170 réponses à ce sujet

[Hans-Erik]

tontoodioso wrote...

Hans-Erik wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

I disagree with you on the endings, OP, but I respect your opinion, and I'm glad you found them good. And honestly, I'm sickened by the response you've gotten thus far. It's like reason has been thrown out the window.

This is the kind of constructive discussion I had hoped to facilitate, what exactly did you dislike?

PLEASE READ https://docs.google....review?sle=true 

All right I will look into it right now if it is to facilitate civil discussion, not for unnecessary insults.

Thank you, it is quite conducive to civil discussion.  It is merely the most complete presentation of anti-ending arguments that I can think of.

[Vasparian]

Khevan77 wrote...

*facepalm*

Yet another someone who doesn't understand why the endings suck.

You really don't help your cause.

[Rockpopple]

tontoodioso wrote...

Rockpopple wrote...

I disagree with you on the endings, OP, but I respect your opinion, and I'm glad you found them good. And honestly, I'm sickened by the response you've gotten thus far. It's like reason has been thrown out the window.

This is the kind of constructive discussion I had hoped to facilitate, what exactly did you dislike?

I know BioWare's tried to explain them to some extent, but the plot holes didn't sit right with me. Little things, like
how Hackett knew Shepard was on the Citadel.

Why nobody noticed both Shepard AND Anderson were still alive after Harbinger's attack.

Why the energy wave damaged the Normandy, but none of the other ships in space (Or do we assume all the ships in space blew up after being hit by the light wave and crashlanded where they could?)

How the Normandy got to the Mass Relay so quickly from Earth.

How and When my squadmates were picked up on Earth to escape the battle on the Normandy.

Where Shepard is taking his/her famous breath - it couldn't be in space and it couldn't be on Earth, so exactly where is it happening? 

I don't really care about the nature of the Starchild, the Crucible, the Reapers and all that. I don't care about the choices between Control, Synthesis, and Destroy... even though Control sounds like an Illusive Man idea and Synthesis sounds like a Sovereign idea. I just don't like the parts that just don't make any sense at all.

That's my problemo with the endings. But again, I respect your opinion and I'm glad you were happy with them. No joke.

Modifié par Rockpopple, 23 mars 2012 - 06:42 .

[Mr. Big Pimpin]

"Hard choices"? Yes, it was hard choosing between "Shepard dies, Normandy crashes, relays are destroyed", "Shepard dies, Normandy crashes, relays are destroyed", and "Shepard dies, Normandy crashes, relays are destroyed". Had to really weigh the positives and negatives on that one.

[tontoodioso]

Pattonesque wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

I personally absolutely loved the ending(s) and would hate to see them
retconned. I believe that many people didn't like to have to make the
hard choices and wanted a win all and save all scenario. This is
unrealistic and would have made no sense in a galactic war with
machines.

Further elaboration would be welcomed but don't change what is already there.

Read my full explanation on my thoughts here.

Even with a different ending, a win-all save-all scenario is impossible. Characters you know have already died on the way there, planets are devastated, and billions of people are dead. The happiest possible ending would still have these things be true. I'm not sure what your point is, basically.

My point is to discover why people are so outraged over a decent ending.

[Alexraptor1]

The reason why ME3's ending sucks can be summed up in three words:

Deus Ex Machina

[jumpingkaede]

tontoodioso wrote...

Pattonesque wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

I personally absolutely loved the ending(s) and would hate to see them
retconned. I believe that many people didn't like to have to make the
hard choices and wanted a win all and save all scenario. This is
unrealistic and would have made no sense in a galactic war with
machines.

Further elaboration would be welcomed but don't change what is already there.

Read my full explanation on my thoughts here.

Even with a different ending, a win-all save-all scenario is impossible. Characters you know have already died on the way there, planets are devastated, and billions of people are dead. The happiest possible ending would still have these things be true. I'm not sure what your point is, basically.

My point is to discover why people are so outraged over a decent ending.

Your premise is that the ending was "decent" to begin with.  Most of us disagree.

[Rockpopple]

Carlthestrange wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

Are you pulling for DLC that elaborates upon or retcons the ending? I am honestly curious which one people want. I am pulling for elaborates upon.

I'm all for keeping the current endings. What I would like are other options that provide a personally more satisfying conclusion. No need to remove the original to give the people what they want.

Ah, except there are many people on these forums clamouring for the current ending to be removed in it's entirety and replaced with something else, including with the removal of the Star Child and basically everything that happened after Shepard and Anderson's confrontation with TIM.

So what's BioWare to do? Some people just want the endings tweaked. Some people want new endings added to the old endings. Some people want the old endings removed altogether. What should they do? They can't do it all.

[nevar00]

If you liked the "pick your own color" explosion ending, fine. It's not deep because it's "dark and edgy" or whatever they were going for. I was looking for those 16 endings that would happen based on my choices in the all 3 games. Instead what I got was littered with plot holes, a dues ex machina, false promises from Bioware, and our decisions not only not mattering but being rendered completely meaningless.

[Rockpopple]

And again, it's just saddening how people can't just be respectful of a differing opinion. Someone actually came in here just to call you or your OP "disgusting". I mean... wow. Just over the freakin' top.

[Vromrig]

tontoodioso wrote...

I personally absolutely loved the ending(s) and would hate to see them  retconned. I believe that many people didn't like to have to make the hard choices and wanted a win all and save all scenario. This is unrealistic and would have made no sense in a galactic war with machines.

Further elaboration would be welcomed but don't change what is already there.

Read my full explanation on my thoughts here.

Edit: I am not a troll, I just appreciate the end as I know many others do, I am happy to hear your opinions and counter-arguments, but simply asserting I am wrong or a troll gets you nothing.

Not interested in giving IGN further page views.

If genuinely interested, could post here.

[Khevan77]

tontoodioso wrote...

Khevan77 wrote...

*snip*

It never explicitly says he is the Citadel, only that it is a part of him. He has control of the Reapers, but that doesn't mean he controls the Citadel.

 Um, huh?  Do I really need to argue this?  He has control of the Reapers, something that's seperate from himself, but he can't control the Citadel, something that's a part of him?  This makes no sense.
 

I agree that the StarKid is the enemy, but what other choice do we have? Follow one of his choices, or watch the Reapers destroy the galaxy.

We don't have a choice, that's the whole point.  Slews of promises made by Bioware before the game launched promised divergent endings, that our choices would affect the endings, etc.  The game may technically follow the hype (War Assetts affect which version of Space Magic Lights you have access to) but it's not at all what the devs made it sound what it would be like.

[CheeseEnchilada]

I'm glad you liked the ending, OP. However, I think that most gamers were aware we would have to make hard choices and weren't looking for a 'save everyone' ending. It's little things that seem to break the lore and don't make a whole lot of sense that's truly bothersome.

-How did Hackett know Shepard was up in the Citadel? Major Coats was reporting that everything was decimated.

-Why can't we talk to the star-child? Investigate? His logic makes very little sense, and Shepard accepts it at face value. If this is the final choice in the game, a little elaboration would be nice.

-What is Synthesis? How does it work? How can you forcibly rewrite organics and synthetics like that? There's a reason it's commonly called 'space magic'--it seems to go completely out of bounds of any science we've seen thus far, even from the reapers.

-Why was the Normandy running? Shouldn't Joker have been on the front lines? And why are squadmates who were on the ground with Shepard suddenly walking out of the Normandy at the end? The Mass Effect universe doesn't have teleporters. Are we to believe Joker somehow picked them up before turning and running, completely abandoning Shepard and the fight?

-The holocaust filled nightmare scenario at the end seems completely contradictory in theme to everything we've seen. The first two games have a definite 'triumph against the odds' feel to it, so to know no matter what you do there will be a dark age is a little disheartening.

Again, I'm happy you enjoyed the endings, and I hope this isn't discouraging. Hopefully this'll help you understand why some of us are against the endings, that's all.

[Bantz]

 OP I'm glad you enjoyed the endings. Please review the attached document so you'll understand why the vast majority of us do not.

docs.google.com/document/d/1QT4IUepvrU1pfv_B95oQj0H84DlCTUmzQ_uQh1voTUs/preview

[Alexraptor1]

The Star Child needs to go, and be replaced on some level with Harbinger
Its the only logical thing to do.

I mean seriously, all of ME2 and the DLC arrival was all about setting Harbinger up as the principle antagonist of the series.
While the collectors may have appeared to be the big baddies there, it was actually Harbinger, and you actually fought Harbinger every single time you fought any collectors.

So ME3 comes around and then what? All we get from Harbinger is a codex entry, a few seconds in a cutscene, and a brief sequence with him shooting at us.... thats it.
They could just as well have cut any reference to Harbinger out completely from ME3, because thats how absent he was.

A final verbal and physical confrontation with Harbinger is a MUST HAVE in order to wrap up this trilogy properly.

[Khevan77]

Vasparian wrote...

Khevan77 wrote...

*facepalm*

Yet another someone who doesn't understand why the endings suck.

You really don't help your cause.

Yeah, I shouldn't have said that part.  But I'm getting tired of people saying that I don't like the ending because it was too dark, it wasn't happy enough, etc.  Bioware's said it, news media has said it, some people on the forums are saying it.  No matter how often someone says "No, that's not why we don't like the endings, here's why.." that whole line about "You didn't get unicorns and butterflies so you're crying" or some variation appears.

It's annoying, but I shouldn't have gone there.

[Midwat]

tontoodioso wrote...

Apocsapel91 wrote...

Good for you. That's exactly why we want optional DLC. That way, you can keep those endings and we can get ones that actually make sense. Good day sir!

Are you pulling for DLC that elaborates upon or retcons the ending? I am honestly curious which one people want. I am pulling for elaborates upon.

I think new ending options are what people are looking for.

Look, you liked the endings - that's fine! To you and your Shepard, the endings are fitting.

The problem is, they don't necessarily make sense to us and our Shepards. That was the whole thing about Mass Effect - player experiences would be radically different based on choices made.

If you were a happy ending person, you could work hard and see things happen (everyone surviving the 'suicide' mission, having Saren kill himself rather than continue to be a tool of the Reapers). If you believed in darker endings, your Shepard could have rushed through things, taken the easy way out, and suffered for his choices.

The problem is, both those Shepards got the same ending (yes, there is about two seconds of difference in the cutscenes), and the consequence from that ending (which, again, is remarkably unvaried) nullifies many choices made earlier.

The DLC doesn't necessarily have to rewrite YOUR ending, but it should address the concerns I (and, apparently, a large number of other people) have.

Modifié par Midwat, 23 mars 2012 - 06:52 .

[Alexraptor1]

-How did Hackett know Shepard was up in the Citadel? Major Coats was reporting that everything was decimated.

Because the Citadel opened itself?

[Yayap311]

I want to drop this link by. Everyone really needs to take the 20 minutes to watch and listen to this video.

If this theory truly is what Bioware intends than i'm all for it.

[byne]

tontoodioso wrote...

kofelover wrote...

If I want harsh realism, I look to CNN World News, not my game library.

As has been stated I was referring what would be realistic within the fiction.

[  ] realistic within the fiction
[  ] green light makes everyone half-robotic

You can only check one of the above boxes. Make your choice wisely.

[HawkOfMay]

tontoodioso wrote...

I personally absolutely loved the ending(s) and would hate to see them  retconned. I believe that many people didn't like to have to make the hard choices and wanted a win all and save all scenario. This is unrealistic and would have made no sense in a galactic war with machines.

Further elaboration would be welcomed but don't change what is already there.

Read my full explanation on my thoughts here.

You didn't answer what I think is REALLY the biggest problem with the ending.   Read this review:   http://calitreview.com/24673 


Sloppy execution that reuses art assets reveals that it’s a hurried inclusion. The under thought and over pretentious dialogue does nothing but create bizarre, confusing plot holes. It even commits the same sin The Devil Inside did earlier this year, and has the gall to add an advertisement by the producers at the end of the credits, which is frankly insulting. 
Far more importantly though, it betrays key themes and values well established by the series thus far. Past player choice impacting the shape of events is negated in favor of an arbitrary and poorly explained “pick your favorite color” moment. Science fiction justification in an otherwise material world is abandoned for magical deism, since quite literally, a god in a machine appears. Unification through altruism and sacrifice is thrown out for pure nihilism: each of the choices you’re forced to make results in Shepard committing some level of genocide or another, with the benefits removed from any relatable emotional touchstone to the intangible space of far flung statistics. It even manages to make The Reapers, one of the more imposing forces of antagonism in recent memory, come across as foolish pawns.


To add a little bit to that review.   Much of  ME1 ME2 dealt with the theme of free will.  Should EDI be treated as seperate entity who's choices be respected?   Does Shepard actually have free will after being rebuilt by Cereberus?  My own Shepard destroyed the heretic geth on the premise that it was a greater evil to take away a creatures free will than to kill them.   I thought it was setting a bad precedent.  If we can rewrite synthetics why isn't moral to do the same to organics?

Taking the ending at face value (i.e. assuming a non-doctrination ending) the current ending just defenestrated all of those themes and then went outtside  stomped on them a few times for good measure.

Modifié par HawkOfMay, 23 mars 2012 - 07:00 .

[tontoodioso]

Exolyps wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

Huyna wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

This is
unrealistic

Yup.
Because multicolor waves of magical energy is realistic.
After all, this is a classical fantasy RPG we are playing, so, why not?

An EMP-type wave is exactly what I would expect out of a Sci-Fi game, many of you seem to foget that we are playing in a science fiction future.

I also seems to forget when the Space Magic was introduced.

An EMP would be tech not magic, and the Mass Relays would be the perfect vehicle to send them from system to system.

[Dragoonlordz]

The amount of arrogant and vicious people posting in here belittling his or her enjoyment and article he wrote which is not much different than if had wrote it on here expressing why liked it, just goes to further show how much BSN has declined over the years. Sorry for those using the space magic term but like said elsewhere just because it is not explained or understood does not mean it is not possible in either science fiction or real life. In fact almost everything in science fiction is this way. Just like many of the elements of the previous games were this way.

I find those who use the space magic term to attack another's view quite silly.

Stand in front of a cave man with planted C4 a mile away using a detonator to activate it, to the cave man it appears to be magic. The same principle with even the smallest of things such as a lighter starting fires. It is constantly reminding the player through out the game that even though they have the plans they do not know what it does, lack of understanding of something that's more advanced. Every race that found a relay did not understand how they worked to begin with and they were vastly more advanced than the own species technology, same with Prothean beacons jumping a civilizations knowledge in leaps and bounds. The Reapers also more advanced and people do not know everything about how they work down to each and every square centimetre of the ship.

What I mean is just because you do not understand something does not mean it's not possible or that it's actually magic and I personally did not need to know how to take apart and rebuild a relay or the normandy to be satisfied with believing they are possible to exist in that universe. As said I am not interested in the game becoming a documentary encyclopedia or biography even dictionary or thesaurus. Not all technology has to be explained to me to enjoy the game of which stated in first post but people are choosing to ignore that statement in order to further their own agendas.

With regard to plot holes I also addressed this as there are ways to get your head around elements, using imagination and interpretation. It is just the case some people either do not want to think about it and want to see or do it and others who refuse to change from the stance of "if they do not agree with me then they are wrong". That stubborn and arrogant reaction is detrimental to the social element of this site being if you refuse to believe or be open to another's opinion then your just saying the same thing over and over again with an element of "trolololo, I can't hear you. <fingers in ears>" which is not a good thing for discussions or debate about the games most of us love.

In all previous games people have had to think about and imagine why somethings happen or what something means, each and every ME title had this so I find it surprising how bitter some are over having to continue doing such in this title. Most of the threads created on the site have been theoretic in nature from the offset and has been a bonus to debating and discussion because of that, not an offense to require such in the games.

[byne]

tontoodioso wrote...

Exolyps wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

Huyna wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

This is
unrealistic

Yup.
Because multicolor waves of magical energy is realistic.
After all, this is a classical fantasy RPG we are playing, so, why not?

An EMP-type wave is exactly what I would expect out of a Sci-Fi game, many of you seem to foget that we are playing in a science fiction future.

I also seems to forget when the Space Magic was introduced.

An EMP would be tech not magic, and the Mass Relays would be the perfect vehicle to send them from system to system.

Last I checked EMPs cant make you half-robot, or give you control of partially organic starships.

Only Destroy can be said to be an EMP. The others are space magic.

[tontoodioso]

Carlthestrange wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

Are you pulling for DLC that elaborates upon or retcons the ending? I am honestly curious which one people want. I am pulling for elaborates upon.

I'm all for keeping the current endings. What I would like are other options that provide a personally more satisfying conclusion. No need to remove the original to give the people what they want.

I can completely agree with this. As I stated originally I would be all for further elaboration.