90 réponses à ce sujet

[Tony Grant]

All-a-Mort wrote...

If the ending(s) had the air of being planned and part of the natural conclusion to the trilogy then there would be less irritation and anger from consumers. But that is not the case. Ignoring for a moment the other numerous elements that suggested ME3 is an unfinished product with insufficient QA carried out on it pre-launch, the endings are too messy, too brief and too out of keeping with the rest of the narrative to be anything other than a crudely tacked on attempt to cheaply conclude the title and series and keep within the publisher's deadline. It is the equivalent of reading the Lord of The Rings series and having Tolkien finish the various plot threads that have stretched and evolved over 3 books by summing it all up in a single page. There is no sense that the ME3 conclusions were planned and all evidence points to a decision to 'fudge it' just to ensure the product wasn't delayed going to market.

I think you got a point. You see, the public's anger came out before I even had a chance to finish my playthrough so my expectations were already low. I kept hearing all this junk about "ghost boy" and  Red, Blue,Green explosions. I was getting so angry I had to shut it out and just get through the game to see for myself. When I got to the end, I said "THIS WAS IT?? THIS WAS ALL THE HYPE??" And I still ended up being surprised and blown away. Straight up, I tried to prepare to hate it, but my reaciton was the opposite and I'm runnin' wit' that.  But I still think Bioware could have possibly ran out of time to expand on the ending and close MAJOR gaps due to time constraints. I didn't care about none of that though because I was satisifed, but I understood why nearly 100,000 people were so mad. 

Here's how this could end up being a win for everybody: Whether you call yourself  a gamer or not--your still a consumer. You keep EA and Bioware in business. Bioware may have to answer to EA, but at the end of the day, they both must answer to you.  Moving forward, I don't think other publishers out there will risk day one DLC, or rush products just to meet the "fiscal year" deadlines. (Notice how Capcom  was so proud to boast their DLC for RE: ORC coming in April would be free right?) 

So whatever's comin' in the next few months may be 10 times better then what Bioware was already developing because of the outcry. Next question is, would it be free?
I trust Bioware's gonna blow people away with what's next--- But I REALLY hope the mega-corp publilshers learn somthing from this too. Even us gamers refuse to be nickele'd and dime'd to death.

[FemmeShep]

lol this piece is so ridiculous.

I think you give BioWare too much credit here. I don't think they expected fans to pick apart the ending the way we are. They wanted the ending to be really deep, symbolic, that made you think.

But that's not at all what fans have been doing. Instead they have been picking apart how poorly written it was, how it contains a lot of plot holes, and tramples over major themes in the game. So I'm not really sure why you think that's brilliant.

Seems to me, the opposite of what they wanted. 

Modifié par FemmeShep, 28 mars 2012 - 12:18 .

[Shahadem]

A little while back there was a Pokemon tournament winner who wanted to make a huge artistic statement about what he thought of everyone he beat. So he took a dump in the middle of the hotel.

By the opener's logic he would surpass briiliancy.

[Phaelducan]

I hated the ending at first, but after giving it some reflection (and buying into the indoctrination theory) I'm willing to concede it might be really awesome (DLC will decide).

For now, I'm in "wait and see" mode.

[Feirefiz1972]

I personaly find the entire motivation that the reapers need to harvest all intelligent life, being to protect it from being wiped out by synthetics, a bit underwhelming. Coming from a poorly explained persona introduced at the very ending of the game felt a bit cheap to me. It felt like some mumbo jumbo explaination i could not relate to, it just did not feel satifying. I do not care for happy endings so an epic and heroic battle resulting in victory or defeat (more like me1 ending i guess) would been far more satisfying to me. Do not get me wrong, i really enjoyed the game as a whole.

[Feirefiz1972]

To me i does not seem that obvious that all intelligent life in every cycle would go down the technology road and end up creating synthetics life. Even if it would be inevitable that we would create synthetic life, then it still does not seem logicaly that they would not be able to coexist. The narrative seems to be a bit self contradictionary after Legions death (does it have soul), after achieving peace between the geth and the quarians it is all of the sudden not possible for synthetics and organics to coexist.

[Your Denden]

I think some people are missing the point of the ending. Some people hate it because Shepard died and the Reapers will almost always win. Because of this, people are focused to that certain bad thing in the ending which truly is just the minor"bad thing in the ending. The result is an argument where the people who think the ending is good because it shows that "It is not a fairytale".

My part of the opinion however is different (and I feel some people would feel the same way as I do). For me, I wouldn't care if Shepard lived or died, or if the Reapers would always proceed to exist or successfully continue with the cycle or whatever. The main problem is the lack of variety between endings. The only changes were the status of Earth, Shepard, and the Normandy crew, where the latter is just some weird plothole that shouldn't have happened anyway.

If the endings had more changes to more things (status of individual races, status of Reapers if chosen not to destroy, etc), and these changes were more elaborated, and removed the unneeded plotholes (why was the Normandy in the Mass Relay anyway?), then it would have been a better ending - even if Shep died or not.

[Tony Grant]

Fliprot wrote...

So.. how many people would have bought the game if they told you before hand that the reapers win no matter what?

      Yo Fliprot, whaddup!  If someone told me the Reapers win no matter what, yeah I’d still buy it. Here's why: When George Lucas dropped them prequels to Star Wars, people who remembered the original trilogy already knew that little innocent kid buzzin' around in that Pod Racer would turn out to be Darth Vader. Still, they flocked to the theatres to watch Episode I, II and III to witness the transition.      


      As for Mass Effect, I remember at the very end of Mass Effect 2, when you see all those Reapers make their way towards Earth's solar system, I said to myself,  "it’s a wrap"—no matter how it would play out. They barely beat Sovereign in Mass Effect 1, how are they gonna stop a whole fleet?  That concern stuck with me all the way to the beginning of Mass Effect 3. When Javik told Shephard on the Normandy, "The process is already done; all you’re doing is delaying your extinction." I said to myself, "Daaaannnggg that's deep! But that don't sound too good!" lol...But  jokes aside, Shephard knew what it was, yet he still tried to do whatever it took to turn the odds. That's what was so freakin’ dope to me. He wouldn’t give up even if the Reapers would eventually win. (That’s just my opinion)

      So It's not about praising Bioware, it's about praising any work for that matter that has the guts to show "The Good Guys" trying their best to overcome a threat they know they can’t beat. (The movie 300 or example) And if that threat could be beaten, best believe there's gonna be some serious sacrifices and casualties involved. Sure, there were isolated moments of triumph during Mass Effect 3 (Curing the Genophage, The Geth making peace with the Quarian's, The Turians and Krogan playing nice, etc.) But they meant almost nothing compared to the main picture: Defeating the Reapers. And that depended on you either completing their cipher or destroying their tech.

Modifié par Tony Grant, 28 mars 2012 - 03:55 .

[Tony Grant]

Shahadem wrote...

A little while back there was a Pokemon tournament winner who wanted to make a huge artistic statement about what he thought of everyone he beat. So he took a dump in the middle of the hotel.

By the opener's logic he would surpass briiliancy.

"Sigh"....


You have spoken, my  friend.
But help me out here--"Pokeman tournament", "dump in the middle of the hotel"
I don't quite get your... um... "Pokeman logic" in reference to ME3.
But feel free to really contribute to this thread by adding your thoughts on the actual game.
You did play it....right?

Modifié par Tony Grant, 28 mars 2012 - 04:12 .

[someone else]

The OP, for all its efforts at eloquence, is superficial and facile.  It extols the "hard love" aspects, praises BW for making a tough choice, but seems to have forgotten what the series is all about - it is not about saving the galaxy or Shepard's fate or whether the reapers win or lose.   It is a GAME and the rules of that game are that the player's choices matter and shape the course of the game and have a significant impact on the outcome - BW totally discounts this in the way it has currently chosen to end the series (I hold out hope for a fix via dlc) 

The OP argues that the game has been lost ever since we learned the Reapers were coming - that Saren was right - "It's  inevitable."  That Harbinger was right, and that all our struggles did was prolong the agony.  As it stands now, it doesn't matter a whit whether you played renegade or paragon, lost or saved anyone in particular, made peace or war - just amass enough EMS points and pick your color, and make up an epilogue in your head.  Choose your poison, indeed.

You paid your money and are entitled to be pleased with BW's current ending.   But please don't insult the rest of us by arguing that arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, no matter how artfully, is a bold, brilliant and compelling climax to the series, nor that this delivers on the promises made, nor rewards the investment in time, emotion and caring so many of us have made.

Modifié par someone else, 28 mars 2012 - 04:15 .

[Tony Grant]

someone else wrote...

The OP, for all its efforts at eloquence, is superficial and facile.  It extols the "hard love" aspects, praises BW for making a tough choice, but seems to have forgotten what the series is all about - it is not about saving the galaxy or Shepard's fate or whether the reapers win or lose.   It is a GAME and the rules of that game are that the player's choices matter and shape the course of the game and have a significant impact on the outcome - BW totally discounts this in the way it has currently chosen to end the series (I hold out hope for a fix via dlc) 

The OP argues that the game has been lost ever since we learned the Reapers were coming - that Saren was right - "It's  inevitable."  That Harbinger was right, and that all our struggles did was prolong the agony.  As it stands now, it doesn't matter a whit whether you played renegade or paragon, lost or saved anyone in particular, made peace or war - just amass enough EMS points and pick your color, and make up an epilogue in your head.  Choose your poison, indeed.

You paid your money and are entitled to be pleased with BW's current ending.   But please don't insult the rest of us by arguing that arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, no matter how artfully, is a bold, brilliant and compelling climax to the series, nor that is delivers on the promises made, nor rewards the investment in time, emotion and caring so many of us have made.

           Yo, I dig' what your sayin. Let the me work with your point.  You say, "it is not about saving the galaxy or Shepard's fate or whether the reapers win or lose. It is a GAME and the rules of that game are that the player's choices matter and shape the course of the game and have a significant impact on the outcome" .


Yes it is a game, but regardless of what you choose, what is the overall outcome or purpose of that game? Is'nt it to save the galaxy, preserve Shephards fate, Defeat the Reapers and sustain life? You've laid all it out perfectly---but backwards. I understand you loud and clear though.  Like yourself, a lot of fans who's followed the entire series is dead serious about this--and  you have the right to be. Ya'll feel like everything you did across all 3 games was for naught and that all your choices were stripped at the very end of ME3. Yeah, I get that. Me personally, I truly thought it was an uphill battle for Bioware after they completed Mass Effect 2. The expectations, how to craft the continuity of your choices, even the gameplay (how would they pull off an in-game boss battle with hundreds of Reapers?) I knew there would be a scaledown of choices towards the end because it all came down to really just one thing--destroying the Reapers. The only choices left were how we chose to get there and what we would choose come end-game. But they wrote the ending (not us) they just let us craft our own way to get there. So with that type of customization being Bioware's staple of gaming, yup--I definately saw a lot of compensation in the "choosing" department.  Tha'ts no excuse for Bioware, that 's only my opinion. I just think they pulled it off and still made a hell of game to close the series. 


           But one thing you gotta understand--I'm not insulting anybody, I'm sharing my personal opinion and perspective of it all. Heck yeah, you got the right to challange me, call me out on it--whatever. I want that--- As you can see, I don't just post somthing and run for cover. That's wack.  The feedback is what we're all here for and I try to make it as clear as possible, and I do choose my words carefully to make it clear this is my opinion.  You want to know what I really think? I think Bioware's move on ME3 as whole project was genius and I aint changing that.  But I also think they were a little too ambitious to successfully close the series without some kind of repercussions (maybe deadlines, budget, script continuity, Corporate shadows, I don't know)
 The majority always has the last say, so your point  will be the definitive role on how Bioware follows up with a "true ending". Now if only we could get a majority to vote on improving Madden, lol.

Modifié par Tony Grant, 28 mars 2012 - 05:23 .

[Manton-X2]

someone else wrote...
The OP argues that the game has been lost ever since we learned the Reapers were coming - that Saren was right - "It's  inevitable."  That Harbinger was right, and that all our struggles did was prolong the agony.  As it stands now, it doesn't matter a whit whether you played renegade or paragon, lost or saved anyone in particular, made peace or war - just amass enough EMS points and pick your color, and make up an epilogue in your head.  Choose your poison, indeed.

I agree with all you said in your post, but I'd take this even further.  The driving point of this series was to stop the Reapers.  Everything you did had that as the underlying motivation.  The saddest thing about ME3 that is lost on some is this .....  no matter what you do, no matter how poorly you play this game and no matter what your decisions ... you can not possibly fail to stop the Reapers. The driving force behind everything you have done for 3 games is a moot point at the end.  There is no scenario, no outcome where the Reapers win and you utterly lose.

How we got from ME2's ending where you could die to no chance of failure what-so-ever (with the exception of the fate of Earth and whether you die or take a half-breath) is something I can't begin to understand.

MX2

[Phaelducan]

Any game has the chance for failure. It's called Game Over. Then you start over/reload, whatever.

VERY rarely do you play a game where you "win" by losing, and even in those games like Heavy Rain it's considered the bad ending and most players will start over or avoid those endings.

In ME2, yeah you can die, but then you "lose" and can't import to ME3. That's like Charlie Sheen winning. Who wants to spend 60 bucks to fail at the ultimate point of the game? Even Mario EVENTUALLY saved the Princess.

If you want "to fail to stop the Reapers," then just die on your next Banshee and call that your canon ending. We play games to win, not to lose. It's human nature, and game devs cater to that need. Hence, multiplayer for all your losing needs (not just in ME3 but in gaming in general). Single player stories are supposed to result in victory (not perfect, and not without loss, but victory nonetheless).

[All-a-Mort]

I have no problem with there being at least one negative ending. The scale of the threat the galaxy faces must mean that 'winning' the war is a relative term. And to be fair we see that to be the case, with potentially some species effectively rendered extinct and homeworlds destroyed. So to my mind a conclusion where anyone survives longterm is a 'win' for the galaxy. But the current endings all seem to be variations of the same thing, and with the relays being destroyed and if lore is followed the affected systems hosting relays also destroyed, the result is hardly different from the Reapers winning.

Now a plot where ancient machines kill off all spacefaring organic life every 50k years or so to maintain galactic order doesn't bother me either. It is basically the same plot as in novelist Alastair Reynolds 'Revelation Space' trilogy, where Inhibitors wipe out races to keep order for when our galaxy combines with Andromeda. I don't even have an issue with the Space Child per se, as an intelligence that sets the thing in motion and oversees the cycle, but it was badly explained, introduced as an element too late and too briefly. If they had added an epilogue to show what happened after the choice was made, to see what the results were, then the endings would be more acceptable, but they haven't. So you are left with no idea if Shepard is dead or alive, indoctrinated or dreaming, whether all civilisation is dead, and what civilisation might look like if synthesis was chosen.

[Manton-X2]

Phaelducan wrote...

Any game has the chance for failure. It's called Game Over. Then you start over/reload, whatever.

VERY rarely do you play a game where you "win" by losing, and even in those games like Heavy Rain it's considered the bad ending and most players will start over or avoid those endings.

In ME2, yeah you can die, but then you "lose" and can't import to ME3. That's like Charlie Sheen winning. Who wants to spend 60 bucks to fail at the ultimate point of the game? Even Mario EVENTUALLY saved the Princess.

If you want "to fail to stop the Reapers," then just die on your next Banshee and call that your canon ending. We play games to win, not to lose. It's human nature, and game devs cater to that need. Hence, multiplayer for all your losing needs (not just in ME3 but in gaming in general). Single player stories are supposed to result in victory (not perfect, and not without loss, but victory nonetheless).

If there is no possibility of failure, then what exactly is the point?  If no matter how poorly I play the role playing aspects of this game and as long as I can trudge my way through the firefights, I win.  No matter how horrible my decisions, no matter who or what I get killed.  I can get ZERO war assets, but as long as I can get through the FPS portions (no matter how many times I need to restart a fight) I can still defeat the Reapers.

Yea, that sounds reasonable.

Give me a break.  That may be why you play a game, so they can hand you a win ... I don't.  I'd like to earn it.

MX2

Modifié par Manton-X2, 28 mars 2012 - 10:41 .

[someone else]

Sorry its taken me so long respond - RL and the need for sleep intevened.

First and foremost - I retract and apologize for suggesting your post was "insulting" - combination of reading too many more poorly articulated threads, the lateness of the hour, and the fact that the ending left me emotionally twisted and drained for days (until I had imbibed sufficient quantities of IT Kool-Aid to dull the pain.)

Tony Grant wrote:

I knew there would be a scaledown of choices towards the end because it all came down to really just one thing--destroying the Reapers. The only choices left were how we chose to get there and what we would choose come end-game. But they wrote the ending (not us) they just let us craft our own way to get there. So with that type of customization being Bioware's staple of gaming, yup--I definately saw a lot of compensation in the "choosing" department. Tha'ts no excuse for Bioware, that 's only my opinion. I just think they pulled it off and still made a hell of game to close the series.

Agree that the choice would have to be narrrowed - however it would have been possible to parse the outcome based on EMR and allies recruited for the naval battle and some combination of squad loyalties, etc for the ground war - see Admiral Cheez' excellent rant post - toward pg 23 or so she lays out quite a good draft - some such finale would not have been undoable or out of reach - and would have been consistent with the rules of the game.

Now I think where we have a difference in perspective is that you seem more taken with the "story" aspect than the "game" aspect in this sense - Our Siegfried and his Brunhilde (Shep and LI) sacrifice themselves purging the world of the Curse (Harbie et al) , leaving a smaller, human-sized world redeemed and cleansed (read Joker and Co in the new Eden) - Powerful, compelling and classic. I believe it is this archtypical motif that resonates so deeply with those who "like" the ending - even if they never heard of Bayreuth.

The problem for me is that my role is not that of audience but author. (I commented in another post - dealing with artistic integrity - that WE are the artists - BW primarily artisans who have furnished us a wondrous set of paints, puppets and building blocks.) It is the damage to my artistry by the forced ending that anquishes me, the absence of choice, not the specific outcome. (We can leave the plot hole discussion to any one of the 5000 or so threads that have dealt with the subject in excruciating detail.)

Manton-X2 wrote:
How we got from ME2's ending where you could die to no chance of failure what-so-ever (with the exception of the fate of Earth and whether you die or take a half-breath) is something I can't begin to understand.

Well a couple of thoughts - in ME1 there was no way to lose - just "Resume" till you get it right. In ME2, curiously, it is much harder to lose than win - you really have to work at it to get your squad down to <2 at the end.

In ME3 - depending on how you view the three outcomes - but more critically depending on what if anything BW does in the way of a fix, it would be possible to actually lose - by choosing any option other than the one in which shep lives. The only way BW can continue the series is from that Destroy ending - players who destroyed their sheps should have no expectation for a follow-on anymore than one who "went out in blaze of glory" in ME2 could expect to import that game into ME3.

My personal preference would be for BW to pick Shep up out of the rubble - recognize that the "ending" was dream, delirium or whatever, replay or reprise the final confrontation in a more plausible way, and end with Shep at the helm of some unnamed craft, determined to find out whats left, what happened to his mates, and see what can be done about rebuilding a new galactic civilization on the ruins of the old - (read BW ME franchise opportunity)

PS - BW has said repeatedly there is no "canon" Shepard - but I would submit that there at least one "canon" characteristic - As long there is one spark of life, one breath left, Shep will fight on, will not accept defeat, and will not abandon the hope for a better universe.    So don't expect my Shep to simply lie there in the rubble or slink away into the shadows - she just ain't that kinda gal.

Modifié par someone else, 28 mars 2012 - 03:01 .

[Phaelducan]

Manton-X2 wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Any game has the chance for failure. It's called Game Over. Then you start over/reload, whatever.

VERY rarely do you play a game where you "win" by losing, and even in those games like Heavy Rain it's considered the bad ending and most players will start over or avoid those endings.

In ME2, yeah you can die, but then you "lose" and can't import to ME3. That's like Charlie Sheen winning. Who wants to spend 60 bucks to fail at the ultimate point of the game? Even Mario EVENTUALLY saved the Princess.

If you want "to fail to stop the Reapers," then just die on your next Banshee and call that your canon ending. We play games to win, not to lose. It's human nature, and game devs cater to that need. Hence, multiplayer for all your losing needs (not just in ME3 but in gaming in general). Single player stories are supposed to result in victory (not perfect, and not without loss, but victory nonetheless).

If there is no possibility of failure, then what exactly is the point?  If no matter how poorly I play the role playing aspects of this game and as long as I can trudge my way through the firefights, I win.  No matter how horrible my decisions, no matter who or what I get killed.  I can get ZERO war assets, but as long as I can get through the FPS portions (no matter how many times I need to restart a fight) I can still defeat the Reapers.

Yea, that sounds reasonable.

Give me a break.  That may be why you play a game, so they can hand you a win ... I don't.  I'd like to earn it.

MX2

MX2, dude that's how every game works. No matter how bad you "play" and how crappy you choices are, at the END of the game you win, provided you can actually get there. As stated previously, and ignored by you, the possibility of failure always exists, and again is called "Game Over." Once you fail, you restart or load. That's how this works. Don't like it? Pick a different hobby. The protagonist is victorious almost universally.

ME2 is an extremely rare exception that allows you to roll credits after dieing, but even then you win. The Collector threat is ended before you die. Furthermore, that ending is extremely difficult to get organically, and requires deliberate and obvious poor choices to arrive it... AND is invalidated by Bioware directly by being disallowed for import in ME3. It's just another cleverly disguised "Game Over." and if you want to get to the real ending (in this case the next game) you have to reload and do better.

You are complaining over literally nothing. Games don't work the way you want, and for good reason. No one wants to win a game by dieing on level 1. You reload and make it to level 2... rinse and repeat.

[KeenBlade]

Tony, SE, MX2, and Mort, I find that I rather enjoyed reading your posts. They are all rather well written with exceedingly few typos in this age of internet shorthand, where "tyops" are part and parcel for virtually all text in forums.

I find that I must agree with all 4 of you to some extent. Tony, as a story, I rather enjoyed the ME series. I am not, however, keen on the ending. That is where I must sympathize with MX2, Mort, and SE. I can't bring myself to play the renegade Shep. I, much like my Shep, build bridges for the ultimate success of my objective through peace and overwhelming firepower. In the end it seemed all that one can accomplish in ME3 is the choice of mysterious energy blast, and whether Shep gasps or not.

My argument is always for logic when there is speculative difference in opinion. Indoctrination Theory makes me feel better as an "artist" as SE said it, however, if what was viewed is the "final word" then while I feel unsatisfied by the scenes, I can accept that fate knowing that I finally got to "stick it to the man". Harbinger, that is.

On an unrelated note, some of the IT groups claim the colors to be a trick played on Shep to trick him/her into a "reaper victory" with synthesis, and control endings. I see it logically. Control is the most peaceful ending as compared to destroy. Synthesis is an entirely unprecedented option until the very end as there is no "green" path in the ME series until then.

Destroying the reapers is, by the provided descriptions, killing hundreds, if not thousands of cycles worth of galactic civilizations. That alone makes it "renegade" in my mind. It didn't stop me from hitting the big, red, "nuke canada" button as the phrase goes.

[termokanden]

someone else wrote...

The OP, for all its efforts at eloquence, is superficial and facile.  It extols the "hard love" aspects, praises BW for making a tough choice, but seems to have forgotten what the series is all about - it is not about saving the galaxy or Shepard's fate or whether the reapers win or lose.   It is a GAME and the rules of that game are that the player's choices matter and shape the course of the game and have a significant impact on the outcome - BW totally discounts this in the way it has currently chosen to end the series (I hold out hope for a fix via dlc) 

The OP argues that the game has been lost ever since we learned the Reapers were coming - that Saren was right - "It's  inevitable."  That Harbinger was right, and that all our struggles did was prolong the agony.  As it stands now, it doesn't matter a whit whether you played renegade or paragon, lost or saved anyone in particular, made peace or war - just amass enough EMS points and pick your color, and make up an epilogue in your head.  Choose your poison, indeed.

You paid your money and are entitled to be pleased with BW's current ending.   But please don't insult the rest of us by arguing that arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, no matter how artfully, is a bold, brilliant and compelling climax to the series, nor that this delivers on the promises made, nor rewards the investment in time, emotion and caring so many of us have made.

I was going to write a reply to this topic, but I'll be damned if this doesn't pretty much say what needed to be said. But since it's me and I can't keep my mouth (fingers?) shut...

I'd just like to add that I think it's a big shame in a game with multiple endings and with so many choices along the way that you can even import from game to game that it just pulls space magic out of a hat at the last minute and disregards everything else. What's worse is that the logic behind said space magic is complete and utter fatalistic nonsense.

Instead, we could have had multiple endings with the heroic sacrifice, failure and success and survival as three of the major outcomes.

Again, I'd like to add that I think ME3 as a whole is exceptional. But I do think they blew it completely with the ending. I hope some DLC will clear it up a bit, but I'm not expecting miracles. I'm also not in the group that demands a rewrite of the ending. It is what it is. Too bad though.

Modifié par termokanden, 28 mars 2012 - 03:49 .

[someone else]

@keenblade

I actually think the three ending in broad terms are acceptable (though, yes, the sappy romantic in me still wants a hugs, puppies and posies option) - as currently executed, however, the plot holes make them untenable. It is as if we have a sketch for an ending rather than a finished production.  Incidently, I agree that the color mix-up suggests the ren/para options are now confounded - but a bit too hamhanded, don't you think? 

I also have thought the reapers' "perspective deserve more consideration than it gets - the race is at least 37million yrs old, and probably much older - I read once and believe it true that humans are incapable of thinking in geologic time scales, much less astronomical ones.  We've been around for what - 50,000 to 100,000 years, and have about 5000 years of civilized history - what, really, can we know about evolution and decay on a galactic time horizon?  From that point of view, Starchild may be fighting the most grim, implacable and invinicible enemy of Reaper and organics alike - entropy.  Methinks the races of ME suffer from a severe case of collective myopia.

That still does not excuse BW's cursory and sloppy endgame.

I have played multiple Shepards - from pure paragons to mostly renegade - [pure renegade is a bit too close to pure a**hole imho] - all classes, both genders - they are all different and approach the choices in the game differently

One quick example - my ren femshep let Kaidan go on Virmire - realizing neither of them could live with the suspicion that her choice might have been motivated by some thing other than pure command judgment - she learned the hard way why there are rules against fraternization, and romances no one else throughout - she's emotionally closed, even to the extent of shutting down Vega - "It's Commander - no nicknames" Different entirely from Bro who's been true blue without a misstep, and bought into Asari inclusiveness, making peace and seeking concilation even if sometimes he looks weak and silly - "No one has to die" - even when you just know...

I'm sure you have similarly detailed embroidery around your Sheps - so where oh where did all this all this go? Why doesn't it matter at all?

My therapist tells me not to decrease or discontinue my daily dose of IT for at least 2 more weeks.

Modifié par someone else, 28 mars 2012 - 04:15 .

[KeenBlade]

My Shep's always a sentimental fool who thinks problems can be solved without explosives. Until it goes horribly wrong, then the site is nuked from orbit. This coming from the same Shep who saw the human reaper at the end of ME2 and pulled off a "boom headshot" with the Cain. >_> Fastest reaper kill ever. lol.  It's worth noting that my Shep has also killed without hesitation, or provocation, but those that recieved such swift punishment were clearly beyond diplomacy, but insisted on monologing. 

IT was the only thing keeping me civil and non-homicidal after I read about the endings, then experienced the Destroy ending. lol. I've taken my grain of salt though. Even as angry as I was, I still bought BW points and enjoyed the 'free' outlet for my rage. ME3 multiplayer. XD I still feel I must kill every last cerberus/reaper unit that shows up, if for no other reason than my wounded inner romantic.

Modifié par KeenBlade, 28 mars 2012 - 04:26 .

[VirtualAlex]

You could not be more right. Cheers.

[someone else]

termokanden wrote...
Again, I'd like to add that I think ME3 as a whole is exceptional. But I do think they blew it completely with the ending. I hope some DLC will clear it up a bit, but I'm not expecting miracles. I'm also not in the group that demands a rewrite of the ending. It is what it is. Too bad though.

Of course.  We wouldn't all be here if ME wasn't an astounding masterpiece.  I've been lucky enough to have been around to open the Beatles LPs for the first time, hear Dylan and the Stones and realize I was in the presence of something game changing - to have sat in a movie theater and watched the debut of Star Wars - nothing even remotely like it had ever been on the screen.   I've been playing computer games since DOS- based Zork - ah, the charms of the Great Underground Empire - nothing even remotely compares to the scope, vision and impact of ME.

I will crawl further out on my twig.

I regard ME as vanguard of an entirely new genre of "entertainment"  - one that blends elements of fiction, gaming, movies, graphic arts and literature in a radically new form of interactive engagement that breaks the glass wall between audience, actor, and author - I am literally in awe of what BW has accomplished and that is why I hope they understand the potential of IT.

BW can implement IT with a mere dlc  (miraculously, it doesn't matter at all whether or not they intended to do so in the first place, as the necessary plot hooks are already in place, and even if it ain't perfect, its a lot less perforated than the current resolution.)

If they do, BW will have broken entirely virgin ground, effectly expanding the game to include the players as actors, having "indoctrinated" so many of us, brought us into the action, allowed us to experience the pain and anguish of succumbing to the "illusion" - not for nothing is the Elusive Man the Illusive Man - to be broken free of thralldom at the last - and on to rebuild the galaxy in God knows how many $60 MEx games and $15 dlc- All without having to rewrite one line of code in the present game.

Tell me how any corporation with one eye on its pride-and-joy flagship product and the other on the bottom line could NOT resist this?

Modifié par someone else, 28 mars 2012 - 04:51 .

[Manton-X2]

Phaelducan wrote...
MX2, dude that's how every game works. No matter how bad you "play" and how crappy you choices are, at the END of the game you win, provided you can actually get there. As stated previously, and ignored by you, the possibility of failure always exists, and again is called "Game Over." Once you fail, you restart or load. That's how this works. Don't like it? Pick a different hobby. The protagonist is victorious almost universally.

ME2 is an extremely rare exception that allows you to roll credits after dieing, but even then you win. The Collector threat is ended before you die. Furthermore, that ending is extremely difficult to get organically, and requires deliberate and obvious poor choices to arrive it... AND is invalidated by Bioware directly by being disallowed for import in ME3. It's just another cleverly disguised "Game Over." and if you want to get to the real ending (in this case the next game) you have to reload and do better.

You are complaining over literally nothing. Games don't work the way you want, and for good reason. No one wants to win a game by dieing on level 1. You reload and make it to level 2... rinse and repeat.

I'm not understanding you.  If, as you say, they will not allow you to import a playthrough where you died in ME2 then you are, by your own argument, proving what I said.  Yes, you could die in ME2 and that result precludes you from moving forward into the final game.  It stops you from winning.  There is a path tree through that game that ends in failure for the player and forces you to go back and earn your way to an acceptable ending (beating the collectors AND living). 

There, in the middle of the story and before any resolution to the primary motivation, you could play so poorly that you died.  Yes, the Collectors are defeated but that is not the overarching motivation of Mass Effect.  The goal isn't to beat the flunkies.  The goal is to somehow stop the Reapers.  Despite wanting to save the Earth, save the other races, save your squadmates and save yourself; the overall goal in the entire Mass Effect series is to stop the Reapers at all cost (because without that, everything else dies).  And yet, here in the third game, that outcome is a foregone conclusion.  Your sole motivation is a moot point because you can't possibly not achieve it.  In essence, there is no failure that forces you to go back and play better.  All other games don't matter here, only ME2 because it set the precedence within its own franchise.  That's what ME3 has to live up to, not Modern Warfare 3 or Soul Calibur V.

Beyond that, since there is no resolution what-so-ever post final battle, you have no clue what happened with almost every other secondary motivation for the game save what happens to Earth and (kind of) what happens to Shepard.  That is my biggest issue with the game.  The thing that was introduced as the motivation 5 minutes into the game and made the primary focus through 89 hours & 50 minutes of game play is reduced to a footnote and thrown away.  It's like you arrived at the Citadel/Crucible and had this conversation: 


Shepard:  I'm here to stop the Reapers!  It took everything I had, but I made it and they =will= be stopped!!

Glowboy: Hmm?  Oh, yea .. they're done.  No, they lost the minute they arrived on Earth and you fled to Mars.  So now, what we're doing is deciding the nature of life in this Galaxy.

Shepard: No, wait .. what?  I mean, everything I did to get here ... that outcome was already decided at the start of the invasion?  Nature of life in the Galaxy?  Why am I qualified ... I don't understand.

Glowboy:  Oh yea ... you defeated them the second you dodged that first beam attack. So, anyway, nature of life in the Galaxy.  Here's three really poor choices for that ... pick one and we can call it a day.    Ok ... no more talk ....  go.


MX2

[someone else]

Manton-X2 wrote...

Beyond that, since there is no resolution what-so-ever post final battle, you have no clue what happened with almost every other secondary motivation for the game save what happens to Earth and (kind of) what happens to Shepard.  That is my biggest issue with the game.  The thing that was introduced as the motivation 5 minutes into the game and made the primary focus through 89 hours & 50 minutes of game play is reduced to a footnote and thrown away.  It's like you arrived at the Citadel/Crucible and had this conversation: 


Shepard:  I'm here to stop the Reapers!  It took everything I had, but I made it and they =will= be stopped!!

Glowboy: Hmm?  Oh, yea .. they're done.  No, they lost the minute they arrived on Earth and you fled to Mars.  So now, what we're doing is deciding the nature of life in this Galaxy.

Shepard: No, wait .. what?  I mean, everything I did to get here ... that outcome was already decided at the start of the invasion?  Nature of life in the Galaxy?  Why am I qualified ... I don't understand.

Glowboy:  Oh yea ... you defeated them the second you dodged that first beam attack. So, anyway, nature of life in the Galaxy.  Here's three really poor choices for that ... pick one and we can call it a day.    Ok ... no more talk ....  go.

MX2

Well, no, not exactly (and you know I am not a fan of the ending) but Blue saves the reapers (somehow allowing a totally de-personalized Shepard to "control" them ??), Green synthesizes the reapers - so they ain't exakly daid, sorta, and you survive as the secret sauce in the new galactic DNA - only RED actually kills them and depending on your EMS and Collector base decision, wipes out or saves earth, and kills or saves Shep.

The real problem is there is no motivation to choose one over another save for idle curiosity - the entire matter is trivial because - and I take this to be your central point - they are all an inevitable GameOverYouWin (unless dlc somehow fixes this)

Modifié par someone else, 28 mars 2012 - 05:30 .