1309 réponses à ce sujet

[Thumb Fu]

calling people stupid for liking the endings is a bit judgmental. People are entitled to their opinion and can interpret the game as they see fit. I personally don't dislike the endings, i just think there needs to be some expansion and elaboration on the endings.

[Diablos2525]

Deithmarez wrote...

Because casual gamers that made bad decisions in high school are just now getting down to finishing it after dealing with kids eight months after the condom tore. Rationalization has deteriorated and thus comprehension is delayed.

Lol pretty much.

Modifié par Diablos2525, 19 mars 2012 - 11:26 .

[AtreiyaN7]

Kiara wrote...

It seems a good amount of the people who dislike the ending have either given up or have already said their complaints and are waiting for Bioware to make the next move. I am not sure how anyone can like the endings... lol different expectations I suppose? or they haven't played all three games.. I am not sure lol

Oh, another one of you (and by "you" I mean those who claims that people who have played all three games can't possibly like the endings and have something wrong with them). I have:

• At least three runs through ME1, and I'll round down for the sake of convenience because it's been a while, of at least 30 hours for a total of 90 hours.
• At least two full runs through ME2 (not counting DLC which kind of messed up my time-keeping) of around 34-35 hours each, so let's just call it 70 hours.
•  One run through ME3 at about 34 hours and am currently on a second run through the game.

So, yes, I have close to 200 hours invested in all the games and will probably go past 200 hours once I complete my second ME3 run. If you factor in the amount of time I've spent in ME3 co-op, it actually goes way over 200 hours too. I liked the ending that I chose - despite knowing full well that there are plot holes, etc. because the ideas behind the endings interested me (given my interest in robotics and AI purely as a layperson/sci-fi fan).

Unlike you guys, I'm okay with people having different opions because I feel that they have valid reasons for disliking the endings - just like those of us who like the endings have our own reasons for feeling that way. As a result, I don't try to force my opinions on others or call them stupid or otherwise imply that they can't possibly be long-term fans of the series if they hated the endings. I'll certainly defend my choice and my position, but I don't go out of my way to insult people for theirs.

[rtv053]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

vertigo72 wrote...

Why I like the endings? Because they are good. You just have to think a little bit to see a whole picture but when you did everything makes sense.

People thought that ME is a space soap opera with some sci-fi, turns out it's a hard sci-fi with some space soap opera. That hurts.

As someone who appreciates hard sci-fi I take offense to that.
You don't know what hard science fiction is, if you consider that ending to be it.

The Crucible and Citadel combine to make
1) you control the Reapers, but only through some a pulse rather than the methods they use among themselves (probably Quantum Entanglement)
2)  Destroy the Reapers by shooting a tube which sends out a pulse of radiation that only targets synthetics (hard scifi knows that EMP can be lethal to humans)
3) The worst offender rewrite all organic and synthetic live to be the same... SAY WHUT!?

That ending made the game into a sci-fantasy.

Thematically, it has a lot in common with many works of hard sci-fi. And remember, hard sci-fi isn't just about being rigorously scientific - can have a focus on scientific and technical DETAIL, without being actually plausible. i.e. explaining in great detail how a ship's drive works, regardless of whether it is even possible.
Some of the best works of 'hard' SF have a large number of parts that are essentially unbelievable/not possible. And don't give me that crap that 'well, hard sci-fi is THEORETICALLY possible'. More often than not, it really isn't.

Good 'hard' sci-fi can be found from the likes of Alastair Reynolds (for Revelation Space, which I think was most likely a huge influence on Mass Effect), Kim Stanley Robinson (the Mars trilogy), and Greg Bear (Blood Music, Eon). All of those books contain unbelievable or unexplainable things.

[Stealthy Cake]

Whats so wanderful about this is the fact that if they release a new ending DLC, it will be COMPLETELY OPTIONAL if you want it or not.
So that Mass Effect can have the ending the serie deserves. :DDDD

[AtreiyaN7]

Diablos2525 wrote...

Deithmarez wrote...

Because casual gamers that made bad decisions in high school are just now getting down to finishing it after dealing with kids eight months after the condom tore. Rationalization has deteriorated and thus comprehension is delayed.

Lol pretty much.

Immature and insulting. *golfclap*

[Diablos2525]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Kiara wrote...

It seems a good amount of the people who dislike the ending have either given up or have already said their complaints and are waiting for Bioware to make the next move. I am not sure how anyone can like the endings... lol different expectations I suppose? or they haven't played all three games.. I am not sure lol

Oh, another one of you (and by "you" I mean those who claims that people who have played all three games can't possibly like the endings and have something wrong with them). I have:

• At least three runs through ME1, and I'll round down for the sake of convenience because it's been a while, of at least 30 hours for a total of 90 hours.
• At least two full runs through ME2 (not counting DLC which kind of messed up my time-keeping) of around 34-35 hours each, so let's just call it 70 hours.
•  One run through ME3 at about 34 hours and am currently on a second run through the game.

So, yes, I have close to 200 hours invested in all the games and will probably go past 200 hours once I complete my second ME3 run. If you factor in the amount of time I've spent in ME3 co-op, it actually goes way over 200 hours too. I liked the ending that I chose - despite knowing full well that there are plot holes, etc. because the ideas behind the endings interested me (given my interest in robotics and AI purely as a layperson/sci-fi fan).

Unlike you guys, I'm okay with people having different opions because I feel that they have valid reasons for disliking the endings - just like those of us who like the endings have our own reasons for feeling that way. As a result, I don't try to force my opinions on others or call them stupid or otherwise imply that they can't possibly be long-term fans of the series if they hated the endings. I'll certainly defend my choice and my position, but I don't go out of my way to insult people for theirs.

This is a sci-fi series, centered around technological advances of the future and player choice. Not space magic, gilligans island, deus ex machina BS.

"It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C."~ Casey Hudson on Mass effect 3 endings prior to release.

Care to explain that quote?

[Vikali]

Diablos2525 wrote...

Deithmarez wrote...

Because casual gamers that made bad decisions in high school are just now getting down to finishing it after dealing with kids eight months after the condom tore. Rationalization has deteriorated and thus comprehension is delayed.

Lol pretty much.

Every single run of Mass Effect I have done has been completionist. Every. Single. One. I have over five different Shepards of both sexes. I'm on my third completionist run of ME3. I'm casual?

[sonicphoto]

 If they make the indoctrination theory real, then yes I will love the ending, because it would be a brilliant concept. If not, then no I won't like it. I suppose some people just find it fun to see mass relays being destroyed. Lol just kidding, all respect to those that like it.

[pilot2969]

KitePolaris wrote...

pilot2969 wrote...

In all honesty if all they did was wrap up the plot holes I would be a lot happier. I for one agree with you about the execution of the ending, it had a lot of potential, and I understood what they were going for. I was disappointed with how they handled the war assets, and ignored a lot of our decisions. I really did feel at the end of the game like I wasted my time because none of the decisions I made felt like it mattered at the end, again though, closing the plot holes created by the ending would make me a lot happier and able to settle for what we were provided with regarding an ending. I still think it was a cheap, forced ending, but I don't hate it either, it just made me feel empty which is not how I personally wanted to experience the ending. 
 

Honestly, I actually do think my choices mattered. I find a ot of people, not all mind you, however, a good portion of the ones who go toe to toe with me don't realize the whole galaxy wasn't in the Sol system. I've had people tell me the Quarians will never see their homeworld and the Krogans will never have children because they're trapped in Sol. But they forget that the other speicies didn't bring every single member to fight.

Like I said, the execution irks me, and I think the Normandy scene was a poor attempt to satisfy the fans since iirc the squad mates were supposed to die. And I think they tried to make it be more uplifting but didn't think it through. 

That's a great way to look at it, I feel a lot of fans need to be SHOWN this though. Imagining how the galaxy turned out is one thing, but when you're paying for a game you expect to have the conflict resolution presented to you visually, and I think that's where things fall apart. Sure not all the Krogan were in the Sol system, but Wrex was, and he was the key player in unifying the Krogan and building a better society, so what happens to them now? This is only one example, but it's issues like this that actually bug me, and it's also things that can be explored in future titles and DLC, but for the time being it's a frustration, it's like ending the movie Saving Private Ryan without cutting back to the epilouge scene prior to the credits, could the ending have worked? Yes, but it would have left a lot of questions that the audience was required to "imagine" the answer to. 

[Vikali]

Diablos2525 wrote...

This is a sci-fi series, centered around technological advances of the future and player choice. Not space magic, gilligans island, deus ex machina BS.

"It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C."~ Casey Hudson on Mass effect 3 endings prior to release.

Care to explain that quote?

Condescending much? No one is saying the endings are perfect. Does something have to be perfect in order to like it? Their idea was in the right direction, in my opinion. And I like it. Would I like clarification? Absolutely. But you are the kind of person that hurts your own cause. Immature, instulting, and condescending.

[Vikali]

pilot2969 wrote...

KitePolaris wrote...

pilot2969 wrote...

In all honesty if all they did was wrap up the plot holes I would be a lot happier. I for one agree with you about the execution of the ending, it had a lot of potential, and I understood what they were going for. I was disappointed with how they handled the war assets, and ignored a lot of our decisions. I really did feel at the end of the game like I wasted my time because none of the decisions I made felt like it mattered at the end, again though, closing the plot holes created by the ending would make me a lot happier and able to settle for what we were provided with regarding an ending. I still think it was a cheap, forced ending, but I don't hate it either, it just made me feel empty which is not how I personally wanted to experience the ending. 
 

Honestly, I actually do think my choices mattered. I find a ot of people, not all mind you, however, a good portion of the ones who go toe to toe with me don't realize the whole galaxy wasn't in the Sol system. I've had people tell me the Quarians will never see their homeworld and the Krogans will never have children because they're trapped in Sol. But they forget that the other speicies didn't bring every single member to fight.

Like I said, the execution irks me, and I think the Normandy scene was a poor attempt to satisfy the fans since iirc the squad mates were supposed to die. And I think they tried to make it be more uplifting but didn't think it through. 

That's a great way to look at it, I feel a lot of fans need to be SHOWN this though. Imagining how the galaxy turned out is one thing, but when you're paying for a game you expect to have the conflict resolution presented to you visually, and I think that's where things fall apart. Sure not all the Krogan were in the Sol system, but Wrex was, and he was the key player in unifying the Krogan and building a better society, so what happens to them now? This is only one example, but it's issues like this that actually bug me, and it's also things that can be explored in future titles and DLC, but for the time being it's a frustration, it's like ending the movie Saving Private Ryan without cutting back to the epilouge scene prior to the credits, could the ending have worked? Yes, but it would have left a lot of questions that the audience was required to "imagine" the answer to. 

You're forgetting Bakara. I guaruntee she wasn't in the Sol system and is very level headed like Wrex. I have no doubt she'll do well. She's strong.

Modifié par KitePolaris, 19 mars 2012 - 11:34 .

[Valo_Soren]

nomoredruggs wrote...



As for why, I don't know, maybe they interpret them in a way that is satisfying to them.

You hit the nail on the head right there. I interpret it in a way that satisfies me. Shepard has freed the galaxy from total control. He made a lot of sacrifices yes, but for the first time the galaxy can decide it's own fate rather then being forced to evolved along specific paths. Thats the long and short of it. However, I'm at the point now that I will probably still like a new or altered ending because I love Mass Effect in a most bias fashion and even I who like the current endings would be to intrigued to see the different ending options if they add them with DLC and will want to download it.  

[Poison_Berrie]

rtv053 wrote...

Thematically, it has a lot in common with many works of hard sci-fi. And remember, hard sci-fi isn't just about being rigorously scientific - can have a focus on scientific and technical DETAIL, without being actually plausible. i.e. explaining in great detail how a ship's drive works, regardless of whether it is even possible.
Some of the best works of 'hard' SF have a large number of parts that are essentially unbelievable/not possible. And don't give me that crap that 'well, hard sci-fi is THEORETICALLY possible'. More often than not, it really isn't.

Good 'hard' sci-fi can be found from the likes of Alastair Reynolds (for Revelation Space, which I think was most likely a huge influence on Mass Effect), Kim Stanley Robinson (the Mars trilogy), and Greg Bear (Blood Music, Eon). All of those books contain unbelievable or unexplainable things.

No it's not.
Hard Science-fiction is notable for it's treatement of science and doing research. 
It does take some leeway by including some impossible things, but it knows the consequences and the limits of those. It doesn't introduce eleventh hour devices that rewrite the entire galaxy. Hard Scifi is more than anythign internally consistent. 
I've read some Revelation Space novels. It's has some impossible things, but it neatly works it into the lore and actual physics.

[Diablos2525]

KitePolaris wrote...

Diablos2525 wrote...

This is a sci-fi series, centered around technological advances of the future and player choice. Not space magic, gilligans island, deus ex machina BS.

"It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C."~ Casey Hudson on Mass effect 3 endings prior to release.

Care to explain that quote?

Condescending much? No one is saying the endings are perfect. Does something have to be perfect in order to like it? Their idea was in the right direction, in my opinion. And I like it. Would I like clarification? Absolutely. But you are the kind of person that hurts your own cause. Immature, instulting, and condescending.

How about you explain away the quote instead of fling personal insults, oh wait ...you can't.

1)Introducing a new and important character in the last 10 minutes of a story, is poor writing, lazy, and cheap.
2) Not to mention the circular logic. Do you know what a circular argument is?
Here you go:

[JerichohHill]

I've put about 200 hours into Mass Effect 1-3.

I fully believed, prior to coming to these forums, that the ending was an Indoctrination Attempt.  Reading that thread on it convinced me completely.  Ergo, I very much liked the ending, because I think it ties nicely to a running theme in the game.

That said, I have read this entire thread, and posters like Diablo represent those who want the ending to be more fleshed out horribly.  I've been thoroughly disgusted with those acting like Diablo, calling us gamers who actually liked the ending as stupid, immature, non-thinking, what have you, consistently and repeatedly with little reprimand from the community (Appreciation to all who voiced a sentiment that it is OKAY to be okay with the ending, and its OKAY to want a better ending, that is mature).

I respect the argument that the ending left much to be desired.  I'd prefer a more fleshed out ending.  I'd like my Shepard to die killing Harbinger, and see an epilogue.  That said, I'm not unsatisfied at all with its current state.

Modifié par JerichohHill, 19 mars 2012 - 11:40 .

[Vikali]

Diablos2525 wrote...

KitePolaris wrote...

Diablos2525 wrote...

This is a sci-fi series, centered around technological advances of the future and player choice. Not space magic, gilligans island, deus ex machina BS.

"It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C."~ Casey Hudson on Mass effect 3 endings prior to release.

Care to explain that quote?

Condescending much? No one is saying the endings are perfect. Does something have to be perfect in order to like it? Their idea was in the right direction, in my opinion. And I like it. Would I like clarification? Absolutely. But you are the kind of person that hurts your own cause. Immature, instulting, and condescending.

How about you explain away the quote instead of fling personal insults, oh wait ...you can't.

1)Introducing a new and important character in the last 10 minutes of a story, is poor writing, lazy, and cheap.
2) Not to mention the circular logic. Do you know what a circular argument is?
Here you go:

I'm not insulting you. You came in here insulting. And you obviously didn't even read my post because I don't disagree with you. I want clarification, too.

[pilot2969]

KitePolaris wrote...

pilot2969 wrote...

KitePolaris wrote...

pilot2969 wrote...

In all honesty if all they did was wrap up the plot holes I would be a lot happier. I for one agree with you about the execution of the ending, it had a lot of potential, and I understood what they were going for. I was disappointed with how they handled the war assets, and ignored a lot of our decisions. I really did feel at the end of the game like I wasted my time because none of the decisions I made felt like it mattered at the end, again though, closing the plot holes created by the ending would make me a lot happier and able to settle for what we were provided with regarding an ending. I still think it was a cheap, forced ending, but I don't hate it either, it just made me feel empty which is not how I personally wanted to experience the ending. 
 

Honestly, I actually do think my choices mattered. I find a ot of people, not all mind you, however, a good portion of the ones who go toe to toe with me don't realize the whole galaxy wasn't in the Sol system. I've had people tell me the Quarians will never see their homeworld and the Krogans will never have children because they're trapped in Sol. But they forget that the other speicies didn't bring every single member to fight.

Like I said, the execution irks me, and I think the Normandy scene was a poor attempt to satisfy the fans since iirc the squad mates were supposed to die. And I think they tried to make it be more uplifting but didn't think it through. 

That's a great way to look at it, I feel a lot of fans need to be SHOWN this though. Imagining how the galaxy turned out is one thing, but when you're paying for a game you expect to have the conflict resolution presented to you visually, and I think that's where things fall apart. Sure not all the Krogan were in the Sol system, but Wrex was, and he was the key player in unifying the Krogan and building a better society, so what happens to them now? This is only one example, but it's issues like this that actually bug me, and it's also things that can be explored in future titles and DLC, but for the time being it's a frustration, it's like ending the movie Saving Private Ryan without cutting back to the epilouge scene prior to the credits, could the ending have worked? Yes, but it would have left a lot of questions that the audience was required to "imagine" the answer to. 

You're forgetting Bakara. I guaruntee she wasn't in the Sol system and is very level headed like Wrex. I have no doubt she'll do well. She's strong.

I'm curious to get your interpretation on the Geth / Quarian war then, because it does fly in the face of everything the catalyst tells you, which is that the created will always rebel against the creator and thus destroy organic life. To me the catalysts arugment no longer makes sense because you solved the conflict between created/creator. Why is it then necessary to listen to the catalyst? It would be like solving the conflict in the middle east, bringing peace between the Muslims and the Jews and then being told that you have to destroy one of them to prevent war, how is that logical?

[Diablos2525]

For all these jokers saying your decisions did affect the endings. HAVE YOU WATCHED THE ENDINGS 0_o? Here you go. All the different colored explosions. Lol.

[Diablos2525]

KitePolaris wrote...

Diablos2525 wrote...

KitePolaris wrote...

Diablos2525 wrote...

This is a sci-fi series, centered around technological advances of the future and player choice. Not space magic, gilligans island, deus ex machina BS.

"It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C."~ Casey Hudson on Mass effect 3 endings prior to release.

Care to explain that quote?

Condescending much? No one is saying the endings are perfect. Does something have to be perfect in order to like it? Their idea was in the right direction, in my opinion. And I like it. Would I like clarification? Absolutely. But you are the kind of person that hurts your own cause. Immature, instulting, and condescending.

How about you explain away the quote instead of fling personal insults, oh wait ...you can't.

1)Introducing a new and important character in the last 10 minutes of a story, is poor writing, lazy, and cheap.
2) Not to mention the circular logic. Do you know what a circular argument is?
Here you go:

I'm not insulting you. You came in here insulting. And you obviously didn't even read my post because I don't disagree with you. I want clarification, too.

Sorry it just upsets me that people like this ending,  because if enough people like it Bioware will take it as a fact that they can get away with this kind of stuff in the future which frustrates me.

[Valo_Soren]

I just want to point out that Bioware said they are still considering all feed back, and that altering/changing the ending has not been ruled out, now this really is mostly beating a dead horse, i think its time to be more patient and less hostile.

[Vikali]

pilot2969 wrote...

I'm curious to get your interpretation on the Geth / Quarian war then, because it does fly in the face of everything the catalyst tells you, which is that the created will always rebel against the creator and thus destroy organic life. To me the catalysts arugment no longer makes sense because you solved the conflict between created/creator. Why is it then necessary to listen to the catalyst? It would be like solving the conflict in the middle east, bringing peace between the Muslims and the Jews and then being told that you have to destroy one of them to prevent war, how is that logical?

I'm of the mind the Catalyst lied mainly due to Shepard surviving the red ending in the first place. And he relies on his cybernetics to surivive judging by thte horrendous state he was in when he was found.

[AtreiyaN7]

Diablos2525 wrote...

"It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C."~ Casey Hudson on Mass effect 3 endings prior to release.

Care to explain that quote?

I don't have to - try asking Casey Hudson who is the one who said it. They might have had ideas that they were playing around with earlier on, but ultimately they decided to go with the endings they chose, which amount to three main endings with minor variations based on your actions (the state of the Earth, the breath ending, etc. from what I hear). If I want to get nitpicky and technical, I could point out that those variations mean there are more than three endings.

And if I really wanted to nitpick and be sarcastic, I could point out that what he says is true in that the endings  similar enough that you can't tell "whether you got ending A, B, or C."  Also, your completely tangential point doesn't address the issue of liking the endings/not liking the endings and your assumptions about those of us who are fine with the existing endings. But please feel free to continue insulting people and/or bringing up complelely unrelated issues.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 19 mars 2012 - 11:47 .

[Diablos2525]

JerichohHill wrote...

I've put about 200 hours into Mass Effect 1-3.

I fully believed, prior to coming to these forums, that the ending was an Indoctrination Attempt.  Reading that thread on it convinced me completely.  Ergo, I very much liked the ending, because I think it ties nicely to a running theme in the game.

That said, I have read this entire thread, and posters like Diablo represent those who want the ending to be more fleshed out horribly.  I've been thoroughly disgusted with those acting like Diablo, calling us gamers who actually liked the ending as stupid, immature, non-thinking, what have you, consistently and repeatedly with little reprimand from the community (Appreciation to all who voiced a sentiment that it is OKAY to be okay with the ending, and its OKAY to want a better ending, that is mature).

I respect the argument that the ending left much to be desired.  I'd prefer a more fleshed out ending.  I'd like my Shepard to die killing Harbinger, and see an epilogue.  That said, I'm not unsatisfied at all with its current state.

"It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you
can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or
C."~ Casey Hudson on Mass effect 3 endings prior to release.

Explain?

[Vikali]

Diablos2525 wrote...

KitePolaris wrote...

Diablos2525 wrote...

KitePolaris wrote...

Diablos2525 wrote...

This is a sci-fi series, centered around technological advances of the future and player choice. Not space magic, gilligans island, deus ex machina BS.

"It's not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B, or C."~ Casey Hudson on Mass effect 3 endings prior to release.

Care to explain that quote?

Condescending much? No one is saying the endings are perfect. Does something have to be perfect in order to like it? Their idea was in the right direction, in my opinion. And I like it. Would I like clarification? Absolutely. But you are the kind of person that hurts your own cause. Immature, instulting, and condescending.

How about you explain away the quote instead of fling personal insults, oh wait ...you can't.

1)Introducing a new and important character in the last 10 minutes of a story, is poor writing, lazy, and cheap.
2) Not to mention the circular logic. Do you know what a circular argument is?
Here you go:

I'm not insulting you. You came in here insulting. And you obviously didn't even read my post because I don't disagree with you. I want clarification, too.

Sorry it just upsets me that people like this ending,  because if enough people like it Bioware will take it as a fact that they can get away with this kind of stuff in the future which frustrates me.

Don't even try apologizing to me because I know you don't mean it and I know you're going to gear up to insult me again in a few minutes. I like the endings. I don't like the execution. I like the idea. I want them to clarify things. I don't need an overhaul. I don't care if they add new endings. I don't care if it's optional DLC. I don't want others to dffer because they are of different view points.

I'm tired of them saying we are pushing their ideas on us when they are the ones that derail all the threads. One that goes "Hey, I love Conrad" in five minutes is filled with "I DONT BECUZ HEZ DED AND IT DUSNT MATTER AND IF U DONT AGREE WITH ME UR STOOPID."

I'm one of Mass Effect's biggest fans. I have written stories of the outside runiverse, I spend a lot of my time in ME related things. It's my scifi fix. Like LOTR for a while was my fantasy fix. I've read every book more than once and the comics. In fact all the books and comics are sitting next to me on my desk. I've invested so much time in this game.

Am I lesser than you? Can you truly say you are better than me because you disagree?