706 réponses à ce sujet

[mcsupersport]

zigamortis wrote...

No one with any artistic integrity would have let that absolute debacle of an ending be released. No one. The ending was so inexcusable on so many levels, that I can’t help but laugh at people’s attempts to defend it by calling it art. As if Art were not subject to ridicule and criticism.

Said so well.

[sweet-d]

Not every one wants a happy ending. I'm okay with Shepard dieing but I'm not okay with how crappy the ending was it gave no closure about any of the other character's. The entire series was about the character's and all they showed was a few them standing on some random planet. That's why the ending sucks also there isn't a difference in any of the endings it's basically only one ending except for the minor details. It just sucked it's like bioware got to the end of the and just quit.

[BuckHammer]

 So what I'm basically trying to get through is that adding an ending that eliminates the need for sacrifice would effectively eliminate any endings that require sacrifice. One of the core concepts of sacrifice is that they are only made because it is necessary to achieve a goal. No one is going to deliberately seek out and choose the ending that requires the most sacrifice. Doing so would eliminate the meaning behind the sacrifice.

So, I oppose any additional content to the current ending that eliminates the need for the sacrifice of Shepard, Anderson, certain squadmates, the ground component of the Earth assault force and many others. I'm completely fine with making the ending more integral with what choices you have made in previous games and such, but that would require the elimination and replacement of the entire ending. Then, with a new ending, you could add all sorts of new endings, some or even most of which could be happy. I support this action.

It's really just the current ending that can't really have a "happy" ending, although I consider the "Control" and "Destroy" endings to be "happy". Again, happy is a subjective term, and it's really difficult to use it as part of this discussion, because it means something different to everyone who is reading this.

The only thing they can do to salvage anything out of the current ending scenario is to add closure and wrap up the questions that everyone has.

Modifié par BuckHammer, 26 mars 2012 - 09:16 .

[firebreather19]

mcsupersport wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

mcsupersport wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

Btw, I'm all for clarification. I'm all for whatever Bioware wants to do...it's their game, and they don't owe us anything. It won't change the position of my game, and if it makes others happy that's great.

But I will know, for a fact, that what I get out of the game as is (barring any extra clarification that might magnify the strength of some of the elements) is far more profound and will last a lot longer than what others will get if they do add on some cheap happy ending where Shep kicks ass rides a horse and streaks off into the sunset with the LI on the back. I get why you want it, I do...but it won't mean even an ounce as much. It's the equivalent of playing a generic FPS. Nothing new, nothing original, nothing even remotely honest in regards to the human experience.

LOL, there is nothing remotely HONEST in reguards to the human experience in THIS ending.  I am glad you are so happy being so supiorior to everyone else and that you "Get IT!!"  

LOL, you soooo smart.

How so?

Being smart and getting more out of an ending doesn't equal the same thing.
Thanks for chiming in sassypants.

1)  The ending is a Duex Ex rip-off, it isn't new. 
2)  It doesn't fit the story that was told.
3)  You are talking like it is something great, and you and the few who get it, can understand at a deeper level, above the "common" gamer.
4)  The ending leaves more questions than it answers and uses a heavy handed bs mechanic to deliver them.
5)  Tone of writing is everything.
6)  Just because a Hero lives or dies doesn't change the human experience, if humans live they usually celebrate or procreate as they can.
7)  Being smart and getting more out of the ending does pretty much, becuase you are saying you get something that others don't becuase you are different than them, ie by your tone and generalization of games, smarter/better.

1) Well Jesus in that case nothing's new, so let's go sit in the dirt and play with rocks and maybe we'll think up something original. 
2) Sure as hell does. It wasn't "Shepard meets a gal/guy, falls in love, gets married, has kids, and oh in between all the drama and lovey dovey talks and kiss wishes he/she fought some robots called Reapers. Nbd though, more like a footnote." It was war since Eden Prime, Shepard vs. the Reapers. Shepard won. End.
3) I don't have to say anything, it's proving itself. You don't want a Donnie Darko ending, you want a Bounty Hunter ending. I get it. Means to an end v. end to means. I can say that because most people will also agree it invalidates the previous games, which is also a ridiculous assumption because the moments in which those choices are made are the ones that matter. If every choice is made pointless because of an impeding death, then really that's sadder than anything else.
4) Sure, more questions than answers is an argument I can appreciate. Luckily there's clarification coming, I hope.
5) Tone is also inferred
6) The human experience can be cheapened with some fake celebratory gold-medal ceremonyesque scene. It's kind of like the Assassin from Serenity when he says something along the lines of "I'm going to build the world, but I'm not going to be a part of it."
7) I have different appreciation for different things, it doesn't mean I'm smarter. If Bioware had originally put in some "happy ending" I'd be just as happy and defending it if this were opposite. But they created the universe, they molded the last 2 99/100ths of the Mass Effect games. I'm willing to follow them into the end, even if the only difference is whether I'm sending the Reapers to hell or leading the universe into an eternity of being harvested.

[ticklefist]

Happy ending shmappy ending. I just wanted a good ending. ME3's ending pulls off the unthinkable. It makes the two previous games worse while making The Matrix trilogy better.

Modifié par ticklefist, 26 mars 2012 - 09:17 .

[Aweus]

TheHoneyRuns wrote...

Aweus wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

When did I say I LIKED the ending.....oh wait, I didn't.

  

Let me quote yourself.

 make something they want to make and don't give a crap about what their fans think 

  txgoldrush wrote... I have said that it does need to be fixed. 

  

So. They should give a crap about what you want but dont give a crap about what someone else thinks?

No, OP wants the ending to stay the same, just to be filled out. Not exactly contradicting theories there.

What does this change in regard to previous statement? If he wants them to stay it means he likes them. Which was the point he denied. He keeps backing up in this thread why he likes the theme of endgins. And then he states that Bioware should not give a crap when someone thinks otherwise. Which means he is biased. Yes, we are biased as well. Everything here is biased. The point is which bias is more represented. Yet some pro-enders try to convince us that they are not biased but only defend the "artistic integrity".

[WazTheMagnificent]

Mbednar wrote...


Everyone should be happy with the ending they choose.  Thats the point of Bioware <3

I disagree with this. To repeat myself:

Mass Effect has NEVER been about letting the player choose EXACTLY what they want though. On the contrary,  it has been about presenting the player with tough choices, and forcing them to weigh up the pros and cons of each. For instance, you can't save Kaidan and Ashley. You can't save the council and prevent heavy losses to the human fleet. But that's the point.

If you want to write your own story, pick up a pen and paper and let rip. That isn't what Mass Effect is about. And for the record, I have no problem with them changing the ending, I just don't agree with the notion that, because ME emphasises choice, there has be the option for a super happy ending. As I said above, self sacrifice makes sense for the paragon ending. Just my opinion though, and honestly ANYTHING would be better than what we got. Yes, even Shepard riding through the cosmos on a magical unicorn with his LI.

[TheHoneyRuns]

zigamortis wrote...

No one with any artistic integrity would have let that absolute debacle of an ending be released. No one. The ending was so inexcusable on so many levels, that I can’t help but laugh at people’s attempts to defend it by calling it art. As if Art were not subject to ridicule and criticism.

Everything is subject to ridicule and criticism. I make fun of my friends cat for being fat all of the time. He ignores me.

If the majority of criticism levied at Bioware and their games continues with short, fireball nastiness without much thought put behind it, I wouldn't be surprised if those fatcats turned tail and started ignoring as well.

[Laughing.Man.d8D]

firebreather19 wrote...

Laughing.Man.d8D wrote...

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. 

Starchild says that once you release the Crucibles engery the mass relays will be DESTROYED, not deactivated. Don't even get me started on Joker flying at FTL and the explosion wave catches up to him.

The Mass Relay structure is destroyed. The energy is bounced from relay to relay deactivating each one. You even see it slow down, then stop, and then the structure explodes. Use logic. If that was the case, the Starchild wouldn't say "Hey you choose Destroy you're going to kill Edi and the Geth." He'd said "Hey, you choose Destroy and everyone dies." There's no need to clarify that Edi and the Geth are eliminated, because everyone is.

People are just making up lame excuses to justify some even more lame notion that the developers were "lazy." Sure, not lazy 299% of the mass effect games, but SUPER lazy that last 1%. 

I used to think, for some ridiculous reason, that the Mass Effect fan base must be the best because of how mature and developed I felt the story and style of the games were. I was terribly off. Do everything right 99% of the time...put all your time and effort and creativity into crafting a vibrant, complex universe, and you take a risk with a plot twist, and just because it doesn't pan out for everyone, they want to eat you alive. Pretty ungrateful. Why would anyone want to be a game developer when there's no real fan loyalty? 

But no let's make up lame assumptions about the entire galaxy being wiped out and choices "not meaning anything." Newsflash: you gain your squadmates loyalty or not, that suicide run still happens. There is no difference in ME1, 2, or 3's endings. Except you actually got much more choice in 3.

Is everything done perfect? Definitely not. The "legend of Shepard" card thing at the end was lame, and even the stargazer bit too. But am I going to seriously write off hundreds of hours of a fantastically crafted story and universe over...that? 

I'd have to seriously question my personality if I did. Because that's not a person you can trust. That's a person who will stab you in the back the first chance they get.

Since Bioware fails to show Earth after the Citadel explodes or the Sol Relay explosion both of our speculations are valid.

Choosing any one of the last 3 choices completely negates all choices Shepard made prior to meeting the Starchild. I can be a loyal fan I just won't be blinded by loyalty. Bioware wanted a galactic dark age, a clean slate to rewrite/rebuild the Mass Effect Universe, I just think they went about it completely wrong with offering too much speculation. If anything I want a sensible ending with clarification on things at the LEAST.

[tjmax]

txgoldrush wrote...

tjmax wrote...

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.

Its never been about a happy ending. its about finishing the story using the lore and logic of the game not pulling something new out in the last 10 min.

and my post is for those that want them.....

I DO think the ending needs to be fixed to reflect more of the lore and quash anything even perceived to be plot holes. I DON'T want a shoehorned happy ending, becuase the fact is, happy endings make less than happy endings more like gameplay failures than true endings.

I actually thought the Catalyst conversation was way too brief, and in fact, was planned to be longer and more descriptive. Really all BW has to do is go back to their original plans and flesh that conversation out, even allowing Shep to debate him in regards to his views on organics/synthetics..

I would have been happy if they ended it with shep getting hit bt harby the habenger's beam and dieing on the feild of battle and everyone dies trying. everything after that is a mistake.

[KingKhan03]

But the thing is this a BioWare game and BioWare games  give you the choice to have happy endings see DAO, it should have been an ending where you felt your choices effected the outcome which they didn`t, The ending that we got just seemed lazy and rushed.

Modifié par KingKhan03, 26 mars 2012 - 09:18 .

[firebreather19]

DA2 was awesome what's wrong with people. Yeah reused areas weren't all that inspiring, but the game itself was one of my favorites. Far better than that point and click DA:O.

[thebigbad1013]

Artistic integrity = minority/entitled.

Just the latest way of trying to brush us off and make it seem like we are totally out of line despite having valid concerns and critisism.

[Mbednar]

WazTheMagnificent wrote...

Mbednar wrote...


Everyone should be happy with the ending they choose.  Thats the point of Bioware <3

I disagree with this. To repeat myself:

Mass Effect has NEVER been about letting the player choose EXACTLY what they want though. On the contrary,  it has been about presenting the player with tough choices, and forcing them to weigh up the pros and cons of each. For instance, you can't save Kaidan and Ashley. You can't save the council and prevent heavy losses to the human fleet. But that's the point.

If you want to write your own story, pick up a pen and paper and let rip. That isn't what Mass Effect is about. And for the record, I have no problem with them changing the ending, I just don't agree with the notion that, because ME emphasises choice, there has be the option for a super happy ending. As I said above, self sacrifice makes sense for the paragon ending. Just my opinion though, and honestly ANYTHING would be better than what we got. Yes, even Shepard riding through the cosmos on a magical unicorn with his LI.

It was such a tough choice in Mass Effect 2 to PREPARE and gain the LOYALTY of my squad so that everyone lived.

Every Bioware game is about choice and how those choices play out.  While as OP stated, a Bitter ending may feel like a gameplay failiure as opposed to a happy ending, a variety of endings, including happy, should have been released for it originally.

Edit:

I LOL'd after re-reading your post in response to the first words in mine.  You "disagree" that fans should be happy.  XD  I laughed.  Not insultingly... just heartily

Modifié par Mbednar, 26 mars 2012 - 09:24 .

[mcsupersport]

BuckHammer wrote...

 So what I'm basically trying to get through is that adding an ending that eliminates the need for sacrifice would effectively eliminate any endings that require sacrifice. One of the core concepts of sacrifice is that they are only made because it is necessary to achieve a goal. No one is going to deliberately seek out and choose the ending that requires the most sacrifice. Doing so would eliminate the meaning behind the sacrifice.

So, I oppose any additional content to the current ending that eliminates the need for the sacrifice of Shepard, Anderson, certain squadmates, the ground component of the Earth assault force and many others. I'm completely fine with making the ending more integral with what choices you have made in previous games and such, but that would require the elimination and replacement of the entire ending. Then, with a new ending, you could add all sorts of new endings, some or even most of which could be happy. I support this action.

It's really just the current ending that can't really have a "happy" ending, although I consider the "Control" and "Destroy" endings to be "happy". Again, happy is a subjective term, and it's really difficult to use it as part of this discussion, because it means something different to everyone who is reading this.

The only thing they can do to salvage anything out of the current ending scenario is to add closure and wrap up the questions that everyone has.

Earth destroyed, population less than 1,000th pre-invasion...check!
Turian homeworld and most colonies destroyed.....check!
Asari homeworld and most colonies destoryed...check!
Mordin dies..check!
Thane dies...check!
Unknown thousands of ground troops die in assault...check!
Unknown thousands die in Space battle...check!
Most known species are reduced to almost pre-space population and capabilities..check!
Add in destruction of relays and other ending bs...check!!


Yep, looks like a receipe for a REALLY happy ending, man if Shepard survives imagine the party they will have, no reservation needed, because you know, there aren't enough people left alive to really pack a place now!!

[Aweus]

BuckHammer wrote...

 So what I'm basically trying to get through is that adding an ending that eliminates the need for sacrifice would effectively eliminate any endings that require sacrifice. One of the core concepts of sacrifice is that they are only made because it is necessary to achieve a goal. No one is going to deliberately seek out and choose the ending that requires the most sacrifice. Doing so would eliminate the meaning behind the sacrifice.

So, I oppose any additional content to the current ending that eliminates the need for the sacrifice of Shepard, Anderson, certain squadmates, the ground component of the Earth assault force and many others. I'm completely fine with making the ending more integral with what choices you have made in previous games and such, but that would require the elimination and replacement of the entire ending. Then, with a new ending, you could add all sorts of new endings, some or even most of which could be happy. I support this action.

It's really just the current ending that can't really have a "happy" ending, although I consider the "Control" and "Destroy" endings to be "happy". Again, happy is a subjective term, and it's really difficult to use it as part of this discussion, because it means something different to everyone who is reading this.

The only thing they can do to salvage anything out of the current ending scenario is to add closure and wrap up the questions that everyone has.

I remember very well when back in November(?) I was speaking with my friend about possible ME3 endings and I told him that one of my Shepards is going to make the sacrifice and die in the end if this will be possible becouse I find this fitting in some way. That would also coincide probably with my Insanity playthrough. So I dont know why you say that presence of more happy ending (I still would not call this full happy ending considering all that happened) invalidate less "optimal" endings. As you said it yourself "happy" is a subjective term. The terms of what is good and what not is also matter of preference in this case. Problem is, I find the variety of options given in ME3 unnaceptable. Not to mention the plotholes which is another truckload of issues.

[firebreather19]

Laughing.Man.d8D wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

Laughing.Man.d8D wrote...

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. 

Starchild says that once you release the Crucibles engery the mass relays will be DESTROYED, not deactivated. Don't even get me started on Joker flying at FTL and the explosion wave catches up to him.

The Mass Relay structure is destroyed. The energy is bounced from relay to relay deactivating each one. You even see it slow down, then stop, and then the structure explodes. Use logic. If that was the case, the Starchild wouldn't say "Hey you choose Destroy you're going to kill Edi and the Geth." He'd said "Hey, you choose Destroy and everyone dies." There's no need to clarify that Edi and the Geth are eliminated, because everyone is.

People are just making up lame excuses to justify some even more lame notion that the developers were "lazy." Sure, not lazy 299% of the mass effect games, but SUPER lazy that last 1%. 

I used to think, for some ridiculous reason, that the Mass Effect fan base must be the best because of how mature and developed I felt the story and style of the games were. I was terribly off. Do everything right 99% of the time...put all your time and effort and creativity into crafting a vibrant, complex universe, and you take a risk with a plot twist, and just because it doesn't pan out for everyone, they want to eat you alive. Pretty ungrateful. Why would anyone want to be a game developer when there's no real fan loyalty? 

But no let's make up lame assumptions about the entire galaxy being wiped out and choices "not meaning anything." Newsflash: you gain your squadmates loyalty or not, that suicide run still happens. There is no difference in ME1, 2, or 3's endings. Except you actually got much more choice in 3.

Is everything done perfect? Definitely not. The "legend of Shepard" card thing at the end was lame, and even the stargazer bit too. But am I going to seriously write off hundreds of hours of a fantastically crafted story and universe over...that? 

I'd have to seriously question my personality if I did. Because that's not a person you can trust. That's a person who will stab you in the back the first chance they get.

Since Bioware fails to show Earth after the Citadel explodes or the Sol Relay explosion both of our speculations are valid.

Choosing any one of the last 3 choices completely negates all choices Shepard made prior to meeting the Starchild. I can be a loyal fan I just won't be blinded by loyalty. Bioware wanted a galactic dark age, a clean slate to rewrite/rebuild the Mass Effect Universe, I just think they went about it completely wrong with offering too much speculation. If anything I want a sensible ending with clarification on things at the LEAST.

Those choices aren't negated, in fact those choices got you to that moment where you could actually make a difference and determine the fate of the universe. Without all those choices you might've never even had the chance to land on Earth and make the run for the beam. Without your original choices maybe Saren would've ended you. 

[txgoldrush]

KingKhan03 wrote...


But the thing is this a BioWare game and BioWare games  give you the choice to have happy endings see DAO, it should have been an ending where you felt your choices effected the outcome which they didn`t, The ending that we got just seemed lazy and rushed.

However, the endiings problem was that it was lazy and rushed, not because it lacks a happy ending. Even if the best ending is bittersweet, choices do matter.

Look at Fallout New Vegas...NONE of the endings are without bad things happening or negative elements. All four sides have their problems.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 26 mars 2012 - 09:24 .

[Scyldemort]

Adding a happy ending IS breaking artistic intergrity

13 pages and counting?
...

[TheHoneyRuns]

firebreather19 wrote...

DA2 was awesome what's wrong with people. Yeah reused areas weren't all that inspiring, but the game itself was one of my favorites. Far better than that point and click DA:O.

Uhh, totally OT, but yeah, DA2 was awesome in story, character design, acting and gameplay.

But to put down DA:O, an equally amazing and far more epic game, for being a point and click?

That's why the adventure genre is dead. Cause of boo-boo like that. 

[firebreather19]

TheHoneyRuns wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

DA2 was awesome what's wrong with people. Yeah reused areas weren't all that inspiring, but the game itself was one of my favorites. Far better than that point and click DA:O.

Uhh, totally OT, but yeah, DA2 was awesome in story, character design, acting and gameplay.

But to put down DA:O, an equally amazing and far more epic game, for being a point and click?

That's why the adventure genre is dead. Cause of boo-boo like that. 

I couldn't do it. It started out cool, had promising story, but everytime I tried to get in combat I just ended up being reminded of Diablo II-style action and it completely turned me off. 

[txgoldrush]

TheHoneyRuns wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

DA2 was awesome what's wrong with people. Yeah reused areas weren't all that inspiring, but the game itself was one of my favorites. Far better than that point and click DA:O.

Uhh, totally OT, but yeah, DA2 was awesome in story, character design, acting and gameplay.

But to put down DA:O, an equally amazing and far more epic game, for being a point and click?

That's why the adventure genre is dead. Cause of boo-boo like that. 

DA2 character design and story (while rushed and flawed) crush DAO's characters and story. DAO was epic just to be epic and that was a problem...it turned into cliched.

And really both DA games are very flawed and far from the best Bioware has to offer, its that fans highly overrate DAO.

[El_Draque]

i want happy ending.

[Mbednar]

firebreather19 wrote...

TheHoneyRuns wrote...

firebreather19 wrote...

DA2 was awesome what's wrong with people. Yeah reused areas weren't all that inspiring, but the game itself was one of my favorites. Far better than that point and click DA:O.

Uhh, totally OT, but yeah, DA2 was awesome in story, character design, acting and gameplay.

But to put down DA:O, an equally amazing and far more epic game, for being a point and click?

That's why the adventure genre is dead. Cause of boo-boo like that. 

I couldn't do it. It started out cool, had promising story, but everytime I tried to get in combat I just ended up being reminded of Diablo II-style action and it completely turned me off. 

The first time I tried to get into it, I HATED the MMO style gameplay.  I went back a few months later and gave it another shot though.  The game IS FANTASTIC story wise, gameplay wise, and the choices in the game matter!

... however, it is a bit dated now

If you can't get into the MMO style combat then you probably won't like it.

[TheHoneyRuns]

It took me three characters to get invested enough in the story to make it out of the Korkari Wilds. I feel ya, I do. But by the time I was hunting down the Ashes of Andraste, the size of my adoration boner for that game and its story and atmosphere and level design and grandiose ambition would have put a Krogan to shame.