1309 réponses à ce sujet

[jb1983]

 A few reasons:

1) Most fans have simmered down or are done with Bioware. Silence isn't always a good thing following a controversy

2) Marketing strategies - almost every single corporation hires people to talk up their product, especially when hit with controversy. 

3) Loyalty goes before thinking - sometimes you can be so loyal to something that you'll overlook a bad product and think, "No, this company is so good and so talented there's no way this was a mess up. This was intentional, so it has to be good." 

4) They actually liked the endings. For whatever reason, they enjoyed the endings and want people to know about it. They are the 1%. 

[AwesomeDudex64]

They have there reasons, even tho they're totally wrong but I'll just respectfully disagree.

[saracen16]

I am Sovereign wrote...

Some people have a fetish for eating excrement, humanity will always have outliers that like things the VAST majority do not. Maybe they're just being contrarian.

Alas, the level of arrogance is astounding.

"Geth say 1 is less than 2. Heretics say 2 is less than 3. Both are correct."

[Persephone]

The Angry One wrote...


Did I say you defended the endings? I said you mock those of us who hate the endings.
Those are two different things, and frankly if you don't like or defend the endings yourself it just makes you look worse.

Attacks? You REAP what you SOW. I am TIRED of posts like the OP's.

Well tough, the endings hurt a lot of us deeply. We're going to express our frustrations in different ways.
Some I agree with, some I don't. The point remians people will not stop expressing because YOU don't like it.

And the ME3 endings being likened to the HOLOCAUST were the straw that broke the camel's back.

Again, you appear to have trouble distinguishing between thematical implications and real life moral and sociological impact, unless there's a post I'm not aware of that outright claims the latter.

You said both. That you "refuted" my "arguments". Which you never did.

No, I simply REFUSE to join the screeching chorus of fanatics. Even if I am not happy with the endings.

Being constructive helps. Being arrogant and vindictive proves your detractors right.

Yes, there is. More than one. "Yes, I just likened ME3 to the holocaust." SICKENING.

[xsdob]

Well, looks like it's time to stop being civil and start throwing napalm at eachother, good old BSN flamewars, fueling fandom schisms because no one want's to ask the other a question without loading it with implications first.

[DemGeth]

xsdob wrote...

Well, looks like it's time to stop being civil and start throwing napalm at eachother, good old BSN flamewars, fueling fandom schisms because no one want's to ask the other a question without loading it with implications first.

Hey what are you trying to say, that I'm stupid?






jking

[Lightice_av]

The Angry One wrote...

Wow, more veiled insults. Is this all you can do to defend this? Imply your opponents are unintelligent?
No, sorry. Mass Effect has never left itself open to wild speculation regarding it's resolutions, it should not now. In fact we were outright promised it would not.

But please continue to insult those who disagree with you all the while claiming it is we who do that. That will get you far.

Pretty remarkable that when I'm saying that I don't hate the ending, I get volleys of insults from left and right over what a stupid sheep/paid mole I am, but when I say what I think about the hate-filled vitriol that every other post in discussion about the endings contain, I am insulting the intelligence of the ranters.

I did not call you stupid. I said that you prefer lowest common denominator to ambiguity. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Lankist]

Xarathos wrote...


You misunderstand my position, evidently: I believe there IS such a thing as objective analysis, otherwise I wouldn't have picked the position I have in the debate. I believe a Monet is objectively better than a fingerpainting I made in kindergarten, for example.

My position, namely: I actually LIKE the indoctrination theory as far as it goes, but hate the fact that it needs to exist in order to explain the glaring flaws I percieve in the ending.

I'll respond to your other points as follows. I do not wish to attack the views of others, merely to explain my own.

Words

Buddy, if you need to explain the symbolism, it isn't symbolism.

Modifié par Lankist, 19 mars 2012 - 06:27 .

[Persephone]

I am Sovereign wrote...

Some people have a fetish for eating excrement, humanity will always have outliers that like things the VAST majority do not. Maybe they're just being contrarian.

WOW.

Another entitled, arrogant insult.

Because the MAJORITY is/was always right. History AND the arts teach us otherwise.

If Majority mattered, girlies like Spears and Aguilera are better singers than Renee Fleming who's loved by the "minority" and not even a known name to the majority.

[The Angry One]

Persephone wrote...

You said both. That you "refuted" my "arguments". Which you never did.

Arguments that we shouldn't express our anger as we do. Now you just mock us and tar us all with the same brush.

No, I simply REFUSE to join the screeching chorus of fanatics. Even if I am not happy with the endings.

"Screeching chorus of fanatics" see, phrasing like that is why I don't take you seriously.

Being constructive helps.

Tell you what, if BioWare comes here and talks with us, genunely TALKS with us and about our grievances I am 100% sure you'll see a lot more constructiveness.

Being arrogant and vindictive proves your detractors right.

I am being neither, however if someone insults me I will defend myself.

Yes, there is. More than one. "Yes, I just likened ME3 to the holocaust." SICKENING.

I have only seen thematic comparisons. I can't speak for anything stronger than that as I haven't seen it, nor does that reflect on most of us.

[Persephone]

Lightice_av wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Wow, more veiled insults. Is this all you can do to defend this? Imply your opponents are unintelligent?
No, sorry. Mass Effect has never left itself open to wild speculation regarding it's resolutions, it should not now. In fact we were outright promised it would not.

But please continue to insult those who disagree with you all the while claiming it is we who do that. That will get you far.

Pretty remarkable that when I'm saying that I don't hate the ending, I get volleys of insults from left and right over what a stupid sheep/paid mole I am, but when I say what I think about the hate-filled vitriol that every other post in discussion about the endings contain, I am insulting the intelligence of the ranters.

I did not call you stupid. I said that you prefer lowest common denominator to ambiguity. Nothing more, nothing less.

I do have to ask this too: Why are those who mock those who like the endings first to cry foul when they are called out on their behavior?

[The Angry One]

Lightice_av wrote...

Pretty remarkable that when I'm saying that I don't hate the ending, I get volleys of insults from left and right over what a stupid sheep/paid mole I am, but when I say what I think about the hate-filled vitriol that every other post in discussion about the endings contain, I am insulting the intelligence of the ranters.

I did not call you stupid. I said that you prefer lowest common denominator to ambiguity. Nothing more, nothing less.

I submit that you should keep the insults to those insulting you or - better yet - do not sink to their level at all.
I take lowest common denominator as an insult. I am not looking for an action flick with a cliche ending. I'm looknig for meaningful resolution and an outcome affected by my work that I put into the game.

[Xarathos]

Lankist wrote...

Xarathos wrote...


You misunderstand my position, evidently: I believe there IS such a thing as objective analysis, otherwise I wouldn't have picked the position I have in the debate. I believe a Monet is objectively better than a fingerpainting I made in kindergarten, for example.

My position, namely: I actually LIKE the indoctrination theory as far as it goes, but hate the fact that it needs to exist in order to explain the glaring flaws I percieve in the ending.

I'll respond to your other points as follows. I do not wish to attack the views of others, merely to explain my own.

Words

Buddy, if you need to explain the symbolism, it isn't symbolism.

Or a Roger Ebert put it, "If you have to ask what it symbolized, it didn't."

[Xarathos]

The Angry One wrote...

Lightice_av wrote...

Pretty remarkable that when I'm saying that I don't hate the ending, I get volleys of insults from left and right over what a stupid sheep/paid mole I am, but when I say what I think about the hate-filled vitriol that every other post in discussion about the endings contain, I am insulting the intelligence of the ranters.

I did not call you stupid. I said that you prefer lowest common denominator to ambiguity. Nothing more, nothing less.

I submit that you should keep the insults to those insulting you or - better yet - do not sink to their level at all.
I take lowest common denominator as an insult. I am not looking for an action flick with a cliche ending. I'm looknig for meaningful resolution and an outcome affected by my work that I put into the game.

Well put, thank you.

[Ryokun1989]

Xarathos wrote...

Ryokun1989 wrote...

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.

You misunderstand my position, evidently: I believe there IS such a thing as objective analysis, otherwise I wouldn't have picked the position I have in the debate. I believe a Monet is objectively better than a fingerpainting I made in kindergarten, for example.

My position, namely: I actually LIKE the indoctrination theory as far as it goes, but hate the fact that it needs to exist in order to explain the glaring flaws I percieve in the ending.

I'll respond to your other points as follows. I do not wish to attack the views of others, merely to explain my own.

1) The god child is a villain because he views genocide as an acceptable solution to a problem, and that organic life IS that problem. Genocide is, to my thinking, universally evil. He created the reapers and sees their actions as acceptable. They are not.

2) I reject the theme of organics always fighting synthetics and always being destoryed by them, because I judge them on their merits as individuals. EDI and the geth do not fit this theme or trend, therefore I reject the assumption it is built upon as both racist and evil, and easily disproven from within the games own lore. I object strongly to the fact that Shepard fails to raise this objection, regardless of whether or not he is seen to be in a 'dream state.'

3) Practically anything other than what we got would be a happy ending, at this point. Anything that provides a sense of achievement and victory. And yes, I got the 'Shepard lives,' screen. It didn't help.

4) Being forced into a choice predicated on faulty logic requires me to invalidate the self-sacrifice of everyone who fought and died to get me to that point; Legion and Mordin both come to mind. I find this upsetting; moreso than Shepard's death alone would upset me. That would merely be sad, and I can accept sadness. And again, after all the sacrifices Shepard made to get there, letting the character LIVE wouldn't invalidate anything. The serious consequences have already happened.

5) The games replay value is null and void if I feel the outcome is going to be exactly the same no matter what I do in an RPG supposedly built around my choices. At the very least, it's lower than Mass Effect 2 was; there's nothing to chase. Even if Shepard died, I would accept that if not for the other glaring problems.

6) I never said I was. I was merely attempting to offer some perspective in response to the OP, who I felt was being just a bit inflamatory. I just don't see why we need to fight with each other. I'm entitled to my opinion, you're entitled to yours. Both are reasonable, they just arise from different premises. That is all.

I apologize if I present myself poorly; it was not my intention to be rude.

I'm sorry, it was I who mistyped, because I do think there is such a thing as objective analysis. I just don't think it can end with a statement such as 'good'. It'll always be relative to other works and the intention of the author.

If the God child's solution is genocide can be debated. He claims to help people ascend rather than kill them. It is my interpretation that the child is a for all intent and purposes a God and doesn't lie. Is he good or evil? Wrong question if you ask me. He 'reaps' civilizations so new ones can grow and a technological singularity can be avoided.

The created rebelling against their creators has always been a theme in Mass Effect. I accept it as one of the rules of the universe. It's basically the concept of technological singularity. In fact, that theory says a technological singularity is inevitable!

I don't think there are any other choices than the ones represented? If the Reapers go, so must their creation: the mass relays.

[saracen16]

Xarathos wrote...

Lankist wrote...

Xarathos wrote...


You misunderstand my position, evidently: I believe there IS such a thing as objective analysis, otherwise I wouldn't have picked the position I have in the debate. I believe a Monet is objectively better than a fingerpainting I made in kindergarten, for example.

My position, namely: I actually LIKE the indoctrination theory as far as it goes, but hate the fact that it needs to exist in order to explain the glaring flaws I percieve in the ending.

I'll respond to your other points as follows. I do not wish to attack the views of others, merely to explain my own.

Words

Buddy, if you need to explain the symbolism, it isn't symbolism.

Or a Roger Ebert put it, "If you have to ask what it symbolized, it didn't."

I disagree: a lot of people do not understand symbolism because they're too busy taking the issue literally. If you take the issue too literally, then of course symbolism should be explained.

[The Angry One]

Persephone wrote...

I do have to ask this too: Why are those who mock those who like the endings first to cry foul when they are called out on their behavior?

I do not mock. I disagree, and claim that they're objectively wrong based on presented evidence.
If they want to keep liking the ending, fine. However justifications such as "it's art", "you don't understand" or "you want a happy ending with unicorns and rainbows and Krogan cakes for Shepard" *will* meet derision based entirely on ATTITUDE.

[hawat333]

I like the endings. So I'm stupid.
Well, you know, that tells more about you than it tells about me.

[dfstone]

GhostlyMaiden wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Ryokun1989 wrote...

That's still the control ending. Shepard selfleslly gives himself to control the synthetics for eternity.

But it's also about order, whereas renegade represents chaos.

Yeah like the Illusive Man wanted to.
Wait, what?

Rewriting the heretics is paragon. Destroying them is renegade.

Letting Legion upload the code is paragon. Letting the geth die is renegade.

Controlling the reapers is paragon. Destroying them is renegade.

Anybody seeing a pattern here?

Thats why the destroy platform is bathed in red light, the control is bathed in blue light.  And the neutral option, synergy, is green.  But I think ME3 makes it a point to blur the line between paragon and renegade.  If you look at the end options, each of them is a plot line in one of the games and is one of the choices of a major character in the games.

In ME1 Saren wanted organics to merge with the reapers = Synergy Option
In ME2 The Illusive Man (Cerberus) wanted to control the reapers = Control Option
In ME3 Anderson wants to destroy the reapers = Destroy Option

You're basically choosing who's philosophy to agree with in the end.  Its not a paragon or renegade choice, imo.

Modifié par dfstone, 19 mars 2012 - 06:36 .

[Persephone]

The Angry One wrote...


Arguments that we shouldn't express our anger as we do. Now you just mock us and tar us all with the same brush.


"Screeching chorus of fanatics" see, phrasing like that is why I don't take you seriously.


Tell you what, if BioWare comes here and talks with us, genunely TALKS with us and about our grievances I am 100% sure you'll see a lot more constructiveness.


I have only seen thematic comparisons. I can't speak for anything stronger than that as I haven't seen it, nor does that reflect on most of us.

Sound familiar? You reap what your "movement" sows. Speak up against those who insult those who like the endings....if you want to be a paragon of justice.

Can you refute that you people ARE fanatics? That the loudest of you are just that?

Why should they. given your behavior? You'll catch more flies with...etc. Ah, diplomacy.

There is NO comparison. NONE. To even suggest this is disgusting and ignorant.

[I am Sovereign]

saracen16 wrote...

I am Sovereign wrote...

Some people have a fetish for eating excrement, humanity will always have outliers that like things the VAST majority do not. Maybe they're just being contrarian.

Alas, the level of arrogance is astounding.

"Geth say 1 is less than 2. Heretics say 2 is less than 3. Both are correct."

Arrogance? You might want to look up the definition of that word, I merely acknowledged that fact that people try to disagree with popular opinions just to be different. At no point did I say my opinion was more valid than anyone else's.

[YeGodz]

Dear posters:

If you're one of the many in this thread who have insisted that most or all of the people who liked the ending are paid shills, I have a question for you:

Who, exactly, are you trying to convince?

[TheBlackBaron]

That post is a good way to get people on your side, OP.

[Lightice_av]

The Angry One wrote...

I submit that you should keep the insults to those insulting you or - better yet - do not sink to their level at all.
I take lowest common denominator as an insult. I am not looking for an action flick with a cliche ending. I'm looknig for meaningful resolution and an outcome affected by my work that I put into the game.

I have made effort to avoid insulting anybody. I am not, however at best of moods after the aforementioned volleys of insults, so you just have to accept that I'm being rather prickly at the moment.

And it's the action flick cliché ending that you will get with your behaviour. If Bioware publishes a new ending, they will make it as boringly inoffensive as humanly possible to avoid the same fan reaction again. They'll aim straight at the lower reaches of the lowest common denominator and give the ranters exactly what they've been wishing for: something entirely predictable, ready-chewed garbage. Because nothing less will satisfy even half of the complainers at this point.