1158 réponses à ce sujet

[SkaldFish]

PhrosniteAgainROFL wrote...

Damien Nightwind wrote...

Honestly if Bioware doesnt add new endings for it then they are set to lose alot of money when they make their next game and no one buys it. Seriously do they think that 90+% of their fans are going to keep paying them money when they give us stuff like those endings?

That said, i will wait for an actual statement from Bioware before believing anything about it. Especially from a source that i cant read at all.

You are highly mistaken if you think that most the people who bought ME3 i.e. the money makers for Bioware/EA, care about all the whole "change the ending thing". Don't mistake the internet " vocal minority" for the majority of buyers.

Oh? Let's see your numbers. I'm not aware of BioWare having released any statistics. Provide facts and then you can legitimately say "you are highly mistaken."

[thekelvman]

PhrosniteAgainROFL wrote...

You are highly mistaken if you think that most the people who bought ME3 i.e. the money makers for Bioware/EA, care about all the whole "change the ending thing". Don't mistake the internet " vocal minority" for the majority of buyers.

And you assume that everyone not in this "vocal minority" loves the endings.

[EricHVela]

Damien Nightwind wrote...

Honestly if Bioware doesnt add new endings for it then they are set to lose alot of money when they make their next game and no one buys it. Seriously do they think that 90+% of their fans are going to keep paying them money when they give us stuff like those endings?

That said, i will wait for an actual statement from Bioware before believing anything about it. Especially from a source that i cant read at all.

Don't bother waiting. EA said it. BW has to obey.

We're talking about the company that acquired and destroyed other companies with their meddling.

[PhrosniteAgainROFL]

Fxnris wrote...

PhrosniteAgainROFL wrote...

Damien Nightwind wrote...

Honestly if Bioware doesnt add new endings for it then they are set to lose alot of money when they make their next game and no one buys it. Seriously do they think that 90+% of their fans are going to keep paying them money when they give us stuff like those endings?

That said, i will wait for an actual statement from Bioware before believing anything about it. Especially from a source that i cant read at all.

You are highly mistaken if you think that most the people who bought ME3 i.e. the money makers for Bioware/EA, care about all the whole "change the ending thing". Don't mistake the internet " vocal minority" for the majority of buyers.

60,000 for the RetakeME3 movement, 50k+ on the Bioware poll, plus someone posted a pretty good link on here a while back stating statistics that actually disproved your theory of us being a vocal minority, we're actually a majority, I'll do some searching and find the link for you.

Also, you didn't answer my previous post. 

Even 100k are a minority considering the game sold millions of copies(3.5mil shipped). Let's not start a fight here. These are the cold facts. This is like boycotting the CoD games because they are basically the same. People are still going to buy them.

thekelvman wrote...

PhrosniteAgainROFL wrote...

You
are highly mistaken if you think that most the people who bought ME3
i.e. the money makers for Bioware/EA, care about all the whole "change
the ending thing". Don't mistake the internet " vocal minority" for the
majority of buyers.

And you assume that everyone not in this "vocal minority" loves the endings.

Of course not. Those people are ok with them. They just moved on. Nothing to get upset over.

Modifié par PhrosniteAgainROFL, 04 avril 2012 - 02:47 .

[tiger-tron]

If this is true and they don't change the ending, then thats it from me. I won't be buying any more DLC if this is the case.

[Fxnris]

CoD?

The selling point of that series is the multiplayer, so your point is invalid, pal.

Plus, the campaigns are extremelly varied.

LOL.

[Gigamantis]

1. That doesn't answer my question. Let me elaborate a bit more to be
clearer. Why were the Collectors making a human Reaper when the Reapers
had almost arrived, and would have centuries to make Reapers? The
Collectors, of course, also beg another question: If all they were doing
was getting a head start on Reaper production for no apparent reason,
why weren't they used to help ensure that Sovereign succeeded? What is
their point otherwise? In Karpyshyn's (sic) ending, it was because they
were examining species to address a particular problem which the Reapers
were trying to solve, which humanity had the most likely solution to.
But now, with this ending, they serve no real purpose except for Shepard
to kill them.
2. No, it wasn't 'overtaking' or surpassing, it was
'turning on and destroying' that he feared. Those are the exact words he
uses to describe it, and calls it inevitable. The fact that the creator
might be synthetic is irrelevant. The point is that something created
to serve can turn on the creator that made it as slaves if it is truly
intelligent, which the Reapers are. If they do not, then it disproves
his entire assertion that it is inevitable. His solution as it stands is
logically absurd.
3. Yes, I know, that is the only explanation. But
why? Why create a solution which you have so little ability to affect?
Essentially 'firing and releasing' a solution of synthetics, when the
reason behind making it is that synthetics will always rebel and destroy
their creators/organics.
4. No. Shepard, Anderson, they both stand
on this platform before - it's right in front of the control panel that
they have used. Yet when Shepard collapses, too weak to fight on, it
admits him. Without this, he would have failed, and the cycle would have
continued. If this is just another example of the Catalyst's irrational
construction 'If someone's dying, and they collapse here, bring them up
to the catalyst roof. People who are about to fail must be allowed to
win instead if they're actualy standing right there.'), this is yet
another idiotic, nonsensical feature to the ending.
5. "The fact you
have reached here proves my solution will no longer work." 1: Why? 2:
Without his advice, how would Shepard know how to use these devices? He
enables *the dying* Shepard to beat the cycle. Without his advice,
Shepard might have stumbled around blind going 'What the **** is all
this ****, and how does it help me?' until he either bleeds out or the
Reapers, who, if you remember, currently occupy the Citadel, finally
send reinforcements and finish him off. He's certainly not going to
think about just shooting everything, or jumping into beams, or randomly
putting his arms into some big glowy electrodes. These are all actions
which would be naturally counter-intuitive to getting a device to work.
He explicitly states, 'The fact that you are here proves my solution
will no longer work. So we must find a new solution,' and then proceeds
to do nothing of the sort, especially if you don't get a high enough
readiness to achieve synthesis.
6. 'Or something else'. So, an energy
being? If he is not an AI, then why is he limited to the Citadel?
There's all sorts of things he could have done to aid his homeboy
Reapers in the preceeding games. He could have undone the Protheans'
work, for example. And, if he is an independant non-machine entity that
only resides in the Citadel, then why does the Crucible's docking with
the Citadel alter him directly? And don't say that it's because the
Crucible was designed to interact with the Catalyst, because noone has
encountered it before, and hence could not know what it is.
7. A waste of time? Really? Shepard is not that
close to death - he has the strength to take a running leap/fire an
enormous pistol with one arm, and also potentially to survive the
destruction of the Citadel. A few minutes argument, which could persuade
the Reapers' creator that he is wrong, and should do something about
that himself?
8. "All forces wiped out, retreat!" Those exact words.
Noone made it to the beam, and they were right behind you - I know,
because I goddamned checked on my second playthrough, about five seconds
before the inevitable beam blast. The notion that your comrades are at
*least* as badly wounded as you is reinforced by the fact you are left
there to die alone. The galaxy's greatest hero, and their best friend,
and they don't even check for a pulse, or retrieve you for medical
attention. Unless they were also desperately running for the beam,
because saving the galaxy is more important than even *your* life. But
they don't. They certainly don't do an Anderson and make a run towards
the beam now that Harbinger's gone. Therefore, they have bitten the
dust. And yet they appear in the Normandy, having fled the most critical
battle in the history of life ever, with no actual way of knowing
what's just happened, and seem pretty cheerful about crashlanding on an
unknown planet.
9. You misunderstand me. I'm talking about within the
context of this particular game. The Reapers spread rapidly across the
entire galaxy, so they certainly could have reached the Citadel as
quickly as they could have reached, say, Palaven, yet the Citadel is
largely ignored until it actually poses a direct threat. Why did they
leave it alone for so long, when it is, as they well knew, the heart of
galactic government?
10. The Illusive Man told them of humanity's
plan to convince them to take the Citadel. They knew from before you
killed Kai Leng, so well before the council races tried to retake Earth.
Even if not, I don't know about you, but the moment I saw an enormous
unarmed spaceship with a vast powersource turn up, I'd get suspicious,
and at least cripple its engines.
Couple more...
11. Why not
temporarily turn off the beam to the citadel, if it's such a threat that
they send down their largest most powerful warship to kill attackers?
Is it that they can't? Again, seems like a pretty big design flaw if not
- yet another example of the bumbling billion-year old
hyper-intelligent super-advanced machines, I suppose.
12. Why is
there human lettering on the Catalyst's area, when no organic has ever
seen it before? And no, they're not part of the Crucible, I did check.
Bit of a glaringly obvious error, isn't it? Almost like the ending was
deliberately flawed, or rushed out...

1. The collectors were just gathering data and humans to create husks and a human reaper.  They were obviously just part of the preparation phase for a full on attack.  Sovereign could have also just been a means to test the waters before a full scale attack.  It's war preparation. 
2. The catalyst was afraid that synthetics he wasn't controlling would turn on organics and wipe them out.  The reapers are the catalysts tools and he's clearly something beyond usual organics. 
3. The reapers are the catalysts tools, he can control them and uses them only for these cleansing cycles.  They may also be his only means but he clearly doesn't consider them dangerous, PROBABLY because he controls them.  At best it's ironic that synthetics are deployed to prevent a synthetic overtaking, but this is definitely NOT a plothole. 
4. Shepard did something at the console to activate the crucible but was informed by Hackett that it wasn't firing.  Only after that did stumbling onto the platform ascend him to the chamber with the catalyst and the firing mechanisms. 
5. There were 2 clear paths and it wasn't all that confusing.  The catalyst probably didn't want Shepard stumbling into a solution without understanding the consequences.  Knowing the cleansing attempt was most likely over the catalyst probably just wanted Shepard to make an informed decision when using the crucible to end it.
6. They didn't explain what the catalyst is exactly, but they gave us a pretty good idea what it can and can't do.  He's some form of life that controls the reapers to initiate a cleansing cycle and can only be interacted with through the crucible.  If he could do any of the things you're alluding to, and actually wanted to, he probably would have.  They don't really get into the catalysts intentions; it's an open-ended plot device.
7. Shepard could barely stand at that point and being able to move doesn't mean you're not close to bleeding to death.  Let me be clear, this is absolutely NOT a plothole.  Sparking a debate when you might not even be able to crawl to either solution in a couple minutes is foolish. 
8. Right, no one else made it to the beam.  You were hit, unconscious for a undisclosed amount of time, and likely assumed to be dead.  Your squad may have  A) Been still unconscious when you entered the crucible and picked up while you were inside, or Assumed you were dead when you were laying their unconscious and forced to retreat without gathering your body.  This isn't a plothole either.
9. It's because it was the center of the gallactic government that it was likely the most difficult to invade, especially since the galaxy is unified in fighting them back.  It stands to reason that the reapers couldn't just brute force the citadel and had to wage war on multiple fronts to keep people occupied.  The reapers were portrayed as powerful, but not so powerful they could've just taken out the heart and ended it whenever they felt like.  They were being held off even when just attacking Earth and Palaven. 
10. It was obvious their goal was to hit the Citadel but it's likely not that easy.  If no battles were staged at any other points all forces would be defending the citadel and it would've taken just as long, if not longer, to take it down.  Waging war on multiple fronts is basic strategy. 
11. It stands to reason that it can't just be shut off.  There's a war being waged around it and the reaper warships are fairly occupied. 
12. The catalyst obviously understood and spoke english, and just because the catalyst inhabits that area doesn't mean he created it.  Since that area was the crucibles trigger it even stands to reason that it was part of the crucible itself, which was built by organics.

[Fxnris]

In addition, you state the vocal minority have just moved on?

Prove it.

At least 9 of the people who work for me have been in a debate about how bad they thought the endings where, and how they have no faith in Bioware, yet they don't post in forums or interact much online.

So you can't speak for everyone

[SiriusXI]

PhrosniteAgainROFL wrote...

Damien Nightwind wrote...

Honestly if Bioware doesnt add new endings for it then they are set to lose alot of money when they make their next game and no one buys it. Seriously do they think that 90+% of their fans are going to keep paying them money when they give us stuff like those endings?

That said, i will wait for an actual statement from Bioware before believing anything about it. Especially from a source that i cant read at all.

You are highly mistaken if you think that most the people who bought ME3 i.e. the money makers for Bioware/EA, care about all the whole "change the ending thing". Don't mistake the internet " vocal minority" for the majority of buyers.

Have you seen the ratings on literally all Amazon sites? They are about 2-3 stars. Even most of the people who gave 5 stars argue that the ending sucked. It's not a vocal minority!! Besides, I want the same as you. Indoctrination Theory or similar would "clarify" and give us a new, better ending.

But I think what Bioware means by "clarify" is to tell us more abou the StarChild and its motivations, which just sucks! AND I think sidequest DLC IS what they actually intend to release. Just lloock at ME2. There were so many side Quest DLCs.

[PhrosniteAgainROFL]

Fxnris wrote...

CoD?

The selling point of that series is the multiplayer, so your point is invalid, pal.

Plus, the campaigns are extremelly varied.

LOL.

The multiplayer is basically the same and the majority of them people who buy those games never touch the singleplayer. Why buy the "new" game when you can just play the old one. It's the almost the same. Not to mention that they are selling you the old maps and people buy them.

But we are getting off topic here. If Bioware changed the ending it would be even worse because that will set a bad expample for the industry. Yes, Bethesda did it and it was worse.

Edit: @SiriusXI ME2 was all about the side quests. Those DLCs fit in that game. Side quest DLC will be out of place in ME3 considering how bad the "side" stuff was.

Modifié par PhrosniteAgainROFL, 04 avril 2012 - 02:54 .

[SkaldFish]

PhrosniteAgainROFL wrote...
Even 100k are a minority considering the game sold millions of copies(3.5mil shipped). Let's not start a fight here. These are the cold facts. This is like boycotting the CoD games because they are basically the same. People are still going to buy them.

Again, let's see your "cold facts." All I see is a contention with nothing but assumptions to back it up. The fact is that none of us has any idea (1) how many of those 3.5 million shipped copies translate to consumer purchases; (2) how many of those consumers have played the game; (3) how many of those who've played the game have finished it; (4) how many of those who've finished it liked or disliked the ending.

I don't see a fact of any temperature in what you said.

[Fxnris]

Bethesda released broken steel, and I'm pretty sure it was the one of the biggest selling DLC's in console history, plus it allowed them to release further DLC post game.

And that made them a massive profit.

[Nial Black-Knee]

LOL........So sad. They are not going to say anything. They will just keep stringing you all along, hoping you'll get over it.

The silence is deafening

[durasteel]

Sinekein wrote...

And a space opera kinda needs humans.

Unles they retcon it too by recreating Atlantis, of course.

Atlantis supposedly met its end about 12,500 years ago. For 50,000+ you would need to go to Mu or Lemuria.

[thekelvman]

I don't see how changing the endings sets a bad precedent for the industry. Just don't make ****ty endings and there won't be a problem!

[McBaal]

Well, no comments in the US or Europe but a mexican newspaper knows the way of the force. No offense, but this sounds like crap. And if it is true, if BW wont change the endings or add further versions they can keep their ME stuff. They wont see a nickle from me within their entire life. If ME goes down Bioware goes down, at least for me. Then i am done with you Bioware, once and for all.

Signed: A former customer

[Nejeli]

The bit about ME3 being the end of Shepard but not the end of the game makes me think that most, if not all, the dlc after the one to clear up the ending is going to be for multiplayer; which they'd almost have to be. I know that during my current replay I'm having a hard time caring about the side missions as is - sure, I could help all those people on the Citadel but they die anyway, so why bother? and I could try to get all those extra assets but I messed up a lot and had less than 3000 EMS during my first playthrough and still got all the good endings except the rubble scene, so why bother? - and I've seen this attitude expressed a lot.

[Joe1962]

Nial Black-Knee wrote...

LOL........So sad. They are not going to say anything. They will just keep stringing you all along, hoping you'll get over it.

The silence is deafening

Yes, it is...sadly. :-(

[SiriusXI]

Nejeli wrote...

The bit about ME3 being the end of Shepard but not the end of the game makes me think that most, if not all, the dlc after the one to clear up the ending is going to be for multiplayer; which they'd almost have to be. I know that during my current replay I'm having a hard time caring about the side missions as is - sure, I could help all those people on the Citadel but they die anyway, so why bother? and I could try to get all those extra assets but I messed up a lot and had less than 3000 EMS during my first playthrough and still got all the good endings except the rubble scene, so why bother? - and I've seen this attitude expressed a lot.

Yeah, that's it... why bother with this if it's sensless anyway? The dark energy theme was soooo good. This is the one thing that's actually bigger than the reapers. The threat of destruction of the universe. They could have developed this so well...

[shodiswe]

I think the biggest issue I had with the ending was shepards conversation with the catalyst. The catalyst/leader of the reaper or maybe even their creator.

If the mass relays are destroyed then I guess they can be rebuilt.. Sounds unfeasibly expensive though, especialy for a wartorn almost anihilated galaxy. I'm guessing future titles will be placed in a distant future where shepards choices would have minimal effect.

But like I said, my shepard talked the illusiveman into understanding that he was indoctrinated and controled by the reapers, to the point where he shot himself just to break free when he realized how bad it was. Then Shepard meets the catalyst and all of a sudden he seems to have lost his ability to speak.
I don't care if the catalyst/reaper ignore his renogotiation tactics and speaches completely, but it seems out of character to just give up on the finishing line. That's what realy anoys me with the ending.
If Shepard commes to the conclusion that he can't force the issue and the allied forces are loosing people for no reason while he's talking to a VI that simply won't understand then that's ok.

What I want is a DLC that enables shepard to take that last fight without looking like a quitter. My Shepard never settled with a partial Victory, thats why I had both the Geth and Quarrians on my side. Throwing in the towel in the last conversation without a fight just killed the ending to me.

[PhrosniteAgainROFL]

Nejeli wrote...

The bit about ME3 being the end of Shepard but not the end of the game makes me think that most, if not all, the dlc after the one to clear up the ending is going to be for multiplayer; which they'd almost have to be. I know that during my current replay I'm having a hard time caring about the side missions as is - sure, I could help all those people on the Citadel but they die anyway, so why bother? and I could try to get all those extra assets but I messed up a lot and had less than 3000 EMS during my first playthrough and still got all the good endings except the rubble scene, so why bother? - and I've seen this attitude expressed a lot.

Yeap. I think one singleplayer DLC to clarify things and all other DLCs will be multiplayer related. Hell, I've spent over 100 hours playing the multi and I'm losing steam fast. Now playing only during the weekend events.

[Gigamantis]

Fxnris wrote...

Bethesda released broken steel, and I'm pretty sure it was the one of the biggest selling DLC's in console history, plus it allowed them to release further DLC post game.

And that made them a massive profit.

Broken steel didn't change the ending.  It just let you keep playing the game after it.

Bioware may release content that builds on some of the concepts in the ending, but you're all idiots if you think they're going to release a whole new one. 

[clarkusdarkus]

i see the minority getting threw around alot and how about those that hated the ending but dont come onto forums or polls to vote? as my brother and his friends at work dont come on here but would be in the retake group so id say it would be alot higher than 60k if everyone had too vote.

[SkaldFish]

Gigamantis wrote...

Fxnris wrote...

Bethesda released broken steel, and I'm pretty sure it was the one of the biggest selling DLC's in console history, plus it allowed them to release further DLC post game.

And that made them a massive profit.

Broken steel didn't change the ending.  It just let you keep playing the game after it.

Bioware may release content that builds on some of the concepts in the ending, but you're all idiots if you think they're going to release a whole new one. 

Did somebody say something? No, my mistake. It was just a poor hungry troll looking for a meal. Starve him it.

Modifié par SkaldFish, 04 avril 2012 - 03:34 .

[Gigamantis]

SkaldFish wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

Fxnris wrote...

Bethesda released broken steel, and I'm pretty sure it was the one of the biggest selling DLC's in console history, plus it allowed them to release further DLC post game.

And that made them a massive profit.

Broken steel didn't change the ending.  It just let you keep playing the game after it.

Bioware may release content that builds on some of the concepts in the ending, but you're all idiots if you think they're going to release a whole new one. 

Did somebody say something? No, my mistake. It was just a poor hungry troll looking for a meal. Starve him it.

The ironic thing is that your post is an obvious attempt to troll.   Do you think you're covering your tracks by calling me a troll?