650 réponses à ce sujet

[Nightwriter]

LordCrux wrote...

If ME3's ending isn't meaningful to you, what other ending would you have preferred? A happy ending? An incompetent Shepard ending? Presenting either one of those diminishes the bitter sweet one. And if you want a different bittersweet ending, how different can it be? In the end, what you're really saying is you want variety because you expected variety.

But what you don't seem to understand is that variety is just a symptom of what I actually wanted, and not the end goal.

The end goal -- what I really wanted -- is the opportunity to define my game experience, as I have defined it in every moment up until now.

The final game choice isn't one I own. The Catalyst lets me pick an option from three choices it deigns to give me. They all lead to roughly the same icky outcome.

LordCrux wrote...

Metagaming is a constant in all games that offer player choice and choice consequence. It seems like you are saying, "BioWare needed to take freedom of choice away from the player in order to prevent metagaming."

The developer is not obligated to scotchgard the game against metagaming. Whether or not you want to metagame or roleplay has always been the player's affair.

And that's exactly why the ending is made to be deliberately open to self-interpretation.

I think you are confusing "open to self-interpretation" with "upsetting and nonsensical." I cannot "interpret" that my Shepard lived. I cannot "interpret" that the mass relays were not destroyed.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 31 mars 2012 - 06:41 .

[Suspire]

The "rainbows and butterflies" words again. Why yes, everyone survives, Mordin raises from the dead, so does Bailey, Aria, and everyone who was on the Citadel, then, we give a massive group hug at the same time, the god child distributes candy for everyone, Shepard and Garrus proceed to adopt him. Then we have a wedding, Garrus takes Shep on robot unicorn that poos rainbows and we fly away to a rebuilt earth. That's precisely what I want.

Modifié par Suspire, 31 mars 2012 - 06:50 .

[JBONE27]

Suspire wrote...

The "rainbows and butterflies" words again. Why yes, everyone survives, Mordin raises from the dead, so does Bailey, Aria, and everyone who was on the Citadel, then, we give a massive group hug at the same time, the god child distributes candy for everyone, Shepard and Garrus proceed to adopt him. Then we have a wedding, Garrus takes Shep on robot unicorn that poos rainbows and we fly away to a rebuilt earth. That's precisely what I want.

There are too few robot unicorns in the ME series.

[Suspire]

iakus wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

I'm sorry, but you're making no sense.  People will try to get the endings they want.  Many will want the happy ending (which is actually rather bittersweet because of everything that has happened in the game), others will want a so so ending (I know I intentionally killed off charaters I didn't like), and still others want the darkest possible ending.  It's not a zero sum thing.  People will chose what they like if given the oppertunity.

Things are formulaic because they work.  The ending we have now is completely non-formulatic, and it makes absoluetely no sense.

There's a reason why the "Shepard breathes" ending is considered the "best" ending to get by many players...

Yet you can have the worst ending. Are you saying no one does? I played paragon, I loved EDI and the geth, I had enough for the most difficult ending (synthesis) yet I chose destroy. I hate it, but it made slightly more sense for me than to pick synthesis or control.

[Nightwriter]

I refuse to adopt him.

Furthermore I am confident the Sorting Hat would Sort him into Slytherin.

I refuse to adopt Slytherins. Refuse.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 31 mars 2012 - 06:54 .

[Festae]

It would be awesome with Mass Effect series culimanting in Shepard receiving a "Happy Ending". It would better explain DNA synthesis.

[Suspire]

JBONE27 wrote...

Suspire wrote...

The "rainbows and butterflies" words again. Why yes, everyone survives, Mordin raises from the dead, so does Bailey, Aria, and everyone who was on the Citadel, then, we give a massive group hug at the same time, the god child distributes candy for everyone, Shepard and Garrus proceed to adopt him. Then we have a wedding, Garrus takes Shep on robot unicorn that poos rainbows and we fly away to a rebuilt earth. That's precisely what I want.

There are too few robot unicorns in the ME series.

I forgot the song has to be .....has to be...... "Always, I wanna be with you / And make believe with you / And live in harmony, harmony, oh love"

[LordCrux]

Nightwriter wrote...

LordCrux wrote...

If ME3's ending isn't meaningful to you, what other ending would you have preferred? A happy ending? An incompetent Shepard ending? Presenting either one of those diminishes the bitter sweet one. And if you want a different bittersweet ending, how different can it be? In the end, what you're really saying is you want variety because you expected variety.

But what you don't seem to understand is that variety is just a symptom of what I actually wanted, and not the end goal.

The end goal -- what I really wanted -- is the opportunity to define my game experience, as I have defined it in every moment up until now.

The final game choice isn't one I own. The Catalyst lets me pick an option from three choices it deigns to give me. They all lead to roughly the same icky outcome.

Again, what outcome do you want? I can post all the possible scenarios, and you can pick the one you like:

a) Everybody lives, everybody is happy
Some people die, some people live
c) Everybody dies, reapers win

If I'm missing an option here, feel free to post it. 

LordCrux wrote...

Metagaming is a constant in all games that offer player choice and choice consequence. It seems like you are saying, "BioWare needed to take freedom of choice away from the player in order to prevent metagaming."

The developer is not obligated to scotchgard the game against metagaming. Whether or not you want to metagame or roleplay has always been the player's affair.

And that's exactly why the ending is made to be deliberately open to self-interpretation.

I think you are confusing "open to self-interpretation" with "upsetting and nonsensical." I cannot "interpret" that my Shepard lived. I cannot "interpret" that the mass relays were not destroyed.

In other words, you want ending a) but unfortunately it isn't good storyteling. I'm sure there are a few dozen people out there who wishes that Shepard does the "it was all a dream" ending, or that Shepard goes back in time, but do you consider them to be viable endings? Should those endings be included as well? At what point does a storyteller say "no" to a branch because it undermines an overaching theme?

Modifié par LordCrux, 31 mars 2012 - 07:00 .

[JBONE27]

LordCrux wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

LordCrux wrote...

If ME3's ending isn't meaningful to you, what other ending would you have preferred? A happy ending? An incompetent Shepard ending? Presenting either one of those diminishes the bitter sweet one. And if you want a different bittersweet ending, how different can it be? In the end, what you're really saying is you want variety because you expected variety.

But what you don't seem to understand is that variety is just a symptom of what I actually wanted, and not the end goal.

The end goal -- what I really wanted -- is the opportunity to define my game experience, as I have defined it in every moment up until now.

The final game choice isn't one I own. The Catalyst lets me pick an option from three choices it deigns to give me. They all lead to roughly the same icky outcome.

Again, what outcome do you want? I can post all the possible scenarios, and you can pick the one you like:

a) Everybody lives, everybody is happy
Some people die, some people live
c) Everybody dies, reapers win

If I'm missing an option here, feel free to post it. 

LordCrux wrote...

Metagaming is a constant in all games that offer player choice and choice consequence. It seems like you are saying, "BioWare needed to take freedom of choice away from the player in order to prevent metagaming."

The developer is not obligated to scotchgard the game against metagaming. Whether or not you want to metagame or roleplay has always been the player's affair.

And that's exactly why the ending is made to be deliberately open to self-interpretation.

I think you are confusing "open to self-interpretation" with "upsetting and nonsensical." I cannot "interpret" that my Shepard lived. I cannot "interpret" that the mass relays were not destroyed.

In other words, you want ending a) but unfortunately it isn't good storyteling. I'm sure there are a few dozen people out there who wishes that Shepard does the "it was all a dream" ending, or that Shepard goes back in time, but do you consider them to be viable endings? Should those endings be included as well? At what point does a storyteller say "no" to a branch because it undermines an overaching theme?

You forgot, everyone dies and the reapers lose.
Also, what makes you think that just because they're alive they're happy?  Their families are baiscally all dead.  Their homes have been destroyed.  Many of their friends are dead.  They're probably going to be suffering from severe PTSD.  They're not happy, they're just survivors.

Modifié par JBONE27, 31 mars 2012 - 07:03 .

[TacDavey]

Han Shot First wrote...

iakus wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

This is why if Bioware were to add new endings, and assuming one of those was an 'everyone lives' ending, it should be paired with a less than ideal outcome as far as the fate of the galaxy goes. You succeed in saving your squad, but don't save every homeworld. The ending where every homeworld was saved would result in the squad taking casualties, and possibly Shepard dying as well.

I still don't see anyone seriously advocating an "everyone lives" ending.

Apparently they are, as whenever I post that I think there should be some deaths in the ending I get called a nihilist, accused of liking the existing endings (even though I don't), or asked what is wrong with happy endings, despite wanting a happy ending myself.

My definition of a happy ending however is one in which Shepard succeeds in his mission of destroying the Reapers and saving the galaxy. If people die achieving that goal, it doesn't make the outcome any less happy.

But people can and already have died. Your only response to this so far hads been "But those people weren't actually able to come on missions with you this game", which, 1) isn't true, as both Tali and Ashley/Kaiden are team members who can both die, and 2) completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter that these people technically can't be selected for mission's leaving the Normany. They are still your friends/comrades who you have been through hell with.

[Suspire]

Nightwriter wrote...

I refuse to adopt him.

Furthermore I am confident the Sorting Hat would Sort him into Slytherin.

I refuse to adopt Slytherins. Refuse.

Too bad, we demand complete understanding and harmony for the ending with everyone, also revive Sole Survivor's Shep's team from Akuze with space magic, and so your ending is gonna have to get ruined and you will not have a dialogue choice to adopt him or not. (it would ruin my happy ending)

Modifié par Suspire, 31 mars 2012 - 07:03 .

[Han Shot First]

TacDavey wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

iakus wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

This is why if Bioware were to add new endings, and assuming one of those was an 'everyone lives' ending, it should be paired with a less than ideal outcome as far as the fate of the galaxy goes. You succeed in saving your squad, but don't save every homeworld. The ending where every homeworld was saved would result in the squad taking casualties, and possibly Shepard dying as well.

I still don't see anyone seriously advocating an "everyone lives" ending.

Apparently they are, as whenever I post that I think there should be some deaths in the ending I get called a nihilist, accused of liking the existing endings (even though I don't), or asked what is wrong with happy endings, despite wanting a happy ending myself.

My definition of a happy ending however is one in which Shepard succeeds in his mission of destroying the Reapers and saving the galaxy. If people die achieving that goal, it doesn't make the outcome any less happy.

But people can and already have died. Your only response to this so far hads been "But those people weren't actually able to come on missions with you this game", which, 1) isn't true, as both Tali and Ashley/Kaiden are team members who can both die, and 2) completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter that these people technically can't be selected for mission's leaving the Normany. They are still your friends/comrades who you have been through hell with.

Tali & Ashley can die, but only if Shepard makes blunders. In that respect it is more like the Mass Effect 2 suicide mission, where it is fairly easy to get everyone through unscathed, and people only die if Shepard makes mistakes. Having characters die at the expense of the main character looking incompetent sort of sucks all the emotional impact right out of the scene.

Likewise having an end game where everyone lives clashes thematically with the rest of the game. Quite frankly, Bioware would be knowlingly inserting bad storytelling as fan service. The best possible ending as far as the fate of the galaxy goes, should require some sacrifice.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 31 mars 2012 - 07:13 .

[Nightwriter]

LordCrux wrote...

Again, what outcome do you want? I can post all the possible scenarios, and you can pick the one you like:

a) Everybody lives, everybody is happy
Some people die, some people live
c) Everybody dies, reapers win

If I'm missing an option here, feel free to post it.

I thought we were talking about the concept of wanting variety for the sake of variety, not what I personally wanted in the ending.

I think option a) is pretty much impossible. Millions of people have already died.

LordCrux wrote...

In other words, you want ending a) but unfortunately it isn't good storyteling. I'm sure there are a few dozen people out there who wishes that Shepard does the "it was all a dream" ending, or that Shepard goes back in time, but do you consider them to be viable endings? Should those endings be included as well? At what point does a storyteller say "no" to a branch because it undermines an overaching theme?

Having a hopeful ending would be perfectly in keeping with the way ME1 and ME2 are able to end. It undermines nothing. It does the opposite of undermine, actually; it plays on and strengthens an existing theme.

IT is nothing more than a desperate attempt by fans to pretend the ending didn't happen.

Going back in time is also ridiculous.

[LordCrux]

JBONE27 wrote...
You forgot, everyone dies and the reapers lose.
Also, what makes you think that just because they're alive they're happy?  Their families are baiscally all dead.  Their homes have been destroyed.  Many of their friends are dead.  They're probably going to be suffering from severe PTSD.  They're not happy, they're just survivors.

What you're missing is that Shepard essentially had the power of a god in his hands, so if there was an ending where the main character lives, then the rest of the galaxy would never learn the lesson to rise above their current level of maturity, and essentially the entire galaxy will destroy itself if the machines can't. The name Shepard given is not by coincidence. There is an overarching theme since the very beginning of the series, and whatever ending has been decided, it must be relevant to that theme.

[agathokakological]

MaestroX101 wrote...

Wait, so Bioware told you exactly what the ending would be? Wouldn't that be like...spoiling the game?

Hope you're trolling. Bioware made a list of things you can expect from the product. This is advertising. People buy products based on these advertisements. Specifically, Bioware advertised that their endings would be highly diversified, and that there would be 16 distinct endings, with even more variables taken into account within those endings. This was not the case.

If the advertisements for a product turn out to be blatant lies, the consumers have a right to demand for their product to be altered to fit what is advertised, demand a refund, or both, depending on the kind of product it is. That is all that is happening. We are entitled to the product we paid for.

[Nightwriter]

Suspire wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I refuse to adopt him.

Furthermore I am confident the Sorting Hat would Sort him into Slytherin.

I refuse to adopt Slytherins. Refuse.

Too bad, we demand complete understanding and harmony for the ending with everyone, also revive Sole Survivor's Shep's team from Akuze with space magic, and so your ending is gonna have to get ruined and you will not have a dialogue choice to adopt him or not. (it would ruin my happy ending)

My perfect ending involves the goddler's annihilation. I need to kill him.

You want me to be happy, don't you?

He ruined my endings, stole my car keys, and I'm pretty sure he is what's causing global warming and the abominable chips-to-air ratio I'm seeing in my potato chip bags.

This is what happens when you allow Slytherins even fourteen lines of dialogue in your videogame.

To kill him, I'll need to find his horcruxes. Who knows where the little bastard hid them.

Modifié par Nightwriter, 31 mars 2012 - 07:18 .

[AntiChri5]

Probably inside different Reapers.

[Suspire]

LordCrux wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...
You forgot, everyone dies and the reapers lose.
Also, what makes you think that just because they're alive they're happy?  Their families are baiscally all dead.  Their homes have been destroyed.  Many of their friends are dead.  They're probably going to be suffering from severe PTSD.  They're not happy, they're just survivors.

What you're missing is that Shepard essentially had the power of a god in his hands, so if there was an ending where the main character lives, then the rest of the galaxy would never learn the lesson to rise above their current level of maturity, and essentially the entire galaxy will destroy itself if the machines can't. The name Shepard given is not by coincidence. There is an overarching theme since the very beginning of the series, and whatever ending has been decided, it must be relevant to that theme.

I don't think anyone agrees with what the theme is. I know for me it's more like "take no bull**** for an answer, there's always another option, against all odds, there's no impossible, I'll show you, we can do this"

[JBONE27]

LordCrux wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...
You forgot, everyone dies and the reapers lose.
Also, what makes you think that just because they're alive they're happy?  Their families are baiscally all dead.  Their homes have been destroyed.  Many of their friends are dead.  They're probably going to be suffering from severe PTSD.  They're not happy, they're just survivors.

What you're missing is that Shepard essentially had the power of a god in his hands, so if there was an ending where the main character lives, then the rest of the galaxy would never learn the lesson to rise above their current level of maturity, and essentially the entire galaxy will destroy itself if the machines can't. The name Shepard given is not by coincidence. There is an overarching theme since the very beginning of the series, and whatever ending has been decided, it must be relevant to that theme.

Actually Shepard has a lot less to do with the noun and a lot more to do with Commander Alan Shepard.

Also, that was a random argument from out of nowhere.  I said,
1. There can be a possiblity of everyone dying and the reapers are destroyed (the Yahg end up ruling until the galaxy comes to an end).
2. Even if Shepard and crew are alive, they're not really happy, they just survived.  Maybe some day they'll be happy, but that day would end up being a long ways away.

[Suspire]

Nightwriter wrote...

Suspire wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I refuse to adopt him.

Furthermore I am confident the Sorting Hat would Sort him into Slytherin.

I refuse to adopt Slytherins. Refuse.

Too bad, we demand complete understanding and harmony for the ending with everyone, also revive Sole Survivor's Shep's team from Akuze with space magic, and so your ending is gonna have to get ruined and you will not have a dialogue choice to adopt him or not. (it would ruin my happy ending)

My perfect ending involves the goddler's annihilation. I need to kill him.

You want me to be happy, don't you?

He ruined my endings, stole my car keys, and I'm pretty sure he is what's causing global warming and the abominable chips-to-air ratio I'm seeing in my potato chip bags.

This is what happens when you allow Slytherins even fourteen lines of dialogue in your videogame.

To kill him, I'll need to find his horcruxes. Who knows where the little bastard hid them.

But you see if you get your ending, I can't get my ending. Because obviously if I could have the option to not adopt him like my dream, I'd want that ending too, cause he's evil, slytheryn and all. Sure, I could just adopt him in the options, but I'd have to essentialy metagame and ...whoa... roleplay! And I could not live knowing I could have chosen not to adopt him. It would be a failure for my Shep, and I need to win the game.
I can't let you ruin that. Have a puppy?

[LordCrux]

Suspire wrote...

LordCrux wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...
You forgot, everyone dies and the reapers lose.
Also, what makes you think that just because they're alive they're happy?  Their families are baiscally all dead.  Their homes have been destroyed.  Many of their friends are dead.  They're probably going to be suffering from severe PTSD.  They're not happy, they're just survivors.

What you're missing is that Shepard essentially had the power of a god in his hands, so if there was an ending where the main character lives, then the rest of the galaxy would never learn the lesson to rise above their current level of maturity, and essentially the entire galaxy will destroy itself if the machines can't. The name Shepard given is not by coincidence. There is an overarching theme since the very beginning of the series, and whatever ending has been decided, it must be relevant to that theme.

I don't think anyone agrees with what the theme is. I know for me it's more like "take no bull**** for an answer, there's always another option, against all odds, there's no impossible, I'll show you, we can do this"

I'm pretty sure the overarching theme for Mass Effect 1 2 &3 has always been about technological singularity, where the advancement of intelligent life is at a critical point. What is the next step if life? Do highly advanced intelligent beings still having things like greed and corruption? Can life evolve beyond material wealth? Is there such a thing as utopia and intellectual enlightenment? You deal with this throughout the entire series, it's sci-fi. The theme is not about 'kicking ass" but about how those grandiose debates relate to very personal and emotional feelings, and it carries through the different people you meet along the way. You define that experience through the choices you make, but ultimately there will be a choice where there is no win-win situation. And while facing your own mortality at the very end, you reflect on the decisions you've made. That what I get out of it. So for me, the open-ended (and unavoidable) climax makes sense for me on many different levels.

[Nightwriter]

Suspire wrote...

But you see if you get your ending, I can't get my ending. Because obviously if I could have the option to not adopt him like my dream, I'd want that ending too, cause he's evil, slytheryn and all. Sure, I could just adopt him in the options, but I'd have to essentialy metagame and ...whoa... roleplay! And I could not live knowing I could have chosen not to adopt him. It would be a failure for my Shep, and I need to win the game.
I can't let you ruin that. Have a puppy?

See, you're ignoring the real issue here, which is that it is objectively impossible for anyone to not hate the goddler. So you realize what this means.

I am talking, of course, about the fact that you have been indoctrinated. There is no puppy, and this entire exchange is happening in your head as you struggle against the goddler's mind control attempts. I must represent the part of you that knows the goddler is an evil liar and is trying to save you from his deceptions.

[Suspire]

LordCrux wrote...

Suspire wrote...

LordCrux wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...
You forgot, everyone dies and the reapers lose.
Also, what makes you think that just because they're alive they're happy?  Their families are baiscally all dead.  Their homes have been destroyed.  Many of their friends are dead.  They're probably going to be suffering from severe PTSD.  They're not happy, they're just survivors.

What you're missing is that Shepard essentially had the power of a god in his hands, so if there was an ending where the main character lives, then the rest of the galaxy would never learn the lesson to rise above their current level of maturity, and essentially the entire galaxy will destroy itself if the machines can't. The name Shepard given is not by coincidence. There is an overarching theme since the very beginning of the series, and whatever ending has been decided, it must be relevant to that theme.

I don't think anyone agrees with what the theme is. I know for me it's more like "take no bull**** for an answer, there's always another option, against all odds, there's no impossible, I'll show you, we can do this"

I'm pretty sure the overarching theme for Mass Effect 1 2 &3 has always been about technological singularity, where the advancement of intelligent life is at a critical point. What is the next step if life? Do highly advanced intelligent beings still having things like greed and corruption? Can life evolve beyond material wealth? Is there such a thing as utopia and intellectual enlightenment? You deal with this throughout the entire series, it's sci-fi. The theme is not about 'kicking ass" but about how those grandiose debates relate to very personal and emotional feelings, and it carries through the different people you meet along the way. You define that experience through the choices you make, but ultimately there will be a choice where there is no win-win situation. And while facing your own mortality at the very end, you reflect on the decisions you've made. That what I get out of it. So for me, the open-ended (and unavoidable) climax makes sense for me on many different levels.

You being pretty sure does not make it so that all endings must be sad, as much as you want to call my description "kick ass". To me it's still much more basic than AI life. It's the parts you mention "personal" but only connected to AI for some characters/geth. It's much more about humanity (in all races) and choice (and persisting when no one believes in you, not letting fear win, not accepting defeat etc). The idea of AI life is there, sure, but the very fact ME can't even hold their own world building in place, contradicting their own stablished technologies, never made it "serious" sci-fi for me.  And it's been done before in much better ways, to matter for me. Hell even the movie AI.
This discussion should be proof enough that optional different endings would benefit everyone. But no, grimdarkers don't want anyone else to be satisfied.

ps: oh and I have to say

LordCrux wrote...

Again, what outcome do you want? I can post all the possible scenarios, and you can pick the one you like:

a) Everybody lives, everybody is happy
Some people die, some people live
c) Everybody dies, reapers win

If I'm missing an option here, feel free to post it.

ALL 3 POSSIBLE? Sir, I am impressed.

Modifié par Suspire, 31 mars 2012 - 08:18 .

[JBONE27]

LordCrux wrote...

Suspire wrote...

LordCrux wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...
You forgot, everyone dies and the reapers lose.
Also, what makes you think that just because they're alive they're happy?  Their families are baiscally all dead.  Their homes have been destroyed.  Many of their friends are dead.  They're probably going to be suffering from severe PTSD.  They're not happy, they're just survivors.

What you're missing is that Shepard essentially had the power of a god in his hands, so if there was an ending where the main character lives, then the rest of the galaxy would never learn the lesson to rise above their current level of maturity, and essentially the entire galaxy will destroy itself if the machines can't. The name Shepard given is not by coincidence. There is an overarching theme since the very beginning of the series, and whatever ending has been decided, it must be relevant to that theme.

I don't think anyone agrees with what the theme is. I know for me it's more like "take no bull**** for an answer, there's always another option, against all odds, there's no impossible, I'll show you, we can do this"

I'm pretty sure the overarching theme for Mass Effect 1 2 &3 has always been about technological singularity, where the advancement of intelligent life is at a critical point. What is the next step if life? Do highly advanced intelligent beings still having things like greed and corruption? Can life evolve beyond material wealth? Is there such a thing as utopia and intellectual enlightenment? You deal with this throughout the entire series, it's sci-fi. The theme is not about 'kicking ass" but about how those grandiose debates relate to very personal and emotional feelings, and it carries through the different people you meet along the way. You define that experience through the choices you make, but ultimately there will be a choice where there is no win-win situation. And while facing your own mortality at the very end, you reflect on the decisions you've made. That what I get out of it. So for me, the open-ended (and unavoidable) climax makes sense for me on many different levels.

All of this would be great if the ending actually made any sense.  I think you're missing the fact that it isn't really openended, emotionally gratifying, logical, or fitting with the overall tone, themes, or style of the trillogy.  It's all just nonsensical space magic.

You probably prefered the second Matrix movie to the first, because the second was all about philosophy and occasional fights, whereas the first was about being a fun comicbook style movie.

Modifié par JBONE27, 31 mars 2012 - 08:00 .

[Suspire]

Nightwriter wrote...

Suspire wrote...

But you see if you get your ending, I can't get my ending. Because obviously if I could have the option to not adopt him like my dream, I'd want that ending too, cause he's evil, slytheryn and all. Sure, I could just adopt him in the options, but I'd have to essentialy metagame and ...whoa... roleplay! And I could not live knowing I could have chosen not to adopt him. It would be a failure for my Shep, and I need to win the game.
I can't let you ruin that. Have a puppy?

See, you're ignoring the real issue here, which is that it is objectively impossible for anyone to not hate the goddler. So you realize what this means.

I am talking, of course, about the fact that you have been indoctrinated. There is no puppy, and this entire exchange is happening in your head as you struggle against the goddler's mind control attempts. I must represent the part of you that knows the goddler is an evil liar and is trying to save you from his deceptions.

You can't trick me with your evil, but saving ways, goddler. Don't you see I'm actually happy Shepard trying to get my perfect happy ending and see my wedding ceremony where I have the Rachni as my bridesmaid? I will just hit the button to transform everything into butterflies and rainbows! Because that's what happy means! And this time they will have all the colors in the world.

I do "have to go" though.

Modifié par Suspire, 31 mars 2012 - 08:09 .