288 réponses à ce sujet

[GuardianAngel470]

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

I think it is fair for gamers to voice their discontent but the arguments that get made are ridiculous to me. Questioning the logic of the catalyst is the ENTIRE point of the ending. No ending scenario lets you say "you know what catalyst? you're totally right! let's just keep things going."

The logic of the catalyst was MEANT to be flawed, otherwise why would the Reapers be wrong and why would Shepard's journey mean so much. It's not that the catalyst reached an illogical decision about how best to preserve the growth of organic life, but that it ignored the hope an possiblity for synthetics and organics to co-exist. The a, b, c decision presented to gamers at the end allowed for them to decide how best to resolve the catalyst's flawed vision.

People who wanted a Disney ending have no merit in their arguments about Shepard deserving that, because ultimately the whole idea was for him to sacrifice HIMSELF. I mean come on people, his name was "Shepard," did people just decide to ignore the minor allegory to Jesus that they were trying to make about needing to be a martyr for the greater good of galactic civilization?

I ask all malcontents regarding the ending sequence this question: Was it easy for you to make the final choice about the future of the galaxy?

You're right, questioning the catalyst's logic IS exactly what we are supposed to do. It is also exactly what Shepard DOESN'T do. That's the problem.

[Xandax]

rgretret wrote...

 In my opinion we should behave kinder towards Bioware, because they made a highly emotional game after all and just because the ending was disappointing for most of us, it doesn't mean that the rest of this masterpiece of a game was too.

A company made a product, hyped it with false statements and the product didn't deliver.
On top of this - the product was full of plotholes, inconsitencies and even invalidated two previous products.

I see no reason why people would think others are unfair.

[FemmeShep]

StuartMarshall wrote...

They nailed the game in almost every way besides the ending. That's what makes the poor ending all the more tragic but if they release a free DLC to offer alternatives (and allow us to go back to the Normandy afterwards so we can play future DLCs AFTER the Cerberus mission) then it will probably be the best game Bioware has ever made.

I actually disagree. After playing the game a 2nd time, I think Mass Effect 3 had a lot of flaws not as noitceable the first time around. The ending is the worst of it, but there were some other major flaws of the game. 

Modifié par FemmeShep, 26 mars 2012 - 04:56 .

[SiriusXI]

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

I think it is fair for gamers to voice their discontent but the arguments that get made are ridiculous to me. Questioning the logic of the catalyst is the ENTIRE point of the ending. No ending scenario lets you say "you know what catalyst? you're totally right! let's just keep things going."

The logic of the catalyst was MEANT to be flawed, otherwise why would the Reapers be wrong and why would Shepard's journey mean so much. It's not that the catalyst reached an illogical decision about how best to preserve the growth of organic life, but that it ignored the hope an possiblity for synthetics and organics to co-exist. The a, b, c decision presented to gamers at the end allowed for them to decide how best to resolve the catalyst's flawed vision.

People who wanted a Disney ending have no merit in their arguments about Shepard deserving that, because ultimately the whole idea was for him to sacrifice HIMSELF. I mean come on people, his name was "Shepard," did people just decide to ignore the minor allegory to Jesus that they were trying to make about needing to be a martyr for the greater good of galactic civilization?

I ask all malcontents regarding the ending sequence this question: Was it easy for you to make the final choice about the future of the galaxy?

The final choice was meaningless, because we were not shown what the... ähhm... "ending[s]" actually do. Everything has to be inferred by the player. This is just sh!t. Why not show us what happened?

And even when you infer what happens it leads to very distubing outcomes:

1. Destroy: You basically cause mass genocide on the geth and kill off some other people with cybernetic implants. Great Job Shepard. Saving the galaxy by sacrifycing an entire species? Shepard would have NEVER done this, at least not paragon Shepard. NO ONE gets left behind!!!

2. Control: Yeah... ok, and why does he have to die in this ending? And wh would the reapers come back? Why can't he order them to kill themselves?

3. And the worst of all: Synthesis: Oh my god... this is the best ending? there is so much wrong with this one.
a) The idea that only a race with superior DNA can assure eternal peace, so it is necessary to erase all genetic differences by creating a new superior DNA? Is Shepard SPACE-HITLER or something?

So melting all synthetic and organic live together and creating a new DNA just means everyone looks the same as before, just with green glow all over their bodies? Ähm, they have now an entirely new DNA and they still have the same phenotype?

c) Why does Shepard have to add himself? Couldn't he just have use a little bit of blood? All the Catalyst needed was his DNA, so why kill himself?

And much more, but I'm tired of writing.
Ending sucks!

Modifié par SiriusXI, 26 mars 2012 - 04:58 .

[MrGone]

Listen, obvious plant, the endings of ME3 aren't just disappointing.

If that was all they were, like 90% of all endings to anything, I would agree.

"Disappointing", isn't really a problem, as it's something we're all used to. No, what we have here is a case of the "downright terribles".


"Disappointing" is going to the fridge, hoping for a beer. Finding out there aren't any.

"Downright terrible" is going to the fridge, hoping for a beer. Finding your wife in the kitchen having sex with your brother while drinking the last one.

"Disappointing" is handing in your test to the teacher, thinking you did a pretty good job on it, and getting back a grade that just barely passed.

"Downright terrible" is handing your test to the teacher, thinking you did a pretty good job on it, and then the teacher molests you.

Do you get the difference yet?

[Janus382]

spartan5127 wrote...

I don't think I've seen one person who hates the rest of the game because of the ending. What the ending does is retroactively make you not really care about the past. That is why people have trouble replaying the game because it feels meaningless in a game where everything you do seems meaningful.

Mostly this.  I feel betrayed and disappointed.  The game and the series is amazing (which is why people feel so strongly), but in the context of the ending... it's quite meh.  I don't think it's unfair that I'm refusing to purchase any future DLC or BW products until they address the ending in an appropriate manner, and restore my faith and trust in them.  I love pretty much all their IP's to varying degrees... it's not like I WANT to do this... but I do want to spare myself of things similar to this in the future.

Modifié par Janus382, 26 mars 2012 - 04:59 .

[Greer]

This isn't about being kind or unkind to BioWare. This isn't about the quality of the rest of the game. This is about the fact that BioWare developers deliberately lied to us, repeatedly and continually, about the product they put out and then, instead of trying to address our legitmate grievances or fix the issue, decided to try to marginalize us and insult us.

So, while I absolutely do not condone personal attacks of any nature for this, I refuse to be "kinder". I refuse to let them continue to try to sweep this under the rug.

Modifié par Greer, 26 mars 2012 - 04:58 .

[Kingofthebonggo]

Raven4030-2 wrote...

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

I think it is fair for gamers to voice their discontent but the arguments that get made are ridiculous to me. Questioning the logic of the catalyst is the ENTIRE point of the ending. No ending scenario lets you say "you know what catalyst? you're totally right! let's just keep things going."

The logic of the catalyst was MEANT to be flawed, otherwise why would the Reapers be wrong and why would Shepard's journey mean so much. It's not that the catalyst reached an illogical decision about how best to preserve the growth of organic life, but that it ignored the hope an possiblity for synthetics and organics to co-exist. The a, b, c decision presented to gamers at the end allowed for them to decide how best to resolve the catalyst's flawed vision.

People who wanted a Disney ending have no merit in their arguments about Shepard deserving that, because ultimately the whole idea was for him to sacrifice HIMSELF. I mean come on people, his name was "Shepard," did people just decide to ignore the minor allegory to Jesus that they were trying to make about needing to be a martyr for the greater good of galactic civilization?

I ask all malcontents regarding the ending sequence this question: Was it easy for you to make the final choice about the future of the galaxy?

Your argument is valid, but that doesn't mean I don't still find disappointment in the ending.

The most common fallacy I've seen made by people talking about the "deeper meaning" is that "if you get it you'll enjoy it". Well I do get it, and I still don't enjoy it, it's not satisfying, it's not what I paid for, and it's not why I play ME3.

However, for me the greatest crime of the ending wasn't killing Shepard, it wasn't the Starchild's faulty logic, it was that at the end of it all, it robbed me of all hope for the ME universe. I expected Shepard to die at the end, I had a feeling that he wouldn't be there to build a house on Rannoch for Tali, but I pressed on thinking "If I do this, maybe the survivors can at least have their Disney ending". What I get is "nope, all Mass Relays go boom, the living now envy the dead, and lots of speculation for everybody suckas".

Absolutely agree. It is not uplifting at all, and I'll admit that during the credits I couldn't believe what had happened. But I don't hate it. i accept it for what it is. Shepard always had a dark cloud over his head throughout the series and I actually, upon reflection, like the ending more and more. It's defintely a bummer but there is hope when his squadmates (if you can get them to survive) get out of the normandy after is crashes, and even more hope in the little boy talking to the old man post-credits. 

[Rogue Unit]

MrGone wrote...

Listen, obvious plant, the endings of ME3 aren't just disappointing.

If that was all they were, like 90% of all endings to anything, I would agree.

"Disappointing", isn't really a problem, as it's something we're all used to. No, what we have here is a case of the "downright terribles".


"Disappointing" is going to the fridge, hoping for a beer. Finding out there aren't any.

"Downright terrible" is going to the fridge, hoping for a beer. Finding your wife in the kitchen having sex with your brother while drinking the last one.

"Disappointing" is handing in your test to the teacher, thinking you did a pretty good job on it, and getting back a grade that just barely passed.

"Downright terrible" is handing your test to the teacher, thinking you did a pretty good job on it, and then the teacher molests you.

Do you get the difference yet?

[Clayless]

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

If you don't see the analogy to Jesus you probably thought Neo was just some dude in the Matrix...

At least we can all agree that this series was better than the Matrix 

Even better is he'll go around saying "Someone said Shepard was an analogy to Jesus" and will notice how much people will say "Well, yeah".

Like he's never seen an anaology to Jesus in media, like Neo like you mentioned.

[ahandsomeshark]

Machines Are Us wrote...

Some people are yes

But it isn't made easier by Bioware (or rather, the representatives) being unwilling to respond to the fans without resorting to PR double speak and making sure to say how many people love the game, either. It makes the less mature fans go all nerd-ragey and makes everybody else look like a bunch of spoilt kids (which apparently is a classic PR move).

this. I didn't become legitimately upset until I'd read some of the responses from bioware. If they'd been more receptive, and actually adressed the issues I don't think there'd be as many angry people posting now. 

[LdyBelial]

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

--snip--

I ask all malcontents regarding the ending sequence this question: Was it easy for you to make the final choice about the future of the galaxy?

Hmm... that was the hardest part about the end for me actually.  I was like "WHAT? My Shepard wouldn't have chosen any of these!"  

Here's why -- Controlling the Reapers?  Nope, not gonna do it.  That would be like -- asking for indoctrination.  Destroying the Reapers?  Genocide.  Can't do that.  Synthesis -- Oooo... the Reapers win!  So... basically I sat at my computer with this stunned look on my face and for what felt like forever I tried to "talk" to the God Child.  I really wanted another resolution.  I really, really did!  

I felt totally screwed.  Honest!

(Edited for a misplaced "a")

Modifié par LdyBelial, 26 mars 2012 - 05:02 .

[Mazandus]

The problem with the ending is that it invalidates and literally throws out everything you've done/experienced in the past 3 games. In ME 2, and ME3 it goes to great pains to allow you to import a Shepard with all your "decisions" intact. If you hadn't played either before, both titles provide you a vehicle to make these "decisions." I know I, as well as my friends, sat with the game waiting for us to make these "choices" not knowing how it would turn out, how would the rachni queen living change the galaxy? How would peace with the Geth or a rejuvenated Krogan?

Instead of some kind of "payoff" for these decisions, you get your choice of blue, red or green along with an absurd cutscene of the Normandy (somehow flying despite red and green choices likely annihilating the craft/giving it some abhorrent proto vagina) crashing with some of the squadmates who were likely with you in the last mission walking out onto The Savage Land, and all ME relays blowing up.

Then x thousand years later some old dude and some kid are talking about "one day" reaching the stars.


If Bioware and their employees wanted to make a "life sucks, everything you do means nothing" story:

1) they should have found another medium aka a 90 min movie instead of 3 games with over 100+ hours of content

2) they should have taken some screen writing classes or joined some writer's workshop. This ending literally reminds me of some composition I had to make in high school, I waited to the last minute, I needed an ending so I just made some stupid **** up to make me sound smarter than the reader. That didn't go over too well with the teacher.

3) most important of all, they should have CARED. If it was really well crafted and executed, I could even get on board with the whole "everything dies" ending, but it wasn't. When Javik is emerging from the Normandy crash which is inexplicably fleeing THE BATTLE OF ALL TIME, after being right next to my Shepard when Harbinger blew me up, well, it just reeks of shoddiness and lack of effort/polish.

RESPECT YOUR AUDIENCE. If you don't you lose them. I, for one, WILL NEVER BUY ONE OF YOUR PRODUCTS AGAIN AT RELEASE. I WILL WAIT MONTHS, YEARS AFTERWARD because it is obvious that you cant' be bothered to give it the care we expect. If you don't want to put in that effort, STOP MAKING AAA Games. Make some indie **** where this is to be expected.

TBH, after finishing the game, I just felt swindled. Like I had just been conned for $140 and 100 hours of my life.

[Clayless]

MrGone wrote...

"Downright terrible" is handing your test to the teacher, thinking you did a pretty good job on it, and then the teacher molests you.

Now the ending is being used in a "being molested" analogy?

My god, I thought being used in a "raped your mother" or "killing your children" analogy was the most absurd one I'd ever hear, but wow I was wrong.

[WarChicken78]

I agree with the OP. The game is fantastic, the only big thing wrong with it are the endings, and I don't think we've seen the last of it.
Everything else are really small problems. Like talis picture for example - yes, it could have been better, but overall it's only one image.

[Corrik Ronis]

And the Titanic was a hell of a ship with flaws that would have been overlooked if not for the iceburg. The endings of things matter.

Hold the line.

[Kingofthebonggo]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

I think it is fair for gamers to voice their discontent but the arguments that get made are ridiculous to me. Questioning the logic of the catalyst is the ENTIRE point of the ending. No ending scenario lets you say "you know what catalyst? you're totally right! let's just keep things going."

The logic of the catalyst was MEANT to be flawed, otherwise why would the Reapers be wrong and why would Shepard's journey mean so much. It's not that the catalyst reached an illogical decision about how best to preserve the growth of organic life, but that it ignored the hope an possiblity for synthetics and organics to co-exist. The a, b, c decision presented to gamers at the end allowed for them to decide how best to resolve the catalyst's flawed vision.

People who wanted a Disney ending have no merit in their arguments about Shepard deserving that, because ultimately the whole idea was for him to sacrifice HIMSELF. I mean come on people, his name was "Shepard," did people just decide to ignore the minor allegory to Jesus that they were trying to make about needing to be a martyr for the greater good of galactic civilization?

I ask all malcontents regarding the ending sequence this question: Was it easy for you to make the final choice about the future of the galaxy?

You're right, questioning the catalyst's logic IS exactly what we are supposed to do. It is also exactly what Shepard DOESN'T do. That's the problem.

I assume you mean because Shepard is forced to choose one of the three options instead of having a "F U" moment where he does something no one expects and proves the catalyst and the reapers wrong?

[Mazandus]

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

Raven4030-2 wrote...

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

I think it is fair for gamers to voice their discontent but the arguments that get made are ridiculous to me. Questioning the logic of the catalyst is the ENTIRE point of the ending. No ending scenario lets you say "you know what catalyst? you're totally right! let's just keep things going."

The logic of the catalyst was MEANT to be flawed, otherwise why would the Reapers be wrong and why would Shepard's journey mean so much. It's not that the catalyst reached an illogical decision about how best to preserve the growth of organic life, but that it ignored the hope an possiblity for synthetics and organics to co-exist. The a, b, c decision presented to gamers at the end allowed for them to decide how best to resolve the catalyst's flawed vision.

People who wanted a Disney ending have no merit in their arguments about Shepard deserving that, because ultimately the whole idea was for him to sacrifice HIMSELF. I mean come on people, his name was "Shepard," did people just decide to ignore the minor allegory to Jesus that they were trying to make about needing to be a martyr for the greater good of galactic civilization?

I ask all malcontents regarding the ending sequence this question: Was it easy for you to make the final choice about the future of the galaxy?

Your argument is valid, but that doesn't mean I don't still find disappointment in the ending.

The most common fallacy I've seen made by people talking about the "deeper meaning" is that "if you get it you'll enjoy it". Well I do get it, and I still don't enjoy it, it's not satisfying, it's not what I paid for, and it's not why I play ME3.

However, for me the greatest crime of the ending wasn't killing Shepard, it wasn't the Starchild's faulty logic, it was that at the end of it all, it robbed me of all hope for the ME universe. I expected Shepard to die at the end, I had a feeling that he wouldn't be there to build a house on Rannoch for Tali, but I pressed on thinking "If I do this, maybe the survivors can at least have their Disney ending". What I get is "nope, all Mass Relays go boom, the living now envy the dead, and lots of speculation for everybody suckas".

Absolutely agree. It is not uplifting at all, and I'll admit that during the credits I couldn't believe what had happened. But I don't hate it. i accept it for what it is. Shepard always had a dark cloud over his head throughout the series and I actually, upon reflection, like the ending more and more. It's defintely a bummer but there is hope when his squadmates (if you can get them to survive) get out of the normandy after is crashes, and even more hope in the little boy talking to the old man post-credits. 

The terrible execution and presentation ruins anything I could salvage out of it. There's tragic and "bittersweet" and then there's "I don't give a **** anymore let's push this thing onto the shelves and fix it with DLC if/when people get mad, but hey maybe they won't get mad, EA will likely buy the **** out of all the ads so we are guaranteed to get some 90's and A+'s, gosh its good to be so smart."

[Statulos]

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

I think it is fair for gamers to voice their discontent but the arguments that get made are ridiculous to me. Questioning the logic of the catalyst is the ENTIRE point of the ending. No ending scenario lets you say "you know what catalyst? you're totally right! let's just keep things going."

The logic of the catalyst was MEANT to be flawed, otherwise why would the Reapers be wrong and why would Shepard's journey mean so much. It's not that the catalyst reached an illogical decision about how best to preserve the growth of organic life, but that it ignored the hope an possiblity for synthetics and organics to co-exist. The a, b, c decision presented to gamers at the end allowed for them to decide how best to resolve the catalyst's flawed vision.

People who wanted a Disney ending have no merit in their arguments about Shepard deserving that, because ultimately the whole idea was for him to sacrifice HIMSELF. I mean come on people, his name was "Shepard," did people just decide to ignore the minor allegory to Jesus that they were trying to make about needing to be a martyr for the greater good of galactic civilization?

I ask all malcontents regarding the ending sequence this question: Was it easy for you to make the final choice about the future of the galaxy?

Actually no. His name is an homage to Alan Shepard, the first US citizen and the second person (first one was Yuri Gagarin) to be in space.

Regarding the thread, well, I don't think I have to be kind or tender to a group of people who have dissapointed me deeply in their last two games (DA2 and ME3).

What I have to be is well behaved and respectful. In another thread I considered that Mr. Hudson should stay away from the boards for a time because if he shows up,, he'd be blatantly insulted.

When Jessica Merizan posted, I remember telling her that stakhanovism is not exactly a good idea.

I respect the fact that many people in Bioware worked a lot to release ME3. But from there to simply liking it because of the hard work there is a huge distance.

[Kingofthebonggo]

LdyBelial wrote...

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

--snip--

I ask all malcontents regarding the ending sequence this question: Was it easy for you to make the final choice about the future of the galaxy?

Hmm... that was the hardest part about the end for me actually.  I was like "WHAT? My Shepard wouldn't have chosen any of these!"  

Here's why -- Controlling the Reapers?  Nope, not gonna do it.  That would be like -- asking for indoctrination.  Destroying the Reapers?  Genocide.  Can't do that.  Synthesis -- Oooo... the Reapers win!  So... basically I sat at my computer with this stunned look on my face and for what felt like forever I tried to "talk" to the God Child.  I really wanted another resolution.  I really, really did!  

I felt totally screwed.  Honest!

(Edited for a misplaced "a")

How would the reapers win from synthesis? The catalyst states that new DNA would be created altering the future form of sentient life in the galaxy. That is not what the reapers do, they preserve organic DNA in a synthetic form....

[Mazandus]

WarChicken78 wrote...

I agree with the OP. The game is fantastic, the only big thing wrong with it are the endings, and I don't think we've seen the last of it.
Everything else are really small problems. Like talis picture for example - yes, it could have been better, but overall it's only one image.

Its one image they photoshopped from some stock modelling photo's. It is the height of laziness. It's like me writing a story or writing a program and literally copy and pasting the text/code from someone else after adding my own idiosyncrincies. Yes, all "art" is "theft" but FFS...

[KevShep]

The rest of the game is great, Its just the whole ending part that destroys the ENTIRE series. Things like a kill all reapers button and the most hindering part and everything wrong with ME is...The Catalyst!

[Turbotanden]

The game series has been awesome, take these quotes as a small example of very well written dialogue:

Hackett: Shepard, let me tell you something that I've learned the hard way. You can pay a soldier to fire a gun. You can pay him to charge the enemy and take a hill. But you can't pay him to believe.

Shepard: ...I don't follow, sir.

Hackett: When you went up against Sovereign, there was no good reason to believe you'd win. But your crew didn't seem to care — they went along anyway. Your trip through the Omega 4 relay? That was a suicide mission if there ever was one. Yet there your crew was, standing beside you, proud to serve. Why? Because they believe in you. Their leader. That's what I need now.

If the indoctrination theory is wrong, it turns out they didn't really need Shepard in the end. All they needed was just a soldier to fire a gun at TIM and then have a chat with godchilddude.

Modifié par Turbotanden, 26 mars 2012 - 05:08 .

[jspiess]

 [Violation of Rule #6 removed]

Modifié par Stanley Woo, 26 mars 2012 - 05:24 .

[Kingofthebonggo]

Statulos wrote...

Kingofthebonggo wrote...

I think it is fair for gamers to voice their discontent but the arguments that get made are ridiculous to me. Questioning the logic of the catalyst is the ENTIRE point of the ending. No ending scenario lets you say "you know what catalyst? you're totally right! let's just keep things going."

The logic of the catalyst was MEANT to be flawed, otherwise why would the Reapers be wrong and why would Shepard's journey mean so much. It's not that the catalyst reached an illogical decision about how best to preserve the growth of organic life, but that it ignored the hope an possiblity for synthetics and organics to co-exist. The a, b, c decision presented to gamers at the end allowed for them to decide how best to resolve the catalyst's flawed vision.

People who wanted a Disney ending have no merit in their arguments about Shepard deserving that, because ultimately the whole idea was for him to sacrifice HIMSELF. I mean come on people, his name was "Shepard," did people just decide to ignore the minor allegory to Jesus that they were trying to make about needing to be a martyr for the greater good of galactic civilization?

I ask all malcontents regarding the ending sequence this question: Was it easy for you to make the final choice about the future of the galaxy?

Actually no. His name is an homage to Alan Shepard, the first US citizen and the second person (first one was Yuri Gagarin) to be in space.

Regarding the thread, well, I don't think I have to be kind or tender to a group of people who have dissapointed me deeply in their last two games (DA2 and ME3).

What I have to be is well behaved and respectful. In another thread I considered that Mr. Hudson should stay away from the boards for a time because if he shows up,, he'd be blatantly insulted.

When Jessica Merizan posted, I remember telling her that stakhanovism is not exactly a good idea.

I respect the fact that many people in Bioware worked a lot to release ME3. But from there to simply liking it because of the hard work there is a huge distance.

So automatically a name cannot serve a dual purpose from a literary point of view. Dude, you totally got me there. The rest of my logic is flawed because Shepard's name serves multiple purposes.