I guess if I'm going to read the thread, I really should address the OP.....
maddlarkin wrote...
Firstly the Mass Effect series has always been about choice and consequence, the extent of this is best seen between ME1 and ME2, if you create a new career in 2 instead of importing a Shepard from 1 who say, saved the council, the game world is almost unrecognisable.
And I'll start by saying that this is a
huge overstatement; and worse, it's an obvious one. A new PC in ME2 gets a garden-variety Renegade starting point. Mostly this just means that the Council is dead and humans more-or-less run the new Council. I recreated one of my ME1 characters in ME2 when I lost her save. It didn't really matter.
Choice is the first failure of ME3’s ending, there should be a bad ending, where everyone dies, they cycle continues and a cut scene of an unknown alien race digging up one of Lira’s boxes and a happy one with ‘blue babies’ and Garrus at the bar (although not with the babies that would be irresponsible parenting.) and every possible contingency in-between this is what was promised by Casey Hudson ‘16 distinct endings’ and unique experience for every play through. This does not happen as whatever your actions you are brought back to the same fixed point. Some have said this was the point, to make the story circular, if that was the case the ending still fails to deliver on what was promised.
This is very confused. Being able to choose actions does not necessarily mean being able to choose outcomes. You can make an argument that an RPG needs to let a player chose a happy ending, but you need to actually make the argument rather than simply assuming it to be true.
And while Casey's statement was very irresponsible, you're reading things into it that he never actually said. Also not that the "16 endings" thing seems to be a myth. People have been talking about it on the boards, but no0 one can produce an actual source for the figure.
As for your list of other endings from things like BSG and
Lost and what they did that ME3 didn't do, you left something out of the argument. Namely, the actual argument. Saying that you don't need to talk about what you're talking about is no way to make a case, son.
And if you're going to mention.....
Art for commission ie to be sold has long made changes to key plot points in response to its audience, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle originally intended to end Sherlock Holmes adventures at the Reinbach Falls. But due to popular demand for a return of the great detective, Holmes was revealed to of survived eventually retiring to tend bees.
... then I'll have to play the hideous edited versions of Shakespeare from Restoration period. You know, the ones where Lear and Cordelia don't die. Or the awful rewritten ending to
Meet John Doe.
I'm not saying the Gatekeepers are automatically right, by any means. But the public damn well isn't automatically right either; especially not self-appointed groups of "fans."
After the bit about Gatekeepers, I got bored with the post, so I'll stop here.
Retour en haut
