Aweus wrote...
Yeah, this. You know, I dont even get mad or anything when I see a thread where someone says he liked the ending and explains why. Thats cool. Why should I be upset about it? Good for the guy.RedTail F22 wrote...
Why are you against giving people choice? It's kind of Mass Effect's thing.
But I honestly start to rage when I see threads where people are against giving more options or calls me stupid becouse I liked different things from them.
AlexXIV wrote...
It would be a main theme if you had a choice to sacrifice. It doesn't really matter though, because this theme exists since ME1. Also the very appearance of a big plot twist/Deus Ex at the end betrayed any main themes anyway. I like how people who have no clue about art try to lecture others. I have no clue about art either, mind you, but seeing how the OP doesn't even have a point you don't even know anything about art. Thanks alot for the art lesson though.
Mind you, I am not for a happy ending, because imo it would feel cheep and forced. But doesn't change how the OP fails to hit any points.
txgoldrush wrote...
AlexXIV wrote...
It would be a main theme if you had a choice to sacrifice. It doesn't really matter though, because this theme exists since ME1. Also the very appearance of a big plot twist/Deus Ex at the end betrayed any main themes anyway. I like how people who have no clue about art try to lecture others. I have no clue about art either, mind you, but seeing how the OP doesn't even have a point you don't even know anything about art. Thanks alot for the art lesson though.
Mind you, I am not for a happy ending, because imo it would feel cheep and forced. But doesn't change how the OP fails to hit any points.
You do have a choice to sacrifice.....notice how in the only end where Shep survives, the synthetics die, which is a bummer for geth lovers, and Shep really does not die altogether in the Control ending but loses his form. The most positive outcome, syntheis, always results in Shep's death.
txgoldrush wrote...
No, the OPTION of a happy ending doesn't fit the Mass Effect universe either...not after billions die, nevermind that the whole society was built by the Reapers anyway. So the lost of their tech with the loss of the Reapers or their purpose DOES FIT with the universe. The fact that the Reapers are gone, that set up the Mass Effect galaxy in the first place, calls for a NEW BEGINNING.
Do I want more choice involved in the ending?..yes I do. An epilogue could fuffill this grievance. But still even with your choices mattering, you can still have a bittersweet at best ending.
firebreather19 wrote...
TheHoneyRuns wrote...
For what it's worth, no, you don't. Dr. Amanda Kenson does.
She signalled the reapers. That galaxy was destroyed the moment she did that. Shepard just saved the rest of galaxy. As always. Until the end ME3, anyway.
If you want to use that logic, Shepard saved all organic life from a constant cycle of being groomed, evolved, and subsequently harvested by the Reapers. Plus the mass relays shutting down don't destroy the clusters they're in, so he/she doesn't actually destroy the galaxy.
Modifié par TheHoneyRuns, 26 mars 2012 - 08:31 .
dallicant wrote...
txgoldrush wrote...
No, the OPTION of a happy ending doesn't fit the Mass Effect universe either...not after billions die, nevermind that the whole society was built by the Reapers anyway. So the lost of their tech with the loss of the Reapers or their purpose DOES FIT with the universe. The fact that the Reapers are gone, that set up the Mass Effect galaxy in the first place, calls for a NEW BEGINNING.
Do I want more choice involved in the ending?..yes I do. An epilogue could fuffill this grievance. But still even with your choices mattering, you can still have a bittersweet at best ending.
I don't understand the argument about society or technology being invalid because it was built on Reaper technology. Everything has to come from somewhere. If you live in Europe, should you reject all paper products because paper is from China and Europe needs to develop its own?
To use a more controversial (and perhaps more relevant) example, should India stop the use of western medicine because it was brought by the British conquest (let's ignore the fact that western medicine itself draws on lots of different sources)? Ideas come from interaction, not isolation, and that means building on what came before.
Yes, there's always Indoctrination, but there's no indication that the mass relays were Indoctrinating the people using them.
txgoldrush wrote...
Icinix wrote...
The ending of the game broke the integrity of the game.
EDI's boobs broke the integrity of the game.
Needing Ashley to be sexier broke the integrity of the game.
Auto Dialogue broke the integrity of the game.
Really. It would be amazing if BioWare could add anything in the form of DLC or game amendments that would do anything BUT add integrity to the game.
auto dialogue = a better written Shepard and really, Renegade Shep was poorly written in the first two games.
firebreather19 wrote...
Mbednar wrote...
firebreather19 wrote...
Laughing.Man.d8D wrote...
Everyone sacrificed their Shepard's to ensure the destruction of the galaxy, all hail artistic integrity, I feel so much better.
Idk what game you played. My Shepard sent the Reapers to hell, maybe sacrificing the Geth and Edi in the process but knowing they achieved free will and would have wanted him to do it anyways. He survived somehow...miracle or tech implants or maybe he's actually dead and just in his own version of heaven, but he finds Miranda and maybe some measure of peace. I think, a man like him who's been through the things he has...you can only find so much peace after that.
Relays go supernova (why do ya think the Normandy is fleeing explosion?).
Everyone dies.
Plot Hole that Shepard is alive.
Lol. Yes the Normany happened to flee the explosion and land on a nearby planet that wasn't destroyed in the supposed galaxy wiping mass relay detonations? There's no plot hole, the Mass Relays are deactivated, not slammed into with an asteroid. Completely different scenarios.
firebreather19 wrote...
The whole "I don't want to play a game that reminds me how ****ty life is" argument is pretty weak.
I didn't hear it when you had to leave Kaidan or Ashley on Virmire.
Didn't hear it when the crew was either killed or at the very least abducted and maybe liquified.
Didn't hear it when Wrex might've died.
Or maybe when you had to shoot Legion, or he gave himself up for a better purpose.
Or even when Mordin sacrificed himself, or you shot him to protect the alliance with the Salarians.
I didn't hear it when hundreds of thousands of Batarians died on your watch.
Mass Effect was always about sacrifice. ME2 was always about gaining the loyalty of your squadmates and making them the future leaders of the the Reaper resistance movement. He asked Shepard, "What do we do?" Response: "We fight or we die." There is no "we win" involved. But survival. Sacrifice to survive, and hope the future is grateful.
There are so many profound messages throughout the series, and they all seem to just be lost upon people.
Storenumber9 wrote...
dallicant wrote...
txgoldrush wrote...
No, the OPTION of a happy ending doesn't fit the Mass Effect universe either...not after billions die, nevermind that the whole society was built by the Reapers anyway. So the lost of their tech with the loss of the Reapers or their purpose DOES FIT with the universe. The fact that the Reapers are gone, that set up the Mass Effect galaxy in the first place, calls for a NEW BEGINNING.
Do I want more choice involved in the ending?..yes I do. An epilogue could fuffill this grievance. But still even with your choices mattering, you can still have a bittersweet at best ending.
I don't understand the argument about society or technology being invalid because it was built on Reaper technology. Everything has to come from somewhere. If you live in Europe, should you reject all paper products because paper is from China and Europe needs to develop its own?
To use a more controversial (and perhaps more relevant) example, should India stop the use of western medicine because it was brought by the British conquest (let's ignore the fact that western medicine itself draws on lots of different sources)? Ideas come from interaction, not isolation, and that means building on what came before.
Yes, there's always Indoctrination, but there's no indication that the mass relays were Indoctrinating the people using them.
You could also use the example that America got a lot of medical and technological advances from the ****s after WW2.
How do you think we got to the moon?
Mbednar wrote...
txgoldrush wrote...
You do not know how the relays blow...why? Because an unknown device was used, not a known method. The crucible may very well interact differently with the relay than say, an asteroid. Nevermind that the crucible may cause the relays to blow with its energy, which causes the same affect in the system as what the Crucible did to earth. So the worst ending may destroy almost everything, but the better endings will transfer their effects through relay bursts. But the use of an unknown such as the Crucible means the plot hole doesn't really exist. Is it a lazy way to cover one? Absolutely.
Really, the most likely thing is whatever happens to Earth happens everywhere.
Cool we've got active dialogue going.
Right, but the explosion the Normandy is fleeing IS likely the Relay blowing up. Last I checked, the Normandy was above Earth. Meaning, the explosion reached Earth.
Oh, and I never got a reply before. How is Mass Effect dark?
The ENTIRE series has been about suceeding against all odds and beating the no win scenario. Both of the previous games have "happy" endings that occur "IF" you played the heck out of the game and prepared.
Truthfully, EMS should have played a major factor in determining whether you get a "happy" ending, but it essentially did nothing.
txgoldrush wrote...
Face it.....a happy ending WOULD break the intergrity of the game.
The MAIN THEME of Mass Effect 3 is VICTORY THROUGH SACRIFICE.. This requires an ending that is bittersweet at best. Yes trilogies as a whole can overlying themes throughout, such as overcoming all odds (which WAS fuffilled in ME3, Shepard DID break the cycle), but single entries in a series or trilogy has their own themes.
Bioware should, and looks like they are, provide far more clarity and closure, however, not change the tone of the ending or provide a happy ending. To do so is selling out and breaking the relevance of the ending....
Hell, ME1 was not a fully happy ending, in fact had elements of victory through sacrifice, as either the a part of the alliance navy or the council is sacrificed, and ME2 is a hollow victory at best. This isn't Star Wars either, where Alderaan and Taris can be annihilated but be no longer relevant 5 minutes later....and end on a ceremony. And ME3 is so dark, a happy ending would not be appropriate.
In fact, ending the current universe and creating a new beginning IS A GOOD THING and a smart move. That needs to stay.
It is a bit OT but since when Revan is a martyr for KotOR? He lives past KotOR is absent during KotOR2 and then returns in Revan novel and SWTOR, his final fate is remained to be seen.People who want a happy ending don't see what Bioware was trying to do: Make Shepherd a martyr of the franchise, like Revan is for the Kotor- and Star Wars universe. A tragic hero that stopped being a player character but became something 'more.'
Modifié par Aweus, 26 mars 2012 - 08:32 .
Mbednar wrote...
txgoldrush wrote...
You do not know how the relays blow...why? Because an unknown device was used, not a known method. The crucible may very well interact differently with the relay than say, an asteroid. Nevermind that the crucible may cause the relays to blow with its energy, which causes the same affect in the system as what the Crucible did to earth. So the worst ending may destroy almost everything, but the better endings will transfer their effects through relay bursts. But the use of an unknown such as the Crucible means the plot hole doesn't really exist. Is it a lazy way to cover one? Absolutely.
Really, the most likely thing is whatever happens to Earth happens everywhere.
Cool we've got active dialogue going.
Right, but the explosion the Normandy is fleeing IS likely the Relay blowing up. Last I checked, the Normandy was above Earth. Meaning, the explosion reached Earth.
Oh, and I never got a reply before. How is Mass Effect dark?
The ENTIRE series has been about suceeding against all odds and beating the no win scenario. Both of the previous games have "happy" endings that occur "IF" you played the heck out of the game and prepared.
Truthfully, EMS should have played a major factor in determining whether you get a "happy" ending, but it essentially did nothing.
Mbednar wrote...
firebreather19 wrote...
The whole "I don't want to play a game that reminds me how ****ty life is" argument is pretty weak.
I didn't hear it when you had to leave Kaidan or Ashley on Virmire.
Didn't hear it when the crew was either killed or at the very least abducted and maybe liquified.
Didn't hear it when Wrex might've died.
Or maybe when you had to shoot Legion, or he gave himself up for a better purpose.
Or even when Mordin sacrificed himself, or you shot him to protect the alliance with the Salarians.
I didn't hear it when hundreds of thousands of Batarians died on your watch.
Mass Effect was always about sacrifice. ME2 was always about gaining the loyalty of your squadmates and making them the future leaders of the the Reaper resistance movement. He asked Shepard, "What do we do?" Response: "We fight or we die." There is no "we win" involved. But survival. Sacrifice to survive, and hope the future is grateful.
There are so many profound messages throughout the series, and they all seem to just be lost upon people.
In ALL of those scenarios we had a choice.
The ending of 3 was 1one choice with 3 different colors.
The unbelievable number of choices throughout the series was railroaded into a structured outcome.
Wasnt this already addressed? No matter what would you choose in ME3 ending it would still not be a full happy ending. Even if Shepard would get blue babies or whatever, it would still not be a classic happy ending. I think most Retake fans would agree with that.firebreather19 wrote...
Happy endings?
In ME1, the Citadel was invaded and hundreds if not thousands were converted into husks. Yeah Shepard stopped Sovereign, but the cost is still there. "Welp we got the bad guy" doesn't cover the fact that the counsel didn't heed your warnings and thousands of people in that one game alone were killed and used as Reaper puppets. Just because Shepard comes out of the rubble doesn't mean it's happy. It means he/she survived.
In ME2, colonists are getting liquified and huskified. You're practically abandoned by the Counsel and military, and your crew gets nearly (or maybe completely) liquified to fuel Human protoreaper. You gain your squadmates and sure you beat it, but by the end you realize you're just delaying the inevitable. The Reapers won't stop until they've murdered (or harvested, if you'd like) you and everyone you love.
So very happy.
firebreather19 wrote...
Mbednar wrote...
txgoldrush wrote...
You do not know how the relays blow...why? Because an unknown device was used, not a known method. The crucible may very well interact differently with the relay than say, an asteroid. Nevermind that the crucible may cause the relays to blow with its energy, which causes the same affect in the system as what the Crucible did to earth. So the worst ending may destroy almost everything, but the better endings will transfer their effects through relay bursts. But the use of an unknown such as the Crucible means the plot hole doesn't really exist. Is it a lazy way to cover one? Absolutely.
Really, the most likely thing is whatever happens to Earth happens everywhere.
Cool we've got active dialogue going.
Right, but the explosion the Normandy is fleeing IS likely the Relay blowing up. Last I checked, the Normandy was above Earth. Meaning, the explosion reached Earth.
Oh, and I never got a reply before. How is Mass Effect dark?
The ENTIRE series has been about suceeding against all odds and beating the no win scenario. Both of the previous games have "happy" endings that occur "IF" you played the heck out of the game and prepared.
Truthfully, EMS should have played a major factor in determining whether you get a "happy" ending, but it essentially did nothing.
Happy endings?
In ME1, the Citadel was invaded and hundreds if not thousands were converted into husks. Yeah Shepard stopped Sovereign, but the cost is still there. "Welp we got the bad guy" doesn't cover the fact that the counsel didn't heed your warnings and thousands of people in that one game alone were killed and used as Reaper puppets. Just because Shepard comes out of the rubble doesn't mean it's happy. It means he/she survived.
In ME2, colonists are getting liquified and huskified. You're practically abandoned by the Counsel and military, and your crew gets nearly (or maybe completely) liquified to fuel Human protoreaper. You gain your squadmates and sure you beat it, but by the end you realize you're just delaying the inevitable. The Reapers won't stop until they've murdered (or harvested, if you'd like) you and everyone you love.
So very happy.
Unfortunately, not having a happy ending is breaking (the spirit of) the law. Artistic integrity does not supersede the lawFace it.....a happy ending WOULD break the intergrity of the game.
It's smart thing for the Mass Effect franchise. However, many fans, unlike corporate apologists like you, don't care very much about EA's future profits.In fact, ending the current universe and creating a new beginning IS A GOOD THING and a smart move. That needs to stay.
txgoldrush wrote...
Mbednar wrote...
firebreather19 wrote...
The whole "I don't want to play a game that reminds me how ****ty life is" argument is pretty weak.
I didn't hear it when you had to leave Kaidan or Ashley on Virmire.
Didn't hear it when the crew was either killed or at the very least abducted and maybe liquified.
Didn't hear it when Wrex might've died.
Or maybe when you had to shoot Legion, or he gave himself up for a better purpose.
Or even when Mordin sacrificed himself, or you shot him to protect the alliance with the Salarians.
I didn't hear it when hundreds of thousands of Batarians died on your watch.
Mass Effect was always about sacrifice. ME2 was always about gaining the loyalty of your squadmates and making them the future leaders of the the Reaper resistance movement. He asked Shepard, "What do we do?" Response: "We fight or we die." There is no "we win" involved. But survival. Sacrifice to survive, and hope the future is grateful.
There are so many profound messages throughout the series, and they all seem to just be lost upon people.
In ALL of those scenarios we had a choice.
The ending of 3 was 1one choice with 3 different colors.
The unbelievable number of choices throughout the series was railroaded into a structured outcome.
Fact, ALL Bioware games are this.....KOTOR had only one choice that mattered, so did Jade Empire....Nevermind that ME1 and ME2 had red and blue endings with the latter based on your performance as well.
Yes, the endings visually are the same, but they do entirely three different things....different in theory enough that if you side with the geth, you may not want to choose the red ending.
Retour en haut