706 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

Chuloos 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.

You have no idea what you are talking about.. how old are you anyway... have your read any Tolkeing, Asimov, Heilen, Eddings, etc.. have you been the the movies in the last 20 years.. or since they began..  adding a happy ending.. would NOT break 'artistic integrity'.   Killing off most of the Universe is NOT a good thing.. what have you been smoking..  Did you even understand the game you played?

and how is most of the universe killed (other than the Reapers doing it before the ending)? The only thing that can be said is that the universe CHANGED. There is no proof, other than the worst ending, that most of the galaxy is killed...

Hell, the film Brazil, the opposite thing happened....a downer ending was "added" and the happy ending was an illusion.

[Lillian Sword-Maiden]

I was expecting a few different endings, one of them being a semi happy one where shep can live with her/his LI.. I also expected an ending where the Reapers would have won. o_<;

I wanted a happy-er ending. Thats pretty much why I was pissed at first. Its not like Shep living makes everything right and full of rainbows, the galaxy would still be in ruins. D:

[RamilVenoard]

Aweus wrote...

RamilVenoard wrote...

Is it best then, that you get to see a happy ending of Shepard with his little blue babies with the knowledge that SO many people died to get him there? It seems to me (personal opinion of course) that Shepard should not survive the last mission, since if he does it takes away from the Jesus character aspect that he has been given.

Ending of ME3 will never be trully happy considering all the sacrifices on the way. Shepard living or not will not change that. I do not see conflict between Shepard living and sacrifices made in the past. Besides, if we read and interpret what we have in current endings, only in synthesis ending Shepard trully dies. In control he becomes some new mysterious entity and in destroy there is the rubble scene. Also as for Jesus... *spoiler alert* he survived 

Lol "*spoiler alert*". I havent gotten that far in the bible yet, damn you! Jk.

And yes Jesus survives, but that is a matter of faith, not of literature. Yes the Bible says he survives, but we take it as poetic liscence (not from a religious standpoint of course), and it's kinda like magic, no? Evidently from all the "space magic" posts, magic seems to be unfulfilling in this case.

But I vote to terminate this exchange now (note Sovereign references) before a debate of Religions comes up. Because this is certainly not the place for one of those.

Modifié par RamilVenoard, 27 mars 2012 - 04:02 .

[twoeggs]

I think part of the problem is that we don't achieve "victory through sacrifice".

After all your work in ME3, you fail. You lose. Blasted by a Reaper, Hammer decimated, a huge chunk of the military might of the galaxy being destroyed to try and defeat the Reapers on ONE planet...

And then everything breaks down. I don't buy into the IT stuff, but from there on out the story falls apart. Despite there obviously still being stragglers trying to gain access to the citadel, the reapers abandon the transport beam - they totally forget about the player character (despite taking a direct interest in you during the story, they suddenly decide "mostly dead" is good enough), and evidently also Anderson.

Once on the Citadel, Anderson somehow makes it to a magic control panel (not even trying to join up with you, which is a bit out of character), you have a battle of words with TIM, and then you get to fail AGAIN. Your fancy Reaper killing machine doesn't work, and you don't have enough blood to even stand...

And then the whole thing gets even worse, after all your failures, you are handed the opportunity to decide what kind of victory sounds best to you. You can betray everyone you know and all of your ideals (as well as all information provided up until that point) and try and control the Reapers... You can betray your allies (geth) and at least one close friend (EDI) to finally destroy the Reapers... Or you can use your free will to betray the right of every other organism in the galaxy to self determinate and force everyone to be part synthetic and part organic (and frankly, I'm not sure how this even solves the 'problem' the Star Child presents to you)...

All of these options betray some theme or facet of the character of Shepard. Not to mention if you have high enough EMS Shepard DOES survive (presumably anyway), and people STILL complain, which I think should show that people don't just want some cupcakes and rainbows ending. Some might prefer that, but a lot of fans agree that the current endings do not do justice to the character they have been playing (some for hundreds of hours), to the lore, to previous foreshadowing, to many of the themes presented in the game, etc.

[EmEr77]

RamilVenoard wrote...

EmEr77, I certainly see your point of view, I really do. Especially the part about different Shepards, different endings. But chances are, if you play ALL your cards right during the three games, THAT is when Shepard will survive, and I really don't want mine to. When I play an RPG and make sure EVERY aspect is perfect and the best outcome is achieved It would be difficult to put into the game the player's preference of ending into the game considering such.

It's difficult to explain what I'm trying to say so forgive my ambiguity.

Correct, but I imagine that's why BioWare was banking on the whole, 16 different endings thing, so playing differently earned a different outcome. If you wanted your Shepard to be the tragic hero, you could do so, if you wanted the happy, sappy ending, you could get it. Something to that effect. It doesn't have to be highly individualized, but it could just be some general endings. I know it would be a circus for the programmers, but then this just returns to what would have happened had BioWare taken more time.

[aliengmr1]

RamilVenoard wrote...

EmEr77, I certainly see your point of view, I really do. Especially the part about different Shepards, different endings. But chances are, if you play ALL your cards right during the three games, THAT is when Shepard will survive, and I really don't want mine to. When I play an RPG and make sure EVERY aspect is perfect and the best outcome is achieved It would be difficult to put into the game the player's preference of ending into the game considering such.

It's difficult to explain what I'm trying to say so forgive my ambiguity.

So space your shep at the end if you want him to die so much. Better yet don't do everything.

[Asari]

agree with the OP!

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

If it's going to be total fatalism, I don't want to play that game. There should be a range of endings from happy to downer and make that depend upon how well you played the games. It shouldn't be choose Red, Green, or Blue only.

Saying a happy ending would break the integrity of the game is BS. Honestly there isn't going to be any happy ending. A happy ending is where Shepard and the team and Normandy, and Shepard's LI survive. There have been way too many people lost along the journey for it to be a happy game. Think Thane. Think possibly Miranda. How about Charr "Oh Blue Rose of Illium...." (that was so sad)? Mordin? Legion or Tali? Samara if you didn't hit the button in time? And others along the way.

If you do everything right, you should as a player get rewarded. If you screw up everything, then Shepard and everyone dies.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 27 mars 2012 - 04:13 .

[Qilue]

I also agree with the OP and although it could have been done a lot better and without the starchild concept. I started playing ME3 knowing in my heart that Shepard was going to die and it was a good death.

Trillions had already died and trillions more may die as a result of the loss of the mass relays, but quadrillions yet to be born will have been saved by ending the galactic cycle. Shepard's death gave hope to the galaxy and returned their fate to that of their own choosing. I realise people would have preferred a happily-ever-after type ending for Shepard, but that would have cheapened the deaths of all those who died fighting the reapers.

As to the synthesis ending, that was hinted at all through the game.

[spartan5127]

Happy ending option should be there. OPTION. Also, you don't get to claim artistic integrity when you put Chobot in as a journalist when you had far more interesting characters that fit that exact role in the game. If they had any integrity, Emily Wong would have been your embedded reporter.

[RamilVenoard]

@EmEr77. Well I play to save the maximum amount of people/races possible. If I don't do everything I can just to obtain a tragic hero ending, then the tragedy is only that I couldn't save as many people as possible. But I do see what you mean that there should be many endings and not just tragic hero.

@aliengmr1. After I played it the first time, I actually played it again up until the Anderson goodbye scene and then stopped to imagine my own ending. I toyed with the idea of a bittersweet ending where shep survives only to commit suicide later because he is guilty about the number of people who lost their lives along the way. Interesting thought but also somewhat unfulfilling.

EDIT:

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

If it's going to be total fatalism,
I don't want to play that game. There should be a range of endings from
happy to downer and make that depend upon how well you played the
games. It shouldn't be choose Red, Green, or Blue only.

See that's another problem for me though, because I like to play the games as best I can, but I still want my shep to go out in a blaze of glory... so basing it on how well you played the game cuts me out of the bargain :/ lol. Your response could possibly be "who cares" but that's exactly why the ending was so frustrating: lack of choice.

Modifié par RamilVenoard, 27 mars 2012 - 04:11 .

[Iconoclaste]

If it's OK for Shepard to die "on duty" then next time he gets killed during a mission, just do not load a savegame and stop the game there. It should make it the same way as reaching the actual ending, from what I read, and without breaking "artistic integrity" or player's expectations.

I bet not many would like to do that.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 27 mars 2012 - 04:13 .

[EmEr77]

RamilVenoard wrote...

@EmEr77. Well I play to save the maximum amount of people/races possible. If I don't do everything I can just to obtain a tragic hero ending, then the tragedy is only that I couldn't save as many people as possible. But I do see what you mean that there should be many endings and not just tragic hero.

@aliengmr1. After I played it the first time, I actually played it again up until the Anderson goodbye scene and then stopped to imagine my own ending. I toyed with the idea of a bittersweet ending where shep survives only to commit suicide later because he is guilty about the number of people who lost their lives along the way. Interesting thought but also somewhat unfulfilling.

See you know where it's at. Basically, all it is right now, is that we all deserved better than what we got. 

[RamilVenoard]

Iconoclaste wrote...

If it's OK for Shepard to die "on duty" then next time he gets killed during a mission, just do not load a savegame and stop the game there. It should make it the same way as reaching the actual ending, from what I read, and without breaking "artistic integrity" or player's expectations.

I bet not many would like to try that.

Well there's something about the ultimate sacrafice that makes Shepard the man/women he/she is. His/her willingness to go the extra mile regardless of renegade or paragon, the willingness to walk into hell and bring everyone back by going out with a bang. It's just that when he goes out in the current ending of ME3, there's no bang, and there's no point... lol

EDIT: OO I misread your post my apologies. I though we were disagreeing. We're on the same page, never mind

Modifié par RamilVenoard, 27 mars 2012 - 04:15 .

[sistersafetypin]

Actually the ending IS breaking it's own artistic integrity by abruptly changing the theme of the whole game

[Iconoclaste]

How "wonderful" it must be to actually be the animator who works on the various "death sequences" for Shepard : most people enjoy the game, and when they get to see your work the go "Yeeeaarckk!..."

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 27 mars 2012 - 04:17 .

[Dan Dark]

While you may think a happy ending goes against the theme of the game, I personally disagree; I argue a happy ending would actually be more fitting to the theme of the series. I'll respect that not everyone thinks that, though - this game did have a certain bit of fatalism about it, and I went into the final mission expecting Shepard to die... but hoping he wouldn't have to.

Thing is, the whole series has been about choice, letting the player craft their own story. Many players would like to be able to see their Shepard limp away, retire from active duty (or at least from the front lines), and to have a future with their love. Others might, of course, prefer the idea of Shepard sacrificing himself to save the galaxy, and I don't have any problem with that - done right, it could be fantastic. But, in a series where it's supposed to be all about player choice, why do these options have to be mutually exclusive? Why can't both options exist, and many in-between, so that everyone can have the ending they want?

[Atraiyu Wrynn]

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.

The main theme of Mass Effect 3 is not victory through sacrifice no matter how often Hudson repeats it.  The main theme is Uniting the entire galaxy to face the reaper threat.

Your statement that this isn't Star Wars doesn't help your case.  ME1 and ME2 are both classic space opera and very similar in tone to Star Wars.  ME3 is as well until the last 10 minutes.  

If you like the current ending, there is no reason for you to care about Bioware adding more.  It's a game not a movie or a novel.  They can have multiple endings.  

Why are you so obsessed with telling me how my playthrough of a game should end?

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I'll just mention, that as one gets older the downer endings start getting less and less desirable. Why? Because you start becoming more in touch with your own mortality. I lost a friend last year to cancer. Maybe that's why this ending is getting to me so much.

[RamilVenoard]

Iconoclaste wrote...

How wonderful it must be to actually be the animator who works on the various "death sequences" for Shepard : most people enjoy the game, and when they get to see your work the go "Yeeeaarckk!..."

Well from the rumours (NOTE rumours) floating about the internet, it seems most of the team was entirely cut out of the ending. And that two people took point and wrote the entire thing.. two unnamed people since I dont want the moderator who will undoubtedly read this thread, to think that I am mounting a personal assault on any of the Bioware staff. But it's commonly known who those two people may or may no be :/.

[txgoldrush]

sistersafetypin wrote...

Actually the ending IS breaking it's own artistic integrity by abruptly changing the theme of the whole game

No, the theme never changed....a sacrifice was made.

[ronnok]

twoeggs wrote...

I think part of the problem is that we don't achieve "victory through sacrifice".

After all your work in ME3, you fail. You lose. Blasted by a Reaper, Hammer decimated, a huge chunk of the military might of the galaxy being destroyed to try and defeat the Reapers on ONE planet...

And then everything breaks down. I don't buy into the IT stuff, but from there on out the story falls apart. Despite there obviously still being stragglers trying to gain access to the citadel, the reapers abandon the transport beam - they totally forget about the player character (despite taking a direct interest in you during the story, they suddenly decide "mostly dead" is good enough), and evidently also Anderson.

Once on the Citadel, Anderson somehow makes it to a magic control panel (not even trying to join up with you, which is a bit out of character), you have a battle of words with TIM, and then you get to fail AGAIN. Your fancy Reaper killing machine doesn't work, and you don't have enough blood to even stand...

And then the whole thing gets even worse, after all your failures, you are handed the opportunity to decide what kind of victory sounds best to you. You can betray everyone you know and all of your ideals (as well as all information provided up until that point) and try and control the Reapers... You can betray your allies (geth) and at least one close friend (EDI) to finally destroy the Reapers... Or you can use your free will to betray the right of every other organism in the galaxy to self determinate and force everyone to be part synthetic and part organic (and frankly, I'm not sure how this even solves the 'problem' the Star Child presents to you)...

All of these options betray some theme or facet of the character of Shepard. Not to mention if you have high enough EMS Shepard DOES survive (presumably anyway), and people STILL complain, which I think should show that people don't just want some cupcakes and rainbows ending. Some might prefer that, but a lot of fans agree that the current endings do not do justice to the character they have been playing (some for hundreds of hours), to the lore, to previous foreshadowing, to many of the themes presented in the game, etc.

QFT

[Iconoclaste]

In fact, I'm a bit tired of dying all the time during games, that seems to have become the "ultimate" challenge, compared to "beating our last best score". I doubt anyone finds "dying" during the game any fun, save for exploratory reasons... But the thing we work so hard to avoid during a game should not be thrown in our face at the very end, especially if we don't even know it's been worth it, artistic integrity or not.

@RamilVenoard : I read the articles too. I was more referring to the "in game" dying sequences, when you get shot by enemies.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 27 mars 2012 - 04:24 .

[txgoldrush]

Atraiyu Wrynn 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.

The main theme of Mass Effect 3 is not victory through sacrifice no matter how often Hudson repeats it.  The main theme is Uniting the entire galaxy to face the reaper threat.

Your statement that this isn't Star Wars doesn't help your case.  ME1 and ME2 are both classic space opera and very similar in tone to Star Wars.  ME3 is as well until the last 10 minutes.  

If you like the current ending, there is no reason for you to care about Bioware adding more.  It's a game not a movie or a novel.  They can have multiple endings.  

Why are you so obsessed with telling me how my playthrough of a game should end?

Than explain Mordin, Thane, Tarquin Victus, Rila, Legion, Prangley (if Jack is dead), and the willingness of Miranda, Grunt, Koris, and more giving their lives for loved ones or victory.

classic space opera? BS...ME2 isn't one, and ME3 is far from one.

Nevermind the fact that happy endings make less than happy ones GAMEPLAY FAILURES and not true endings. To make a sadder, more bittersweet ending meaningful, there can be no ending happier than it.

[Dan Dark]

txgoldrush wrote...

Nevermind the fact that happy endings make less than happy ones GAMEPLAY FAILURES and not true endings. To make a sadder, more bittersweet ending meaningful, there can be no ending happier than it.

...why? What, we can't have a happy ending, because it's addition will suddenly invalidate your bittersweet ending that you had been perfectly content with? Written correctly, sad and bittersweet could easily be just as powerful and meaningful as happy; heck, it'd probably be easier for the bittersweet one to be more powerful, really.