345 réponses à ce sujet

[Rickin10]

I tried reading the explanation, but I've long since realised I am far too simple to understand the profound genius of the ending.

[lofte_2000]

My problem is not with the theme of the ending or letting Shepard die, it's the way it was done by using the A,B or C ending choices (which we were told wouldn't be) and the godchild that was introduced right at the end of the game, plot holes etc etc that made it a fail. Also there was no real final battle, didn't see any of your war assets actually taking part in the fight to 'take back earth' which we have to assume that we did as there was really no proof of. It was just bad and not what I would expect from a BioWare game.

[Keltikone]

Rickin10 wrote...

I tried reading the explanation, but I've long since realised I am far too simple to understand the profound genius of the ending.

Dont feel bad about it, I'm a highly qualified expert in my chosen profession, my peers consider me highly intelligent and capable of a level of clinical reasoning beyond most of them.

I don't get it either, damn I hate to be this dumb just to justify a badly constructed video game ending <_<

[KaeserZen]

I will have to respectfully disagree with the OP on this topic.

I think this review is as much speculation as the Indoctrination Theory, but that the Indoctrination Theorymakes more valid points.

Basically, the guy says : the ending is not the cutscene. First assumption, and a wrong one. It would have been almost as much or even worse if we got the ending cut before the cutscene.

Then, he goes on to say : "Okay, your decisions don't matter in the final choice", then quickly retracts by saying : well, maybe they do, maybe you have to save Miranda's father to get the Control ending !
He's very, very dead in my playthrough, and I was still offered a choice between all 3 options.

I stopped reading here, because basing a positive reviews on positive assumptions instead of looking at hard facts is too biaised for me.

[crimzontearz]

yea....no

[SCK barman]

just a coment on the peice, got as far as 'However, I do not look at this cutscene to be the ending of the game.' and stopped reading. i dont get to within 5 pages of the end of a book then stop and consider where ive stopped to be the end. (i do stop near the begining of books quite frequently though lol)

[2Shepards]

How about.....no.....

If I have to go on the net to read an analysis about how the ending was good, maybe that mean the ending was BAD.
Needing someone to convince you that it was good, makes its BAD.

[ungodlike]

There is nothing great about this analysis other than the word great in its title " Mass Effect 3: Great Ending or
Greatest Ending ". It doesn't even prove why or how the ending could be considered "great" and in what context.

http://jmstevenson.w...ss.com/2012/03/ 

Modifié par ungodlike, 05 avril 2012 - 11:04 .

[StarcloudSWG]

http://social.biowar...7821/1#10487821

Here's a few equally well written counterarguments that address most, if not all, of the points that were brought up in the Escapist thread.

Taken IN ISOLATION and from a PURELY academic standpoint, the Escapist author is correct.

Taken IN THE CONTEXT OF THE GAME, the Escapist author is so badly off the mark it's not funny.

[X_30002000]

Well well,
apparently the author is expecting indoctrination theory will be announced at the PAX (in his reply to massive criticism). So he defends the ending and then confirms that without indoctrination theory it is a crap.

[Ieldra]

KaeserZen wrote...
Then, he goes on to say : "Okay, your decisions don't matter in the final choice", then quickly retracts by saying : well, maybe they do, maybe you have to save Miranda's father to get the Control ending !
He's very, very dead in my playthrough, and I was still offered a choice between all 3 options.

No, he didn't say that. He explicitly said that this is example of how things should have been done. Namely, certain decisions in the game enabling and disabling ending choices. For instance, making peace between the quarians and the geth could be a prerequisite for enabling Synthesis.

There is some stuff in the article I don't agree with (I answered there), but it's a good analysis that touches a lot of the relevant points. What he didn't do was touch on some main problems people have with the ending: the destruction of the universe and the failure to present the final choice in a way that makes sense.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 05 avril 2012 - 11:02 .

[Myrmedus]

If an ending requires a literary analysis for it to be intelligible or "well done" then it's not well done.

[Shepard Wins]

"I believe such an ending would be nonsensical and would have been a complete tonal shift in the series changing what I consider one of the best videogame narratives of all time into this lame B movie ending where everyone lives."

I stopped reading right there.

[philippe willaume]

ProtoPWS wrote...

Link: 
http://www.escapistm...-great-spoilers 

Like many of you, after finishing Mass Effect 3 I've turned to the internet to discuss the storyline and see what other people think of the game. I really did not like the ending at all.... until I stumbled onto this analysis. The author does a really good job of explaining the themes of the storyline and why the ending fits with those themes. As much as I hated the ending before, since reading that post I did a replay of the game and came away with a much better feeling. Sorry for not posting the full text but it's extremely long and I did not write it so a link will have to do.

Then your problem was with the understanding the theme of the ending, and I am happy it helped.
I am fine with the theme and  the creative direction. In fact I like the last minute change of premises, but i am massively miffed with the
the lack of consistency of the ending itself.
The lack of closure for the story stakeholders
the lack of impact/exposure/contextualisation of the ending with the actual play through.
 
I think this is what rattled people cage more than understanding the theme

i totally agree with the fact that the creative direction is BW and BW only and the flip side of that is that is that when the advertise that the ending will reflect the decision made in the game it is their job to put the said artistic direction in context with the play through.
Phil

[T-0pel]

almost every single point is wrong... I really have to stop reading these articles...

[Myrmedus]

[quote]Ieldra2 wrote...

[quote]KaeserZen wrote...
Then, he goes on to say : "Okay, your decisions don't matter in the final choice", then quickly retracts by saying : well, maybe they do, maybe you have to save Miranda's father to get the Control ending !
He's very, very dead in my playthrough, and I was still offered a choice between all 3 options.[/quote]
No, he didn't say that. He explicitly said that this is example of how things should have been done. Namely, certain decisions in the game enabling and disabling ending choices. For instance, making peace between the quarians and the geth could be a prerequisite for enabling Synthesis.[/quote]
[/quote]

Bingo - this is exactly what your decisions should've done. There should've been forks in the road that led to particular endings and your decisions led you down particular paths. There could've been some overlapping etc. but doing it like this would've been perfect. It would've given the game meaningful decisions, replayability (you'd need to play through again to get different endings rather than just reload and pick a different one

Having said that, the article is still poor in terms of explaining why the endings were well done and this point only reinforced the counter-point IMO: that they weren't well done.

[marrak]

Rather than waste my time with all 11 pages, or even bothering with reading the article, I'll just point out one little nuance that's bugging the hell out of me every time I see it.

"I have a degree..." does not suddenly give you greater insight into the inner workings of the meaning behind this ending. I've got a degree, I'm working on my Masters in English, and I have a friend who just got accepted for a PhD program. I've spoken with countless friends of mine in my Masters program who have played the game since ME1, and my PhD bound friend who is only passingly familiar with the games and has never played them, but I showed her the ending.

All of them, every last one, agree the ending is poorly done and makes little sense when you look at the last few games. If I tried to turn in something that broke the narrative this poorly at the end, my instructors would tell me to go back and either clarify some sense of build up or foreshadowing, or to simply correct the narrative in some fashion that would flow with the rest of the story. You can have closure with speculation; Blade Runner does this perfectly, by tying up the main story of the replicants being hunted while also making you wonder what will happen... was Deckard a replicant? Will Rachel live... etc. But first and foremost they gave closure to the main story: Roy and Deckard fight, Roy saves him to pass on a desired legacy, then dies having achieved a sense of personal satisfaction that someone will remember what he gave to the world.

...it's also a good way of ending on a happy note (Deckard and Rachel live) while being bittersweet (The replicants die tragically for simply wanting to live).

Modifié par marrak, 05 avril 2012 - 11:08 .

[sargon1986]

Nope. The endings ****ing suck.

[Blackbear2106]

If the ending is great then its great, if it needs a great analysis to persuade people to think its great then its just a failure.

[Grand Wazoo]

"You just don't like the ending because you don't understand it!".

In other words, "I have run out of arguments".

[Jeb231]

The endings could work but that would require the catalyst to have a bunch more lines. You should be able to argue against his logic, to refute it partially and he should give you all the details required for you to make an informed choice about the possible outcomes. Like how does Synthesis work, how can I control the reapers if I'm dead, etc...Also an origin story would be nice.

Modifié par Jeb231, 05 avril 2012 - 11:13 .

[katamuro]

You know if you need an article to explain why the ending you got is a good ending it already means its a bad ending. I mean come on no one needed an article for the end of Star wars episode 6. I am just saying that its just wrong that anyone needed to write an article to explain.

[FatalX7.0]

FJVP wrote...

"Mass Effect 3: Great Ending or Greatest Ending" Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't they just a rehash of Deus Ex's endings? Or so I've heard. If so he should give credit where it's due.

Yeah.

Pretty much an exact copy of Deus Ex. And some Battlestar Galactica, I think.

[Ravellion]

 I think he attacks a straw man, namely the desire for a happy ending, which is irrelevant. Whether an ending is happy or sad has little to no effect on the quality of said ending. In this case, Shepard's sacrifice is not the problem with the ending - it is the introduction of a major character/force in the last ten minutes of the game, leaps of logic and inexplicable happenings just before that, and the implications of what happens to the galaxy (not Shepard!) after the "30 second cutscene". Second, this is not just a story - it is a game. The lack of relevance of previously made choices in the game on the ending do adversely affect the quality of the ending.

Oh, and I have a Masters degree in English literature, specialising in modern American drama. Does that trump his degree?

[Edje Edgar]

Your first argument is that the theme of the game is about sacrifice because:"you're a soldier and soldiers sacrifice themselves"? Which is A. not true, B. would mean almost every game is about sacrifice. Please, you're just projecting.

The fact that the entire plot of Mass Effect 2 became pointless should tell you ME3 was not in line with the overall narrative established in ME 1 and 2.