274 réponses à ce sujet

[Faerillis]

leonia42 wrote...

LeeluMultipass wrote...

Did it not bother you at all that two of those endings went against absolutely everything that we've learned about the Reapers in the Mass Effect Universe?

Personally I was a bit miffed that the synthesis ending was framed as the perfect solution when it was basically everything that Saron stood for in ME1. Control is obvious....we know they can't be controlled. I know it's Commander Shepard and all...but he's still just a human. He can't actually control the reapers. Just no way.

And of course the Destroy ending. Well...Shepard just spent 3 games (or maybe just 2 depending on how you want to see it) proving that synthetic life and organic life and exist peacefully. I mean...I would expect Shepard to shove the options back into the Catalyst's face at this point.

I was frustrated because the choices didn't make sense as they were given. You didn't feel that way? Please elaborate. I'm honestly trying to see this from all sides because I WANT to enjoy the endings. I genuinely wish I could replay ME3 right now and feel right about it.

You're supposed to feel frustrated. The choices suck. That's the point. It was a hard choice to make and it forced you to really evaluate what was most important to the galaxy as a whole. You can't expect the Reapers to suddenly play fair in the end.

Except the choices are prohibitive and are barely choices. Choices that suck in the end, no matter what, are fine. However my Shepard would have refused all 3. He and I (well, He as I) would have told SparkleSon that the Mass Relays being destroyed would be as good as destroying all life in the Galaxy, and that if CatalystChild didn't take the Reapers and go peacefully, then Shepard would stand and watch as the galactic force he brought fought to the last man and did as much damage as possible.

[Leonia]

Just because you didn't get a reward for your choice doesn't mean it was ignored, there's not always a direct consequence to be had. The choices weren't lacking, the results may be, depending on what you needed to feel justified in making that choice (but then you're metagaming and not experiencing things as they happened, as Shepard saw it).

[Leonia]

Faerillis wrote...

Except the choices are prohibitive and are barely choices. Choices that suck in the end, no matter what, are fine. However my Shepard would have refused all 3. He and I (well, He as I) would have told SparkleSon that the Mass Relays being destroyed would be as good as destroying all life in the Galaxy, and that if CatalystChild didn't take the Reapers and go peacefully, then Shepard would stand and watch as the galactic force he brought fought to the last man and did as much damage as possible.

But you couldn't refuse all three, imagine how Shepard feels at that moment. Life's not fair and when you are deciding the fate of the galaxy it's doubly unfair. You can dream about what if and imagine how it could have been but that's not the hand you were dealt. Play your cards as you have them instead of waiting for a new hand or you risk losing everything.

[Miths]

I don't feel the least bit mislead.
After someone pointed me to a Google Docs document someone had compiled which listed a bunch of more or less glaring plot holes (I stopped reading part way through, I hadn't noticed most of them myself - I tend to focus on and often only see the big picture rather than the details in everything I do and every kind of fiction I consume - so I saw no reason to risk spoiling what had been a great ending for me), I'll admit that from an objective point of view the ending was probably rather flawed and lacking in consistency, but if I abstract from all those inconsistencies I didn't spot anyway (other than a few relating to events and character behaviours in the latter hours of ME3), I loved how the ending (I chose control) played out.

Shepard giving up her life seemed like a fitting end for a larger than life hero - and what I had sort of expected the series to end with (having her skip off to live happily ever after with Liara would have been somewhat unsatisfying I suspect).
Destroying the mass relays and leaving the galaxy fractured, in chaos and no doubt with millions or billions yet to die and possibly entire civilizations crumbling as a result, also fit excellently with my view of life, the universe and what I tend to like in sci-fi - and it wasn't all dark but also ended with what I perceived as hope for a new future for the galaxy (which was further solidified in the post credits epilogue), exemplified with parts of the stranded Normandy crew (in my case Joker, EDI and Liara) walking into the sunlight on a lush planet.
Just because interstellar travel and communication is suddenly cut off doesn't mean that sentient life is going to die out. Chaos, fear, wars, famine and many other unpleasantries will no doubt ensue on many planets - and technology and societies will be set back centuries or more in many places - but if all that was any hindrance for life none of us would be here playing Mass Effect .

As for supposedly not having "my" choices matter enough in the final outcome - while I agree that what I had chosen for Shepard over the course of the three games large turned out to be irrelevant in the end, I'm perfectly fine with that.
What you do along the journey doesn't necessarily matter one bit at the end of it (and yes, that's obviously a metaphor I feel can be applied to more than just the ME series), but many - though certainly not all - of the steps you take along that journey are nevertheless responsible for making sure you reach that end.

I also didn't mind that some questions were left unanswered or that we didn't get to see what happened at the end to most of the travelling companions from these three games. Shepard got the chance to talk to and say good luck and goodbye to all of them in London before the final battle.

Modifié par Miths, 20 mars 2012 - 06:34 .

[Lugaidster]

leonia42 wrote...

That's why it's so hard to be ok with the ending, people were never going to be totally satisfied with it, no matter how hard the devs tried.

I'm sorry but that's just a cop-out. I'm pretty sure they could've given it a better shot.

leonia42 wrote... 

I think as gamers we grew very attached to those relationships, so much so that we lost sight of what Mass Effect was ultimately about: stopping the Reapers. It seems like an oversimplification of the plot but that's really what the premise of the trilogy boils down to.

Which is why many feel like it's a bad ending. It over-simplifies the trilogy. Why make it a three games 90+ hours history if you are going to oversimplify it. That's a bad excuse for poor execution.

If you give that level of control to the narrator of the story, you'd expect at least some cohesion on the focus. If the entire trilogy was just fighting the reapers, no personal attachments, I think this kind of ending would've sufficed. 

[Setz]

TheNexus wrote...

Valo_Soren wrote...

I do not feel misled because I expected this kind of esoteric and self sacrificing ending in the first place. I'm not sure why a dark universe sci-fi world like Mass effect would lead people to believe that the ending was going to be all rainbows and cup cakes.

You justed stated the problem.

Bioware gave us the ending.

We wanted the endings, plural.

Which is where the difference lies between people who followed the hype and those of us that just played the game. We weren't expecting "endings" so the ending was... sufficient. I'm not going to say good, or great. But it was an ending.

[SpideyKnight]

 You can't mislead sheep.

[Setz]

SpideyKnight wrote...

 You can't mislead sheep.

Way to turn an actual question into an insult fest. I guess my response would be, and you can't sastify every whining toddler.

[Leonia]

Lugaidster wrote...

leonia42 wrote...

That's why it's so hard to be ok with the ending, people were never going to be totally satisfied with it, no matter how hard the devs tried.

I'm sorry but that's just a cop-out. I'm pretty sure they could've given it a better shot.

leonia42 wrote... 

I think as gamers we grew very attached to those relationships, so much so that we lost sight of what Mass Effect was ultimately about: stopping the Reapers. It seems like an oversimplification of the plot but that's really what the premise of the trilogy boils down to.

Which is why many feel like it's a bad ending. It over-simplifies the trilogy. Why make it a three games 90+ hours history if you are going to oversimplify it. That's a bad excuse for poor execution.

If you give that level of control to the narrator of the story, you'd expect at least some cohesion on the focus. If the entire trilogy was just fighting the reapers, no personal attachments, I think this kind of ending would've sufficed. 

Right and my point is that the point of the trilogy was to stop the Reapers but we as players focused on other things (relationships, choices not related to Reapers, etc.). It's not entirely the writer's fault that his audience wasn't interested in the original theme of the story. And there's nothing wrong with holding that view, those characters were awesome and they added to the story because quite frankly the story wasn't very interesting without them and it WAS overly simple. You can choose to look at it differently and that's your right but if you wish to understand the ending as it was, you will have to set aside your bias as a player and try to see the conclusion the writer's wanted. Maybe that's why you can find no satisfaction in the ending and I'm sorry you cannot get the needed closure that you so desperately want, I really am.

Modifié par leonia42, 20 mars 2012 - 06:35 .

[Valo_Soren]

LeeluMultipass wrote...

Valo_Soren wrote...

Actually the choices are to control the reapers, thereby enslaving them to the will of Shepard, symbiosis, thereby creating a new race, or destruction, destroying the reapers and all other synthetic life forms in the galaxy including EDI and the Geth. Each ending is based on the variables of your choices throughout the game based no the War Assets you collect and based on that War asset number depending on how much you do in the game, it affects different variables in each ending.

Shepard made a huge sacrifice in order to free the galaxy from control, the mass relays are gone, evolution can no longer be forced on the organic races of hte galaxy. Each ending gives the races of the milky way, a fresh start, yes it will be tough starting out, but it will be ok in the long run because the galaxy is finally free after millions of years of Reaper control.

Did it not bother you at all that two of those endings went against absolutely everything that we've learned about the Reapers in the Mass Effect Universe?

Personally I was a bit miffed that the synthesis ending was framed as the perfect solution when it was basically everything that Saron stood for in ME1. Control is obvious....we know they can't be controlled. I know it's Commander Shepard and all...but he's still just a human. He can't actually control the reapers. Just no way.

And of course the Destroy ending. Well...Shepard just spent 3 games (or maybe just 2 depending on how you want to see it) proving that synthetic life and organic life and exist peacefully. I mean...I would expect Shepard to shove the options back into the Catalyst's face at this point.

I was frustrated because the choices didn't make sense as they were given. You didn't feel that way? Please elaborate. I'm honestly trying to see this from all sides because I WANT to enjoy the endings. I genuinely wish I could replay ME3 right now and feel right about it.

No it didn't bother me at all because I had predicted that there was some other kind of motivation behind the reapers purposes when I first met Sovereign in Mass Effect 1. He keeps repeating 'you cannot fathom why we do this' over and over again, then Harbinger in ME 2 "we are the harbingers of your perfection, prepare these humans for ascension' The idea behind repurposing, use organic life to create more reapers, a blending of organci and synthetic life forms in order to keep organic life to completely destroying itself, confusing as it may be it makes perfect sense. Assuming the catalyst-starchild-whatever you want to call it is a super intelligent being with a severe lack of morality by recycling the galaxy every 50,000 years they believe they are taking organic life to its best stage of evolution.

Sovereign says it himself, "You exist because we allow it, and you will end, because we demand it." The solution right there, the first hint that the reapers feel like they know whats best for our galaxy, the catalyst only repeats that to shepard at the end of 3, when shepard says 'we don't want anyone telling us what to do we want to control out own fate' and the catalyst says 'you can't be allowed to! you will destroy yourselves!' The reapers actually believe they are saving us from ourselves. Saving both organic and synthetic life forms, the repeating theme of AI 's being a huge no no because they can't be trusted is apparent through all three games and the catalyst on reinforces that idea. Just because theirs peace with the Geth now doesn't mean there will ALWAYS be peace with the geth. One instance does not debunk the theory if the catalyst has seen the same repeating pattern over and over again every 50,000 years.

Also Saren didn't stand for symbiosis, he was tricked into thinking it was best to let the reapers form and change everyone, basically to allow themselves to be indoctrinated, the symbiosis shepard partakes in is different a whole new life form, not just a human with reaper tech, but a blending of organic and synthetic material, in essence everyone is now the same race. And besides Saren talks about appeasing the reapers almost the entire time in ME 1, appesing them, becomign their servants so they aren't made extinct.

If the catalyst says shepard could control the reapers and gives him a chance to then I believe it, to be honest while people say 'why would shepard just take the catalyst at his word' in my opinion the reapers, both sovereign and harbinger were always completely honest with shepard, they had no reason to lie to him, neither does the catalyst, they don't work on trickery, they believe nothing can stop them so there is no reason to think they would have to trick their way out of a situation. The catalyst could likely easily kill shepard or have lured him into a trap why would he give him some choice and make him think he was helping the galaxy if he really wasn't helping the galaxy, there would be no reason to, the catalyst has no reason to trick him, its a being thats milions of years old that has repeated the same process over and over again every 50,000 years, nothing had been able to stop the reapers until now so literally a new solution is needed, so there is no reason to think the Catalyst is not being truthful.


As far as the destruction option goes I really only see that option being made by an angry renegade shep who really didnt trust the geth anyway and wasn't as fond as EDI as everyone else on the ship might have been. The Control or symbiosis seems more likely the choice for PAragon shepard. IF the reapers are controlled by shepard even if shepard dies, they will leave the galaxy and no longer harm anyone as they have to do as shepard commands.

Thats as thorough as I can think to be right now, I hope that sheds some light as to why I love the endings and ending choices.

[Lugaidster]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

SpideyKnight wrote...

 You can't mislead sheep.

And, you're the problem with the "RetakeME3" movement.

I have no problem with the movement in and of itself, though I think it's rather arrogant, but stuff like that is amusingly pitiful.

Please don't generalize, the point you're trying to make is incredibly racist. It's about as racist as seeing a black man rob a place and say, "see that's the problem with black people, they don't do themselves any favors by robing places". Don't over generalize, there are extremists in both ends of the stick.

[Leonia]

Lugaidster wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

SpideyKnight wrote...

 You can't mislead sheep.

And, you're the problem with the "RetakeME3" movement.

I have no problem with the movement in and of itself, though I think it's rather arrogant, but stuff like that is amusingly pitiful.

Please don't generalize, the point you're trying to make is incredibly racist. It's about as racist as seeing a black man rob a place and say, "see that's the problem with black people, they don't do themselves any favors by robing places". Don't over generalize, there are extremists in both ends of the stick.

How in the name of the spirits is that racist? Let's just ignore the insults and get on with the discussion, no need to defend them.

[AtreiyaN7]

HenchxNarf wrote...

I chose Synthesis so that my Jezika Shepard could be with Kaidan forever. She loved him through THREE GAMES!

Me too - my Shepard still loved Kaidan all along despite my romance with Thane in ME2. I found the love triangle in ME3 rather poignant because Thane ended up watching over Kaidan for me after I made my choice. I really wish Thane could have lived because my Shep still loved him despite rekindling things with Kaidan. At least Thane died well. The prayer with Kolyat was beautiful and sad too  (totally gutted me, along with reading Thane's letter).

[HenchxNarf]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

I chose Synthesis so that my Jezika Shepard could be with Kaidan forever. She loved him through THREE GAMES!

Me too - my Shepard still loved Kaidan all along despite my romance with Thane in ME2. I found the love triangle in ME3 rather poignant because Thane ended up watching over Kaidan for me after I made my choice. I really wish Thane could have lived because my Shep still loved him despite rekindling things with Kaidan. At least Thane died well. The prayer with Kolyat was beautiful and sad too  (totally gutted me, along with reading Thane's letter).

I have a Thanemancing Shep, but I'm afraid my heart can't take it to watch the scene or know he's going to die lol And it is rather poetic that Thane watches over Kaidan. I liked that.

Thane's death was tragic and yet beautiful all at the same time.

[Valo_Soren]

HenchxNarf wrote...

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

I chose Synthesis so that my Jezika Shepard could be with Kaidan forever. She loved him through THREE GAMES!

Me too - my Shepard still loved Kaidan all along despite my romance with Thane in ME2. I found the love triangle in ME3 rather poignant because Thane ended up watching over Kaidan for me after I made my choice. I really wish Thane could have lived because my Shep still loved him despite rekindling things with Kaidan. At least Thane died well. The prayer with Kolyat was beautiful and sad too  (totally gutted me, along with reading Thane's letter).

I have a Thanemancing Shep, but I'm afraid my heart can't take it to watch the scene or know he's going to die lol And it is rather poetic that Thane watches over Kaidan. I liked that.

Thane's death was tragic and yet beautiful all at the same time.

It is quite sad but you do get a romantic moment with him even so, but ultimately he tells her that its time to move on.

[GuardianAngel470]

Valo_Soren wrote...

I do not feel misled because I expected this kind of esoteric and self sacrificing ending in the first place. I'm not sure why a dark universe sci-fi world like Mass effect would lead people to believe that the ending was going to be all rainbows and cup cakes.

That, and every other time a similar sentiment is stated, is a straw man argument. It is misrepresenting the position of your opponents and purposefully or accidentally arguing against that misrepresentation instead of the actual issue.

It is fallacious and fundamentally illogical.

[Cadence of the Planes]

What you call misled, I call pleasantly surprised

[Valo_Soren]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Valo_Soren wrote...

I do not feel misled because I expected this kind of esoteric and self sacrificing ending in the first place. I'm not sure why a dark universe sci-fi world like Mass effect would lead people to believe that the ending was going to be all rainbows and cup cakes.

That, and every other time a similar sentiment is stated, is a straw man argument. It is misrepresenting the position of your opponents and purposefully or accidentally arguing against that misrepresentation instead of the actual issue.

It is fallacious and fundamentally illogical.

God forbid I use several metaphors in one post, anyway, read on this thread further to see me go into further detail as to why I like the ending and stop taking things so personal.

[Faerillis]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Faerillis wrote...

I think a lot of the veteran players who don't feel misled, simply don't understand the complaints. There are plenty of videos that explain the complaints in a perfectly reasonable, mostly calm manner; I'd personally recommend Angry Joe's video regarding the endings.

Here are some of the arguments against the Endings. I'm not asking for you agreement on this, nor am I trying to stir anything up, I simply want this discussion to address the actual beliefs of those who take umbrage with the ME3 Endings and not a strawman.

1. The player choices are shallow, and directly contradict a number of developer and writer quotes from before the release. The fact that nothing the players do, besides gaining a minimal amount of War Assets, effects the ending in any way, shape or form. Ignoring that there are 4 Endings total: Green, Red, Blue, or Orange explosions.
2. The player doesn't even get the option of challenging the nonsense of StarChild. We don't get the option to say "We peacefully resolved the conflict between organic and synthetic on Rannoch. 3. We don't get to tell GlowBoy that "These options aren't acceptable; I will not destroy the Mass Relays and destroy the galaxy with them. You can take the Reapers and go, or I will sit here until the forces I've gathered have died." The way my Shepard would have.

1. As I said before, people don't seem to understand that this is nothing new.

This is nothing new.

Mass Effect 2 was astonishingly awful at showing choices, and that carried over into ME3. Nothing surprising there.

2. You're not in a position to challenge anything. You've been on the galactic field for less than fifty years. The Starchild has been there for untold millenia. Who are you, Shepard, to tell HIM that you think that somehow, this time, everything will magically work out? You reeeaaally think something like this has never happened before (synthetics and organics working together)? Do you really?

3. That's completely absurd. The point of the entire series was to destroy the Reapers, not keep the Relays intact. You can't refuse to deal with the Reapers.

1. I disagree completely. While the ending cinematic was recycled regardless of your decision, the impact of your decision was felt.

2. WHO AM I TO QUESTION SOMEONE WHO SPOUTED UTTER CRAP THAT I CAN DISPROVE?! Are you kidding?!

3. The Mass Relays are the basis of the series, the key to the galaxy, the basis for civilization, the centre of all space faring life; why fight, when you are going to lose all you are fighting for? Why invalidate every reason the billions, if not trillions, of people fighting the Reapers are fighting for.
Especially considering all the people fighting on and above Earth are doomed to die regardless of your choice.

Modifié par Faerillis, 20 mars 2012 - 06:53 .

[Tietj]

I don't really consider myself part of the "retake" movement but it amuses me that generally when people say they don't have a problem with it, they simply can't resist calling it whiny or arrogant or some other insulting term, usually in the same breath. Both sides have their points, and both sides have arrogant members. Saying that the Retake movement has more is misleading because there are simply more of them in general, on this forum.

[Valo_Soren]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Valo_Soren wrote...

I do not feel misled because I expected this kind of esoteric and self sacrificing ending in the first place. I'm not sure why a dark universe sci-fi world like Mass effect would lead people to believe that the ending was going to be all rainbows and cup cakes.

That, and every other time a similar sentiment is stated, is a straw man argument. It is misrepresenting the position of your opponents and purposefully or accidentally arguing against that misrepresentation instead of the actual issue.

It is fallacious and fundamentally illogical.

Though I will say the way some of your number act does sometimes warrant this response, illogical or not.

[Valo_Soren]

Tietj wrote...

I don't really consider myself part of the "retake" movement but it amuses me that generally when people say they don't have a problem with it, they simply can't resist calling it whiny or arrogant or some other insulting term, usually in the same breath. Both sides have their points, and both sides have arrogant members. Saying that the Retake movement has more is misleading because there are simply more of them in general, on this forum.

Sorry to burst our bubble but a lot of it it does some times seem like whining. I try to 'mostly' be diplomatic however, sometimes I can't help it.