650 réponses à ce sujet

[JBONE27]

Subject M wrote...

Heather Cline wrote...

No it's not. Look at DA:O they had different endings and there was a sad ending where the Warden died. Was it meaningless? No it wasn't. There were also a couple of other different endings were Alistair died, Loghain died, or no one died.

It didn't make any less of an impact on any of the endings in DA:O. So Razman your argument of having an off-switch makes tragedy meaningless has been disproven.

Razman might feel that way. So it might be true for him. But I agree, I found the DA:O. "sacrifice" ending very sad.

I actually found the one where Allistar sacrifices himself more sad... I guess I was just less attached to my Grey Warden than I was to Allistar.

[The Razman]

slyguy200 wrote...

The Razman wrote...

...
Tragedy with an off-switch is utterly meaningless. That's what we've been saying.

You can't have your happy ending option without destroying the sad ending option. And Bioware chose to make a sad ending. Live with it.

No, what you are saying is kinda stupid

No, and no again.
You are just so very narrow minded and selfish Raz<_<

I bow to the superior logic and verbosity of your logical argument.

[Iakus]

The Razman wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

If someone want so target an ending where everybody dies and the galaxy goes to ****, then by all means, let them have that as one of the ending OPTIONS.

But the rest of us would like to have endings, OPTIONAL endings, wherein all of our efforts and all of our time and completion zeal doesn't result in being utterly meaningless.

Tragedy with an off-switch is utterly meaningless. That's what we've been saying.

You can't have your happy ending option without destroying the sad ending option. And Bioware chose to make a sad ending. Live with it.

How is an optional ending you have to work for an on/off switch?

This is a role playing game.  You create Shepard's story, decide how he/she proceeds, and deal with the consequences.  Casey Hudson even said the players are teh "cocreators" of Shepard's story, there is no canon.

No one's ending invalidates anyone else's.  So why can't we have more options in how to end it? 

[JBONE27]

kbct wrote...

Subject M wrote...
I call BS on this. At least for this type of game and at least for myself. But I suspect I am not alone.

You're not alone at all! Razman is part of the 2% that liked the ending as-is. Everyone else wants it changed (to varying degrees). Yet here he is trying to keep people from getting what they want.

A whole 2%, and I thought I was in the minority for saying it was better than most video game ending, but really needed an epilogue that reflected the choices you've made during the entire trillogy.

[Heather Cline]

You're going around in circles Razman. I put forth a logical argument to your accusation that having a happy ending precludes the sad ending. I proved to you that a game can have multiple different endings ranging from sad to happy. I proved that you can have both and not have one preclude the other.

Fact is you're argument of 'find me an article' is meaningless. You have nothing to prove that a game can have multiple endings and have a range from sad to happy that the happy precludes the sad.

[Burori]

 I don't want a happy ending. 

I would like however is an ending that does not contridict half of what we learned from ME1 all the way through to ME3. As it stands the ending does that, it takes all that we learned about the ME universe and just turns it upside down and tosses it into the sun to be burned.

If I had an ending where it ended with Shep sitting down realising that their last ditch effort was in vain and he watched everyone die in the efforts. I would have been content with that ending. 

Where I think the ending went horribly wrong is the explaination of what the Reapers do what they do. I feel had that been kept a mystery, a LOT of people would have been content. 

[kbct]

The Razman wrote...
People moan about business decisions impacting on the creative process of gamemaking almost constantly. Why is it suddenly a good thing in this instance?

Because it could repair BioWare's reputation and bottom line.

[kbct]

The Razman wrote...

slyguy200 wrote...

The Razman wrote...

...
Tragedy with an off-switch is utterly meaningless. That's what we've been saying.

You can't have your happy ending option without destroying the sad ending option. And Bioware chose to make a sad ending. Live with it.

No, what you are saying is kinda stupid

No, and no again.
You are just so very narrow minded and selfish Raz

I bow to the superior logic and verbosity of your logical argument.

You seem to think it is necessary for all outcomes to be sh!tty. It doesn't have to be that way.

[The Razman]

iakus wrote...

The Razman wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

If someone want so target an ending where everybody dies and the galaxy goes to ****, then by all means, let them have that as one of the ending OPTIONS.

But the rest of us would like to have endings, OPTIONAL endings, wherein all of our efforts and all of our time and completion zeal doesn't result in being utterly meaningless.

Tragedy with an off-switch is utterly meaningless. That's what we've been saying.

You can't have your happy ending option without destroying the sad ending option. And Bioware chose to make a sad ending. Live with it.

How is an optional ending you have to work for an on/off switch?

This is a role playing game.  You create Shepard's story, decide how he/she proceeds, and deal with the consequences.  Casey Hudson even said the players are teh "cocreators" of Shepard's story, there is no canon.

No one's ending invalidates anyone else's.  So why can't we have more options in how to end it? 

For exactly the reasons I've said already. The whole reason a sad ending works in any narrative artform is that you don't have a choice in it. Would Half Life 2: Episode 2 been anywhere near as sad if you had an option to play well and prevent Eli's death? Would the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet work in any way if it was in a Choose Your Own Adventure format and the other options led to them living happy ever after? Tragedy depends on us experiencing emotions we don't want to; if you can just go back and do it again so that it doesn't happen, you effectively have a free off-switch for those emotions. Do you see the point?

[Nicky 192]

Heather Cline wrote...

I've posted this elsewhere but I'll state it here. I want a happy ending. It isn't all sunshine and rainbows and all those who think that is what those of us who want a happy ending want you are dead wrong.

The kind of happy ending we want is our Shepard ending up with her/his LI in the end and possibly with the crew of the Normandy as well alive.

It doesn't mean that it's all sunshine and rainbows and everyone is singing and dancing. The earth has been ravaged, people have died. There will be a long rebuilding period but there is hope and Shepard gets to be with her/his LI and look to the future whatever that may be.

That is what I want and I don't think that this kind of happy ending is so bad.

This ^^^ And its wrong to try and take away a persons right to choose in a game that is built around choice. If some people want to feel unhappy, thats fair enough that is there choice and i wont disagree. There has to be hope though, the story is one about hope, the hope that  you can ,through the choices that  you make, unite  people who have difference's who may infact, sometimes hate each other. That they can work together to defeat a greater evil, experiance loss but  still keep hoping. To  get to the end and not to have the hope of a happy ending is soul destroying. There is very real tragedy in real life and we know this, so we  don't need to be reminded in a game that is for made for entertainment that "hey you can't win em all".

[Heather Cline]

Razman the entire ME game series is based on choice. From choosing your gender, to class, to whether you are paragon or renegade. These choices continue on even in ME1's ending. Do you save the council or do you destroy them? ME2, do you get everyone's loyalty or do you screw them to the wall? Do you save the kidnapped people from the Normandy SR2 or do you leave them to rot and die?

Every choice in the game gives you a choice to alter your ending. ME3 should be no different no matter what you say. If the first 2 games allowed your choices to affect your ending the ending of ME3 should be exactly the same.

Your argument about a sad ending should be the one and only is utter bull in the face of these facts.

Fact, ME1 choices affected your ending. Fact ME2 choices affected that games ending. Fact your choices in ME3 up until the final crap that is called an 'ending' for ME3 affected every thing you did from either curing the genophage or sabotaging it.

Therefore the facts are on my side not yours.

Modifié par Heather Cline, 30 mars 2012 - 11:11 .

[Iakus]

The Razman wrote...
For exactly the reasons I've said already. The whole reason a sad ending works in any narrative artform is that you don't have a choice in it. Would Half Life 2: Episode 2 been anywhere near as sad if you had an option to play well and prevent Eli's death? Would the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet work in any way if it was in a Choose Your Own Adventure format and the other options led to them living happy ever after? Tragedy depends on us experiencing emotions we don't want to; if you can just go back and do it again so that it doesn't happen, you effectively have a free off-switch for those emotions. Do you see the point?

Those aren't stories where the audience has a voice in shaping the storyline.  We do.  In a limited manner, true, but we still have an investment in the story that a more passive participant lacks.  If such players don't want that story to be a downer, why should it be forced on them anyway?  Why shouldn't they have an option for a brighter ending,?  Even if that ending is harder to achieve?

If a person likes tragedy and wants to play one out, the'll play out a tragedy.  If a player wants something happier, or more uplifting, why not that too?

Modifié par iakus, 30 mars 2012 - 11:15 .

[Heather Cline]

Razman if you want a sad ending go play FF13-2. That is considered a story being told where the player has no choice what so ever in how the game ends. No matter what you do to get that 100% perfect play through when you get it the ending of that game is very sad and also the secret ending to that game proves that the hero's got screwed.

Mass Effect choices have mattered in every games ending except ME3. You want to keep your ending then fine keep it but don't be a selfish jerk and deny others the happy ending the want.

[Father_Jerusalem]

Because this isn't Hello Kitty Effect.

[The Razman]

Heather Cline wrote...

You're going around in circles Razman. I put forth a logical argument to your accusation that having a happy ending precludes the sad ending. I proved to you that a game can have multiple different endings ranging from sad to happy. I proved that you can have both and not have one preclude the other.

Fact is you're argument of 'find me an article' is meaningless. You have nothing to prove that a game can have multiple endings and have a range from sad to happy that the happy precludes the sad.

No, you simply said "It can happen ... Dragon Age: Origins did it!"

Dragon Age: Origins tried it, and failed to create an ending with any significant emotional impact. When I have time I'll go find some links to show you if you want how basically all of the saddest moments in video-game history depend on you not having an alternative option to prevent them, from Aerith's death in Final Fantasy VII to the end of Red Dead Redemption, to Eli Vance's death in HL2:EP2. But for now ... you need to understand that your argument is centred around Dragon Age: Origins, and when I ask for you to provide an article, I'm trying to show you that your lack of ability to provide one is evidence that Dragon Age: Origins is an example of it failing, not that it's evidence to the contrary.

Please, you need to provide me with an article which proves that wrong, otherwise you have no argument. And we're wasting our time here.

[BUNJI12]

There is a possibility of having multiple endings in ME3 that range from happy to sad because of all the different choices that can be made, all that is needed is a really good writer...

Modifié par BUNJI12, 30 mars 2012 - 11:15 .

[JBONE27]

Burori wrote...

 I don't want a happy ending. 

I would like however is an ending that does not contridict half of what we learned from ME1 all the way through to ME3. As it stands the ending does that, it takes all that we learned about the ME universe and just turns it upside down and tosses it into the sun to be burned.

If I had an ending where it ended with Shep sitting down realising that their last ditch effort was in vain and he watched everyone die in the efforts. I would have been content with that ending. 

Where I think the ending went horribly wrong is the explaination of what the Reapers do what they do. I feel had that been kept a mystery, a LOT of people would have been content. 

If that's the ending you've worked for, then I say of course you should have it.  I agree with part of that.  Also, not showing us how the forces we've picked up were used was a bad move by Bioware.  It would have probably added a day per asset, but it would have been worth it for such a spectacular cut scene.

[EHondaMashButton]

I don't like the ending, and I agree with Razman. Lesser of two evils is fine. Having outright "happy" "bittersweet" and "sad" endings cheapens all of them. Its cheesy. Its lazy.

Being a completionist doesn't make you exempt from facing tough decisions. It makes Shepard's character stagnant. Every choice comes with consequences. Sidestepping that makes the story not worth telling.

This is mass effect.

[kbct]

The Razman wrote...

iakus wrote...

The Razman wrote...

BeefoTheBold wrote...

If someone want so target an ending where everybody dies and the galaxy goes to ****, then by all means, let them have that as one of the ending OPTIONS.

But the rest of us would like to have endings, OPTIONAL endings, wherein all of our efforts and all of our time and completion zeal doesn't result in being utterly meaningless.

Tragedy with an off-switch is utterly meaningless. That's what we've been saying.

You can't have your happy ending option without destroying the sad ending option. And Bioware chose to make a sad ending. Live with it.

How is an optional ending you have to work for an on/off switch?

This is a role playing game.  You create Shepard's story, decide how he/she proceeds, and deal with the consequences.  Casey Hudson even said the players are teh "cocreators" of Shepard's story, there is no canon.

No one's ending invalidates anyone else's.  So why can't we have more options in how to end it? 

For exactly the reasons I've said already. The whole reason a sad ending works in any narrative artform is that you don't have a choice in it. Would Half Life 2: Episode 2 been anywhere near as sad if you had an option to play well and prevent Eli's death? Would the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet work in any way if it was in a Choose Your Own Adventure format and the other options led to them living happy ever after? Tragedy depends on us experiencing emotions we don't want to; if you can just go back and do it again so that it doesn't happen, you effectively have a free off-switch for those emotions. Do you see the point?

Yes, all paths must lead to a tragic conclusion. Because it is a tragedy. Maybe you should get the word "tragedy" out of your head. It doesn't have to be a tragedy.

[BlacJAC74]

I saved Wrex and as such i want my Shep to survive for the next 50,000 years, so he and his LI can defeat the reapers twice over. He's that good!

My choices, like saving wrex and defeating Saren should make me immune to bullets and death itself.

Modifié par BlacJAC74, 30 mars 2012 - 11:19 .

[JBONE27]

The Razman wrote...

Heather Cline wrote...

You're going around in circles Razman. I put forth a logical argument to your accusation that having a happy ending precludes the sad ending. I proved to you that a game can have multiple different endings ranging from sad to happy. I proved that you can have both and not have one preclude the other.

Fact is you're argument of 'find me an article' is meaningless. You have nothing to prove that a game can have multiple endings and have a range from sad to happy that the happy precludes the sad.

No, you simply said "It can happen ... Dragon Age: Origins did it!"

Dragon Age: Origins tried it, and failed to create an ending with any significant emotional impact. When I have time I'll go find some links to show you if you want how basically all of the saddest moments in video-game history depend on you not having an alternative option to prevent them, from Aerith's death in Final Fantasy VII to the end of Red Dead Redemption, to Eli Vance's death in HL2:EP2. But for now ... you need to understand that your argument is centred around Dragon Age: Origins, and when I ask for you to provide an article, I'm trying to show you that your lack of ability to provide one is evidence that Dragon Age: Origins is an example of it failing, not that it's evidence to the contrary.

Please, you need to provide me with an article which proves that wrong, otherwise you have no argument. And we're wasting our time here.

Maybe I'm just sick, but I actually cheered when Aerith died.  I hated that girl.  As for the others, Red Dead Redemtion's ending bored me, and I've never played HL2:EP2.