429 réponses à ce sujet

[Cucobr]

 No.

After you were hit by the reaper, eveything happens in Shepard's mind.

[Strike2k2]

Sidney wrote...

Strike2k2 wrote...

The Option to fight rather than submit has been a common theme in all the games, up until the last 10 minutes of the game. Unacceptable.

...but this is what you've fought for - a chance to stop the Reapers. You've succeeded. There is no submission here. Your options would have been the same if the Starchild wasn't there telling you what to do. What if Vigil had popped up and said the Protheans had concieved of three ways to wipe out the Reapers: A,B, C. Same thing - actually that would make more sense since the protheans would ahve build those options in an I have no idea when/why star child built in the ABC options.

No. That is not what we fought for. We were fighting for the survival of our galactic civilization. We were fighting for the right to chose our own destiny. What the crucible represented was the end of Galactic civilization and being forced to chose A,B and C is anything but chosing our own destiny. Vigil/Starchild cornered Shepard. The illution of choice is NOT choice.

[Sainta117]

I think it's a reasonable price to pay. Note FTL travel still exists and while there would be catastrophic disruption to the galactic economy and political situation (especially given the damage the Reapers have done) it would be unlikely to knock everybody back to the "village" stage, just as Europe's dark ages following the collapse of Rome didn't make everyone move back into caves. Government got more local and more clearly based on force, lawlessness went up, economies diversified locally due to a lack of viable imports and exports, and tech stagnated or moved in different directions (medieval armor, for instance, was better than roman-era gear in many respects, in large part because its purpose changed).

[Indylavi]

One of my problems with the relays being destroyed that I'm not sure others have picked up on. Is that there are many dormant relays around the Galaxy. At least according to what I gathered from the ME1 Codex. What happened to these? In the ending all I saw as the active ones being destroyed.

[majormajormmajor]

forgot the mass starvation bit

[Poison_Berrie]

Tregon wrote...

But do they have refineries AND raw materials for fuel? Their refuelling stations might simply be fuel depots which are topped up by tankers periodically...

Check the Gas Giants in inhabited systems. These are entire infrastructures of refineries and refueling stations.

Also, not all colonies necessarily have refueling and starship maintenance facilities. And even if they had, it's again question of how long their spare part supply would last... 

Any reasonably sized colony would have starport and the facilities to service such starships. The question about how they get their spare parts is a valid one, though.
We can assume though, that most colonies would revert to mostly agriculture and space activity would likely be limited to their own system and be limited there as well. Unless neighbouring systems have industrial and mining infrastructure.
And that's only the lucky few who didn't suffer Reapers.

Modifié par Poison_Berrie, 23 mars 2012 - 02:14 .

[ShinAnubisXIII]

Indylavi wrote...

One of my problems with the relays being destroyed that I'm not sure others have picked up on. Is that there are many dormant relays around the Galaxy. At least according to what I gathered from the ME1 Codex. What happened to these? In the ending all I saw as the active ones being destroyed.

Not only that but what happens to the Omega-4 Relay? This particular Relay has no connection to the regular network. And unless it's somehow caught up in the crossfire, the space magic laser ping-pong shouldn't hit it.

[Sidney]

Strike2k2 wrote...
No. That is not what we fought for. We were fighting for the survival of our galactic civilization. We were fighting for the right to chose our own destiny. What the crucible represented was the end of Galactic civilization and being forced to chose A,B and C is anything but chosing our own destiny. Vigil/Starchild cornered Shepard. The illution of choice is NOT choice.

You won, your civilization survived. It will not pass through the war unchanged but it did survive. You are not ending civilization anymore than the sudden loss of all airplanes would mean the end of global civilization. You had a choice how to end the war. You don't like those choices but making unpleasanbt choices is actually a choice. I'm not sure what more you wanted unless all this unrest really is that people wanted a space magic button that killed reapers and added a nice fresh pine scent to deep space and nothing else.

[Strike2k2]

[quote]Sidney wrote...

[quote]Strike2k2 wrote...
No. That is not what we fought for. We were fighting for the survival of our galactic civilization. We were fighting for the right to chose our own destiny. What the crucible represented was the end of Galactic civilization and being forced to chose A,B and C is anything but chosing our own destiny. Vigil/Starchild cornered Shepard. The illution of choice is NOT choice.
[/quote]

You won, your civilization survived. It will not pass through the war unchanged but it did survive. You are not ending civilization anymore than the sudden loss of all airplanes would mean the end of global civilization. You had a choice how to end the war. You don't like those choices but making unpleasanbt choices is actually a choice. I'm not sure what more you wanted unless all this unrest really is that people wanted a space magic button that killed reapers and added a nice fresh pine scent to deep space and nothing else.

[/quote]

What part suvived? Does a mass relay explosion no longer destroy and entire solar system? Even if we grant a pass and say, "this time, the mass relay explosions didn't take out the solar system" you still have civilizations cut off from resources and supply lines that no doubt feed a whole population of people.

The choices we were given to us to chose from was NOT what was promissed. I don't care how artistic you want to try and spin the endings. If it was stated that they were going to change the framework of ME3 and pursue a divergent path I would have politly passed on purchasing it. But that's not what was said or done on multiple occasions by the Bioware staff. And the choices that were put before us at the end was not a culmination of the hours spent playing the series.

We didn't want a space magic ending (which is what some people argue is what we got) but we wanted our choices to matter. And those choices to reflect what we had previously done throughout the series. Why is this basic idea seemingly so hard for you to grasp? From the point where shepard gets injured by Harbinger onward the game no longer takes into account what you've done at any other point during any of the previous titles/games. Which is exactly the opposite of what was PROMISED.

http://social.biowar.../index/10473356


[quote]Interview with Casey Hudson (Director) 4/28/11
http://www.gameinfor...s-effect-3.aspx

“For
people who are invested in these characters and the back-story of the
universe and everything, all of these things come to a resolution in
Mass Effect 3. And they are resolved in a way that's very different
based on what you would do in those situations.”[/quote]
[quote]Mike Gamble (Associate Producer) 8/24/11
http://www.nowgamer....in_bioware.html

Mass
Effect 3 will shake up the player's moral choices more than ever
before, even going so far as allowing the Reapers to win the battle for
Earth, according to BioWare's community representative Mike Gamble.[/quote]
[quote]Interview with Casey Hudson (Director) 1/10/12
http://www.gameinfor...PostPageIndex=2

Interviewer:
[Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2] “Is that
same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?”

Hudson:
“Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to build
the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about eventually
tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is coming to an end
with this game. That means the endings can be a lot more different. At
this point we’re taking into account so many decisions that you’ve made
as a player and reflecting a lot of that stuff. 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.....The endings have a
lot more sophistication and variety in them.”

“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player decide what your story is.”[/quote]
[quote]Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer) 2/2/12
http://www.eurogamer...me-people-angry

“Every decision you've made will impact how things go. The player's also the architect of what happens."

Whether you're happy or angry at the ending, know this: it is an ending.
BioWare will not do a "Lost" and leave fans with more questions than
answers after finishing the game, Gamble promised.

“You'll
get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless
of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide
some answers to these people.”

“Because a lot of these plot
threads are concluding and because it's being brought to a finale, since
you were a part of architecting how they got to how they were, you will
definitely sense how they close was because of the decisions you made
and because of the decisions you didn't make”[/quote]
[quote]Mike Gamble (Associate Producer) 2/2/12
http://www.nowgamer....ry_details.html

"Of
course you don’t have to play multiplayer, you can choose to play all
the side-quests in single-player and do all that stuff you’ll still get
all the same endings and same information, it’s just a totally different
way of playing"[/quote]
[quote]Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer) 2/6/12
http://www.computera...missing-in-me2/

“And, to be honest, you [the fans] are crafting your Mass Effect story as much as we are anyway.”[/quote]

Post-Gold

[quote]Official Mass Effect Website (Still there)
http://masseffect.com/about/story/

“Experience
the beginning, middle, and end of an emotional story unlike any other,
where the decisions you make completely shape your experience and
outcome.”[/quote]
[quote]Casey Hudson (Director) 2/17/12
http://www.computera...ly-good/?page=2

“There
is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach
the end-game. And even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to
break down to some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game
ending where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few
things - it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the
final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who plays
it.”[/quote]
[quote]Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer) 2/23/12
http://www.360magazi...ferent-endings/

“There
are many different endings. We wouldn’t do it any other way. How could
you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and then be
forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t say any
more than that…”[/quote]
[quote]Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer) 2/28/12
http://popwatch.ew.c...-3-mac-walters/

“[The presence of the Rachni] has huge consequences in Mass Effect 3. Even just in the final battle with the Reapers.”[/quote]
[quote]Interview with Casey Hudson (Director) 3/2/12
http://venturebeat.c...fans-interview/

“Fans
want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get some
closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”

“Mass
Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the lore,
learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers, being
able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an end.”

Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”

Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”[/quote]
[quote]Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer) 3/5/12
http://business.fina...-all-audiences/

“I’m
always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think one
of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are
optimal for different people”[/quote]
[quote]Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer) 3/7/12
Issue 108 of 360Gamer (Hardcopy only, not available online)

When asked about the science of the game being plausible

"From
very early on we wanted the science of the universe to be plausible.
Obviously it's set in the future so you have to make some leaps of faith
but we didn't want it to be just magic in space."[/quote]
[quote]Casey Hudson (Director) 3/8/12
http://gamescatalyst...active-stories/

“The
whole idea of Mass Effect3 is resolving all of the biggest questions,
about the Protheons and the Reapers, and being in the driver's seat to
end the galaxy and all of these big plot lines, to decide what
civilizations are going to live or die: All of these things are answered
in Mass Effect 3.”[/quote]
Now I ask you, In all seriousness, Is any of this **** in the game?
Basically what we got was a big "**** you, we'll end the game how we want to regardless of what you've done up to this point. Why? Because we want to add a twist to the ending at the expense of all else."

Modifié par Strike2k2, 23 mars 2012 - 02:50 .

[Strike2k2]

Bump for justice.

[SweetDaddySiki]

I think its the obvious endpoint, The citadel is gone, the mass relays are gone. Every important planet in the galaxy is rubble, and there are billions and billions dead. The Galaxy will be prey to warlords and bandits as fleets cut off from thier homeworld try and find someway to live. the old empires will crumble. As the old saying goes..the future isn't what it used to be..but at least the galaxy HAS a future,

We know its possible to create mass relays. In time the network will be slowly and painfully rebuilt. Splinter colonies will reconnect. New empires will rise. Someone may build a new citadel.

Sol system may be the nexus of a new galactic order, or it may turn into a warzone. I suspect there aren't enough of allied ships and troops left to really matter. Gotta be careful about those asari though..given enough time they could potentially replace the population of earth given their unique talents.

The Quarrians will now find they are the most powerful species in known space. Will they become a Space Mongol empire? using thier fleet to levy tribute? Will they exploit this?

Interesting possibilities. And in the right hands it could make for one HELL of a good game. Imagine mass effect 4 starting with a test of a new experimental mass relay, and moving on from there.

Modifié par SweetDaddySiki, 23 mars 2012 - 03:17 .

[Wickwrackscar]

Lugaidster wrote...

kyrieee wrote...

It's storytelling, not realism
The people 10,000 years from now are not tangible, you don't feel good for saving them. Your emotional connection to the story is had through the characters. It's them we want to save, unrealistic or not.

Agree completely. There's this quote from Mordin that I've been using to illustrate that exact same idea:

"Hard to imagine galaxy. Too many people. Faceless. Statistics. Easy to depersonalize. [...] For this fight, want personal connection. Can't anthropomorphize galaxy. But can think of favorite [people]. Fighting for [them]." 

A thousand times this. In terms of storytelling, the state of the galaxy is just a footnote. The writers worked hard to make us care about the characters in all three games. And man, where they sucessful. 
The galaxy may be better off in the long run, but that's not what I care about as a player.
How much solace would it give to a survivor of Hiroshima if you told her this: "You know, your family is dead and you and your unborn daughter will die a painful death by radiation poisining, but look on the bright side: In 60 years Japan will be one of the wealthiest nations in the world!"
That's why it is so easy to percieve the outcome of the mass effect story as bitter only.

[CaptainZaysh]

This whole thread has been good, but the posts from people saying they'd rather everyone were killed by the Reapers than have to live in a universe without mass relays that is beset by problems such as war and hunger are comedy gold.

[Strike2k2]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

This whole thread has been good, but the posts from people saying they'd rather everyone were killed by the Reapers than have to live in a universe without mass relays that is beset by problems such as war and hunger are comedy gold.

Why is it funny to prefer death over pain and suffering?

[nomoredruggs]

CheeseEnchilada wrote...

In an edgy, dark novel where this was an established theme, I would fully embrace it.

From a game series that had you walking out of the debris of a reaper with a smirk in the first game and getting everyone out of a suicide mission alive in the second, it seems like a high price, and one that goes against the theme of the first two games, which has always seemed to be 'triumph against the odds'. I was expecting a bittersweet ending, but this seems heavy on the bitter, light on the sweet. The way it was implemented wasn't flawless either.

Couldn't have said it better.

[CaptainZaysh]

Strike2k2 wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

This whole thread has been good, but the posts from people saying they'd rather everyone were killed by the Reapers than have to live in a universe without mass relays that is beset by problems such as war and hunger are comedy gold.

Why is it funny to prefer death over pain and suffering?

Because you currently live in a universe without mass relays, which is beset with war and hunger, and you presumably think your life is worthwhile.

[Sidney]

Strike2k2 wrote...
What part suvived? Does a mass relay explosion no longer destroy and entire solar system? Even if we grant a pass and say, "this time, the mass relay explosions didn't take out the solar system" you still have civilizations cut off from resources and supply lines that no doubt feed a whole population of people.

I cut out all the quotes because frankly people oversell in their own minds what these things mean. Every decision you make is reflected in the game - it is summed up into the score that affects the endings. There, game over they did what you wanted but they didn't do it the way you wanted.

Why do people still think that crashing an asteroid into a working relay and having it disharge it's energy first are the same thing? This is sort oif like saying crashing a plane loaded with fuel is the same as drianing that fuel and then crashing it. You get very different kinds of *booms* from those moments.

As for food, where do you think food is grown? The homeworlds of all these species is viable for food production.

Yes, blowing up the relays is dramatic but, again, the Reapers had won for hundred of cycles. You think that beating them was gonna come at a low cost?

[Samzo77]

There's a theme through all of the games about sacrifice, so this seems to be right to me. The moment I heard the citadel and relays were made the reapers I wanted the civilizations to abandon them as much as possible. At the least they should have started a new citadel, and get off what was essentially a trap for all advanced life. But then again, they didn't fully believe Shepard about the reapers.

[shin-zan]

Too high. Would have been better to give up/leave clues for the next circle to do better at that point.

Modifié par shin-zan, 23 mars 2012 - 04:36 .

[Dorrieb]

My goal was to save our civilization, and our civilization fell anyway. I suppose future civilizations may thank us for breaking the galactic cycle for them, and at least our species were not made extinct, which is better'n'nothing. Yay, me.

[Wildhide]

nomoredruggs wrote...

CheeseEnchilada wrote...

In an edgy, dark novel where this was an established theme, I would fully embrace it.

From a game series that had you walking out of the debris of a reaper with a smirk in the first game and getting everyone out of a suicide mission alive in the second, it seems like a high price, and one that goes against the theme of the first two games, which has always seemed to be 'triumph against the odds'. I was expecting a bittersweet ending, but this seems heavy on the bitter, light on the sweet. The way it was implemented wasn't flawless either.

Couldn't have said it better.

I agree as well, and also with the comment from Mordin someone posted above.  But I also don't like how Shepard went from never giving up to just surrender and doing what the Catalyst (Who according to him is the main villian of the entire series) says.  He just gobbles up all the crap he spouts off and accepts it for gospel... WHY?

That's not Commander Shepard, he doesn't just give up and listen to the villian.  He didn't do it for Saren, or Sovereign, or the Illusive Man, or Harbringer!  Why would he do it now and just by the tripe?

Real ending choices would include Shepard not just picking from Space Magic options presented by the worst forced character and plot additions I've seen in a very long time.

I'd rate Sonic Unleashed higher than the ending of this game.

[CaptainZaysh]

Dorrieb wrote...

My goal was to save our civilization, and our civilization fell anyway. I suppose future civilizations may thank us for breaking the galactic cycle for them, and at least our species were not made extinct, which is better'n'nothing. Yay, me.

Better than nothing?  Better than nothing?

Dorrieb, you are way too hard on yourself.  You ended a cycle of galactic extinctions that have been going on for at least 37 million years.  You saved billions upon billions of human and alien men, women and children from being turned into zombies, or being fed feet first into a meat grinder as part of some diabolical transcendance.

That was way better than nothing.  If you did that in the universe I lived in I would be thinking thoughts a lot more grateful than yay, Dorrieb.

[WindOverTuchanka]

SweetDaddySiki wrote...

I think its the obvious endpoint, The citadel is gone, the mass relays are gone. Every important planet in the galaxy is rubble, and there are billions and billions dead. The Galaxy will be prey to warlords and bandits as fleets cut off from thier homeworld try and find someway to live. the old empires will crumble. As the old saying goes..the future isn't what it used to be..but at least the galaxy HAS a future

Interesting possibilities. And in the right hands it could make for one HELL of a good game. Imagine mass effect 4 starting with a test of a new experimental mass relay, and moving on from there.

I believe "the right hands" are the key point here. I won't play this setup if it was made by Bioware. I won't play it if it was made by 90% of developers out there. I'll probably play it if it was made by Obsidian, they seem to be the the right people to develop this kind of setting.
But seriously, will Bioware throw another franchise they're tired of that way? And will Obsidian pick it up again, after the PR disaster they went through with KOTOR 2? I doubt that.

[Wildhide]

Sidney wrote...

Strike2k2 wrote...
What part suvived? Does a mass relay explosion no longer destroy and entire solar system? Even if we grant a pass and say, "this time, the mass relay explosions didn't take out the solar system" you still have civilizations cut off from resources and supply lines that no doubt feed a whole population of people.

I cut out all the quotes because frankly people oversell in their own minds what these things mean. Every decision you make is reflected in the game - it is summed up into the score that affects the endings. There, game over they did what you wanted but they didn't do it the way you wanted.

Why do people still think that crashing an asteroid into a working relay and having it disharge it's energy first are the same thing? This is sort oif like saying crashing a plane loaded with fuel is the same as drianing that fuel and then crashing it. You get very different kinds of *booms* from those moments.

As for food, where do you think food is grown? The homeworlds of all these species is viable for food production.

Yes, blowing up the relays is dramatic but, again, the Reapers had won for hundred of cycles. You think that beating them was gonna come at a low cost?

The decisions are reflected, but by the way the game ends are made pointless.  Thus they don't actually matter or have any impact.  Who cares if you cured the Genophage?  The Krogan will overpopulate their homeworld that's barely alive and die off.  The rest are going to die stuck at Earth, or just start killing people.

It was nice of you to give the Quarians Rannoch and have them make peace with the Geth.  Too bad most of them can't get to Rannoch and will starve over Earth.  Of course we're assuming the relays didn't just blow up both solar systems like game lore suggests.

[CaptainZaysh]

Wildhide wrote...

I agree as well, and also with the comment from Mordin someone posted above.  But I also don't like how Shepard went from never giving up to just surrender and doing what the Catalyst (Who according to him is the main villian of the entire series) says.  He just gobbles up all the crap he spouts off and accepts it for gospel... WHY?

That's not Commander Shepard, he doesn't just give up and listen to the villian.  He didn't do it for Saren, or Sovereign, or the Illusive Man, or Harbringer!  Why would he do it now and just by the tripe?

Real ending choices would include Shepard not just picking from Space Magic options presented by the worst forced character and plot additions I've seen in a very long time.

But you can choose not to take any of the Catalyst's options.