494 réponses à ce sujet

[Velocithon]

edit: woops wrong quote lol 

Modifié par Velocithon, 31 mars 2012 - 07:56 .

[Quietness]

Reverse Centaur wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Hexley UK wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

I'm glad people on this forum are able to have differing opinions. Oh wait....

Yea the problem with that is when 95% hate the ending and only 5% like it your not gonna see much "differing opinions".

So because the majority dislikes something someone who disagrees is wrong and must be purged by verbal diarrhea? 

It's not really the majority, just the majority on Bioware forums. The cult just enjoys making a lot of noise because things didn't turn out how they preferred.

Math Please with EA given stats on sales figures including returns/refunds and trade-ins. Please also include the silent portion and how they actually divide up, and not simply "they like the ending cause they didnt say they dont like the ending"

[humes spork]

The Angry One wrote...

You may be right, I'd further say that they refuse to think about it, because when you actually think about the ending the cracks appear and overwhelm any symbolism the writers were apparently going for.
Many pro-enders have debated end up presenting their headcanon as fact, which is what leads me to this conclusion, they take the basic concept (Shepard sacrifices their life to stop the Reapers) and make up their own ending from that.

Actually, I can only speak for myself, but I'm an ME afficionado. I have the novels and comics, diligently followed along the whole way, have seven Shepards straight through to the end of ME2 only two of which have completed ME3 so far being on my third, spent hours codex- and wiki-delving, and debated the game with lots of other people fans or not.

I liked the ending. I have no compunctions against and freely admit the ending is not without numerous problems, but I understand and feel the ending is in fact thematically-appropriate and sensible.

What I do have a problem with are people declaring their opinion to be objective fact.

[CDHarrisUSF]

Tazzmission wrote...

video games are art if you take the time to look it up dude

your only saying it isnt because of the ending and you know it

i think its really funny that the da2 crowd as mad as they were never went this far and said games arent art

I posit that games are art, but this does not support your point. "Art" is not bulletproof armor against criticism and ridicule. The artist has goals in mind when creating a piece of art. This means art can fail. If the vast majority do not respond in the desired fashion, the obvious conclusion is that the artist failed to demonstrate an understanding of either the medium itself or the intended audience (both equally important). The artist can arrogantly choose to ignore all of the criticism by claiming that they just couldn't comprehend his genius if he wants, but doing so can create a dangerous bias in the feedback loop which leads to the artist becoming more and more out of touch with reality. It's also not a good idea if you plan on making a career out of your "art."

M Night Shyamalan's career is a good example of what not to do. His career shot up seemingly out of nowhere with The Sixth Sense. Some people in the media hailed him as a creative genius. Then, he let the praise go to his head. After the initial success, he got to do pretty much whatever he wanted without people second-guessing his artistic decisions. When the next couple of movies didn't go over as well with critics and fans, rather than recognizing that having people around to push back against your bad ideas might be helpful... he continued to ignore criticism and surround himself with yes-men. Each movie since then has been getting steadily worse than the one before it. His statements during the controversy surrounding the casting and production of The Last Airbender showed just how out of touch and pretentious he had become.

[T-0pel]

Ok I will go play some ME multiplayer. People on these forums just ignore me :-D Either my arguments are so good that they dont no how to respond or I they just sound so retarded they wont even bother to answer :-D

Bye

[The Angry One]

In the end it boils down to this. Mass Effect is about our characters.
If you feel the current endings befit your characters and you don't care about the minutae, fine.
However, I do and the endings don't fit my character. So I want an ending that does.

In the end this shouldn't impact on your endings, just give us more options. So these debates are ultimately pointless.

[Wolven_Soul]

Ravenmyste wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

why dont you make a thread on it and not hijack ops thread?

Stop evading my points. OP and others here state the ending is solid and stands up on his own.
Whenever I ask for specific details as to your reasoning you don't respond.

If you "get it" and we don't it should be easy to explain in a logical uncounterable fashion, no?

you question would open another attack  since you would just ignore it and continue you trolling on the ones that understood it.
 as for the Normandy scene  i can only think that  hackett ordered  everyone that could get way into FTL the ones that are stranded may not be the only once that was in FTL when it collapsed

So because someone disagrees with you and posts his or her reasons why it is automatically an attack?

[Zan_Vaelius]

The Angry One wrote...

Zan_Vaelius wrote...

Couple of the pages back I made a response to that.
Essentially according to Semiotics getting the story is an individual thing based on our background ie. stories we read, our life situation, history, personal expectation etc. The best example here would be "Waiting for Godot" which is essentially a story about nothing. Everybody interprets it his own personal way which he gets and others maybe do and maybe do not. There was an experiment made that they played Waiting for Godot to a bunch of prisoners who interpretted is a story about prisoners waiting for their sentences to end. 
In other words there is no right or wrong way of getting a story, though sometimes misinterpretation are possible.

Mass Effect has never been a story left open to interpretation, so if you believe that ME3's ending is such (I don't believe it is, it is just badly put together) then it has failed.

Every story is open to interpretation, it's just there is sometimes no hidden meaning there. To use another example, the book with poisoned pages from "The Name of the Rose" by U. Eco. Many people saw it as things like a symbol of evil that lies within mankind, or poisonous knowledge etc. However it turned out that Eco simply once saw a moldy book in his attic and the idea kinda stuck in his head.

EDIT: A stupid mistake 

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

[Wolven_Soul]

Evil Minion wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

I see a lot of anti-enders asking the pro-enders "What did you like and what did you 'get' about the ending?" And I've yet to see a single answer to that question. I wonder why we, the anti-enders, think you're trolling?

or maybe you know the anti enders just dont like what the pro enders have to say because no matter what is said we are told we are wrong


thats a fact and you know it

i have given multiple explinations myself and you know what? same crap everyday by the vocal crowd


they can insult people so much before people get tired of it 

But you haven't said anything except to repeat what is in this quoted post here.  You're also coming across very arrogant.  When people are asking, repeatedly, for what it is you like and "get", instead of saying "you wouldn't understand" like some hipster, perhaps you should try to explain it.

*double sigh*

There was nothing to "get." He interpretted the same events differently than you did.

Saying someone else didn't "get it" is merely a bad choice of words.

That is what he said, but there are plenty of other people out there who are saying that us retakers don't get it.  The OP is okay in my book, he corrected himself adequately.  There are still a lot of people though who like to claim that we just don't get it.

Even if there was something to get, no pro ender will ever be able to explain why Bioware advertised something they did not deliver on.

[Evil Minion]

No one is wanting to to "prove" the ending is good. What is being exspected of you is to provide premises which support your conclusion of the ending being good. Just as I can provide you with reasons to support my conclusion of the ending being bad. It's like, Philosophy 101- arguments. Come on guys, you seem intelligent enough. Stop trying to avoid explaining yourselves. I'm legitimitely curious as to the reasons why someone thinks it is good. If anyone sent me a PM explaining yourself that would be much appreciated

Well, I don't know if it's objectively "good," but I can tell you why I thought it was okay (and I can even point out areas I thought weren't so okay).

Long story short:

1. I "liked" it because I actually enjoy ambiguous endings (although I don't think they work very well in video games, which is why I understand that others don't care for it).

2. Many of the things other people see as "plotholes," I do not see as plotholes.

3. I predicted most of the endings way back in ME2.

4. Being a scifi nerd, I couldn't help but noticed the similarities between the ME universe and other well-known scifi sagas; therefore, I drew parallels between other plots I knew and what happened, in ME3, so it made "sense" to me (Ghostdweeb and The Borg Queen are very similar).

5. I suspect that the endings were designed to induce the same feelings of sadness, frustration, and insignificance that Shepard was feeling at that moment and, in that, is quite clever in its manipulation.

Anyway, that's my short answer.

Again, I mean absolutely no disrespect towards the anti-enders.

[Bob3terd]

Evil Minion wrote...


That's "evidence" of someone's subjective interpretation of the ending.

I can do the same thing in my British literature class when writting a paper on Shakespeare.

But it's still just a subjective interpretation.

Where's the empirical, scientific evidence that objectively "proves" the endings were "bad?" What are the measurable, physical properties of "badness?"

Cut it down to make it easier to read.
Science as im sure your aware is simply the catagorisation of knowledge through testable blah blah etc, and as such is not somthing your gunna get when talking about literature, video games etc.

However this doesn't mean that you cant be objective about why the endings are bad /unstatisfactory for some people e.g:
The use of diabolus ex machina (harbingers beam), Deus ex machina (sky kid).
Lack of resolution of important plot threads, normandy crew and squadmates, dark energy/haestrom's sun. Unintetionally bad resolution of the reapers motivations somthing in my view (subjective) should have remained ambigous, but alas was answered in a poor maner in that the reapers moved from beings of unknowable motivation and therefor somthing to be fearful of, to somthing pitiful and idiotic.

Not all opinions are subjective even on matters such as this, i suggest looking up "The hero with a thousand faces" by Jospeh Campbell or simply google "the hero's journey" it is essentialy a narrative pattern used to provide a psychologically satisfying story, mass effect 1 and 2 follows this. Mass effect 3 follows it up to the second to last act and as such can be used objectivly to explain why the endings failed to satisfy so many people.

Modifié par Bob3terd, 31 mars 2012 - 08:07 .

[Shaigunjoe]

Wolven_Soul wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

Caz Tirin wrote...

I see a lot of anti-enders asking the pro-enders "What did you like and what did you 'get' about the ending?" And I've yet to see a single answer to that question. I wonder why we, the anti-enders, think you're trolling?

or maybe you know the anti enders just dont like what the pro enders have to say because no matter what is said we are told we are wrong


thats a fact and you know it

i have given multiple explinations myself and you know what? same crap everyday by the vocal crowd


they can insult people so much before people get tired of it 

But you haven't said anything except to repeat what is in this quoted post here.  You're also coming across very arrogant.  When people are asking, repeatedly, for what it is you like and "get", instead of saying "you wouldn't understand" like some hipster, perhaps you should try to explain it.

*double sigh*

There was nothing to "get." He interpretted the same events differently than you did.

Saying someone else didn't "get it" is merely a bad choice of words.

That is what he said, but there are plenty of other people out there who are saying that us retakers don't get it.  The OP is okay in my book, he corrected himself adequately.  There are still a lot of people though who like to claim that we just don't get it.

Even if there was something to get, no pro ender will ever be able to explain why Bioware advertised something they did not deliver on.

My biggest problem is that I get so tired of the complaint, 'nobody explains why they like it'.  That couldn't be a more inaccurate statement.  Just search the forums, myself and others have typed plenty on why we like the endings, why it made sense.

Even if there was something to get, no pro ender will ever be able to
explain why Bioware advertised something they did not deliver on.

 
I get tired of this too, its like nobody has never heard of a PR hype machine, I haven't believed any kind of pre release PR bull**** since fable 1.  Hopefully, at this point, you won't either.

Modifié par Shaigunjoe, 31 mars 2012 - 08:03 .

[Wolven_Soul]

Evil Minion wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

*sigh*

It's a matter of taste. If I liked Shakespeare and you didn't, would you want me to "prove" that I liked it and to provide evidence that it was "good?"

Any english buff can show you why Shakespeare is brilliant and well loved even if you don't like it. I didn't like a lot of Shakespeare in school but gosh darnit, I respected the man. His writing really was brilliant.

In your opinion.

Many people do not like Shakespeare. You cannot "prove" he was "good."

I disagree.  If someone is talented, it is very obvious.  For instance, I am not a Stephen King fan, don't like his style of writing.  But you will never hear me say he is a bad writer.  The man is amazing, just because I do not like him does not mean that I cannot see it.

[humes spork]

Evil Minion wrote...

4. Being a scifi nerd, I couldn't help but noticed the similarities between the ME universe and other well-known scifi sagas; therefore, I drew parallels between other plots I knew and what happened, in ME3, so it made "sense" to me (Ghostdweeb and The Borg Queen are very similar).

I actually felt starbrat was something of a composite character of similar sci-fi predecessors. It has more relation to HAL 9000, I felt, than something like the Borg Queen.

Then again, Berman and Braga kind of soured my opinion of and taste for the Borg as villains after they felt it necessary to jacknife them into every GD Star Trek work regardless how much sense it made.

[QwibQwibLover]

Bioware calls his main charakter Shepard. He sacrifices himself to the greater good() and at the end the little kid calls Shepard "the" Shepard! Looks like someone wanted a good SciFi game to end like Jesus "frakkin" christ?!
Yeah god has his myster......ahhh frakk you all

[Evil Minion]

Zan_Vaelius wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Zan_Vaelius wrote...

Couple of the pages back I made a response to that.
Essentially according to Semiotics getting the story is an individual thing based on our background ie. stories we read, our life situation, history, personal expectation etc. The best example here would be "Waiting for Godot" which is essentially a story about nothing. Everybody interprets it his own personal way which he gets and others maybe do and maybe do not. There was an experiment made that they played Waiting for Godot to a bunch of prisoners who interpretted is a story about prisoners waiting for their sentences to end. 
In other words there is no right or wrong way of getting a story, though sometimes misinterpretation are possible.

Mass Effect has never been a story left open to interpretation, so if you believe that ME3's ending is such (I don't believe it is, it is just badly put together) then it has failed.

Every story is open to interpretation, it's just there is sometimes no hidden meaning there. To use another example, the book with poisoned pages from "The Name of the Rose" by U. Eco. Many people saw it as things like a symbol of evil that lies within mankind, or poisonous knowledge etc. However it turned out that Eco simply once saw a moldy book in his attic and the idea kinda stuck in his head.

EDIT: A stupid mistake 

Exactly.

But even if the author didn't actually "intend" a meaning, people are still going to "interpret" it how they see it. There's even a line of argument that posits once an artist releases their work into the world, it's no longer the property of the artist, but belongs to the audience, to receive it as they see fit.

Which is kinda what ME had going for it all along.....

[Abraxas Krios]

I really really wish i felt the same as yo. Honestly I want to love bioware, but im not able to accept bad content.

[Babyberry]

Skimming this thread, I wonder if part of the problem with this debate is not everyone has the same background knowledge of how a story is built. I know my particular background knowledge helped lead me to the conclusions I made about the endings (I hate all of them).

This isn't me saying my opinion is more correct than others. It's just a curious problem that I think people are forgetting. Some people don't want to know all about story building and why that is an issue in the endings (this is my opinion!). They also might not know how to articulate why they liked the ending in a way that will satisfy us who didn't like it.

Let's face it-- there are a lot of very well thought out videos and articles that (I feel) clearly explain what makes the endings not work. I've had a hard time finding an article or video that explains to me why the endings are good, past phrases such as "artistic integrity" which is a highly debatable point itself. Pro-Enders are in a tough spot and I think it will always be hard for them to debate their positions until someone takes the time to make a high profile video or article like the ones we have.

I wish someone would take the time though, or post links to posts they feel explain their positions. I honesty love literary based debates but all I've seen is a lot of frustration which leads to name calling and passive aggressive comments.

[Wolven_Soul]

Evil Minion wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

*sigh*

It's a matter of taste. If I liked Shakespeare and you didn't, would you want me to "prove" that I liked it and to provide evidence that it was "good?"

Any english buff can show you why Shakespeare is brilliant and well loved even if you don't like it. I didn't like a lot of Shakespeare in school but gosh darnit, I respected the man. His writing really was brilliant.

In your opinion.

Many people do not like Shakespeare. You cannot "prove" he was "good."

The ending is objectively bad for various reasons we have outlined. This is fact.
You do not get to play the subjective card on an entirely bad piece of writing.

You can choose to like it regardless, and that is subjective. The actual merit of the ending is not.

The ending was not "objectively bad."

There are no "facts" when interpretting art.

Art is subjective. Your opinions are just that: opinions. You may think your opinions are facts because you feel strongly about them, but it still doesn't make them facts.

If there's anything you don't "get," it's apparently the difference between "subjective" and "objective" thought.

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

There you go, a well thought out arguement on why the ending, artistically,  is actually fairly bad.

[Evil Minion]

humes spork wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

4. Being a scifi nerd, I couldn't help but noticed the similarities between the ME universe and other well-known scifi sagas; therefore, I drew parallels between other plots I knew and what happened, in ME3, so it made "sense" to me (Ghostdweeb and The Borg Queen are very similar).

I actually felt starbrat was something of a composite character of similar sci-fi predecessors. It has more relation to HAL 9000, I felt, than something like the Borg Queen.

Then again, Berman and Braga kind of soured my opinion of and taste for the Borg as villains after they felt it necessary to jacknife them into every GD Star Trek work regardless how much sense it made.

I was thinking more along the lines that The Borg were this awesome evil force that wanted to assimilate all organic life, and they couldn't be stopped or reasoned with.....but THEN......we find out that The Borg, who we thought were a collective conscious, were actually being "controlled" by a Queen the entire time.

They never hinted at the fact The Borg were really being governed by one individual in the series, they just threw her out there to give Picard something to yell at in "First Contact."

Modifié par Evil Minion, 31 mars 2012 - 08:09 .

[Caz Tirin]

Evil Minion wrote...
1. I "liked" it because I actually enjoy ambiguous endings (although I don't think they work very well in video games, which is why I understand that others don't care for it).

2. Many of the things other people see as "plotholes," I do not see as plotholes.

3. I predicted most of the endings way back in ME2.

4. Being a scifi nerd, I couldn't help but noticed the similarities between the ME universe and other well-known scifi sagas; therefore, I drew parallels between other plots I knew and what happened, in ME3, so it made "sense" to me (Ghostdweeb and The Borg Queen are very similar).

5. I suspect that the endings were designed to induce the same feelings of sadness, frustration, and insignificance that Shepard was feeling at that moment and, in that, is quite clever in its manipulation.

Anyway, that's my short answer.

Again, I mean absolutely no disrespect towards the anti-enders.

1. Thank you for this.  It's more of an explanation than anyone else has given.  You accept it's ambiguous and you state that is why you like it.  That's one of the main points of the question we've been asking: "What did you 'get' about the ending?"

2.  I'm curious which things you don't see as plotholes.  I was going to give a list of several, but then I realized it might be something else entirely.

5. If that was they're aim, then I agree.  But even if that was their aim, we all spent 2.9 games with the focus being about the choices we made and how that would bring about the salvation of the galaxy (granted that salvation was implied, but it was implied HEAVILY and at every major choice).  At the last minute, Shepard is no longer able to stand up for him/her-self and tell Starbaby "Stick it!  We'll do this our way like we have from the start!" ??

[Shared]

Evil Minion wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

Evil Minion wrote...

*sigh*

It's a matter of taste. If I liked Shakespeare and you didn't, would you want me to "prove" that I liked it and to provide evidence that it was "good?"

Any english buff can show you why Shakespeare is brilliant and well loved even if you don't like it. I didn't like a lot of Shakespeare in school but gosh darnit, I respected the man. His writing really was brilliant.

In your opinion.

Many people do not like Shakespeare. You cannot "prove" he was "good."

The ending is objectively bad for various reasons we have outlined. This is fact.
You do not get to play the subjective card on an entirely bad piece of writing.

You can choose to like it regardless, and that is subjective. The actual merit of the ending is not.

The ending was not "objectively bad."

There are no "facts" when interpretting art.

Art is subjective. Your opinions are just that: opinions. You may think your opinions are facts because you feel strongly about them, but it still doesn't make them facts.

If there's anything you don't "get," it's apparently the difference between "subjective" and "objective" thought.

I can point out one thing about the ending that was objectivly bad, and has nothing what so ever to do with subjectivity. Massive reuse of old textures. That is objectivly bad in any form of video games, and causes human architecture, numbers and letters to appear on a place in the citadel, where "no one has been before". that is something that is objectivly bad.

[RevenantWolf]

http://www.cinemable...izon-40885.html

[Shaigunjoe]

Wolven_Soul wrote...
http://jmstevenson.w...-mass-effect-3/
There you go, a well thought out arguement on why the ending, artistically,  is actually fairly bad.

Please, that old thing?  The author couldn't even realize that ending the reaper cycle was returning with the elixer.

Also, he just presents a forumula, any engineer with half a mind knows the dangers of plugging and chugging.  Not only that, but most artist probably don't think much of adhearing to formula's anyway.

Modifié par Shaigunjoe, 31 mars 2012 - 08:12 .

[lillitheris]

RevenantWolf wrote...

http://www.cinemable...izon-40885.html

Deserves a thread of its own, even though I don't really want to attribute shilling to our discordants.