407 réponses à ce sujet

[K_Tabris]

Because they are all the same ending. So much variety in the game, and all of it has the same result? What the f**k is that? What's the point in spending hours upon hours of making different Shepards, who make different choices, if all of the endings override player choice and effectively destroy the franchise?

[RunicDragons]

I was mostly pissed off because the endings didn't make sense...

I personally love a grim-dark ending.

[Fiannawolf]

I hate it mostly cause it doesnt make sense at face value, if its an idoc attempt then they still need to wrap things up, plus no closure at all.

[Dean_the_Young]

Lambchopz wrote...



That is a diagram of an example of how the endings should have been.

I agree in concept of letting prior choices dictate outcome (and especially the threat of Harbinger taking out Shepard if too few Assets), but not in that execution.

Much of that is too intricate for too little reason. While differentiation needs to be made, over-complexity needs to be avoided.  Some of it rests on other flaws: there's no reason for TIM to be Direct Controlled, for example, or even have TIM indoctrinated in the first place. (Yes, I relize that wasn't your entire point.)


Assuming you had the assets to get on the station, you could have had Anderson/TIM/Shepard have a unavoidable dispute... but then allow things so that Anderson or TIM could survive and help Shepard with the favored ending. One person has to sacrifice themselves as the 'Executor' of the choice, either in destroying or assuming control, while a second person is able to mitigate the damage to the relays and survives. So having two people working on the solution gives the 'better' ending of saving the relays, and letting the other person assume the executor role allows Shepard to survive..

As to how it would flow...

TIM, Anderson, or Both will die in the final confrontation.

If BOTH die, Shepard can choose either path... but without help, Shepard gets the 'bad' ending of relays destroyed, and Shepard dies. Pretty much the ending of canon, really. Very bitter, but the galaxy does survive and the Reapers are destroyed.

If TIM dies (because Shepard sides with Anderson in destroying the Reapers), then Anderson helps. Either Anderson or Shepard sacrifices themselves as Executor to destroy the ending, with Anderson being willing if Shepard shows reluctance, while the other prevents the destruction of the Relays. The survivor, be it Shepard or Anderson, survives and meets the crew. The galaxy is shown to celebrate the destruction of the Reapers, despite the horrific damage.

This ending is bittersweet: someone will die, but it doesn't have to be Shepard. The damage is worse than if the Reapers were controlled, but there's a freedom from fear.


If Anderson dies (because TIM convinces Shepard to control the Reapers, and Anderson violently objects), TIM helps. Either TIM or Shepard has to sacrifice themselves to control the Reapers: TIM wants to assume control, but respects Shepard enough (if you kept the Collector Base) or can be persuaded to allow Shepard to fill that role. While one assumes control, the other prevents the relays from being destroyed. The Survivor escapses: TIM will make an escape back to Cerberus, or Shepard will be returned to earth by a controlled Harbinger. The galaxy is shown to be relieved but worried as the Reapers now rebuild what they had destroyed: they aren't violent now, but it's clear they could be.

This ending can be somewhere between ideal and worrisome, depending on perspective. The Illusive Man's survival may be galling, but if he were in control of the Reapers it would be downright ominous. The benefits of the Reapers are undeniable, but-




Etc.


The point I'm trying to make isn't 'my idea is better', but rather that your decision tree could be singificantly simplified yet have more output variation. Rather than a half-dozen versions of 'does Harbinger make it to Earth' affecting the endgame, you can have three: Harbinger doesn't, Harbinger does but it's not enough to stop, Harbinger stops. Then that leads into another simple three-way output: TIM and/or Anderson dieing. Which leads into the choice, and the simplified consequence outputs.

Complexity isn't the same thing as content, but it is synonymous with cost. Everything you show is going to have to justify the cost that can't be spent elsewhere.

[canle10]

yeah it doesnt make sense but i have a question. why is it that in the last conversation with the illusive man the paragon option is greyed out, and i know i have full paragon because its a new game plus with my paragon like maxed out.

[MassEffect762]

Both. The ending reeks of laziness.

No closure.

Really no variety.(Happy/Sad/Bad endings)

No consequences.(Final battle)

StarChild(*vomit*)

Modifié par MassEffect762, 18 mars 2012 - 04:53 .

[PorcelynDoll]

Both.

The ending made no sense to me at all. It was really bad. Also it was a total cop out. Where's my showdown with Harbinger?

I have nothing against sad endings. They definitely should be included but there should be happy ones as well.

I am mostly angry because all those hours of play I put in making the decisions I wanted and my Shep who I wanted made 0 impact at all. Everything I did meant nothing

[Cartims]

canle10 wrote...

yeah it doesnt make sense but i have a question. why is it that in the last conversation with the illusive man the paragon option is greyed out, and i know i have full paragon because its a new game plus with my paragon like maxed out.

Oooooo, a new color.....grey....this is truly art.

[Poison_Berrie]

canle10 wrote...

yeah it doesnt make sense but i have a question. why is it that in the last conversation with the illusive man the paragon option is greyed out, and i know i have full paragon because its a new game plus with my paragon like maxed out.

You are supposed to be consistent in your choices during that conversation (I think).
Pick your color and stick with it, at least untill the final choice.

EDIT: I would consider the Normandy not marooning on some distant planet and my team not fleeing on me in the finale a happy ending.

Modifié par Poison_Berrie, 18 mars 2012 - 04:55 .

[Cosmar]

I just want an ending that makes sense.

And as far as "sad" endings go, the endings we have are not very sad...just vague. A sad ending would be one where we watch all our friends die in extremely painful ways...

[Divitiacus]

The ending has so many problems it's hard to unpack them clearly.

The first, and biggest problem, which is also connected to the happy ending is that there is no relevance, essentially, to what we do. With Space Troll we essentially have to accept the 3 choices, and nothing we do matters at all because the destruction of the Mass Relays basically makes everything we did pointless before that point anyway. This is the biggest problem, and surpasses anything.

Secondly, the game is all about choices mattering, hope, coming together against a dark universe and succeeding. This has been the theme for the past 2 games. It continues up to the last 15 minutes of this game. Then, as in point one, it doesn't matter. Frankly, if you played the perfect 3 game playthrough achieving galactic solidarity and have like 12,000 galactic readiness, why shouldn't you be rewarded with a better ending? Could you imagine how epic the ending would be if when faced with the troll logic, you could painstakingly earn the ability to defeat the Reapers while telling Space Troll to go f himself? It would be as satisfying as this ending is painful because it's rejecting terrible options. I call option 2 the Kobayashi Maru choice.

Third, and this relates to the second, the implications of the endings all are the same and all equally horrible. Once more, it suberts the messages of the games by making it accept genocide is the answer. That people CAN'T live together. This is a) against theme, tone, everything we believed in at that point and basically proven untrue by our own actions, as well as the fact that Protheans seemed to have beaten their Geth counterpart, but whoops 50,000 years it's Reaper time.

[J0HNL3I]

because it makes no ****ing sense

[IsleySilverlord]

Both.

I want a happy ending that makes sense
I want a "neutral" ending that makes sense
I want a sad ending that makes sense

[Turtlicious]

both

[CanadAvenger]

I hate the ending because it betrays everything the story was about in the first two games. None of your decisions that you've made over 100 hours of game time ago matter at all, and you're stuck with making 3 choices (sorry, 16) that you can hardly call a victory.

The endings don't make any sense especially when compared to the rest of the series, and they leave such enormous plot holes it's not even funny.

There wasn't enough options for endings either. Should we have been railroaded to a happy ending, like we were railroaded into screwing over the galaxy? No, but the option should have been there. As said in another thread: "Shepard is not a tragic hero" - we deserve the option of a happy ending.

[MrAtomica]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

That is a diagram of an example of how the endings should have been.

I agree in concept of letting prior choices dictate outcome (and especially the threat of Harbinger taking out Shepard if too few Assets), but not in that execution.

Much of that is too intricate for too little reason. While differentiation needs to be made, over-complexity needs to be avoided.  Some of it rests on other flaws: there's no reason for TIM to be Direct Controlled, for example, or even have TIM indoctrinated in the first place. (Yes, I relize that wasn't your entire point.)


Assuming you had the assets to get on the station, you could have had Anderson/TIM/Shepard have a unavoidable dispute... but then allow things so that Anderson or TIM could survive and help Shepard with the favored ending. One person has to sacrifice themselves as the 'Executor' of the choice, either in destroying or assuming control, while a second person is able to mitigate the damage to the relays and survives. So having two people working on the solution gives the 'better' ending of saving the relays, and letting the other person assume the executor role allows Shepard to survive..

As to how it would flow...

TIM, Anderson, or Both will die in the final confrontation.

If BOTH die, Shepard can choose either path... but without help, Shepard gets the 'bad' ending of relays destroyed, and Shepard dies. Pretty much the ending of canon, really. Very bitter, but the galaxy does survive and the Reapers are destroyed.

If TIM dies (because Shepard sides with Anderson in destroying the Reapers), then Anderson helps. Either Anderson or Shepard sacrifices themselves as Executor to destroy the ending, with Anderson being willing if Shepard shows reluctance, while the other prevents the destruction of the Relays. The survivor, be it Shepard or Anderson, survives and meets the crew. The galaxy is shown to celebrate the destruction of the Reapers, despite the horrific damage.

This ending is bittersweet: someone will die, but it doesn't have to be Shepard. The damage is worse than if the Reapers were controlled, but there's a freedom from fear.


If Anderson dies (because TIM convinces Shepard to control the Reapers, and Anderson violently objects), TIM helps. Either TIM or Shepard has to sacrifice themselves to control the Reapers: TIM wants to assume control, but respects Shepard enough (if you kept the Collector Base) or can be persuaded to allow Shepard to fill that role. While one assumes control, the other prevents the relays from being destroyed. The Survivor escapses: TIM will make an escape back to Cerberus, or Shepard will be returned to earth by a controlled Harbinger. The galaxy is shown to be relieved but worried as the Reapers now rebuild what they had destroyed: they aren't violent now, but it's clear they could be.

This ending can be somewhere between ideal and worrisome, depending on perspective. The Illusive Man's survival may be galling, but if he were in control of the Reapers it would be downright ominous. The benefits of the Reapers are undeniable, but-




Etc.


The point I'm trying to make isn't 'my idea is better', but rather that your decision tree could be singificantly simplified yet have more output variation. Rather than a half-dozen versions of 'does Harbinger make it to Earth' affecting the endgame, you can have three: Harbinger doesn't, Harbinger does but it's not enough to stop, Harbinger stops. Then that leads into another simple three-way output: TIM and/or Anderson dieing. Which leads into the choice, and the simplified consequence outputs.

Complexity isn't the same thing as content, but it is synonymous with cost. Everything you show is going to have to justify the cost that can't be spent elsewhere.

I agree with you on this. The way which you describe it, your version of the endings sounds very similar to Dragon Age: Origins, which was certainly a satisfying way of going about things.

To be honest, I was expecting Anderson and TIM to play a role similar to Loghain and Alistair in the end, and was more than a little disappointed to find out that I was wrong. The opportunity to give people who want Shepard to live an out, without sacrificing the ability to deliver a bittersweet "blaze of glory" finale, seemed too good to pass up.

Modifié par MrAtomica, 18 mars 2012 - 05:01 .

[crkuns]

I'm just mad I didn't get to grow old with Liara and make blue babies. Oh, and I think the loss of the mass relays completely lame.


DaddyKuns

[Heather Cline]

canle10 wrote...

yeah it doesnt make sense but i have a question. why is it that in the last conversation with the illusive man the paragon option is greyed out, and i know i have full paragon because its a new game plus with my paragon like maxed out.

Canle the reason why it's greyed out is because the in the game every conversation you ever have with TIM throughout the game gives you the chance to use paragon or renegade persuasion options on him. If you did not do any of those or missed one of those times then they are greyed out for you. You need to always use a paragon/renegade persuasion in every conversation with him starting from Mars and so forth throughout the game until you meet him at the citadel. That is why they are greyed out for you.

Hope this helps.

As for the game endings, I hated them plain and simple. We were promised 16 different endings reflecting our decisions throughout 3 games. Reflecting our decisions throughout the final game. We expected those 16 different endings and all we got were actually 3 options and all 3 were just different flavors of bad.

We didn't even get even one ending where there was a remotely happy ending with your LI no matter who they were. Even one good ending and 15 bad endings is better than what we got. Yes I want an ending where my Shepard lives out her life with her LI so sue me. I'm not saying all sunshine, rainbows and everyone lives kind of deal. But one ending where my Shepard is with her LI at the end and they either grow old together or in my case with Liara, my Shepard grows old and Liara lives on after my Shepard dies of old age. Better than what we got at least.

Modifié par Heather Cline, 18 mars 2012 - 05:08 .

[curufinwe03]

There should be room for both, a happy and a sad ending(16?). In my opinion, Shepard deserves a happy end and i would enjoy it too.

[KaeserZen]

asdoorip wrote...

Both.

I want a happy ending that makes sense
I want a "neutral" ending that makes sense
I want a sad ending that makes sense

This + variations of each ending based on your choices.

[XxBrokenBonezxX]

Both...but more so because its not a happy ending

[K_Tabris]

This is amazing, and illustrates, just as Lambchops says, exactly how the endings could go, in traditional-style, beautiful Bioware endings variety that appropriately reflects player choice. Instead, Bioware ripped that from us, in true Big Brother, capitalist style, because they are effing lazy.

Seriously, this just made me even more pissed.

[Melra]

80% of the people would still be crying over lack of "happy" ending, even if the endings made more sense.

[-Skorpious-]

Can I say both? Or at least a true bittersweet ending?

[GreenDragon37]

 Both really. It really doesn't make any sense and also there should be OPTIONS for happy endings, sad endings and anything in between. I think DA:O did this well.