274 réponses à ce sujet

[Leonia]

Faerillis - you're not accustomed to people telling you no in real-life, are you? Sometimes there are boundaries and limitations that you can't avoid. That's what makes things so difficult. Do you really support not fighting at all because the ending is bleak? FTL travel still exists, new technology can be created, civilisation wasn't wiped from existance, they have a second chance at life without the Reapers and their technology. Sure, it will be hard, but they'll endure or they'll cease to exist.

Modifié par leonia42, 20 mars 2012 - 06:54 .

[AtreiyaN7]

Valo_Soren wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

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.

It was sad but definitely a worthwhile experience I thought. I was always prepared for Thane's death, so I was able to handle it after it happened (albeit I cried, heh). Despite my being in two of the cure for Thane groups, I actually kind of think it would have cheapened the relationship in a way if he'd received some sort of miracle cure. Still, I empathize with those who had their hearts set on Thane living.

Modifié par AtreiyaN7, 20 mars 2012 - 06:56 .

[HenchxNarf]

Well it was going somewhat civilly. Until now.

[Nega Knight]

I was upset that you don't really get to see your choices affect anything, but even then I could have accepted the ending if it wasn't for all those other niggling little plot holes.

Why was Joker running away? How did your squad get on the Normandy if they were on Earth and Joker was busy running away? How did Shepard get back to Earth if he/she was on the Citadel when it blew up? Did they survive the explosion and somehow survive re-entry despite the fact that their armor was completely shredded (assuming Shepard was wearing environmentally sealed armor capable of withstanding re-entry in the first place)?

Not even bringing up that either Garrus and Tali or everyone else on the Normandy is going to starve to death on that planet they crash on. Or that your whole fleet is stranded in the Sol system, since they most assuredly do not have the resources available to make the years or decades long trips back to their homeworlds, or even out of the local Cluster. Or that the burnt out remnants of Earth can in no way support all these aliens. Or that the Turians and Quarians are screwed regardless. Although infuriating, these aren't really plot holes; maybe they were intentional.

[Tietj]

Just because some are whining doesn't make all of their arguments invalid. There are problems with the ending, to be honest. The difference is in how we let those problems affect us.

[Lugaidster]

Valo_Soren wrote...

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. 

 

If that really is true, then none of the new options really solves the problem he thinks exist. Chaos vs Order will still be present in all three choices. As well as the "creator vs created" theme. Shepard set out to fight against the Reapers not only to save the galaxy, but to save the galaxy without sacrificing "soul of their species". To fight for a chance to prove the reapers wrong.

Synthesis by itself sacrifices your identity and is an inherently racist premise.

Control doesn't really address the problem of the reapers, by giving the to the control of a single person is as giving a country dictated by one person to another person. The problem is the system not the leader. There's no way to feel at ease with that.

Destruction is genocide, and really defeats the purpose of actually uniting the galaxy, but then again, it's my prefered choice. "Sacrifices have to be made for the sake of victory" *sigh*

Valo_Soren wrote... 


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.

Unless behaviour is really predictable (I behemently oppose any logic that claims sapient creatures to be predictable), the fact that this has happened in the past is not proof for it to happen in the future. It just makes it more likely.

Valo_Soren wrote...  


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.

 

So suddenly it's much better if it's not the reapers who decide but Shepard? What makes Shepard more qualified to make such a decision on behalf of every culture and specie out there. At least Legion chose for himself. What is the purpose to fight for a chance to shape your future as you see fit if you are going to let someone else do that for you.

Valo_Soren wrote...   


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.

 

So it wasn't established in the lore that the reapers (the catalyst refers to himself as one of them) aren't trustworthy? Furthermore, wasn't it established that they possess means to make you feel like they their way of thinking is right? I'm not giving any credit to the indoctrination theory but to put that much faith in a reaper is not something I'm easy about.

Valo_Soren wrote...    

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. 

 

The way I see it, a paragon will stick to his principles, with that said, he breaks them with every choice. So there's no clear paragon choice for me. Just as I don't see a clear renegade. Which really bothers me because they gave them the colors. To assume that's just a design oversight is silly IMO, attention to details is really important throughout the series, so the colors have to be intentional (Making me hate the endings even more). 

Valo_Soren wrote...     

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.

I appreciate that. Even if I didn't enjoy them, I find it entertaining to discuss the reasons why with someone else. I just hoped I didn't have to.

[GuardianAngel470]

Valo_Soren wrote...

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.

"The feeling is mutual, believe me."

[Setz]

Faerillis wrote...

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.

The relays are just a means of transportation... Nobodies fighting for the relays. They're fighting to LIVE. Regardless of whether or not they get sent back to the craddle of civilizatoin, they want the chance to rebuild. The entire theme of the game has been If only one person survives, it's worth it.

[sistersafetypin]

HiddenKING wrote...

sistersafetypin wrote...

I have another question... Why don't you care that almost up until the day of launch, Casey Hudson and others were claiming there would be wildly diverging endings because the fans deserved more then an 'A, B, C' pick one end.

But that's what we got. And I don't understand why you're not upset.

I didn't believe anythin that was said toward launch, it's marketin. When Capcom says they won't release a "Super" or "Complete" edition of a game, I've learned not to believe them, when Peter Molyneux promises anythin, I know he probably won't deliver. Choice or the Illusion of choice is very limited, there wasn't much difference between the endings of the previous 2 Mass Effects. Yes you could have characters killed off in ME2, but it was fairly linear. Honestly don't believe you should have been given an end choice. I think a story, any story should have a beginnin and end. Everythin else is subject to change, except for that. You can't change the beginnin of Mass Effect, and I don't think the end needs it either.

I can respect this. Especially when you mention Capcom and Molyneux. I guess for me the issue is, I have never before now put Bioware in the same boat as Peter Molyneux. In all honesty, I probably would have accused someone of trolling if they said it before this issue. And really, I'm reluctant to do so now. I'd rather them redeam themselves in my eyes then have to take anything the Devs of Bioware say with a grain of salt.

[Leonia]

Valo_Soren wrote...

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.

This isn't helping, even if you believe they are whining you don't have to point it out to them.

[Tietj]

Henchxnarf how can you possibly say that it is suddenly not civil? In virtually every one of your posts you insult the other side, from the very beginning of this thread and elsewhere.

[Defiantfa11]

Once you let PS3 owners into a game like Mass Effect they're no better than THIS

[Hudathan]

Valo_Soren wrote...
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.

I played a mostly Paragon Shepard and I felt that I had no choice but to take the destroy option. During my first playthrough, I was about as emotionally drained as my character was. All I wanted to do was to turn on the Crucible and hope that it stopped the Reapers somehow, I was tired and desperate for a solution.

When I was presented with the three choices, destroy and synthesis were the superior options in my mind. Shepard couldn't know for sure that control would even work since everything in the Mass Effect series has shown that lesser organic minds are not powerful enough when compared to the Reapers. Therefore, control was too dangerous.

While synthesis was the most 'promising' option, it went against the concept of freedom that a Paragon Shepard would have come to believe after liberating the Geth and curing the Genophage. That Shepard can somehow play God and achieve 'eternal peace' entirely on the word of an ancient AI that may or may not be wrong was simply too uncertain and vague a concept for Shepard's immediate needs. And of course, by taking either control or synthesis options, Shepard and therefor the player have decided to place the future of the galaxy on the mere assumptions of the Catalyst. Neither of those things have ever been done before and there is no way even an ancient being such as the Catalyst can reach those conclusions with certainty.

And that leaves the destroy option. The allied fleets were fighting outside but it is and was always going to be a losing battle. All they are doing is buying Shepard time to activate the Crucible and come up with a solution, any solution other than annhilation. Therefore, with no time to waste and two unreliable options, my Shepard's best bet at the time was to simply destroy the Reapers and hope that his actions through out the story will lead to the galaxy of his and my ideals. The Geth were unfortunate victims of this sacrifice, but even they would understand the reasons behind my decision and would probably make the sacrifice in Shepard's place if their positions were reversed. Shepard and the Geth sacrificed themselves so that galactic life has a chance to evolve the way it was meant to whether it be good or bad, free from control and predetermination. It was that freedom which led me to my choice, not anger at the Geth or anything negative. But the fact that these endings carry so many nuances on such an individual level is why I enjoyed the theme Bioware came up with.

And of course I was given the easter egg ending in which Shepard takes a breath on what seems to be Earth. So the game must be 'rewarding' my particular train of thought with an easter egg that makes me wonder what else is going on. That's just how I looked at the whole thing.

Modifié par Hudathan, 20 mars 2012 - 07:02 .

[Lugaidster]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

B. If you'd look at the second part of my post you'd see that I said I have no problem with the movement in and of itself.

Really?

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

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

  

You're giving the movement a face, a stereotype. It's as stereotyping as giving a race a face because some of them are robers. Maybe calling you a racist is over the top, and I apologize for that, but your comment isn't without fault.

[HenchxNarf]

Tietj wrote...

Henchxnarf how can you possibly say that it is suddenly not civil? In virtually every one of your posts you insult the other side, from the very beginning of this thread and elsewhere.

Actually, I haven't insulted anyone. I've been civil throughout. I stated that I judge the subset group in the movement that deserves to be judged by their actions. Which is logical when they're acting like children. But not everyone as a whole. Unlike you, of course, who calls out everything you see.

[sistersafetypin]

Setz wrote...

Anuvis13 wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

sistersafetypin wrote...



I agree. But judging a movement by the actions of one is silly imho. It's as bad as judging the whole of the Occupy movement on one person.

But when a large group acts the way he does in your group, it looks bad. And you cannot possibly deny that there is not a very large chunk in your movement that acts this way.

That goes both ways. The majority of the people who like the ending think we want a happy/Disney ending and don't hesitate to claim we are whiners who just want that. Which is completely wrong. They are also unaware of the major plot holes in almost all cases. If someone likes the ending then I respect that but I expect they inform themselves before mocking others or making assumptions.

Umm... social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/323/index/10291251/2#10297848

It's
an ending poll. And people voting for the happy unicorn ending are
winning by a landslide. You're actually a minority in not asking for one.

We're asking for choices. I don't think ME is better for having a cliche 'dark' ending over a cliche 'happy' one. And reference the part in bold for why some that don't agree with you are loosing their cool. That's insulting for more reasons that I care to go into.

[HenchxNarf]

Defiantfa11 wrote...

Once you let PS3 owners into a game like Mass Effect they're no better than THIS

Way to be a part of the problem!

PS3 players have every right to be into a game like ME.

[Wabajakka]

Ya, people who actually like the ending are just beyond me. One thing I noticed about most of them though is that they can't exactly explain in any good detail why the endings were good at all, other than saying it was just good (using very general words to describe so), or acting like trolls and saying that the clear plot holes made sense. Nor can they actually explain the immense plot holes left by the endings and act like they don't exist.

[Leonia]

@Hudathan - that basically sums up my feeling as well and why I chose the Destroy ending. Well-spoken!

[DemGeth]

Spectre_Shepard wrote...

Please read first:

For the record, I'm not angry with any of you, nor do I think you're stupid or arrogant or whatever for liking the ending. That's cool, I happen to feel otherwise.

Now, I can get how someone who just plays ME3, and has ZERO prior knowledge of the Mass Effect universe might think these endings are OK. I mean, they probably aren't aware of how Mass Effect has been built on player choice since day 1, and also probably haven't kept up with all the developer comments about how ME3 was supposed to conclude.

But what about all you guys who ARE big Mass Effect fans, and know how these games are designed and what Bioware has said? I mean, what's your perspective? It seems clear to me that Bioware has, at the very least, misled us in some capacity as to how Mass Effect would conclude. I personally feel like I've been lied to.

So how is it that you guys feel differently? Why do you feel like justice has been done to Commander Shepard with these endings?

Please keep it civil, no flaming on either side, I really want to get some perspective here. 

Anyways I thought the ending was fine.  I never expected some great ending.  All the ME endings kinda sucked.  I expected it to be a great game, not a great 5 minute cut scene.

It is a great game.  

[HenchxNarf]

Orange Tee wrote...

Ya, people who actually like the ending are just beyond me. One thing I noticed about most of them though is that they can't exactly explain in any good detail why the endings were good at all, other than saying it was just good (using very general words to describe so), or acting like trolls and saying that the clear plot holes made sense. Nor can they actually explain the immense plot holes left by the endings and act like they don't exist.

People like the ending. Deal with it. We don't have to explain ourselves to you or anyone else.

[Leonia]

Orange Tee wrote...

Ya, people who actually like the ending are just beyond me. One thing I noticed about most of them though is that they can't exactly explain in any good detail why the endings were good at all, other than saying it was just good (using very general words to describe so), or acting like trolls and saying that the clear plot holes made sense. Nor can they actually explain the immense plot holes left by the endings and act like they don't exist.

Perhaps you'd enjoy reading the posts in this thread then. There's a lot of intelligent discussion going on.

[Wabajakka]

HenchxNarf wrote...

Orange Tee wrote...

Ya, people who actually like the ending are just beyond me. One thing I noticed about most of them though is that they can't exactly explain in any good detail why the endings were good at all, other than saying it was just good (using very general words to describe so), or acting like trolls and saying that the clear plot holes made sense. Nor can they actually explain the immense plot holes left by the endings and act like they don't exist.

People like the ending. Deal with it. We don't have to explain ourselves to you or anyone else.

My point exactly. 

I would actually love to see an in detail thread on why someone liked the ending, rather than just saying it was deep and can't explain it. I'm open to see good reasoning into why the ending was "good" or "made sense".