345 réponses à ce sujet

[The Angry One]

Geneaux486 wrote...

And I've observed similar and worse behavior from people who hated the ending.  Doesn't mean I think everyone of that opinion is like that.

The difference is, the ending has only 3 defences.

"I liked it in spite of everything." -fine, whatever. But it's still objectively bad. You want to like it in spite of that? Go ahead.

"I made up my own ending!" -whether you admit it or not... this is not a good thing.

"You don't get it/it's over your head." -pseudo intellectualism really has no place here.

Modifié par The Angry One, 05 avril 2012 - 03:41 .

[Athro]

I think the main issues are that the writer spends most of his analysis talking about speculative details and very little about actual presented information along with not engaging the actual execution of said themes.

The tonal shift comes from the narrative structure and execution more than the themes explored.

And also - he tries to argue the Hero's Journey when another more professional analysis has already shown how it fails to present the Hero's Journey.

[Velocithon]

Web head seems genuine. Not sure how he can like it given the flaws but oh well. To each his own. He isn't being snobby about it so that's cool.

Unlike others.

[Reciever80]

You have to understand, while the points he makes are indeed correct, and agree-able, he doesn't take into account how the plot introduces new characters and new information at the very end of the game. It's the end of the end of the game; you should be focusing on closure, not new questions. I didn't need to know the reasons for the reapers. To have their reasons known is to take away their mystique. That being said, even with their reasons, I can still see why they have to kill organic life. However, it took weeks of reading up on it to actually understand what the "Catalyst" was trying to say. It was an extremely brief explanation of three choices that the player didn't really know about.

To be honest, when I played through the ending, I had no idea that all three options destroy the mass relays. I had actually thought that it was only the destroy ending that made the relays explode. There was no way to ask the Catalyst questions, there was no choice in the dialogue, and there was no closure to the series, except for Shepard's death. Instead we get a bizarre dialogue that gets no clarification except after weeks of studying and multiple playthroughs. If I wanted confusion and lack of closure, I would have watched the third Matrix movie. Not to mention the dozens of plot holes created when you find out the Catalyst, the person in charge of the reapers, has been hiding in the Citadel the whole time.

The author of that post only really explains why Shepard has to die, and to be honest, I agree with him on. What he says makes sense. However, he only addresses one of the complaints about the ending, when in reality the actual issues are much different.

[Nobrandminda]

 Good analysis, certainly better than the usual "You all are a bunch of whiners for complaining about the ending" approach, but there's a troubling word that pops up a lot: if.  As in, the ending is good if...

this narrative theme is only uncovered if you have Javik. 
If you end up agreeing with me that these are the main themes of the series I feel you have to then agree the ending is actually very appropriate and hence great. 
if you do forgive them you are sorry but you can't cure them now 

In fact, for the first third or so of the post, he's trying to convince people that "sacrific for the greater good" is a primary theme of the series.  But half of his examples are prefaced by "If the player does..."  He completely glosses over the fact that in many of his examples (most notably the Suicide Mission of ME2) it is completely possible to avoid a pointless sacrifice.  

That's the problem with his whole analysis.  It's based on a certain interpretation of a certain kind of playthrough.  Maybe he played through the game in such a way that Sacrifice for the Greater good, entropy (meaning unavoidable cycles) and forgivness were the primary themes driving his story.

I didn't.

In my game, the primary themes would probably be things like overcoming impossible odds (surviving the suicide mission and bringing peace to the geth and quarians), getting a diverse group of people to work towards a common goal (geth/quarians again, the crew of the Normandy) and maintaining my honor in the face of extinction (destroying the collector base, this conversation with Javik at 3:40)  One of his primary themes, entropy, is based on the idea that there are certain unavoidable cycles, but my Shepard was determined to break those cycles.  He cured the Genophage under Wrex's and Bakura's leadership in order to restore the Krogan without reliving the Krogan Rebellion.  He ended the 300 year old conflict between the Quarians and the Geth.  His primary goal in the series was to stop the reapers, thereby ending the cycle that has gone on since time immamorial.

Mass Effect 3 is a game about choice.  The ending did not reflect my choices.  It is a bad ending.

Modifié par Nobrandminda, 05 avril 2012 - 03:49 .

[Geneaux486]

The Angry One wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

And I've observed similar and worse behavior from people who hated the ending.  Doesn't mean I think everyone of that opinion is like that.

The difference is, the ending has only 3 defences.

"I liked it in spite of everything." -fine, whatever. But it's still objectively bad. You want to like it in spite of that? Go ahead.

"I made up my own ending!" -whether you admit it or not... this is not a good thing.

"You don't get it/it's over your head." -pseudo intellectualism really has no place here.

There are far more defences than that.  People's view on the ending is subjective.  To say it has plotholes, to say it breaks away from the major themes, all subjective.  Everything comes down to opinion.  The plotholes can be explained, the themes are there, and the implications of the endings vary. 

Modifié par Geneaux486, 05 avril 2012 - 03:44 .

[Noatz]

Okay so I just spent 15 mins reading all of this when I really should be going to bed because you got my hopes up that there was finally a new perspective out there that could help me enjoy the ending.

And it was a waste of time like all the other pro ending articles.

I'm tired so in the interests of brevity I'll just blow out the weak points rather than riddle the whole damn thing with holes.

1. His ENTIRE argument hinges on a subjective interpretation of what the themes are. He says they are Sacrifice, "Entropy" (wat) and Forgiveness and expects everyone to just accept that while conveniently ignoring themes such as Unity and Determination which are left at the door by the ending.

2. Two of his supposed themes are poorly argued/don't apply. Why does he call the second theme Entropy? This is a bad use of the term, he should of called it Cycles or History Repeating. He also doesn't address that much of ME is about breaking these cycles and yet some endings present a paradox where you break the cycle by submitting to it. The Forgiveness theme is used to develop characters, not the overall universe. It doesn't apply as a theme of the series in the same way as revenge doesn't apply as a theme (many characters have revenge stories as well, but this is ignored in his post).

Oh and also if Sacrifice is such an important theme - how come Shepard can live?

3. He downplays the choice element. Choice is a lot deeper in this context than he gives it credit for. Its about your actions having reprecussions and how that affects the way the player interacts with the universe. It isn't just a "gameplay mechanic". Not recognising this almost voids his opinion by itself.

4. He attempts to dismiss the plotholes. Plotholes are not good - they are a sign of poorly planned narrative. As a supposed literature graduate he should know this.

There are many other problems with this article of course, but it really is too late for me to bring them all up now.

[Ariq]

People just love strawmen.

This guy is just on about us misguided fans wanting rainbows, puppy dogs, and Mom's apple pie. Served in a house on Rannoch, with Garrus tapping the keg while Liara plays with blue toddlers. While some people do want some variation of that, it isn't the main objection to the ending.

1) Sacrifice. Yes, I get it. Sacrifice is a theme of Mass Effect. I figured that out on Virmire, where there are not one, but two possible sacrifices for the greater good. In case I missed it, ME3 brings it back home with Mordin's redemptive arc, Thane's noble sacrifice, and Legion's choice to merge with the Geth collective. It's important to note that sacrifice is *a* theme though, not *THE* theme. That's a subtle, and important distinction. If it were *THE* theme, I suspect the ME2 suicide mission would have played out a touch differently.{And I would have been fine with that, btw. Planescape: Torment - favorite game of all time. Big spoiler: there ain't no puppy dogs at the end. }

2) Entropy. Yeah, sure, sort of. But none of that explains why suddenly I'm taking the main and primary villain's word for it all. Shepard spits in Sovereign's eye, blows the heck out of Harbinger's Collector puppets, and (in my game at least) shoots the Illusive Man. These three guys have been feeding me the same rhetoric since ME1. I didn't buy it when Saren tried to talk me into synthesis, and I don't buy it here. Or at least, I wouldn't have bought it if I had been given any option not to do so.

And forget the thematic breakdown for a minute, does this guy really believe the pseudo-philosophical ramblings of the kid actually worked to sell the theme of entropy? Wait, here, in the last 5 minutes of the game, we'll introduce an unknown, untrustworthy and unlikable character, who will feed you information that makes no sense whatsoever, employs circular logic, and can't be argued with. And then surrender to the ideals of the Illusive Man, Saren the Indoctrinated, or else blow up the noble Geth because some kid told me I ought to. Some brats pull wings off flies, I don't listen to their supposed "wisdom" either. And don't even get me started on green balls of light fusing DNA and runtime processes which exist as code in a collective. See, those are my problems with the ending. Not the theme of Entropy (which I'm only marginally on board with) but the hamfisted manner in which I'm shoved across a minefield of plotholes to reach the pretty coloured lights. And yes, I did mix my metaphors there. Deal with it.

3) Forgiveness. Nifty. Not going to argue, though I'd argue that 'redemption' was closer to the mark. In any event, see middle rant.

Last of all, he handwaves out the whole epilogue / lack thereof bit. You know, explanations for the consequences of the Relay explosion destroying all major capital worlds, earth dying, the Turians and Quarians starving to death, the Krogans stranded in Sol (oh lovely) and that's if a supernova didn't just blow us to bits. And where did Joker go? Oh. He's not bothered by any of that. That was just a cinematic. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. A wizard he ain't, but he does have a nifty bag of Space Magic!™

TL;dr : I don't want happy endings. I want endings that don't drop me into infinite plotholes. Also, closure. Kthx.

Modifié par Ariq, 05 avril 2012 - 03:45 .

[Dridengx]

free17 wrote...

I think this makes six. Six people isn't going to convince me of anything.

I believe this is where the problem lies. People who don't like the ending such as this guy I quoted. Seem to feel people are somehow caring or pushing him to some notion of changing his opinion? This is simply not the case. No one cares if you 'get it' or not. it's your life, your opinion. Pro enders don't gain anything converting you.


In the last month I have yet to see these so called '6' pro enders try and convince anyone to their way of thinking. if anything, I mostly see them fighting for their opinions and getting into pointless arguements until names are being called like children.

Pro enders are trying to stop Retake from using charities as shields, insults to community members, trolling pro ender threads (which aren't even many to begin with), and ME fans (assuming both sides are fans) looking out for Bioware.

Retake wants something, we get it, they get it, everyone gets it. the problem is majority believe you don't deserve it based on the actions of some of your members. Which doesn't even matter to begin with, it's an opinion of some pro enders and you claimed it yourselves its only 6 right? you are the mighty 56k yet still feel the need to troll those 6 everytime you get? you can't better yourselves and ignore them?

Your beef is with Bioware for the ending right? why get caught up fighting with pro enders? stop wasting your time especially if there is only 6 of them.. yet they take so much of your mind you talk about them when they are not even in threads you are posting on. I've seen some baiting members not present lol. use all that emotion for your cause? Bioware said be constructive not disruptive. Attacking BSN or other fans isn't doing anything for you or your cause but tainting the name of Retake.

Pro enders have a reason to complain either it being they want peace, they want to not be called EA PR, Bioware employees in diguise, or to see normal threads on the front page. It doesn't mean they hate you, want to ruin your hopes and dreams of a different ending. They just want the drama and hate to stop?

The only people who should care are not even here most of the time. direct your criticism to Bioware not eachother. Preaching to the choir is only good for morale but staying strong for a month now proves you don't need it am I right?

Making 100's of threads complaining about the same thing for a whole month is dull and boring. don't you think? Bioware already told you several times they heard you, PAX is coming and claimed to make a statement about your request. Why attack other members? ignore them. What you want is greater than a few strangers online right?

[OgFux69]

Disclaimer: I have a degree in literature and I minored in film studies.

It begins wrong. This information is irrelevant.

[The Angry One]

Ah dridengx, the very one who's making people who like the ending look bad that I was talking about.
Still not done eh?

Is your little friend Hench going to show up too? Oh what delightful fun.

Modifié par The Angry One, 05 avril 2012 - 03:48 .

[Heavvy Metall]

2papercuts wrote...

written April 1

am i the only one that noticed this?

Thread closed//

[KingKhan03]

LOL dridengx i knew you had yet to make an appearance.

[Velocithon]

Geneaux486 wrote...





There are far more defences than that.  People's view on the ending is subjective.  To say it has plotholes, to say it breaks away from the major themes, all subjective.  Everything comes down to opinion.

Jave to disagree. A plot hole is a plot hole. If something isn't explained or reasoning isnt given and leaves things open ended, it's a plot hole. There are varying degrees of them though and some might not matter to people. 

[eddieoctane]

2papercuts wrote...

written April 1

am i the only one that noticed this?

Didn't have time to notice. I closed the window shortly after the post opened with the guy's "credentials".

Maybe it's just arrogance on my part, but I really don't care about credentialing of any form unless it involves science or public safety.  I learned a lot about literature in the 13 years of English classes each and every American youth has to sit through. I have a decent grasp on literary concepts. Did you ever take a single class on engineering mechanics? Would you walk across a bridge, even one spanning a backyard creek, designed/built by someone who hasn't?

[The Angry One]

Heavvy Metall wrote...

2papercuts wrote...

written April 1

am i the only one that noticed this?

Thread closed//

Oh dear.

[ticklefist]

I remember when I used to think my opinions about music were more valid than others because I actually made music and thus had the right to credibly judge. I also remember how young, naive, and full of myself I was.

Modifié par ticklefist, 05 avril 2012 - 03:50 .

[alx119]

If a guy has to write a long ass post just to describe why the ending is well done, is because the ending wasn't well done.
People usually is smug enough to say that the majority is filled with dumb people who "don't get" things, just because they aren't a part of the majority. Kind of like neo****s thinks that everyone's wrong to think that ****sm is bad. The mass is stupid, I'll agree to that, but the mass is formed by individuals, and each one has proven more intelligence than some people in the supposedly intelligent minority.

[Geneaux486]

The Angry One wrote...

Ah dridengx, the very one who's making people who like the ending look bad that I was talking about.
Still not done eh?

Is your little friend Hench going to show up too? Oh wait delightful fun.

You are not in a position to criticize.  Your behavior in this thread alone is proof of that.

[BluKardinal]

Ultimately that is exactly the point though. If the ending really was good, it wouldn't need a long explanation as to why. Nobody writes long essays with the thesis "Macbeth is a good play."

The bottom line is that in somewhere between a large and overwhelming majority of the playerbase, the endings triggered an extremely negative emotional reaction. All the explanation in the world can't change that simple fact.

[Heavvy Metall]

Dridengx wrote...

free17 wrote...

I think this makes six. Six people isn't going to convince me of anything.

I believe this is where the problem lies. People who don't like the ending such as this guy I quoted. Seem to feel people are somehow caring or pushing him to some notion of changing his opinion? This is simply not the case. No one cares if you 'get it' or not. it's your life, your opinion. Pro enders don't gain anything converting you.


In the last month I have yet to see these so called '6' pro enders try and convince anyone to their way of thinking. if anything, I mostly see them fighting for their opinions and getting into pointless arguements until names are being called like children.

Pro enders are trying to stop Retake from using charities as shields, insults to community members, trolling pro ender threads (which aren't even many to begin with), and ME fans (assuming both sides are fans) looking out for Bioware.

Retake wants something, we get it, they get it, everyone gets it. the problem is majority believe you don't deserve it based on the actions of some of your members. Which doesn't even matter to begin with, it's an opinion of some pro enders and you claimed it yourselves its only 6 right? you are the mighty 56k yet still feel the need to troll those 6 everytime you get? you can't better yourselves and ignore them?

Your beef is with Bioware for the ending right? why get caught up fighting with pro enders? stop wasting your time especially if there is only 6 of them.. yet they take so much of your mind you talk about them when they are not even in threads you are posting on. I've seen some baiting members not present lol. use all that emotion for your cause? Bioware said be constructive not disruptive. Attacking BSN or other fans isn't doing anything for you or your cause but tainting the name of Retake.

Pro enders have a reason to complain either it being they want peace, they want to not be called EA PR, Bioware employees in diguise, or to see normal threads on the front page. It doesn't mean they hate you, want to ruin your hopes and dreams of a different ending. They just want the drama and hate to stop?

The only people who should care are not even here most of the time. direct your criticism to Bioware not eachother. Preaching to the choir is only good for morale but staying strong for a month now proves you don't need it am I right?

Making 100's of threads complaining about the same thing for a whole month is dull and boring. don't you think? Bioware already told you several times they heard you, PAX is coming and claimed to make a statement about your request. Why attack other members? ignore them. What you want is greater than a few strangers online right?

I love how your signature says "Shepard deserves better fans" even though jenifer hale is dissapointed in the endings. 

[Velocithon]

Sorry for any typos I'm on my phone.

[The Angry One]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Ah dridengx, the very one who's making people who like the ending look bad that I was talking about.
Still not done eh?

Is your little friend Hench going to show up too? Oh wait delightful fun.

You are not in a position to criticize.  Your behavior in this thread alone is proof of that.

Is that so? Apparently observations on your nature count as "bad behaviour" now?
Understandable, the truth is always unpopular.

[Dridengx]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Ah dridengx, the very one who's making people who like the ending look bad that I was talking about.
Still not done eh?

Is your little friend Hench going to show up too? Oh wait delightful fun.

You are not in a position to criticize.  Your behavior in this thread alone is proof of that.

notice how she didn't even read my post? if only lol

[aliengmr1]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

And I've observed similar and worse behavior from people who hated the ending.  Doesn't mean I think everyone of that opinion is like that.

The difference is, the ending has only 3 defences.

"I liked it in spite of everything." -fine, whatever. But it's still objectively bad. You want to like it in spite of that? Go ahead.

"I made up my own ending!" -whether you admit it or not... this is not a good thing.

"You don't get it/it's over your head." -pseudo intellectualism really has no place here.

There are far more defences than that.  People's view on the ending is subjective.  To say it has plotholes, to say it breaks away from the major themes, all subjective.  Everything comes down to opinion.  The plotholes can be explained, the themes are there, and the implications of the endings vary. 

With respect, I disagree. While some parts are subjective there are quite a few that aren't. Even the article the OP linked said as much.