481 réponses à ce sujet

[GdawgTuk]

Oh wow, I "lol'ed" at this big time. At first I was unsure of where this was going, but this video is some much needed, light hearted humor about the ending. That and it's less than 2 minutes long.

www.youtube.com/watch

Modifié par GdawgTuk, 09 avril 2012 - 12:52 .

[eboshi12]

This is a great video. It's nice to have someone who can sum up my feelings and observations in a much more elegant and concise way than I ever could. Thanks to the guy who made it.

[Yougottawanna]

Hey: about the overlapping narrations in the narrative coherence bit. My intention was to demonstrate how it wasn't any one of those issues that was individually the problem, but the combination of all of them. I also chose the issues to show that they were the product of problems with the things previously discussed (genre, character focus, central conflict).

The thing is that I wasn't really looking for answers to these questions. Just the fact that I'm asking them is itself a problem. I shouldn't have to go to the internet for answers to them, or have to speculate up ones for myself. I'm not completely obtuse, and I've paid as much attention to the Mass Effect universe as can reasonably be expected, so if these questions popped up for me and disrupted my experience, I imagine they did for lots of people.

I actually have the script for that video still, and the script has the questions from that section listed out. If anyone's interested, here they are (I may have changed the wording of some of them when I recorded the voiceover, so these may not be the same verbatim questions from the video, but they should be very close):

How did they get the citadel to earth? I didn't know it could move. How did they move something so big clear across the Galaxy?
I don't get what the Crucible was even originally supposed to do. Did the people that first worked on it know that the Citadel kid was controlling the Reapers? Was building the Crucible ever necessary in the first place?
How exactly is this beam of light supposed to take me to the Citadel? I've never seen anything like this before.
Why am I wearing armor again - and a helmet - when they find me in the rubble back on Earth?
I only see one route to the control panel - how did Anderson get here first?
How is the Illusive Man controlling me and Anderson? I've never seen anyone do this before.
I appear to be outside the Citadel, in space, and I'm not wearing my spacesuit. How am I breathing?
When I destroy synthetic life, will that kill the partly synthetic quarians too, or people with biotic implants?
If I choose to control the Reapers, can I just tell them to self-destruct and then let the Geth go?
There are a dozen different problems with Hologram kid's logic, why can't I point any of them out?
Does liquifying a civilization and turning it into a space cthuhlu really count as preserving it?
If this kid was controlling the Citadel the whole time, why did it need Sovereign to do any of the stuff it did in the entire first game?
Why does each decision require the destruction of the mass relays? I don't see how that follows.
The mass relays are scattered all across the galaxy - how is it even possible to destroy them all at once like this?
How will all the fleets over earth get back home without the mass relays?
I thought destroying a mass relay created a supernova-like thing. Did I just destroy our solar system?
Will the new, half-synthetic Krogan still have four testicles?
How does me jumping into a beam of light alter all life in the galaxy?
What does it MEAN - in a practical sense - that organic and synthetic life are now merged?
Explain to me, in your own words, what you think DNA is.
I only see the outcomes of three people at most. What happened to practically everyone I care about?
Turians and Quarians can't eat human food, what will they eat if they're stranded over earth?
How did Garrus get onto the Normandy if he was back down on Earth, presumably dead, when I last saw him?
Why is the Normandy trying to jump through a relay?
After the relay blows, where IS the Normandy and how did it get there?
Who is this old man, and who is the kid he's talking to?
Why does NOTHING ABOUT THIS MAKE ANY SENSE?

[GdawgTuk]

Yougottawanna wrote...

Hey: about the overlapping narrations in the narrative coherence bit. My intention was to demonstrate how it wasn't any one of those issues that was individually the problem, but the combination of all of them. I also chose the issues to show that they were the product of problems with the things previously discussed (genre, character focus, central conflict).

The thing is that I wasn't really looking for answers to these questions. Just the fact that I'm asking them is itself a problem. I shouldn't have to go to the internet for answers to them, or have to speculate up ones for myself. I'm not completely obtuse, and I've paid as much attention to the Mass Effect universe as can reasonably be expected, so if these questions popped up for me and disrupted my experience, I imagine they did for lots of people.

I actually have the script for that video still, and the script has the questions from that section listed out. If anyone's interested, here they are (I may have changed the wording of some of them when I recorded the voiceover, so these may not be the same verbatim questions from the video, but they should be very close):

How did they get the citadel to earth? I didn't know it could move. How did they move something so big clear across the Galaxy?
I don't get what the Crucible was even originally supposed to do. Did the people that first worked on it know that the Citadel kid was controlling the Reapers? Was building the Crucible ever necessary in the first place?
How exactly is this beam of light supposed to take me to the Citadel? I've never seen anything like this before.
Why am I wearing armor again - and a helmet - when they find me in the rubble back on Earth?
I only see one route to the control panel - how did Anderson get here first?
How is the Illusive Man controlling me and Anderson? I've never seen anyone do this before.
I appear to be outside the Citadel, in space, and I'm not wearing my spacesuit. How am I breathing?
When I destroy synthetic life, will that kill the partly synthetic quarians too, or people with biotic implants?
If I choose to control the Reapers, can I just tell them to self-destruct and then let the Geth go?
There are a dozen different problems with Hologram kid's logic, why can't I point any of them out?
Does liquifying a civilization and turning it into a space cthuhlu really count as preserving it?
If this kid was controlling the Citadel the whole time, why did it need Sovereign to do any of the stuff it did in the entire first game?
Why does each decision require the destruction of the mass relays? I don't see how that follows.
The mass relays are scattered all across the galaxy - how is it even possible to destroy them all at once like this?
How will all the fleets over earth get back home without the mass relays?
I thought destroying a mass relay created a supernova-like thing. Did I just destroy our solar system?
Will the new, half-synthetic Krogan still have four testicles?
How does me jumping into a beam of light alter all life in the galaxy?
What does it MEAN - in a practical sense - that organic and synthetic life are now merged?
Explain to me, in your own words, what you think DNA is.
I only see the outcomes of three people at most. What happened to practically everyone I care about?
Turians and Quarians can't eat human food, what will they eat if they're stranded over earth?
How did Garrus get onto the Normandy if he was back down on Earth, presumably dead, when I last saw him?
Why is the Normandy trying to jump through a relay?
After the relay blows, where IS the Normandy and how did it get there?
Who is this old man, and who is the kid he's talking to?
Why does NOTHING ABOUT THIS MAKE ANY SENSE?

You made the video? If so, cheers! Outstanding work on everything you have posted so far. This was phenominal. 

Allen was actually curious about this list, so I am sure he will be interested.

[k8ee]

Yes, I remember asking myself those questions, including "how come that kid said all synthetic life would die if I choose destroy, and yet EDI stepped off the Normandy in my ending?" Supposedly the one's you see exiting the Normandy are your LI and one person from the squad you took in the final assault. I took Garrus and EDI in the assault, and so that's who I saw in that crash scene.... so EDI's not dead?... god the confusion, even weeks later, is giving me frown lines.

[Coder4Hire]

Awesome video. Perhaps I should have done more of that and less rage here on the forums...

[killnoob]

did anyone show Patrick Weekes about this?

[Spartanburger]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
It's actually why I like the sacrifice of the Geth, because I do care about them.  It made me think about choosing destroy.

Personally, the Geth sacrifice seemed to come out of nowhere for me and seemed completely undeserving.

Let me put it in different words. Yes, the goal is to destroy all the synthetics and Destroy accomplishes that very well. My problem is that destroying what the Geth symbolize came as a slap to the face to me.

We (Shepard) witnessed (if peace is chosen or if you're a monster and saved the Geth over the Quarians) a race being born. Not physically, but mentally. You were there, talking with Legion while he made the Geth fully sentient individuals.

And then it's immediately taken away by the Destroy ending. That level of potential, that level of personal connection by the player, should not be yanked out of the player's grasp at the last moment (in my opinion) especially in such a way. If there was something more, maybe Shepard messaging the Geth fleet before the destroy to apologize ("I'm sorry, it's the only way" + "We understand. If we must be sacrificed so that intelligent life can be self determining then so be it.") or at least something then I could better understand. But there wasn't.


When SpaceChild said that it would destroy the Geth, they way he talked made it seem like he thought that Shepard didn't like the Geth or sought to destroy them. Something that, considering Legion in ME2 and the entire peace (or monster/Quarian sacrifice) outcome of the Quarian/Geth conflict is completely wrong. What if, like my Shepard (and me) he didn't hate or seek to destroy the Geth?

And the simple fact that you watched them achieve complete sentience and individuality and then have it taken away without warning felt like I had just had a child taken away while it was at school, with the school and police forces not doing anything about it and the perpetrator calling me and saying "Hey, I thought this was what you wanted." No. No it wasn't what I wanted and I'd do a lot to ensure that it doesn't happen (the only reason why I chose Synthesis over destroy).

A bit of an extreme example, but nonetheless it accurately represents my feelings on the Geth being destroyed in the ending.

That hurt. It really did.

How would I solve this problem in the EC DLC? Actually, it might be easier than thought.

You yourself mention about how the SpaceChild might not know just how well calibrated (why wasn't there an option to send Garrus to the Crucible? He would have that thing calibrated to hit the fleas of a Varren on the other side of the galaxy) the Crucible is simply because Shepard can live (at least, it's implied/teased). I would have the ending that Shepard live in also have the Crucible be calibrated enough so that at least a portion of the Geth survive. I would explain it (in all endings basically) that the Geth, being unsure as to what the blast from the Crucible/Citadel would do, would FTL jump to the edge of the solar system and go into temporary hybernation. Control would have no effect on them and they'd wake up again after the set time period. Synthesis... would do whatever synthesis does. Destroy would wipe them clean leaving only the bare husks of their machinery (they are simply software). But, in destroy if a certain EMS was achieved (I'd put the number at least at the same number it takes to have Shepard survive, if not higher like 6.5k) then a portion of the Geth (or all of them) survive. The Crucible would be calibrated enough to only effect the Reapers. The Reaper code that helped the Geth ascend would be gone, and with it some Geth programs, but they would still be there. Perhaps their remaining programs would then be consolidated into a single platform, once again taking on the beliefs of the True Geth mentioned in ME2 that they would prefer to achieve sentience on their own terms (I question why they used the Reaper code at all in ME3 because of this, but I can justify it down to there being a significantly smaller number of Geth programs and therefore they wouldn't be thinking well. Also explains why they allied with the Reapers in ME3 in the first place).

That's what I'd do, but I'll leave the final decision to the developers (especially if Mr. Weekes has anything to do with it) and remain cautiously excited.

And this response has gone on longer than expected. It would probably be more relevant in a thread directly discussing the outcomes of the endings, but it's way too late for me to be able to do that.

[ForceXev]

I tried watching this video once but the first five minutes is like a Star Trek love-fest, and then when he actually says the whole quote "to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before" I had to turn it off. I like Star Trek well enough, but jeez I thought the video was about Mass Effect.

Anyway, I guess I'll pick it up from there and try again to get through it...

[TransientNomad]

Saw it a long time ago, but it was a fantastic vid. This guy did a great job!

[Coder4Hire]

Awesome video. Perhaps I should have done more of that and less rage here on the forums...

[Cloud43]

Great video, definitely a must watch for anyone who is invested in this whole debacle.

[ladyshara]

Thank you BSN for taking up even more of my freetime. :-P Just watched all his videos. Pretty much spot-on. Also amusing. I feel better now. Nice to know I'm not the only one ridiculously invested in a videogame.

[Riion]

This is a great mix of the basis for much of our "nerdrage" and sarcastic comedy. Sharing this with all my friends

[Allan Schumacher]

Yougottawanna wrote...

<snip>

Thanks for the clarification.  It helped me make sense of the idea that it wasn't just a culmination of the entire game's issues where it all came to be.

I think some of the questions are actually explained, and in my impression don't present an issue, but then I also didn't mind the ending.  By the same token, some of the questions are very valid and questions that I also had.  If you want to go over it I can, but just wanted to explicitly call out a thanks.

Personally, the Geth sacrifice seemed to come out of nowhere for me and seemed completely undeserving.

That's fair.  I think as the game player if you found the inclusion of the Geth to be placed without being able to rationalize their inclusion, it's going to trip the player up.  Especially if they liked the Geth (I think it's hard not to sympathize with them).

Let
me put it in different words. Yes, the goal is to destroy all the
synthetics and Destroy accomplishes that very well. My problem is that
destroying what the Geth symbolize came as a slap to the face to me.

We
(Shepard) witnessed (if peace is chosen or if you're a monster and
saved the Geth over the Quarians) a race being born. Not physically, but
mentally. You were there, talking with Legion while he made the Geth
fully sentient individuals.

And then it's immediately taken away by the Destroy ending. That level
of potential, that level of personal connection by the player, should
not be yanked out of the player's grasp at the last moment (in my
opinion) especially in such a way. If there was something more, maybe
Shepard messaging the Geth fleet before the destroy to apologize ("I'm
sorry, it's the only way" + "We understand. If we must be sacrificed so
that intelligent life can be self determining then so be it.") or at
least something then I could better understand. But there wasn't.

This is actually why the choice works for me.  By the same token, it's also why people wish they could tell the Catalyst off.  Issues with the Catalyst aside, I don't find the inclusion of the Geth to be logically inconsistent because it still works as being a part of the unpredictability of the Crucible.

We're able to have Shepard empathize with the Geth, but then be put in a position that challenges the "We fight or we die" stance he held throughout the game.  If the Catalyst had mentioned "But all Vorcha will also die" then it's a bit easier to go "Eh... sorry Vorcha" because the player hasn't established that emotional connection with them.  I imagine any player that didn't like the Geth didn't have much issue with this decision either.

But I do also recognize that what I like in a game isn't necessarily what other people like in a game.  I actually enjoyed mulling over this decision because it illicited an emotional reaction from me (something I thought Mass Effect did really well, and one of the things that is constant throughout all of my favourite games).  I enjoy being presented with a difficult choice, and sometimes I appreciate that there may not be a better way around it.  I felt the same way with Ashley/Kaiden as well as Mordin on Tuchanka.  Though I understand a subtle difference in that Mordin and Ash/Kaiden all expressed a willingness to go through with it.

It is a crappy thing to have to do, but it's what I find makes Shepard an interesting character.  Though I'm not a complete nihilist, as my favourite movie is The Shawshank Redemption which is a movie that has me cheering right along side Andy at the end.  So yeah, I can understand why people have issues with it.  I remember seeing a comment along the lines of how the point of video games is to provide some escapism, and not allowing the player to truly "win" is a bad thing for games.  It's not something I require, but as a game dev it is something for me to think about.

Allan

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 09 avril 2012 - 03:21 .

[matn35]

I just finished the video. It was awesome.

[Skirlasvoud]

We have taken narrative coherence for granted. It's all our fault we were suprised by the ending.

[Alamar2078]

I wonder if the writers ever realized that the endings seem to either promote slavery, genocide, or ethnocide as valid ways to resolve your issues. Did a Diversity Manager actually sign off on something like this??

[luckyj2020]

Just watched it. Literally explains everything so well. I hope Bioware will take this to heart and forget about this "clarifying". His points are incredibly valid and show exactly where Bioware went wrong, and where they went right. Please listen to his ideas and implement them.

[Pyromatic Tabby]

Skirlasvoud wrote...


We have taken narrative coherence for granted. It's all our fault we were suprised by the ending.

It's taken for granted because it's an intrinsic part of storytelling in general.

Frankly it's practically a requirement for storytelling, It's not our fault we expected the storyline to reach a logical conclusion.

[TreguardD]

Allan Schumacher wrote...


We're able to have Shepard empathize with the Geth, but then be put in a position that challenges the "We fight or we die" stance he held throughout the game.  If the Catalyst had mentioned "But all Vorcha will also die" then it's a bit easier to go "Eh... sorry Vorcha" because the player hasn't established that emotional connection with them.  I imagine any player that didn't like the Geth didn't have much issue with this decision either.

No. It would not be any easier, and that's the *point*.

I am still making a decision for a race that I have no right to decide.

In no ending do I allow Self Determination. True Self Determination.

(By the way. Whatever happened to the rest of the collectors? There were some in the Retake Earth video. They'd make a fancy good 4th enemy race for Multiplayer)

[Norwood06]

This is the first youtube video over 10 minutes that I've watched start to finish.

I liked the point on abandoning the focus on characters the best, nailed it.

I disagree with him on genre, though. One of the themes of ME is the danger of using technology you don't understand. The relays, the citadel, the keepers, etc. And consistently in the ME universe, each aspect of unknown tech was hiding (and enabling) this elaborate plot against organic life. The Geth storyline in ME2 reinforces this theme as well. To use reaper upgrades was to evolve as the reapers wanted.

Enter the catalyst, again technology we don't understand, but we assume its prothean, just like we did with the relays & citadel. Again, this is wrong, the protheans think it goes all the way back to the first cycles, but they were wrong about citadel and relays, just as the humans/asari/turians were.  They're no wiser re: the catalyst. Bottom line, no one really knows what the catalyst is or who designed it. It could be another reaper trap.

So, If using unknown tech is the only chance humans have to survive, then the story necessarily introduces new plot elements in the conclusion. We have to find out what it does. And BW's unfortunate decision to include starchild is at least consistent with the theme in ME, that if you use technology that you don't understand, bad things (or maybe unintended things) are going to happen to you.

Loved the vid, overall. Best (and most mature) taking to task of ME3 to date.

Modifié par Norwood06, 09 avril 2012 - 04:14 .

[killnoob]

 Allan, give us some scoops on the "other-game 3" Bioware has been planning/making...

Modifié par killnoob, 09 avril 2012 - 04:12 .

[James9749]

I'm watching the video now.

[luckyj2020]

Just watched the other video, and once again he nailed it.