265 réponses à ce sujet

[Vromrig]

I don't know, these seem rather nit- picky..

No, indicative of simply putting on blinders.

Substantial plot holes that ruin the motif of the ending. Equally, with shattering, colossal doomsday ending, plot holes exacerbated.

[K1llm1n1on]

NReed106 wrote...

Oh so art can't be criticized when it is terrible? Great writers like Charles Dickens never changed their works? Films never change their own endings and have test viewings?

The "artistic integrity" argument is awful. It is saying that artists should be lazy in their writing, insult their consumers with gaping plot holes that go unexplained, lie to consumers before a game ships, and consumers should not demand improvements because something "artistic" was sold to them and they have no right to tell someone to change it.

Fine, if BW doesn't change anything okay, but don't expect people to support BW in the future, in fact you can expect them to try to hurt BW sales

Overall, here is an analysis of why the ending is awful, and it has nothing to do with galactic dark age etc, but the STRUCTURE of the narrative itself:

http://jmstevenson.w...-mass-effect-3/

I gather that you are not in the arts.

The core of talking about and thinking about art is criticism, but that criticism is achieved by analysis and interpretation, not just a knee-jerk reaction. You can't say that it's fair to criticize art that is terrible if you can't explain why it's terrible, and what it's terrible compared to.

Who is asserting that the game can't be criticized because it's "artistic?" What are you talking about?
Seriously, I'm not asking rhetorically.

[K1llm1n1on]

Vromrig wrote...

I don't know, these seem rather nit- picky..

No, indicative of simply putting on blinders.

Substantial plot holes that ruin the motif of the ending. Equally, with shattering, colossal doomsday ending, plot holes exacerbated.

I love that you post in character, first off- awesome!

This is another intrpretation issue, though. You say blinders, I say look at the bigger picture.
You say galactic dark age, I say a chance for the civilizations to build their own mass relays without the Reaper strings attached. I can't sayyou're wrong because that's just how you see it.

[Geneaux486]

K1llm1n1on wrote...

Vromrig wrote...

I don't know, these seem rather nit- picky..

No, indicative of simply putting on blinders.

Substantial plot holes that ruin the motif of the ending. Equally, with shattering, colossal doomsday ending, plot holes exacerbated.

I love that you post in character, first off- awesome!

This is another intrpretation issue, though. You say blinders, I say look at the bigger picture.
You say galactic dark age, I say a chance for the civilizations to build their own mass relays without the Reaper strings attached. I can't sayyou're wrong because that's just how you see it.

Or the Reapers will rebuild the Mass Relays with no strings attached.  They have to get home to, after all.  The validity of most plotholes is highly debateable as well.  Blinders not necesarry.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 27 mars 2012 - 01:47 .

[Lookout1390]

I weep for you, OP

And that is why Bioware will continue to flourish, and we will be continued to be handed more ****.

The ending was absolutely terrible, any true fan of the series can see the massive plot holes that are just littered all over the place. Why would anyone accept that this is how it ends?

Are you telling me you have no questions or concerns about the ending?

[DJBare]

K1llm1n1on wrote...
First off, the Crucible destroys the mass relays while containing their destruction, to preserve the systems nearby, so the whole universe isn't destroyed.

Is that an assumption?, because if not, I've missed the part in the game where it is explained, the only thing that we have to go on is the relay in Arrival as far as I'm aware.

[K1llm1n1on]

SandSkorpion wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

SandSkorpion wrote...

The OP likes the ending..yet the majority of you want to convince him that it is bad? You want to tear the game down for him because you're upset with it? You feel that because you're unhappy everyone else must be to? That's pathetic.

Arguing on a public forum is pathetic now? 

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Arguing over the Internet has ALWAYS been Pathetic. Hold old are you? lol.

aliengmr1 wrote...

Dramatic? OP is free to stop discussing at any point.[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/angry.png[/smilie]

No where near as Dramatic as the majority of posters here are being over the ending of a video game. Can't say that the artistic direction the developers steered the game towards invoked negative emotions...because it has been well been established on THESE forums that this game is not art and that artistic integrity does not apply.

I bet all of you 100 credits that if the endings where just how you imagined them...you'd all be singing praises on how artistic and moving this game was. You all are so upset with the ending that you are nitpicking every detail of the game..pointing out every inconsistency and making a fuss about it. It's ridiculous. There was a post earlier today about someone who fell into depression because of the ending. Other's post that video gaming has been ruined for them. Now THAT's dramatic.

I agree with the bulk of your post except the bit about games not being art (obviously you know this from my OP).
But I think that's why people are freaking out about the ending- they don't want it to be art, they just want a clean, rational, satisfying conclusion.
I'm in the arts and I am actually really happe that they made an ambiguous, complicated ending, and I'm really enamored of the idea of this dark age that some people call what will follow.
I've been noticing this popping up more in games lately, where the creators of the game are trying to elevate the genre and the players are flipping gigantic ****s over it.
I'm also with you that people are really overdoing it in their posts, but when doesn't something get ridiculous on forums?

[K1llm1n1on]

Geneaux486 wrote...

K1llm1n1on wrote...

Vromrig wrote...

I don't know, these seem rather nit- picky..

No, indicative of simply putting on blinders.

Substantial plot holes that ruin the motif of the ending. Equally, with shattering, colossal doomsday ending, plot holes exacerbated.

I love that you post in character, first off- awesome!

This is another intrpretation issue, though. You say blinders, I say look at the bigger picture.
You say galactic dark age, I say a chance for the civilizations to build their own mass relays without the Reaper strings attached. I can't sayyou're wrong because that's just how you see it.

Or the Reapers will rebuild the Mass Relays with no strings attached.  They have to get home to, after all.  The validity of most plotholes is highly debateable as well.  Blinders not necesarry.

But the Reapers are no more.

[James9749]

Cheviot wrote...

James9749 wrote...

Sirakou wrote...

I still cannot wrap my head around everyone saying the relay should have supernova'd. Yes, that happens when you smash an asteroid into it. But when a signal gets sent out from the Citadel, same "unknown" type of technology, its not going to react the same way.

If you smash a battery with a hammer, its going to be bad and messy. Dispose of battery properly, much more contained reaction. Why can't the same thing happen here?

Then why did the Normandy crash if it was a more contained explosion? In either case, whether you believe the Relay's go supernova and destroy a system, and hence would make the Normandy crash or desintigrate from the explosion and wipe out all galactic life that lived near the explosion, or if you believed it was more contained, and wouldn't destroy galactic civilization, then why would the Normandy crash if it was this "contained" explosion?
I'll continue my point of view in a latter post. I just wanted to reply to this guy.

Because it wasn't the explosion that damaged the Normandy, it was the collapse of the mass effect corridor it was in.

Our_Last_Scene wrote...
First page and already you got called a Bioware employee by the retake movement.

Has anyone called you a troll yet OP? I just skipped to the end after I saw that Bioware Employee thing.

No one's called the OP a troll, but I think someone who agreed with him was accused of being one, on page 2.

There is still the Blue explosion, which doesn't fit within this logic. You don't see the Citadel or the relay fire a beam, and it only takes control of the Reapers. I played the "control" ending, and the relays weren't shown being destroyed, yet they used the same Galactic explosions as Destroy and Synthesis, which wouldn't make sense. Even if it did make sense, the relays would still be intact, and the Normandy wouldn't be chased by the collapse of the Mass effect corridor because.... The relays are still intact.

[The Night Mammoth]

Cheviot wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Cheviot wrote...

James9749 wrote...

Sirakou wrote...

I still cannot wrap my head around everyone saying the relay should have supernova'd. Yes, that happens when you smash an asteroid into it. But when a signal gets sent out from the Citadel, same "unknown" type of technology, its not going to react the same way.

If you smash a battery with a hammer, its going to be bad and messy. Dispose of battery properly, much more contained reaction. Why can't the same thing happen here?

Then why did the Normandy crash if it was a more contained explosion? In either case, whether you believe the Relay's go supernova and destroy a system, and hence would make the Normandy crash or desintigrate from the explosion and wipe out all galactic life that lived near the explosion, or if you believed it was more contained, and wouldn't destroy galactic civilization, then why would the Normandy crash if it was this "contained" explosion?
I'll continue my point of view in a latter post. I just wanted to reply to this guy.

Because it wasn't the explosion that damaged the Normandy, it was the collapse of the mass effect corridor it was in.

How do you know it was in a Mass Effect corridor? 

My previous reply to you outlines the reasons I think this.

Mass Relay travel is near instantaneous. Once the sending Relay is destroyed, the corridor collapses. The Normandy shouldn't have been travelling for so much time, or it should have dropped out into deep space as soon as the connection dissapeared. 

Either way, reaching the Charon Relay means it had to leave before Shepard fires the ring, but after Joker knows Shepard still lives, assuming it somehow swooped down and Lazurus projected my whole team before it has to escape the battle. 

Then of course, it lands on a planet that shouldn't really exist. 

[Geneaux486]

K1llm1n1on wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

K1llm1n1on wrote...

Vromrig wrote...

I don't know, these seem rather nit- picky..

No, indicative of simply putting on blinders.

Substantial plot holes that ruin the motif of the ending. Equally, with shattering, colossal doomsday ending, plot holes exacerbated.

I love that you post in character, first off- awesome!

This is another intrpretation issue, though. You say blinders, I say look at the bigger picture.
You say galactic dark age, I say a chance for the civilizations to build their own mass relays without the Reaper strings attached. I can't sayyou're wrong because that's just how you see it.

Or the Reapers will rebuild the Mass Relays with no strings attached.  They have to get home to, after all.  The validity of most plotholes is highly debateable as well.  Blinders not necesarry.

But the Reapers are no more.

I went with synthesis, so they survived in my ending.

Also, saying things like the ending is factually bad and any true fan could see that, and that pro-ending views are harmful to the gaming industry, just make the people saying those things sound like giant tools.  Same with "space magic" and "starchild".  Desperate strawman buzzwords meant to make these concepts sound more outlandish than they actually are.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 27 mars 2012 - 01:54 .

[K1llm1n1on]

Lookout1390 wrote...

I weep for you, OP

And that is why Bioware will continue to flourish, and we will be continued to be handed more ****.

The ending was absolutely terrible, any true fan of the series can see the massive plot holes that are just littered all over the place. Why would anyone accept that this is how it ends?

Are you telling me you have no questions or concerns about the ending?

Here's a hanky, Lookout, but save your tears- I am too far gone. I am the proverbial spilled milk.

My other posts in this thread reflect my doubts and concerns.
I accept this is how it ends because I have no choice- that's one of the things that I really like about the ending. It's hard to accept, it's unresolved, it raises questions. Good books do this, good art, and I like to see games doing it, too.
Yes, BioWare has made me suffer, but it's great that it has done that.

[ShdwFox7]

K1llm1n1on wrote...

demin8891 wrote...

Summary for those who don't want to read this massive wall of text: Artistic integrity.

I'm glad you liked it, OP. I really am. I'm just incapable of accepting mediocrity and plot holes the size of the Collector Base.

What specifically are your referring to when you say mediocrity? What plot holes do you see?

Big clue this guy may be trolling folks

Modifié par ShdwFox7, 27 mars 2012 - 02:00 .

[Cheviot]

Lookout1390 wrote...

I weep for you, OP

And that is why Bioware will continue to flourish, and we will be continued to be handed more ****.

The ending was absolutely terrible, any true fan of the series can see the massive plot holes that are just littered all over the place. Why would anyone accept that this is how it ends?

Are you telling me you have no questions or concerns about the ending?

Reapers had to be defeated.  Shepard goes on a quest to unite the galaxy against the Reapers and find the Catalyst.  Achieves that.  Struggles through impossible odds to defeat the Reapers.  In the process, he has to sacrifice himself to save the generations that follow from the threat of the Reapers.  That's a good ending.  Where are the plot holes?

[Lookout1390]

K1llm1n1on wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

I weep for you, OP

And that is why Bioware will continue to flourish, and we will be continued to be handed more ****.

The ending was absolutely terrible, any true fan of the series can see the massive plot holes that are just littered all over the place. Why would anyone accept that this is how it ends?

Are you telling me you have no questions or concerns about the ending?

Here's a hanky, Lookout, but save your tears- I am too far gone. I am the proverbial spilled milk.

My other posts in this thread reflect my doubts and concerns.
I accept this is how it ends because I have no choice- that's one of the things that I really like about the ending. It's hard to accept, it's unresolved, it raises questions. Good books do this, good art, and I like to see games doing it, too.
Yes, BioWare has made me suffer, but it's great that it has done that.

Is it too late...the rEApers have won....

[Geneaux486]

ShdwFox7 wrote...

K1llm1n1on wrote...

demin8891 wrote...

Summary for those who don't want to read this massive wall of text: Artistic integrity.

I'm glad you liked it, OP. I really am. I'm just incapable of accepting mediocrity and plot holes the size of the Collector Base.

What specifically are your referring to when you say mediocrity? What plot holes do you see?

Big clue this guy is trolling folks

No.  It isn't.

[K1llm1n1on]

Geneaux486 wrote...

K1llm1n1on wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

K1llm1n1on wrote...

Vromrig wrote...

I don't know, these seem rather nit- picky..

No, indicative of simply putting on blinders.

Substantial plot holes that ruin the motif of the ending. Equally, with shattering, colossal doomsday ending, plot holes exacerbated.

I love that you post in character, first off- awesome!

This is another intrpretation issue, though. You say blinders, I say look at the bigger picture.
You say galactic dark age, I say a chance for the civilizations to build their own mass relays without the Reaper strings attached. I can't sayyou're wrong because that's just how you see it.

Or the Reapers will rebuild the Mass Relays with no strings attached.  They have to get home to, after all.  The validity of most plotholes is highly debateable as well.  Blinders not necesarry.

But the Reapers are no more.

I went with synthesis, so they survived in my ending.

Also, saying things like the ending is factually bad and any true fan could see that, and that pro-ending views are harmful to the gaming industry, just make the people saying those things sound like giant tools.  Same with "space magic" and "starchild".  Desperate strawman buzzwords meant to make these concepts sound more outlandish than they actually are.

I agree on the last paragraph, wholeheartedly- those are just ways to try to discredit dissenting voices.

But on your ending- synthesis doesn't still eliminate the Reapers?

[Geneaux486]

K1llm1n1on wrote...
But on your ending- synthesis doesn't still eliminate the Reapers?

I don't know whether or not it's possible, but no, the Reapers weren't destroyed when I chose Synthesis. 

[K1llm1n1on]

Opsrbest wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Opsrbest wrote...
I know people think thats bad writing but it really isn't. Maybe people don't like fatalism and determinism in writing but that's neither here nor there for how ME3 ends.

It's bad writing when the reader has to explain more of the ending than the author does. It's bad writing when there are three dozen pretty large plot holes. It's bad writing when your premise is abandoned in the last five minutes. It's bad writing when you introduce a new character in the last five minutes. It's bad writing when said character is the story's main villain. It's bad writing when the villain then has the faulty logc to explain his motivations. It's bad writing when your protagonist takes a back seat and lets others drive the plot. It's bad writing when around a dozen characters suddenly think differently to how they should. It's bad writing when you build a plot around the classical story outline most others have and abaondon it at the finale. It's bad writing when there isn't any post-conclusion epilogue. It's bad writing when the story preceeding doesn't support the outcome in any way. It's bad writing when you refuse to offer any story and character resolution when it is expected. It's bad writing when you end a trilogy on a cliffhanger. 

Predeterminism.







Predestination.

Concepts vague to most but required to be known by most authors and writers.

Indeed.
Why is the phrase "shoveling **** against the tide" coming to mind the longer this goes on?

[James9749]

Hey, OP, watch this video. It will show you all of the different endings at the same time.
Tell me your opinion afterwards.


Edit: It's only about 2 and a half minutes long, and doesn't show the Whole of the endings, but you will be surprised, I assure you.

Modifié par James9749, 27 mars 2012 - 02:02 .

[K1llm1n1on]

Geneaux486 wrote...

K1llm1n1on wrote...
But on your ending- synthesis doesn't still eliminate the Reapers?

I don't know whether or not it's possible, but no, the Reapers weren't destroyed when I chose Synthesis. 

I'm gonna have to check on that one. I thought they were, but....

[Lookout1390]

Cheviot wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

I weep for you, OP

And that is why Bioware will continue to flourish, and we will be continued to be handed more ****.

The ending was absolutely terrible, any true fan of the series can see the massive plot holes that are just littered all over the place. Why would anyone accept that this is how it ends?

Are you telling me you have no questions or concerns about the ending?

Reapers had to be defeated.  Shepard goes on a quest to unite the galaxy against the Reapers and find the Catalyst.  Achieves that.  Struggles through impossible odds to defeat the Reapers.  In the process, he has to sacrifice himself to save the generations that follow from the threat of the Reapers.  That's a good ending.  Where are the plot holes?

Unless you picked destroy, you did not defeat the reapers. 

The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?

Generations that follow

Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.

The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age

Where did the Normandy land?

Why was joker running in the first place?

Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?

[DJBare]

K1llm1n1on wrote...
My other posts in this thread reflect my doubts and concerns.
I accept this is how it ends because I have no choice-

Which basically goes against the entire premise of the Mass Effect universe.

[ShdwFox7]

Geneaux486 wrote...

ShdwFox7 wrote...

K1llm1n1on wrote...

demin8891 wrote...

Summary for those who don't want to read this massive wall of text: Artistic integrity.

I'm glad you liked it, OP. I really am. I'm just incapable of accepting mediocrity and plot holes the size of the Collector Base.

What specifically are your referring to when you say mediocrity? What plot holes do you see?

Big clue this guy is trolling folks

No.  It isn't.

Are you serious? They just asked what the plot holes were. Even the people who like the ending know their is plot holes. Just to name off a few: 1) how did our squad mates on earth end up on the Normandy? 2) Why was Joker near a relay rather than fighting in the battle? 3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo? 4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam? The list goes on, and on, and on...