endings are plagued with plot-holes, they make Shepard behave out of character, and long list of etc etc etc that can be found around.

I will repeat here what I put on other topics:

1.- Defeat: If you don't have enough EMS (rushed only the main missions without preparing, etc) The Reapers should win, plain and simple.

2.- Success: Reapers are defeated. Now, this one have a lot of nuance:
a.- Pyrrhic victory: Shepard, Normandy and team are wiped out, most of the fleet and ground forces are wiped out, but they win.
b.- Sacrifice: Shepard and crew die, but the Fleet and ground troops are in better shape.
c.- Heroic Sacrifice: Shepard dies, but the Normandy and crew survive, fleets and ground troops are in a generally good shape (Above 50% of survival)
d.- Total triumph, against all odds, whatever you want to call it. Shepard and crew survive.

On endings b, c and d Relays and Citadel should be kept intact. And there should be an epilogue showing what happened after these events. Did the Elcor recovered? or went extinct? (AKA did you finished the lil side-quests regarding the Elcor or not)

I see this in the same way as what happened on Dragon Age: Origins. We had a sacrifice ending and others on which you could send a friend or an enemy to death, or one on which everyone survives but at the cost of not knowing what Morrigan wanted. That adds replayability, because not all my Wardens did the same in the end, and the funeral scene was very rewarding. Trying to limit the ending of ME3 to only one possibility will be a big mistake, does not matter if all endings are good or all endings are bad or all are in the middle, the fact that the choice is not there is one of the biggest flaws


So yes, there should be 1 very hard to get happy ending, many sacrifices endings an one complete fail ending. To me an RPG is about the possibilities.

[cynicalandbored]

I honestly want a happy ending after trying so hard. It's fiction after all and I want it to be slightly less depressing than the real world. But what pissed me off what that nothing made sense. See yo dawg.

[eddieoctane]

Both. Happy endings can always be justified in an entertainment medium. I actually read parts of the Iliad and the Odyssey for my Latin class. Odysseus spends 10 years of fighting. Only 1 ship of his men remain to travel back to Ithaca. he spends another 10 years trying to get home, and every one of his men die and his ship is wrecked. When he gets home, a bunch of drunk degenerates are trying to hook up with his wife. What's a king who couldn't be killed by demigods to do? He offs the lot of them, sits down on his throne, and has a "happily ever after" with his wife and son. The quintessential epic itself has a happy ending. It's not ridiculous to want one in Mass Effect.

And any ending devoid of logic is a bad ending. Bad endings can ruin games/movies/books. Even if Homer's works were full of dei ex machina, the gods actually made sense when they showed up on the battlefield. When you talk about ancient Greece, gods, heroes, and monsters belong. Starchild doesn't fit in the Mass Effect universe. A borderline omniscient being with broken logic has no place in our game.

[Emerald69]

It should have been about choice, and we should have the possibility of getting every ending from the Happy rainbows and kittens to the bittersweet sacrifice. And conclude this epic trilogy logically and free of plot holes.

[SweetJeeba]

The story was already shaping up to be so dire and desperate that I didn't expectmy Shepard to survive, but the fact that I wasnt given even a hint of my team's condition outside of myown pissed me off. It is one thing to be clueless about the bigger open plot threads in the galaxy, it's another to be completely clueless as to how everyone that mattered stories ended

[Steel Dancer]

Because it makes little to zero sense.

I never wanted a happy ending to everything, or for all my Shep playthroughs, and there's a powerful message in sacrifice when it means something. What was presented, didn't.

That doesn't mean I didn't want the option to Earn My Happy Ending, I just wanted the possibility.

Modifié par Steel Dancer, 18 mars 2012 - 01:45 .

[Zunzun]

Mostly because it doesn't make any sense. Everything that happens after Anderson dies doesn't fit with what's been built during 3 games.

Second thing is we don't get any real epilogue. For a story that huge, it's important to be able to say a real goodbye to all thoses characters we've spent countless hours with by seeing what happens to them, what the consequences of our choices are.

Finally, the lack of happy ending bothers me cause I like happy endings, and would have liked to be able to choose one. But I can live with that as long as the ending makes sense.

[sAxMoNkI]

My main grievances were that the ending contradicted the canon that was established up to that point in various ways;

1. Dropping out of FTL unexpectedly means the excess energy is shed as lethal radiation sooo the crew are effectively dead (its in the codex under FTL I think)

2.Why would the crew abandon shepard in his time of most need? Surely they would do anything to have backed shep up?

3. For a game that has the tagline "take back earth" you don't actually take back Earth (in any meaningful sense at least)

4. The game was touted as being shaped by your decision throughout, especially the ending. Why should someone who played rengegade the whole way have the same choices as someone who played paragon

5. The fate of entire races is left at best ambiguous and at worst bleak. Why bother to stop the reapers if eveything you fought to save is gone. I understand that you have broken the cycle and any future species will be saved but still...

6. Real life spends enough time imprinting upon people that the odds are against them and people usually cant make a difference regardless of how hard they fight. It would have been nice to see someone pull off the impossible, odds be damned! Thats why I'm playing the game after all. The first game you're on your own with people saying you're crazy, the second game you're constantly told that you are on a suicide mission, but if you prepare well enough by God you get it done! So in the 3rd game, however difficult it would be to obtain, why can't there be a possibility of Shep achieving the "impossible". It wouldn't be THE ending, but a choice for those who wish the story to end that way. If you want Shep to make the ultimate sacrafice to save everyone then that should be a choice to.

Ultimately I guess I hate the ending because it goes against the grain of everything in Mass Effect, from the sudden change in Shepard's personality to a submissive, surrender monkey to the sudden disregard for previously established and built up lore to the drastic change of tone from "anything is possible if you fight hard enough for it" to "it doesnt matter what you do, some things are just beyond your understanding or your ability to change them". It's jarring and unecessary but worst it just doesn't fit.

I do want to point out that up until the ending, Bioware crafted a game (and series) that has immersed me and affected me like no other. 99% of mass effect 3 is perfect, I just wish the ending lived up to the quality of the rest of it. So thankyou bioware for an incredible ride and please don't do yourselves a disservice by not wrapping it up to the standard you know you're capable of.

Modifié par sAxMoNkI, 18 mars 2012 - 01:47 .

[Crinkles]

I don't like it because it's so illogical. I'm okay with Shepard dying, for example, but there has to be a good reason for that. The choices the Catalyst presents are just so non-sensical. For one, you're forced to agree with the underlying premise that synethics will always destroy their creator, something I don't agree with and which my Shepard has actively preached against.

There is also no explanation why these choices exist: why can the Crucible only destroy all synthetic life, not just the Reapers? It seems like it would actually easier to build something Reaper-specific. Why do the mass relays have to be destroyed no matter what choice you make? Why does your Effective Military Strength determine what choices you have? (I don't see the connection between having a squad of Krogan and being able to choose Synthesis.)

Then of course there is the whole Normandy sequence. It's not explained why the blast damages the Normandy---it makes sense for the Destroy choice, with EDI being an AI and all, but it happens in every choice. How did the people who were with me right before I used the conduit get onto the Normandy?

There's possible explanations, but it's poor storytelling to not give any clue as to what those might be. Imagine if we skipped the whole Eden Prime sequence in the first Mass Effect. Sure, there are many possible explanations for Shepard to be hunting Saren looking for the Conduit... but you'd think it was kind of stupid if the game never told you what those reasons were.

At the very least, the current endings require a lot more explanation to make any sense. I'd prefer it if the mass relays didn't get destroyed either---not so much because I want a happy end, but because I want to feel like I actually saved the galaxy. Causing a galactic dark age and dooming the billions (trillions?) of people on the Citadel and in systems dependent on the relay for food and other supplies hardly feels like you really made things better.

In fact, I think it would be a better ending if everyone died. Have the star child explain that the energy released by the Crucible would be so great that the entire Sol system would be vaporized---but the Reapers would be gone. Then you have a real bittersweet ending; so many are dead, but their sacrifice saved the galaxy. You could even connect the Galaxy At War system into it by being allowed to refuse to use the Crucible: the unified fleet fights the Reapers directly. If your Effective Military Strength is high enough, the fleet fights to the last man, and against all odds the Reapers are defeated, if at the cost of almost every ship and soldier.

[Kiara]

I wasn't expecting a happy ending, the thought of Shepard dying no matter what to save the Galaxy at the end off a trilogy makes sense. Granted a chance at the Happy ending would be nice, but I could live without one.

What is driving me bonkers is it makes no sense as it is right now, so many questions when we were promised answers. The ending doesn't feel like a ending... it feels like a cliffhanger.. if they can explain the ending so it makes sense I would be fine with that.

[MrAtomica]

Needs to at least be an option for a happy ending.

Why? Because Mass Effect 1 and 2 established that precedent. This is not a grimdark, pseudo-philosophical trilogy; at least, it wasn't. The world we live in is dark enough. Sometimes, it feels good to come out feeling like a hero.

Let's not even get in to how utterly nonsensical the current endings are. There are some interesting ideas, but they are not drawn together properly.

[Malevolence65]

I'm pretty sure that most people would have liked a choice of endings that would run the gamut between "happy, blue babies, etc." and "Reapers win". Of course, they would have to be well thought out, congruent with the rest of the series and game, and not obviously a certain writer's "baby".

[cynicalandbored]

Oh yes and of course that awkward moment when Shepard breathes.

[SweetJeeba]

Also it made no sense

Can we be honest about the debate here. There seems to be more debate about why it's a bad ending than if it was a bad ending or not

[sushismygen]

Both. Mostly because it doesn't make any sense though! My Shep was prepered to die but not like this. 
And why all of the sudden a good ending is a bad thing?! Annoyes me to no end...<_<

[Tietj]

Both! I just don't understand people who say that they didn't expect a happy ending. Really, you didn't expect one? It's a video game, not a Tolstoy novel.