1309 réponses à ce sujet

[Gunslinger01101]

I also like how this thread is now generational! After only a few hours, completely different faces!

[crimsontotem]

Lightice_av wrote...

I have just read all of the post linked in your sig. You do make some very good points about the three choices and yes I also love each of the games almost 100%.. but what is your views on all the plot holes? You must have seen them.. Joker running away, crew members by magic appearing on the Normandy when they were dead in London? Mass Relays destroying each solar system (because that what they do when destoryed).

Joker runs away because he has every reason to think that you failed. The Mass Relays convert their energy into Crucible energy, not explosions (and they aren't close enough to destroy most inhabited planets anyway; most are on the far edges of star systems). As for the dead crewmates, I call a plain and simple glitch, not a wierd plot point.

speculation... is that what people want? five years of wondering and waiting and excitement... end with a speculation? How do you know they are dead? they were never shown dead or told.

[majormajormmajor]

Gunslinger01101 wrote...

...Absence of proof? I could link about two dozen threads that itemize the proof behind the Indoctrination Theory. You have failed to counter a single item.

Indoctrination theory is a crock of bull and anyone who seriously cottons on to it needs to be checked to see if he is also a believer in the Easter Bunny or Young Earth creationism. Which is irrelevant to this , because no where was the indoctrination theory brought up, you illiterate

Gunslinger01101 wrote...

"In the absence of proof they resort to slander, and now squeal like
little pigs when they find themselves on the receiving end."

applies to you.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO UUUUUUUUU

is this fooking kindergarten or what

[Genera1Nemesis]

ExpletiusUk wrote...

Regarding the OP's first point: It's a backlash to the fan backlash I think.

Also the majority of the people who were ok with the ending probably aren't even aware this is discussion is happening as they're either replaying or are now playing something else now.

I'd be interested to see what the representation of total sales to those of us discussing this on the forum/facebook etc is

Why I'm now posting that I like the ending: I'm quiet and don't like to make a fuss. But seeing large amounts of people say that because I like the ending I'm either stupid or not committed to the series ticks me off.

So it rouses me to actually post on the forums for the first time.

Exactly. I find that there is middle ground though between those that like and don't. People tend to forget that the choices they had in these games never actually effected the 'main' plot in so much as they wished to have more of a choice regarding the endings (they could have been more varied but hear me out)

In ME1 you had two options given to you at two different times; save council or not; promote Anderson or Udina.

In ME 2 you had two choices; destroy collector base; hand it over to Cerberus.

After these choices were made we basically got the exact same cutscene; in ME2 the only change in it is base blowing up or blue 'space magic' as people like to say. As an addition you were treated to a possible casket in the docking bay or more if you were a hothead, lol. But these were the same scenes; no matter what. The final shot was always Shep (if he survived, otherwise it was Joker) looking out the hole in the Normandy's hull. I never had the choice to stay with Cerberus, and I never had the choice to keep the base for myself. The narrative dictated these events so that there could be continuity in ME3.

Going back to the request of 'more varied endings' I understand this point to a certain degree. I also believe that this is not the last Mass Effect. I might be wrong; but they've always said ths is the end of Sheperd trilogy; not the end of Mass Effect. So with that I have to ask; if in your game you getyou 'happy' ending (Shep lives, relays intact etc) then how can Bioware have any continuity in their universe moving forward? What if (a faux pas I suppose) that is the entire premise of Mass Effect 4; the rebuilding of the galactic super-highway in some manner or something similar?

All I'm saying is that we were always limited in our 'choices' in these games. We would need a super intelligent cpu to program every single possible outcome based on our choices and if we ever built that cpu then well we have bigger problems on our hands (see technological singularity)

[Ryokun1989]

Xarathos wrote...

The problem seems to be largely that we're analyzing the ending from two completely different viewpoints.

As far as I can tell, the ending 'likers' seem to believe that the ending must be evaluated subjectively, and that therefore their interpritation of the ending makes it 'good' - at least for them. And so far as subjective judgements go, they're right - that's the definition of subjective. There's also a group of them who are part of the 'indoctrination' theory camp, but have reached the conclusion that because an analysis of the endings that explains some of our objections is possible (and exists) that this makes the ending 'good.'

As near as I can tell, most of the ending 'haters' (including myself in that category) seem to believe that the ending can be analyzed objectively, and that it is objectively bad.  In my specific case, I am a design student, and as such I also reject the belief that there is no objective standard on which art can be judged.

Neither is stupid. Just different.

And then there is a small group on BOTH sides who are doing their best to troll everyone. Because that's just how the internet works. These people will go about attempting to provoke a reaction from the other side with comments like, "you just don't understand the ending," or "you're showing signs of gamer entitlement! Wah!"

And before someone from the other side jumps on me, I do enjoy literary analysis. That's why I believe firmly that writing can be evaluated objectively, and why I've come to the conclusion that this ending is objectively bad. Because I reject the themes it presents; I reject the last minute villain reveal; and yes, in terms of a game I want to play multiple times, I feel very strongly that a 'happy' ending should be an OPTION for those who are willing to put in the work to pursue it.

If you liked it, fine. Noone can take that away from you.

There is no reason we cannot be civil about this. Let's keep the name calling to a minimum, please. Nobody is the enemy here. This is not a war. It is a ... how to phrase? A philosophical disagreement. Over a video game.

I like how you act reasonable and at the same time alledge that we are all liking something 'objectively bad'... That's not *entirely* extending an olive branch.

How do you figure the god child is a villain? What themes are these that you reject? How do you define 'happy ending'? What would have needed to happen for it to count as happy? One theme is self-sacrifice.. wouldn't it weaken the premise if you have Shepard live without very serious consequence?
Also, how does how 'happy' the ending is impact how replayable the game becomes?

You're not the only design student here; nor the only one who thinks there's no such things as objective analysis.

[TheGunslinger]

Be civil guys. It's alright to voice your opinion, however it's really unnecessary to bash other people's opinions by calling them names if they liked the ending, or even if they didn't.

Modifié par TheGunslinger, 19 mars 2012 - 04:06 .

[Gulkin]

There is a not a lot of those threads. It most be around 20% just like the reality. The problem is ppl bump them for free because they want to argu. That's the point of those thread is being on the top so we can all see them. So next time, you see one ignore it. Simple and more effective, after 1 min it already at the page 3.

Remember each time you answer of those posts you help that person. There isn't enough "ending lover" on this forum to bump them all the time.

Modifié par Gulkin, 19 mars 2012 - 04:07 .

[Gunslinger01101]

I suggest you people never read any of the great sci-fi space operas. Foundation, Dune, Dark Tower, Rama, all of these leave you "wondering" and with a good amount of "speculation" (and no, no books by brian herbert count towards dune). So if gaming ever truly wants to ascend the story telling ladder to "art" along WITH entertainment, this is what happens. I thought the end was both thoughtful AND entertaining. I think gamers weren't ready for it. For all the clamoring we do to be taken seriously, apparently most of us aren't ready for our beloved medium to ascend any higher than entertainment.

[Psycott09]

I personally don't mind the endings so much. I liked it because you have the choice to do what you set out to do which is kill the reapers(with some unintended consequences), or do what the Illusive Man had planned all along. It was pretty heavy stuff because no matter what the universe would never be the same again, or just in time. It's ambiguity works well in my opinion.

I am a bit hypocritical though because I just want to see them to revisit the characters to see what happened to the rest of the Normandy crew. Hopefully it gets explored in some DLC

[charon45]

Lightice_av wrote...




6. They aren't marooned on the planet forever. They have the quantum entanglement communicator, and knowledge that the galaxy made it. It may take quite some time, but they'll be saved eventually. But again, the fact that something doesn't go perfectly isn't "illogical".
 

On this point, they are marooned on the planet for the rest of their lives.  The post-credits prologue shows their descendants still on the same planet, and space travel has become a myth.  That was the point of the stargazer scene.

[Vlad1113]

When they introduced a MP faclity in the game, it has probably attracted a lot of 'kids' (and yes being as old as I am I can use that phrase) new to the franchise...I've read some of the MP forums a great many of them haven't even touched SP to any depth.

Like most of us who have played all three games, I wonder how anyone can actually like the minimally altered endings..but there are some folks who insist on liking weird things.
They are (if you care to check out the forums) a tiny but vocal minority which suggests that theres a lot of unused tostesterone not burning out in the MP game and being directed at the majority of us in the forums as another method of attention seeking/passive agressive comforting/failure frustration call it what you will

[RogueBot]

Personally, I believe Bioware intentionally left hints that Shepard was indoctrinated. The reason I don't like that is because I think it was done to breed speculation, as opposed to it actually being their intention that Shepard was indoctrinated.

So, while the indoc theory's a valid one, Bioware's shift from a straightforward space opera about love, companionship, and beating the odds to an intentionally vague ending with with little resolution and more questions than answers is poorly done. It's just incredibly inconsistent storytelling.

If Bioware plans to continue Shepard's story and it is shown that he is, in fact, indoctrinated, I would look upon ME3's ending much more favorably. But I don't think that's their intention. They just wanted to create speculation.

[Gunslinger01101]

majormajormmajor wrote...

Gunslinger01101 wrote...

...Absence of proof? I could link about two dozen threads that itemize the proof behind the Indoctrination Theory. You have failed to counter a single item.

Indoctrination theory is a crock of bull and anyone who seriously cottons on to it needs to be checked to see if he is also a believer in the Easter Bunny or Young Earth creationism. Which is irrelevant to this , because no where was the indoctrination theory brought up, you illiterate

Gunslinger01101 wrote...

"In the absence of proof they resort to slander, and now squeal like
little pigs when they find themselves on the receiving end."

applies to you.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO UUUUUUUUU

is this fooking kindergarten or what

Friend, chill out or get reported and probably banned.

I doubt you have actually taken time to read the evidence there is in favor of indoctrination theory. But when it turns out its true, probably months from now, I will make sure to PM you with an I told you so.

As far as what I said, you threw out the first insult, I am merely stating that YOU are the one acting in the absence of proof. I'm going to further state that YOU are the one acting in an immature and frankly insulting and inappropriate way.

[Dragonfable of Dain]

I personaly think people who say they "like" the ending are just angry that many people believe that they are entitled to a good ending. I personaly wouldn't have minded if all the endings resulted in the death of shep and the entire crew of the normandy, but the ending we got was just so forced, made no sense at all, and would have resulted in the death of many more people in the game via mass relay explosions, starvation of the galactic fleet stranded in the sol system, and the planets who are densely populated which would have a hard time becoming self sufficient from a galaxy wide economy.

Modifié par Dragonfable of Dain, 19 mars 2012 - 04:13 .

[Lightice_av]

crimsontotem wrote...

speculation... is that what people want? five years of wondering and waiting and excitement... end with a speculation? How do you know they are dead? they were never shown dead or told.

Good endings raise questions and leave room for speculation. Definitive endings are boring and predictable. Not that you need to speculate all that much if you are familiar with the characters and the universe. I feared a generic happy ending that would try to answer each and every question that fans have made over the years, and while I have few small issues with the ending that we got, it's still lightyears better than what most people are calling for.

[AzaZeLgaming]

Some of these ppl are the reason why there is so much hostility in the forums, since they are indenial and they completely IGNORE THE LORE!

Joker runs away because he has every reason to think that you failed.

However Hackett has no reason to think this? When exactly Joker realises that Shepard failed? After the Harbinger beam or after the discussion with Hackett, inside the Citadel? Also it doesn't matter if Joker runs away, since it doesn't explain how the hell your squadmates which you picked to follow you into the Citadel beam, got back in the Normandy after the Harbinger beam. They should be dead.

It also seems strange that Joker and the Normandy crew, and only they, knew to escape the solar system. Why did they assume the wave from the Crucible would be dangerous to them, or that Sol System's Relay would explode and start running away in the Normandy, yet none of the other combatants on the ground assumed the same or made any attempt to flee before it hit?

The Mass Relays convert their energy into Crucible energy, not explosions (and they aren't close enough to destroy most inhabited planets anyway; most are on the far edges of star systems).

This is simply wrong, since this is refuted by the "Arrival" DLC. It was established in Arrival that the destruction of a Mass Relay results in a powerful supernova-like explosion that destroys the star system the Relay resides in. It doesn't matter how the Mass Relay is destroyed, since if IT IS DESTROYED, it WILL make a supernova explosion regardless how it got destroyed. Also your latter comment is also invalid, since there is a Relay in the very same system, where for example Tuchanka (Aralakh system) are.

Modifié par AzaZeLgaming, 19 mars 2012 - 04:19 .

[Gunslinger01101]

Vlad1113 wrote...

When they introduced a MP faclity in the game, it has probably attracted a lot of 'kids' (and yes being as old as I am I can use that phrase) new to the franchise...I've read some of the MP forums a great many of them haven't even touched SP to any depth.

Like most of us who have played all three games, I wonder how anyone can actually like the minimally altered endings..but there are some folks who insist on liking weird things.
They are (if you care to check out the forums) a tiny but vocal minority which suggests that theres a lot of unused tostesterone not burning out in the MP game and being directed at the majority of us in the forums as another method of attention seeking/passive agressive comforting/failure frustration call it what you will

You have no idea how small or large any group is by merely "looking at the forums." So please stop representing yourself as being backed up by any kind of statistical authority on the subject what-so-ever. Hilarious try though.

[Ryokun1989]

RogueBot wrote...

Personally, I believe Bioware intentionally left hints that Shepard was indoctrinated. The reason I don't like that is because I think it was done to breed speculation, as opposed to it actually being their intention that Shepard was indoctrinated.

So, while the indoc theory's a valid one, Bioware's shift from a straightforward space opera about love, companionship, and beating the odds to an intentionally vague ending with with little resolution and more questions than answers is poorly done. It's just incredibly inconsistent storytelling.

If Bioware plans to continue Shepard's story and it is shown that he is, in fact, indoctrinated, I would look upon ME3's ending much more favorably. But I don't think that's their intention. They just wanted to create speculation.

I've never seen Mass Effect as an entirely straightforward Space Opera.. we were messing with some pretty heavy decisions for that. Luke Skywalker never had to decide whether to cure the genophage!

I personally believe the 'hints' that a lot of people think points to indoctrination actually point to a metaphysical reality (no, that's not the same as a dream). 
You can check out my signature link for some ideas on that if you like.

[boardnfool86]

Diablos2525 wrote...

I've been seeing a lot of people like the endings of Mass effect 3. I have to wonder though, are they really big fans of the series or have they just picked up the latest one and put "action mode" or whatever on. Because the ending makes no sense... at all, and goes against the lore established by previous mass effect games and dlc. Are these people just ****s, or simply ignorant? Every time they say they like the ending they never give a reason why. Is it the fact that it was ripped straight from Deus Ex 1. Or the fact that it creates 10 plotholes, or the fact that it goes against the whole purpose of the series where you collect forces to stop the Reapers only to make the collection of those forces pointless since we all get 98% the same ending.

I am seriously so confused, how can people be so stupid? Have they not finished the game?

EDIT: I'm wondering if all the people who finished the game first were mostly series fans, whereas now we are seeing a bunch of first time fans finishing the game weeks later?

I've played all 3, picked each one up as they came out, and I replayed 1 when 2 came out, then replayed the whole series when 3 came out... and I love the ending. Was it masterfully executed? No. I think its the right direction, and was in large part well done. Your choices totally matter, why people need things like the fate of the rachni to affect what the crucible does when fired is absurd. However, the fate of the normandy makes little sense beyond allegory, it should have crashed on Earth (putting even more weight behind saving Earth cause if you don't then your whole crew dies). Still, great ending - its not as flawed as its response suggests and sould not be retconned.

[Gunslinger01101]

Dragonfable of Dain wrote...

I personaly think people who say they "like" the ending are just angry that many people believe that they are entitled to a good ending. I personaly wouldn't have minded if all the endings resulted in the death of shep and the entire crew of the normandy, but the ending we got was just so forced, made no sense at all, and would have resulted in the death of many more people in the game via mass relay explosions, starvation of the galactic fleet stranded in the sol system, and the planets who are densely populated which would have a hard time becoming self sufficient from a galaxy wide economy.

Another generalization. How many times do I have to put this down in just one thread? Just because you don't think it's good, doesn't mean it's not. In fact, most likely you just didn't understand it. Which is neither Bioware's problem, nor mine. Well, it might be a bit Bioware's problem, because they made a game that is purchased by a market that the ending is too advanced for...apparently.

[crimsontotem]

http://social.biowar.../index/10244422

paid thralls

[terdferguson123]

I just finished the game a day ago, and I bet a lot of other people are probobly just finishing the game too. Many people have work/school/families and other things to worry about and don't have the time to beat a 50 hour game in a week. Also, some people actually really like to take their time with games and not rush them, especially a game like Mass Effect.

I know that I will get flamed for this, but I also believe that the types of people with other obligations outside of video games, or those who like to really take their time playing, are usually the same people who will be more reasonable about the discrepencies in a game.

Modifié par terdferguson123, 19 mars 2012 - 04:17 .

[Lightice_av]

charon45 wrote...

Lightice_av wrote...




6. They aren't marooned on the planet forever. They have the quantum entanglement communicator, and knowledge that the galaxy made it. It may take quite some time, but they'll be saved eventually. But again, the fact that something doesn't go perfectly isn't "illogical".
 

On this point, they are marooned on the planet for the rest of their lives.  The post-credits prologue shows their descendants still on the same planet, and space travel has become a myth.  That was the point of the stargazer scene.

Yeah, because they totally wouldn't colonize a perfectly habitable garden world they just discovered.

[smegmalongbeach]

majormajormmajor wrote...

smegmalongbeach wrote...

because there was no over reaction or entitlement in the things people were posting. you have all handled yourselves so maturely and have really respected mass effect as a development team and as a series.

lets all get upset because we got called entilteled brats because we were reacting to the ending so maturely. we are so picked on as gamers and forum posters, please feel bad for us

typical ending-loving puke rhetoric. In the absence of proof they resort to slander, and now squeal like little pigs when they find themselves on the receiving end.

sure guy, proof of what? 

the posts made here and on twitter about the ending were largly insulting to the development team and came off as entiltled brats complaining it didnt end the way they wanted so the media called them on it and now you act like you were all respectful and acted maturely but that did not happen you got called entitled for acting entitled not for not liking the ending. it wasnt till after that people started trying to make respectful complaints about the ending but the damage had already been done. thats why the ending hate is looked at negatively by alot of people.

i made no comment on the ending and if i like it or not

[Marcus Lee]

They are Bioware's staffs ><

Modifié par Marcus Lee, 19 mars 2012 - 04:18 .