1291 réponses à ce sujet

[Vhalkyrie]

Omega-202 wrote...

WHAT'S THE ALTERNATIVE?  

Yes, everything is pretty messed up at the end, but if you failed to do what you did then the Reapers would have won.  If you failed to destroy/control/fuse then every human, turian, asari, salarian, krogan, quarian, drell, hanar, elcor, volus, batarian, geth and god damned vorcha would have been assimilated or killed.  

Do you not realize that?  Everyone would be dead.  Everyone.  Dead.  

But instead, Shepard uses the Crucible and galactic society is allowed to continue in some makeshift way.  

In the universe we were given, those were the only options.  You aren't given A or B and then allowed to choose C.  

No.  What Shepard does is called Mutually Assured Destruction.  It is not considered a win by military strategists.  At all.

[Sidney]

Velocithon wrote...

The point Angry One is making in case people miss, is that the ending seems to show that in the distant future life goes on free of the Reapers.

The point is...who cares? We the players have spent three games bonding with the current characters. It's them we care about, not the future.

I care. I was all about saving life in the galaxy. I guess some people didn't get that from the series. I don't really want some DAO style screens telling me "Garrus now runs a cafe and bistro on Palavan called the Happy Sniper".

What I want is for the threat I saved the galaxy from to make some lick spit of sense. To have some grand design that isn't idiotic.

[Karrie788]

HenchxNarf wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

The point Angry One is making in case people miss, is that the ending seems to show that in the distant future life goes on free of the Reapers.

The point is...who cares? We the players have spent three games bonding with the current characters. It's them we care about, not the future.

I wasn't going to come back here, but I had to with this.

ME3 was meant to be the end of Shepard's story. Which means in the next game, even if the endings were something different, we most likely wouldn't have the same people in the game as has been in the last three.

ME4 is supposed to start a new story. Shep is done, finished.

So, with that in mind, the OP's post seems selfish and not entirely correct.

I agree. This was supposed to be the end of Shepard's story. We all knew that.

But there are far more elegant ways to end a story than to use a ridiculous twist such as "rock falls, everyone dies".

And hell yes, we are selfish. When it comes to video games, I think we can be selfish. We put sometimes hundreds of hours of emotional investment in the series. To ask for a little reward for the player as in, give them some closure, is not an unreasonable request.

[xxskyshadowxx]

pistolols wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

pistolols wrote...

the way i see it, casey hudson made it very clear he was sorry he hurt your feelings and that he knows his most passionate fans needed more time to say goodbye to their video game characters...so not really sure what you're still crying about.  They made a statement about this.  They know how you feel.  So what is this thread possibly accomplishing other than beating a dead horse?

Possibly because BioWare have been vague and condescending about the whole issue, and I feel the need to express my thoughts now and then.

They know how you feel.  They know how retake movement feels.  This is essentially spam at this point.

Actually, their comments thus far have indicated otherwise.

[aliengmr1]

HenchxNarf wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

The point Angry One is making in case people miss, is that the ending seems to show that in the distant future life goes on free of the Reapers.

The point is...who cares? We the players have spent three games bonding with the current characters. It's them we care about, not the future.

I wasn't going to come back here, but I had to with this.

ME3 was meant to be the end of Shepard's story. Which means in the next game, even if the endings were something different, we most likely wouldn't have the same people in the game as has been in the last three.

ME4 is supposed to start a new story. Shep is done, finished.

So, with that in mind, the OP's post seems selfish and not entirely correct.

There is no ME4.

[Mitra]

The Angry One wrote...

It's come up in a few discussions now and then from various people that, no matter what the consequences of the ending, the cycle is in fact broken, Reapers are no longer a threat and future races will be free of bad Reaper influence, being culled etc. etc.

There's one issue I have with this: I DON'T CARE.

I got into Mass Effect because I became invested into the galaxy, it's various races and the galaxy.
I don't care whether the Yahg are now free to expand across the galaxy and eat puppies or whatever it is they do.
I don't care that in 10, 20, 30,000 years there'll be some form of galactic society again and I certainly don't care what some senile old man has to say to his naive grandson 10,000 years in the future on some backwater world I don't know and don't give a damn about!

I care about this galaxy, as is. I care about Garrus, about Liara, about Kaidan, about Tali building her home on Rannoch, about Wrex raising his new children. I care about Jack and her students, about Conrad, about Bailey. I care about the Turians, the Asari, the Quarians, the Geth, the Krogans.
Heck I even care about Vega and his N7 promotion.

That's what I care about, the characters I've gotten to know for 3 games. Not some nebulous, unseen and uneeded future. For that, you might as well let the Reapers win, because it amounts to exactly the same thing in the end. This isn't just about Shepard's unhappy ending. I want a happy ending, but even if it had to be a sacrifice, then I want that sacrifice to mean something other than some alien I don't care about not fearing the robotic squids from hell.

Hell YES, I agree with you! You took words from my lips

[Isichar]

HenchxNarf wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

The point Angry One is making in case people miss, is that the ending seems to show that in the distant future life goes on free of the Reapers.

The point is...who cares? We the players have spent three games bonding with the current characters. It's them we care about, not the future.

I wasn't going to come back here, but I had to with this.

ME3 was meant to be the end of Shepard's story. Which means in the next game, even if the endings were something different, we most likely wouldn't have the same people in the game as has been in the last three.

ME4 is supposed to start a new story. Shep is done, finished.

So, with that in mind, the OP's post seems selfish and not entirely correct.

How do you suppose bioware is gonna do an ME4 with its fanbase largely alienated?

[HenchxNarf]

Karrie788 wrote...

I agree. This was supposed to be the end of Shepard's story. We all knew that.

But there are far more elegant ways to end a story than to use a ridiculous twist such as "rock falls, everyone dies".

And hell yes, we are selfish. When it comes to video games, I think we can be selfish. We put sometimes hundreds of hours of emotional investment in the series. To ask for a little reward for the player as in, give them some closure, is not an unreasonable request.

I would agree with you if it was your story to control. However, it is not. This is how Bioware wanted Shepard's story to end. They created this world and was gracious enough to let us enjoy the parts between point A and point B. But the beginning and end were always set.

[Torrible]

The people you talked about knew the odds were against them and were prepared to sacrifice their lives. They made a positive and permanent difference to the future of the galaxy. Their exploits would be forever retold in the story of the Shepard. They were dead but also immortalised.

The reapers were destroyed and yes, the cycle was broken. The galaxy could finally live in everlasting peace. No more cyclical struggle between Organics and Synthetics. The krogans can repopulate. With the females back in leadership, they could return to the glorious culture they once were. Widely considered to be the galaxy's greatest threat after the reapers, this would no longer be the case with the females in charge.

No species (Turians, Salarians, Elcors etc.) brought their entire population to war. They could always repopulate back in their home worlds. The Quarians finally had their homeworld back. They could now build a future for their children, in a world free of masks and induction ports. With the reapers gone, so could the Asari.

As for Humans, the future of Mass Effect isn't going to be different from where we are now. An absence of knowledge or access to the rest of the galaxy doesn't affect our individual happiness at all. We are still in awe of the wonders of the galaxy and universe.

The future wasn't bleak at all. There were bigger things in the galaxy than Shepard and his squadmates/allies.

Modifié par Torrible, 01 avril 2012 - 04:54 .

[HenchxNarf]

Isichar wrote...

How do you suppose bioware is gonna do an ME4 with its fanbase largely alienated?

I'm pretty sure they're doing just fine. BSN isn't the whole of their fanbase.

[DJBare]

Omega-202 wrote...
I wish the end was better, but sometimes you accept what you're given as the choice made by the creator.  Mac and Casey chose this as the message they wanted to send.  That's it.  Its a valid story to tell.  If you don't like it, that's too bad, but you just have to accept it.  

No, I do not have to accept it, my wallet, my money, my choice which gaming company that money goes too, if they announce at PAX "You just have to accept it"; I'll give you one guess what I will be voting my displeasure with.

Modifié par DJBare, 01 avril 2012 - 04:50 .

[The Angry One]

HenchxNarf wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

The point Angry One is making in case people miss, is that the ending seems to show that in the distant future life goes on free of the Reapers.

The point is...who cares? We the players have spent three games bonding with the current characters. It's them we care about, not the future.

I wasn't going to come back here, but I had to with this.

ME3 was meant to be the end of Shepard's story. Which means in the next game, even if the endings were something different, we most likely wouldn't have the same people in the game as has been in the last three.

ME4 is supposed to start a new story. Shep is done, finished.

So, with that in mind, the OP's post seems selfish and not entirely correct.

And what the hell does that have to do with giving the characters of ME3 closure and a proper future?
Oh, right. Nothing whatsoever.

[Karrie788]

HenchxNarf wrote...

Karrie788 wrote...

I agree. This was supposed to be the end of Shepard's story. We all knew that.

But there are far more elegant ways to end a story than to use a ridiculous twist such as "rock falls, everyone dies".

And hell yes, we are selfish. When it comes to video games, I think we can be selfish. We put sometimes hundreds of hours of emotional investment in the series. To ask for a little reward for the player as in, give them some closure, is not an unreasonable request.

I would agree with you if it was your story to control. However, it is not. This is how Bioware wanted Shepard's story to end. They created this world and was gracious enough to let us enjoy the parts between point A and point B. But the beginning and end were always set.

In the end yes, it is their story. Problem is, this is a video game, not a movie or a book. It's interactive. And ME has been promoted by the devs as a game in which the player's choices mattered. They also said that they were developing the games alongside with the fans. For instance, team dextro romances would have never happened if it wasn't for the fan feedback.

Don't see why that should change in regards to the endings.

[sniper1250]

I care that the cycle was broken.

But I also care more about what happened to the various characters, factions, species, and general personal character plot lines more. Even if it was just to tell us they got stabbed in a bar fight a month later, I always want to know what happens to characters in games I play. I'd even accept they got shot during the run to the beam.

I wish the endings were ambiguous about the cycles ending and concrete about what happened to everyone instead of what we got. I mean, it's even more conductive to being able to make games placed later in the timeline with the same enemies that way. They could have lazy Reapers that were still in dark space come back in like a thousand years when everyone we care about is for sure dead of old age and start up a new trilogy with new tech and mechanics. But nooooooo, they wanted speculation and ambiguity.

[Vhalkyrie]

Sidney wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...

Please explain how destruction of a mass relay doesn't go supernova, as shown in Arrival, and described in the codex. 

Because you see it discharge the energy before the relay blows up. There is nothing to "go nova" left in the relay it expends the energy to propogate the wave. The discharge of the energy is what crushes relay rather than crushing the relay causing the explosion like in Arrival.

A lightning bolt is a discharge of energy.  It isn't harmless.

[Sidney]

The Angry One wrote...

Sidney wrote...

Vhalkyrie wrote...

Please explain how destruction of a mass relay doesn't go supernova, as shown in Arrival, and described in the codex. 

Because you see it discharge the energy before the relay blows up. There is nothing to "go nova" left in the relay it expends the energy to propogate the wave. The discharge of the energy is what crushes relay rather than crushing the relay causing the explosion like in Arrival.

No, the energy backfire is what destroys the relay. You then see an expanding explosion which then cuts away.
I am not in the camp that says this is what happens for certain, but we certainly SEE the beginning of a nova.

Just watched it again. You see the "charging ray" hit a relay, the core then turns your space magic color of choice and then the core starts to spin faster. The new color is fired off and as it is discharged the relay blows up. You see two different blasts. One is the "pulse" that wipes out the reapers which, dpending on your ending, has been showns to do diddly to organics, The second is a conventional kaput type boom for the Relay itself. In other words the relay doesn't blow up in ME3 like it does in Arrivalk.

[HenchxNarf]

Karrie788 wrote...

In the end yes, it is their story. Problem is, this is a video game, not a movie or a book. It's interactive. And ME has been promoted by the devs as a game in which the player's choices mattered. They also said that they were developing the games alongside with the fans. For instance, team dextro romances would have never happened if it wasn't for the fan feedback.

Don't see why that should change in regards to the endings.

Yeah, the player's choices matter between point A and point B. That doesn't make it your right to demand them change the ending that has been there since day one. They took fan feedback and gave you something you wanted between those points.

[The Angry One]

HenchxNarf wrote...

Karrie788 wrote...

In the end yes, it is their story. Problem is, this is a video game, not a movie or a book. It's interactive. And ME has been promoted by the devs as a game in which the player's choices mattered. They also said that they were developing the games alongside with the fans. For instance, team dextro romances would have never happened if it wasn't for the fan feedback.

Don't see why that should change in regards to the endings.

Yeah, the player's choices matter between point A and point B. That doesn't make it your right to demand them change the ending that has been there since day one. They took fan feedback and gave you something you wanted between those points.

You mean the ending that didn't exist until Mac Walters scribbled something onto a notepad a few months ago? 
That ending? 

Modifié par The Angry One, 01 avril 2012 - 04:54 .

[Omega-202]

The Angry One wrote...

That's what happens here. As for your last sentence, I don't care about others. I did not fight for them, I did not spend 3 games so people I don't know will live in peace somehow somewhere. That's got nothing to do with what I've played.

But you're not the only person who played.  

I personally DID play to stop the Reapers.  I played so that countless lives could be saved.  Mass Effect 3 made it very clear that was one of the main drives.  Look at Anderson and Shepard's discussions before leaving Earth.  Yes, you can't save them all, but you fight to save the ones you can.  

Just because that wasn't your motivation doesn't mean it wasn't someone elses.  There had to be a choice made on how to end it.  BioWare had to choose what the sacrifice was to be for and they chose altruistic "greater good" over a personal happy ending.  That's their choice.  

[Karrie788]

HenchxNarf wrote...

Karrie788 wrote...

In the end yes, it is their story. Problem is, this is a video game, not a movie or a book. It's interactive. And ME has been promoted by the devs as a game in which the player's choices mattered. They also said that they were developing the games alongside with the fans. For instance, team dextro romances would have never happened if it wasn't for the fan feedback.

Don't see why that should change in regards to the endings.

Yeah, the player's choices matter between point A and point B. That doesn't make it your right to demand them change the ending that has been there since day one. They took fan feedback and gave you something you wanted between those points.

Agreed on the fact that we shouldn't demand new endings. However, that won't stop me from saying the endings were rubbish and that I'd reaaaally like them changed.

And to take away from the player everything that was great about the game and that he loved, in the END, the CONCLUSION, doesn't seem like a good strategy to me.

[Rafe34]

BrotherWarth wrote...

Nathan_41 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Rolando93 wrote...


Why does everyone assume that everyone will die just because there are no mass relays? The galactic fleet has the quarians. Not only are they masters at salvaging and repurposing old ships, they apparently know how to grow food on their ships. Salarians can multiply the output with some agricultural engineering. And I'm sure krogan are good for fertilizer.

Because Quarians are not magicians, and their food can only feed the Turians and themselves, and it's doubtful they have enough for both. They're also cut off from badly needed fuel and supplies.

Do we actually know for a fact that the Quarian Liveships took part in the battle? I don't recall from memory.

I believe the codex says it's the entire fleet, but if those ships stayed at Rannoch then the bulk of the Qurian race is dead regardless.

I could have sworn Gerel at one point said, they'd only be taking the heavy warships to the fight at Earth.

Anyway, good thread, Angry One. This is exactly the problem with the endings. I don't care what some guy thinks of me 10,000 years from now, I want to know what happened to the people I spent the last 100 hours gaming with.

[firebreather19]

Funny, you don't care about any of that even though through ME1, 2, and 3, that was always Shepard's number one goal. Heck, you get two dialogue choice options in the very beginning of ME3--either "we fight or we die" or "we try our best to survive." It's fine you don't care, but why did you play through the first two games? Thought the third was going to do suddenly change course?

If anything, this game and its ending has been a stroke of brilliance. I mean really, it's completely shed light on current-day humans, at the very least gamers of the sci-fi RPG variety. Only worried about the right now, with no vision at all beyond maybe a week or so. I mean if you don't care about the future, then Bioware should've just given you the beginning game choice to go hide in stasis pods like Javik and wait it out. Then you and your LI can emerge from the pods to a dead universe and pretend to play Adam and Eve for a while. Fun stuff.

Kind of cool how not only the game's story but also fan reaction to the ending is pretty telling of the times. I think people will study this at a later date, the hypocrisy and such.

[DJBare]

HenchxNarf wrote...

Yeah, the player's choices matter between point A and point B. That doesn't make it your right to demand them change the ending that has been there since day one. They took fan feedback and gave you something you wanted between those points.

Can folk please dump the word demand, unless of course by demanding you mean we will take our cash elsewhere and purchase games from other developers because we are not satisfied with the current product.

[The Angry One]

Omega-202 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

That's what happens here. As for your last sentence, I don't care about others. I did not fight for them, I did not spend 3 games so people I don't know will live in peace somehow somewhere. That's got nothing to do with what I've played.

But you're not the only person who played.  

I personally DID play to stop the Reapers.  I played so that countless lives could be saved.  Mass Effect 3 made it very clear that was one of the main drives.  Look at Anderson and Shepard's discussions before leaving Earth.  Yes, you can't save them all, but you fight to save the ones you can. 

Or, you know, save nobody.
You may be fine with it, but a lot of us play character driven games for the characters, and being told we can save none of them and leaving them to a bleak, vague fate is not acceptable.

Just because that wasn't your motivation doesn't mean it wasn't someone elses.  There had to be a choice made on how to end it.  BioWare had to choose what the sacrifice was to be for and they chose altruistic "greater good" over a personal happy ending.  That's their choice.  

In every other BioWare game, I can make the choice. Why is it suddenly their choice?