170 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoonlordz]

byne wrote...

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.

You not understanding how something works is not magic, it just appears to you that way because you do not know how it was done. When people saw the first plane flying many I bet thought was magic, but it does not make it so. You cannot say it is not possible because it is fiction which is based around, try using your "space magic" in a trekkie forum see how far that gets you. All you can say when talking about science fiction is 'not known' instead of 'not possible' because anything is possible in fiction.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 23 mars 2012 - 07:09 .

[Khevan77]

Space magic in and of itself isn't a bad thing. Space magic with context works (biotics? FTL travel? good things, but space magic.)

Space magic without context, or in a context that doesn't make sense is a bad thing.

That said, I don't have a problem with the space magic aspects of the endings. I have a problem with why the space magic was necessary in the first place.

[Richard 060]

While I think that:

A) the endings are really, really ill-conceived from a storytelling perspective, beyond anything that an epilogue might fix, and;

while BioWare has no obligation at all to change the endings, it'd be a really bad call to leave them as they are, since who could honestly stand by them and proudly defend them as 'well-written'?;


...any fix or change to the endings should be an optional decision for gamers, so that people who, for whatever reason, like the endings as they are can enjoy them that way.

Either make it an optional bit of DLC, and/or include a 'toggle' option to enable/disable the modified versions. But don't force it on everyone, otherwise there's going to be a mass outcry from the people who didn't want a change - and they'd be well within their rights to be angry.


Must admit, BioWare's in a pretty precarious position with this, and I'd hate to be them right now. Get it wrong in whatever way, and they stand to p*** off a sizeable part of their audience...

[Midwat]

tontoodioso wrote...

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

That's a reasonable viewpoint.

The thing I don't get is the backlash to the retake movement - why must the game end in ONE AND ONLY ONE way? As I said before, our Shepards are different - it makes sense that they would arrive at different fates.

[HawkOfMay]

Dragoonlordz wrote...
You not understanding how something works is not magic, it just appears to you that waybecause you do not know how it was done. When people saw the first plane flying many I bet thought was magic, but it does not make it so. You cannot say it is not possible because it is fiction which is based around, try using your "space magic" in a trekkie forum see how far that gets you. All you can say when talking about science fiction is 'not known' instead of 'not possible'.

There is a difference between 'space magic' and consistency within an established framework.   The ME series had 2 games and 99% percent of a third game to setup a consistent framework of how the universe worked.   The big plot reveals of ME1 and ME2 stayed within that framework and was internally consistent.

The ME3 ending decided that internal consistency was not important.   That has nothing to do with 'space magic'; that has to do with staying true to the story and expecations that were established.

[Cgrissom]

tontoodioso wrote...

Stonesoundjam wrote...

Troll tree in full season.

Because I actually agree with the freedom of Bioware to create it's endings any way it sees fit that makes me a Troll?

Apparently so. 

[alx119]

Im sorry but you don't give enough, nor good, arguments to defend the ending. You're just saying "it's good cause it's good". I read your article, and it's vague and doesn't seem to have any thought on it. This is the impression I get from reading it, that you're just saying "Great" to be on the opposite side, everyone loves to be a rebel.

But the defense "You can't save everyone" doesn't apply here, since you save no one. It's true, it's a war, you can't save everyone. So the final decision is basically kill everyone, that does not make sense. And what you fail to see is that the final decision is not your own, but one that is imposed to you, by a being with god complex with a really flawed logic that forces you to choose between three colors.

If you think that's great, by all means, please, continue being happy. But for the rest of us, it's called ignorance, and willful ignorance is a synonym of stupidity (and sorry for the wording, there's no other). If you are just being a conformist about the ending, alright, but don't try to defend it by using your own conformism because people is going to jump on you with actual logic and well thought-on arguments that you won't be able to rebate.

Plus, no, by basically 1. wiping all life from the galaxy 2. leaving it in a dark age you negate all the choices and efforts done in ME1, 2 and the rest of 3. So no, your choices did not matter in the end. You cured the genophage? Great I hope they can enjoy it while they can. You unified the geth and the quarians? Absolutely fantastic, pretty much all the quarians are stranded in Sol System and won't be able to see their homeworlds, that they finally retook, in quite a few generations (aka never because the liveships won't last long enough). Do I really need to continue? Because Palaven is also quite ****ed, and Krogans are stranded there as well.

Just saying, if you want to keep loving the endings, remain ignorant.

[Candidate 88766]

The endings are riddled with plotholes, are poorly explained, don't take into account previous choices, and take control away from Shepard - you use Reaper technology and choices offered by a Reaper AI to defeat the Reapers. Shepard is just tagging along in that end sequence.

However, I love the mood of the endings and the idea that defeating the Reapers leaves the galaxy on the brink of destruction. The idea that the combined armies of the entire Milky Way could do little more than buy time for Shepard to reach the Conduit, and finding out that defeating the Reapers means the loss of galactic society, is something that I really like.

Bioware made the Reapers out to be this nigh unstoppable force in ME1 and ME2, and frankly I think they lived up to that idea in a way I didn't think possible. The Reapers are truly devastating, and defeating them comes at tragic cost.

There is still hope - there is a ton of Reaper technology lying around now, there are QEC's to share new finds with the other species, and given the staggering depopulation of Earth and the massive losses of both the Sword and Hammer forces, finding shelter for everyone shouldn't be a huge issue. Given that the Quarian Liveships could provide much of the food for the entire flotilla, they shouldn't have a problem providing for what is left of the Quarian and Turian militaries.

The endings could, and indeed should, have been so much better. But I personally really like what Bioware tried to do with the endings. They didn't hold back. They've given us two stories with happy endings, but the final devastating twist of the story is that there was never going to be a truly happy ending. I believe that the Reapers (apart form their disappointing motive) lived up to what Bioware hinted at with the conversation with Sovereign on Illos.

Am I happy with the endings? No.

But I both appreciate and indeed like what Bioware tried to do, and whilst I am in the minority in my views I like that Bioware didn't hold back. I'm not saying others' opinions are wrong - indeed, I wouldn't say no to a happy ending and I definitely don't begrudge others the happy ending they want - but I personally feel that the mood Bioware attempted works really well with this story. There aren't many stories that work with a bleak/bittersweet ending, but I personally believe that ME3 - and indeed the entire Mass Effect trilogy - is one of them.

But as I say, thats just my opinion and I don't begrudge others their opinions.

[Vromrig]

Because I actually agree with the freedom of Bioware to create it's endings any way it sees fit that makes me a Troll?

Originally suspected simply in favor of current ending based on story merits.

Usage of term "creative freedom" undermines position.

Highly disappointed.

[sprintst]

There are lots of pretty obvious logic holes and continuity errors in the endings as given. I don't have a beef with the grim endings or the death of the main character or the dire consequences for the galaxy, I just think the ending is poorly constructed. They could have hit the same notes in another fashion and I'd be fine with it.

[Dragoonlordz]

Cgrissom wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

Stonesoundjam wrote...

Troll tree in full season.

Because I actually agree with the freedom of Bioware to create it's endings any way it sees fit that makes me a Troll?

Apparently so. 

The ones who revert to using troll name calling are just doing so because they have a distinct lack of inteligent retort or opposing counter point. They try to discredit another opinion by resorting to the lowest and cheapest form of come back which is to call others a troll. Unfortunately over the years this has become more and more in occurence on BSN.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 23 mars 2012 - 07:22 .

[Sesshaku]

Wait, so now the endinGGGG it's not only art but realistic?

So circular reasoning, space magic and teleporting are now realistic?.

C'mon people, the ending has so many plotholes that even reapers can play golf on it. Also, it's just ONE ending, they promised us more than 10.

[tontoodioso]

Hans-Erik wrote...

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.

OK so I read through it, and there are some great points there that argue the ending, at the same time for every logical fallacy there is a possible explaination. Since the ending was left up to speculation we all come up with these ideas in our head. For instance the author states that Sovereign claims that each reaper is an "idependent nation," which goes against the ending saying that the reapers were controlled on the citadel. But who said that the reapers were aware they were being controlled? Indoctrinated organics are not aware that they are being controlled for the most part, so why would "indoctrinated" machines? Every argument can be argued with a counter-argument, I am not saying in any way that my argument is better or that his are, but each person will take what they want from it, whether that be positive or negative, and I think that is what Bioware did right in all this above all else.

[byne]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

byne wrote...

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.

You not understanding how something works is not magic, it just appears to you that way because you do not know how it was done. When people saw the first plane flying many I bet thought was magic, but it does not make it so. You cannot say it is not possible because it is fiction which is based around, try using your "space magic" in a trekkie forum see how far that gets you. All you can say when talking about science fiction is 'not known' instead of 'not possible' because anything is possible in fiction.

So, would you be ok with Shepard suddenly learning how to shapeshift? I mean, just because you dont understand it, and it makes no sense given what we know about the ME universe lore, that doesnt make it magic, right?

[alx119]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Cgrissom wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

Stonesoundjam wrote...

Troll tree in full season.

Because I actually agree with the freedom of Bioware to create it's endings any way it sees fit that makes me a Troll?

Apparently so. 

The ones who revert to using troll name calling are just doing so because they have a distinct lack of inteligent retort or opposing counter point. They try to discredit another opinion by resorting to the lowest and cheapest form of come back which is to call others a troll.

Ignoring the actual well thought-on arguments against it is ignorance. Willful ignorance is the same as being willfully dumb for the sake of happiness. Many pro-enders try to rebate said arguments in a civil manner, heck I had a nice conversation with a pro-ender yesterday morning, we ended up, of course, agreeing to disagreeing, but it was productive and showed me that not all pro-enders are simple conformist.

What bugs me though, is how many of you only point out "troll" answers to support your own causes. Troll answers exist because peopel have already talked loud enough for anyone that could actually care to listen, there's no point on repeating or reiterating arguments if people is just not going to listen, better take it with humor. By only picking up these troll answers, you demonstrate the same apparent lack of intelligence. 

[tontoodioso]

Rockpopple 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?

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.

As far as no one noticing Shepard, they broadcast that message before Shepard got up, many of the soldiers were still alive, but none able to walk. Anderson I cannot explain.

I assumed that the Normandy was damaged because it was operated by, and therefor was, a fully aware synthetic AI (EDI).

I am glad to see a few people who don't agree but are willing to have a decent discussion.

[alx119]

tontoodioso wrote...

Hans-Erik wrote...

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.

OK so I read through it, and there are some great points there that argue the ending, at the same time for every logical fallacy there is a possible explaination. Since the ending was left up to speculation we all come up with these ideas in our head. For instance the author states that Sovereign claims that each reaper is an "idependent nation," which goes against the ending saying that the reapers were controlled on the citadel. But who said that the reapers were aware they were being controlled? Indoctrinated organics are not aware that they are being controlled for the most part, so why would "indoctrinated" machines? Every argument can be argued with a counter-argument, I am not saying in any way that my argument is better or that his are, but each person will take what they want from it, whether that be positive or negative, and I think that is what Bioware did right in all this above all else.

Yeah, speculation for everyone. That's how much the endings fail :/ 

[tontoodioso]

Mr. Big Pimpin wrote...

"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.

By that logic you didn't care about anything or anyone in the Galaxy besides Shepard, the Normandy, and the relays.

[Stealthy Cake]

Its actually endin(g) in singular, mind you. :DDDD

[tontoodioso]

alx119 wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

Hans-Erik wrote...

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.

OK so I read through it, and there are some great points there that argue the ending, at the same time for every logical fallacy there is a possible explaination. Since the ending was left up to speculation we all come up with these ideas in our head. For instance the author states that Sovereign claims that each reaper is an "idependent nation," which goes against the ending saying that the reapers were controlled on the citadel. But who said that the reapers were aware they were being controlled? Indoctrinated organics are not aware that they are being controlled for the most part, so why would "indoctrinated" machines? Every argument can be argued with a counter-argument, I am not saying in any way that my argument is better or that his are, but each person will take what they want from it, whether that be positive or negative, and I think that is what Bioware did right in all this above all else.

Yeah, speculation for everyone. That's how much the endings fail :/ 

I respect that opinion, I really do, but is it really such a terrible thing that we had to make our own connections and conclusions based on the materials given?

[Wolfva2]

Hans-Erik wrote...

@OP

Please read this before making ANY further comments on why people don't like the endings. Your ignorance is painful. Thanks!

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

Why would other people's opinions matter to him?  HE liked the ending.  So?  Why does that offend you so much?  Do you honestly believe that people should all march in lockstep, every single person believing the exact same thing?  Heck, I liked the ending to (except for the Normandy bit, that was...confusing).  Does MY liking the ending in someway invalidate YOUR hatred of it?  

See, THIS is the problem with the world.  People who think that any opinion contrary to theirs is a personal insult which must be dealt with.  I have seen more threads on how the ending sucks then there are husks I've killed, and I just passed them by.  They didn't like the game, oh well.  It doesn't effect MY enjoyment of the game.  

Honestly folks, if you hated the ending then by all mean let Bioware know.  You're customers, your opinion matters to them.  But don't slam someone who DID like the ending just because you disagree.  Don't claim he's trolling, or is to stupid to know better, etc.  

[tontoodioso]

Stealthy Cake wrote...

Its actually endin(g) in singular, mind you. :DDDD

As stated, if all you cared about was Shepard, the Normandy, and the Relays, then yes, there is only one ending.

[Dragoonlordz]

alx119 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Cgrissom wrote...

tontoodioso wrote...

Stonesoundjam wrote...

Troll tree in full season.

Because I actually agree with the freedom of Bioware to create it's endings any way it sees fit that makes me a Troll?

Apparently so. 

The ones who revert to using troll name calling are just doing so because they have a distinct lack of inteligent retort or opposing counter point. They try to discredit another opinion by resorting to the lowest and cheapest form of come back which is to call others a troll.

Ignoring the actual well thought-on arguments against it is ignorance. Willful ignorance is the same as being willfully dumb for the sake of happiness. Many pro-enders try to rebate said arguments in a civil manner, heck I had a nice conversation with a pro-ender yesterday morning, we ended up, of course, agreeing to disagreeing, but it was productive and showed me that not all pro-enders are simple conformist.

What bugs me though, is how many of you only point out "troll" answers to support your own causes. Troll answers exist because peopel have already talked loud enough for anyone that could actually care to listen, there's no point on repeating or reiterating arguments if people is just not going to listen, better take it with humor. By only picking up these troll answers, you demonstrate the same apparent lack of intelligence. 

If you do not want them pointing out then stop doing them. Simple as that.

You criticizing my criticizing of others would imply you fall into the last sentence of your own reply. See how it works?

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 23 mars 2012 - 07:32 .

[ediskrad327]

i loved the part where Galactic society is destroyed and and there is space magic, how Shepard blindly accepts the starchild's logic and Joker runs away from the battle and your squad teleports to the Normandy and are happy to be trapped in Jurassic Park for the rest of their lives....oh wait....i HATED that part

[byne]

tontoodioso wrote...


I respect that opinion, I really do, but is it really such a terrible thing that we had to make our own connections and conclusions based on the materials given?

Given that Bioware went so far as to explain such a minor thing as why we can hear spaceships in space, where sound cant travel, but chose not to bother explaining the endings, yes. Yes it is.

If it was the standard operationg procedure in the ME universe to just say 'Let them figure it out on their own', I guess it'd be ok, but Bioware has gone to great lengths to explain basically everything in the universe, so I'm not going to let them not explaining the ending slide.