913 réponses à ce sujet

[Johanna]

Because art.

Dunno.  Seriously, it's fscking stupid.

[HorusTheFalcon]

The solution is not to clarify Star child, but delete him.

[Wabajakka]

To be honest BW response to us with how proud of their work they are and "art" is bull**** and is alienating and dismissing the fan base.

They need to take notes from other developers and listen to their fans. It's funny because they stress listening to us the most, but when the time comes, they fail miserably. Endings have changed a number of times in more forms of art than just gaming as well.

The way they've handled it has led to bad word of mouth and the fastest plummeting sales of any game I've ever seen.

Modifié par Orange Tee, 07 avril 2012 - 02:58 .

[The_Crazy_Hand]

 It doesn't matter because they already sacrificed "Artistic Integrity" several times.  The trial at the beginning becomming a defense committee hearing, Tali's face being changed to a stock photo, adding in romance options they never originally intended to, etc.

[the slynx]

a.m.p wrote...

torudoom wrote...

after two games spent recruiting people for the fight, Shepard ultimately has to hand all authority for the fight over to the forces he's managed to round up

Thank you. Would have so much loved this. Instead of unsettling messianic overtones - an actual theme of unity.

Well, thanks for this thread, and the other one you made proposing an ending. I think stuff from this one is still completely usable if BioWare only wants to insert a few additional CGI sequences, and perhaps a few lines of dialogue.

I really hope someone at BioWare is reading these sorts of ideas and passing them on. I was sceptical at first of the mere possibility of fixing the endings, but some people have had some great suggestions in this thread - and they're feasible on a limited budget.

[Lilaeth]

Personally, I'm for sending Starchild to his room with no supper. For a very long time!

[Bourne Endeavor]

CapnManx wrote...

It's stated clearly that the Reapers can't be defeated by conventional means, and that the Crucible is their only real hope. Saying 'No' to the Star Child is essentially giving up on the whole 'saving the galaxy' thing; and just letting the Reapers win.

Sheppard is consistently portrayed as someone who just wont give up, no matter the odds; so quitting just isn't an option for him/her (and therefore wouldn't be presented as one).

You do realize Shepard made a career out of "defying the odds," yes? We do not actually know if conventional means would be feasible against the Reapers because just as the war reaches its climax, we are thrown into the Catalyst nonsense. Shepard then goes on to take him at complete face value, made worse because she is not even given the opportunity to argue. Godboy's flaws would be less noteworthy if it wasn't literally forced on you.

[The_Crazy_Hand]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

You do realize Shepard made a career out of "defying the odds," yes? We do not actually know if conventional means would be feasible against the Reapers because just as the war reaches its climax, we are thrown into the Catalyst nonsense. Shepard then goes on to take him at complete face value, made worse because she is not even given the opportunity to argue. Godboy's flaws would be less noteworthy if it wasn't literally forced on you.

Plus, canon codex entries like "The Miracle at Palaven" and "Reaper Vulnerabilities" make it clear you can defeat th[em conventionally.

[zovoes]

The_Crazy_Hand wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

You do realize Shepard made a career out of "defying the odds," yes? We do not actually know if conventional means would be feasible against the Reapers because just as the war reaches its climax, we are thrown into the Catalyst nonsense. Shepard then goes on to take him at complete face value, made worse because she is not even given the opportunity to argue. Godboy's flaws would be less noteworthy if it wasn't literally forced on you.

Plus, canon codex entries like "The Miracle at Palaven" and "Reaper Vulnerabilities" make it clear you can defeat th[em conventionally.

codex says blowing a relay makes it go nova, they still go boom. canon means jack in the end man. they ****ed their own artistic integrity and we got them on that, they just don't want to say so.

[a.m.p]

HorusTheFalcon wrote...

The solution is not to clarify Star child, but delete him.

Yes, I'm pretty sure most of BSN is in agreement on that. But that is not going to happen obviously. Starchild is one of the three biggest problems, the other two being the whole synthetics/organics bull**** and Shepard acting completely out of character.
If we try and fix that last one, the ending becomes 30% better, right? Throw in some closure that they are already doing anyway and we're much better off than we started a month ago.

[GreyLord]

I think it's a great idea...except one change...

You select no, you get a cutscene...of your entire fleet dead, earth ravaged, and the Reapers triumphant.

Hackett already told you they couldn't win.

However, an option to say no isn't a bad idea...but you should pay for it as well...with everything dead or destroyed.

[a.m.p]

GreyLord wrote...

I think it's a great idea...except one change...

You select no, you get a cutscene...of your entire fleet dead, earth ravaged, and the Reapers triumphant.

Hackett already told you they couldn't win.

However, an option to say no isn't a bad idea...but you should pay for it as well...with everything dead or destroyed.

Previous pages of this thread and a number of other long and detailed threads are full of potential ways to justify being able to fight the reapers conventionally and win. At this point there are arguments both for and against it. If the writers decide it is possible, they can easily make it an option without contradicting previously established facts (unlike say, synthesis).

[EsterCloat]

Because they don't want to change anything. This is "their" product and we shouldn't have any say over it apparently. Because apparently we're idiots and unless what we like is the same as what they think we like, we're wrong.

[a.m.p]

The_Crazy_Hand wrote...

 It doesn't matter because they already sacrificed "Artistic Integrity" several times.  The trial at the beginning becomming a defense committee hearing,

Did that happen? At some point there was supposed to be an actual trial? And it was turned into whatever the opening sequence is? Why?...

[OneDrunkMonk]

The only thing that even remotely makes sense to me is that the "Catalyst" entity, controller of the Reapers, used the physical construct of the child Shepard saw die back on Earth as means to draw sympathy from Shepard in order to trick him/her into not destroying the Reapers. Thus the red option is the valid one if the player chose not to allow Shepard to be fooled or semi/fully indoctrinated.

Now, how this "Catalyst" entity resides on or is part of the Citadel makes no sense whatsoever because if the mastermind behind the Reapers is part of or resides on the Citadel then what was the whole effort of Sovereign and Saren in ME1 for? Why wasn't the cleanse of the universe staged from the Citadel on outwards? The Citadel being the central hub of galactic government and action of organics it only makes sense to wipe out the organics there first. In fact if the Reaper controller is or part of the Citadel then that would mean the Reapers always had the upper hand in intel as to the actions of organics and thus would be able to preemptively strike the organics at every turn.

Also don't get how the Crucible couldn't deactivate (which is essentially what happened in the red option) the Reapers without effecting the Geth and EDI. All the Crucible had to do to be effective is cause a result to happen to the Reapers on their network. The Catalyst is the central hub of that network, so the Crucible using the Catalyst shuts down the Reapers. Any AI not on that network is unaffected. In fact all that was needed was to shut down all Reaper shield matrixes, like how destroying Saren's skeleton (mysteriously) did in ME1. That, by the way, would have given us some epic footage of the allied fleets blowing the Reapers into bits. At any rate, none of this destroying of the Relays nonsense or even worse the bio-synthetic magical merger nonsense.

[a.m.p]

OneDrunkMonk wrote...

Now, how this "Catalyst" entity resides on or is part of the Citadel makes no sense whatsoever because if the mastermind behind the Reapers is part of or resides on the Citadel then what was the whole effort of Sovereign and Saren in ME1 for? Why wasn't the cleanse of the universe staged from the Citadel on outwards? The Citadel being the central hub of galactic government and action of organics it only makes sense to wipe out the organics there first. In fact if the Reaper controller is or part of the Citadel then that would mean the Reapers always had the upper hand in intel as to the actions of organics and thus would be able to preemptively strike the organics at every turn.

Also don't get how the Crucible couldn't deactivate (which is essentially what happened in the red option) the Reapers without effecting the Geth and EDI. All the Crucible had to do to be effective is cause a result to happen to the Reapers on their network. The Catalyst is the central hub of that network, so the Crucible using the Catalyst shuts down the Reapers. Any AI not on that network is unaffected. In fact all that was needed was to shut down all Reaper shield matrixes, like how destroying Saren's skeleton (mysteriously) did in ME1. That, by the way, would have given us some epic footage of the allied fleets blowing the Reapers into bits. At any rate, none of this destroying of the Relays nonsense or even worse the bio-synthetic magical merger nonsense.

I am in complete agreement about all and every of these points. However we seem to be stuck with the starchild and all that comes with it, plus with whatever clarifications the Extended cut can bring.

So I am offering a compromise. An option for people who obsessively want to shoot starchild in the head (like myself) to reject all of that nonsense and have an ending depending on our painstakingly gathered war assets, which would also not require much more work than they are already devoting to the EC.

[JELLAQTP]

What I really hate of the endings is how Shepard is so obedient. Even his animation changes, he is now a weak person. The child orders him around. When he talks about control (something Shepard fought with TIM all ME3) he only says, "oh, so TIM was right". Nothing more.

Shepard is broken in the end. As somebody said here, If the starchild gave two options, and you fight and get the destruction option by yourself it would be more interesting.

[Ashilana]

a.m.p wrote...

 It would not change anything except for Shepard who was supposed to be the character that we, the player, created.

Bioware keeps their vision, we keep our Shepard.

They don't want to admit that they destroyed Shep in the last ten minutes.  Their PR department is now in charge and no real discussion with Bioware is possible.  It is sad, but unfortunately there is no chance of them altering the ending at all.

[CapnManx]

Roguekad wrote...

CapnManx wrote...

It's stated clearly that the Reapers can't be defeated by conventional means, and that the Crucible is their only real hope. Saying 'No' to the Star Child is essentially giving up on the whole 'saving the galaxy' thing; and just letting the Reapers win.

Sheppard is consistently portrayed as someone who just wont give up, no matter the odds; so quitting just isn't an option for him/her (and therefore wouldn't be presented as one).

So Sov wasn't killed by disrupting his link with Seraen, which left him volnurable and he wasn't finished off with convential weapons? 

I do agree Shep would find another option that didn't lead to continuing the cycle, forcing conformity on the universe or commiting genocide on a race that just reached peace with its creators.

'So Sov wasn't killed by disrupting his link with Seraen...'  That right there is not conventional means; that he was finished off by conventional weapons is besides the point.  You can't fight a war by relying on things like feedback from controlled avatars (Soveriegn), or giant wild animals (the destroyer on Tuchanka).

The Codex states that it takes multiple dreadnaughts working together to bring down one Soveriegn class Reaper; the Codex is also pretty clear that there simply aren't that many dreadnaughts out there (and that was before the Reapers invaded; ships were getting lost left right and centre throughout ME3).  It took repeated orbital bombardment, with the aid of a ground based targetting system, to take down that one destroyer on Rannoch.  On the other hand, Reapers have repeatedly demonstrated the ability to kill ships with a single hit.

You all saw what happened when they launched the counter attack on Earth; the combined forces of the whole galaxy whent in, and they weren't even trying to retake the whole planet, they were focusing all their efforts on getting people to that beam.  Yet only 2 people made it, despite the best efforts of the greatest military force ever assembled.

Those kind of losses cannot be sustained; especially since Reapers replenish their own forces by diminishing their enemy's.  Sure, if they had unlimited resources, ships, and manpower; but they didn't.

Killing individual Reapers simply takes too much work; while they can kill their enemies all too easily.  Saying they can be beaten in a war just because we have seen a few killed off is like saying the Rebellion could have won against an entire fleet of Death Stars because 'if they are shot in just the right spot...'.

[the slynx]

JELLAQTP wrote...

What I really hate of the endings is how Shepard is so obedient. ...

Shepard is broken in the end. As somebody said here, If the starchild gave two options, and you fight and get the destruction option by yourself it would be more interesting.

Agreed. It's jarring, and unnecessary. It could have been done in other ways to give both options: accepting the endings as the kid outlines them, and forging your own path, even if the costs are potentially higher.

I really think there is a feasible and achievable compromise for BioWare here. They can commit to their endings, and to another one that's still in keeping with the game - probably moreso than the ending thus far.

[the slynx]

CapnManx wrote...

You all saw what happened when they launched the counter attack on Earth; the combined forces of the whole galaxy whent in, and they weren't even trying to retake the whole planet, they were focusing all their efforts on getting people to that beam.  Yet only 2 people made it, despite the best efforts of the greatest military force ever assembled.
...

Killing individual Reapers simply takes too much work; while they can kill their enemies all too easily.  Saying they can be beaten in a war just because we have seen a few killed off is like saying the Rebellion could have won against an entire fleet of Death Stars because 'if they are shot in just the right spot...'.

Generally, I agree with you about the ability to win with conventional means. But there are suggestions in this thread and others about how one might use the Citadel not to destroy, but to even out the fight. I don't think these would be any more of a Deux Ex Machina-type development than Star Kid already is - and potentially less so, if it was handled correctly. For the purposes of this sort of a discussion, that seems to me a salient point.

[OneDrunkMonk]

Sovereign was pretty much taken out by the Normandy 1 (pre Thanix cannons BTW) once Sovereign's shields were offline. So, all the Crucible had to do was offline all Reaper shields. However, I will propose that a combined allied fleet of Alliance, Turian, Asari, GETH (<--emphasis), etc. etc. would have been able to take a dent out of the Reaper fleet by sheer overwhelming firepower alone. Not to mention enhanced tech with improved shield matrixes and Thanix cannons. But again, Reapers minus their shields, any cruiser could take one out.

[badd88]

Artistic integrity?

[a.m.p]

Ashilana wrote...

a.m.p wrote...

 It would not change anything except for Shepard who was supposed to be the character that we, the player, created.

Bioware keeps their vision, we keep our Shepard.

They don't want to admit that they destroyed Shep in the last ten minutes.  Their PR department is now in charge and no real discussion with Bioware is possible.  It is sad, but unfortunately there is no chance of them altering the ending at all.

Their PR department seems to be very good at its job of making them look good for the general public regardless of what they do.

Imagine how good their PR department could make them look if they agreed to add one extra ending based on fan input and perspective of the fan-created character. The ultimate freedom of choice in our ground-breaking choice-based game, stuff like that.