395 réponses à ce sujet

[MaverickPerry]

Anastassia wrote...

This is incorrect. I did play Arrival, and what I remember being established was that plowing an asteroid into a Mass Relay to destroy it wipes out the star system. But it's already been said by more than one BioWare employee that the Mass Relays don't explode the way you all assume they do, and that your interpretation of it was something they didn't anticipate because it's incorrect.

Then BioWare failed, not the players lack of "interpretation". It's their job to deliver an ending - not because I said so, but because they promised it for years and we bought that promise with $60-$120. Not only that, but they did what they specifically said they wouldn't do as an ending (A B and C, etc.).

If, at the end of Lord of the Rings, just before they drop the ring into the mountain, Frodo and Sam dress up in drag and start singing the Nyan Cat theme song, Gandlaf flies in having sex with Ronald McDonald, and the screen goes black, I'd say that was an unfair  "ending". I certainly wouldn't say, "It's up to the veiwers to interpret what happened. Tolkein wrote a perfect story. You know, artisitic integrity and all that."

There's a certain innate expected level of quality required, especially after buying three games, countless DLCs, and six years. 

Modifié par MaverickPerry, 10 avril 2012 - 12:23 .

[Annora]

wintermaul55 wrote...

So in other words .... i payed 10 dollars for arrive when it added no value to the story.... great...

Uh, what does that even mean? It added value because it adds context for why Shepard was arrested.

[MaverickPerry]

MegaSovereign wrote...

It's important to agree on WHY it was bad.

Some people are saying the Extended Cut won't do the job because it isn't addressing the reasons they had in mind.

I was simply stating that his having to defend it in such exhaustive attempts is proof THAT it's bad. 

You came in with your WHY.

Two separate issues entirely.

[SiriusXI]

lx_theo wrote...

 *Readies Omni-Shield of Invulnerability*

Yes, I said it. The ending was good. It wasn't great. It wasn't amazing. It wasn't the quality the series deserved to end on after such a great run. But it was good.

Many of the so called "plotholes" can easily be explained relatively easily without creating a whole conspiracy around it. There are a few that seem like oversights, like the sudden appearance of certain characters in ending scenes.

The whole Indoctrination Theory is just silly, and while it would be cool, it would also make no sense for Bioware to do without having actual content afterwards in the released title. Not to mention much of this "proof" is nothing of the sort, and a lot of it is non sequitur even when together.

Other than that, the greatest failing was that it didn't provide enough closure. The universe had many ways it could develop afterwards based on how things turned out on many different fronts throughout the game. The problem with the ending is that it doesn't reference these and specify what happens to provide said closure. Bioware is doing the smart thing is offering an ending that gives more closure.

So, the ending was good. All this hate for it is absolutely ridiculous.

EDIT: Here is me addressing the issue of "plotholes"
http://social.biowar...3404/4#11197542

Come on, that fact that you need to explain plotholes with rediculous explanations is already proof that the ending is horrible. No one can say the ending was good. At best you could say the ending was poorly done. AT BEST!!!


Plus: Synthesis is implicitely labeled as the best ending by Bioware! But this is the most racist thing ever!! And Bioware suggests the Player to go along with it. This just makes me sick!

Modifié par SiriusXI, 10 avril 2012 - 12:23 .

[MaverickPerry]

Starts off with: 

lx_theo wrote...

Yes, I said it. The ending was good. 

But then immediately follows it up with: 

lx_theo wrote... 

It wasn't great. It wasn't amazing. It wasn't the quality the series deserved to end on after such a great run. 

There are a few that seem like oversights, like the sudden appearance of certain characters in ending scenes.

the greatest failing was that it didn't provide enough closure. The universe had many ways it could develop afterwards based on how things turned out on many different fronts throughout the game. The problem with the ending is that it doesn't reference these and specify what happens to provide said closure. 

 

So it's "good" except for the part where it's not great or amazing, has multiple oversights, lack of closure, no answers, and, to quote you, "wasn't the quality the series deserved".

But other than that, it was good? That's like saying Hitler was a nice guy except for that whole global war, genocide, N@zi thing for a few years. But other than that, he was nice, and all the hate towards him is ridiculous.

I hope you're trolling, otherwise you're just absolutely, mind-numbingly retarded. 

Modifié par MaverickPerry, 10 avril 2012 - 12:28 .

[MegaSovereign]

viperabyss wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...


The themes "entropy" and "sacrifice for the greater good" has always been an major part of the Mass Effect trilogy. These themes were straight up reflected in the ending.

But so was "not accepting anyone's logic but your own". Think about it, when was the last time you had to accept someone else's logic at face value, without the option to argue against him/her? You certainly can argue against Saren, or Ashley / Kaidan, or Garrus, or the Council, or just about everyone. You can even argue against the Illusive Man's conjecture of "Collector is kidnapping every human colony", until he sends you to Freedom's Progress to see for yourself. He even said that he would be disappointed if you could be convinced easily.

So why weren't we allowed to argue with the Catalyst? With an idea as abstract as the Catalyst's, we should even be given more option to explore his reasoning. But instead, we got nothing but 14 lines of "you're doing it my way".

And to be quite honest, no one really cares if Shepard is sacrificed. A lot of people have gone into the game knowing Shepard is going to die. Do they like it? No, but they do accept it. But when Shepard was sacrificed in the most meaningless way, against a broken logic that cannot be argued, that was not the ending fans are looking for. They're looking for a perfect period, not a corpse in some dumpster in some dark alley.

You can't argue in speech but you can certainly ignore the Catalyst's wishes of choosing Synthesis.

You can always use the Crucible to destroy the reapers ----which was what you were trying to do since the start of the game. CLEARLY the Catalyst DID NOT WANT Shepard to choose Destroy (or even Control for that matter).

And there were many things in the ME series that you were forced to do against your free will. Not EVERYONE who has seen Freedom's Progress will  conclude that "working with Cerberus is the only way to stop the Collectors." For pete's sake, they're a TERRORIST organization.

They could have gave you the option to hi-jack the Normandy and face the consequence of not having the unlimited resources that Cerberus provides, but they didn't.

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 10 avril 2012 - 12:24 .

[nomoredruggs]

MegaSovereign wrote...

The themes "entropy" and "sacrifice for the greater good" has always been an major part of the Mass Effect trilogy. These themes were straight up reflected in the ending.

I found the "overcome impossible odds through perseverance and unity" to be the most prominent, and I guess that's why I was expecting a different feel from how it would end.

Modifié par nomoredruggs, 10 avril 2012 - 12:24 .

[webhead921]

MaverickPerry wrote...


I hope you're trolling, otherwise you're just absolutely, mind-numbingly retarded. 

Reported;)

[wintermaul55]

Anastassia wrote...

wintermaul55 wrote...

So in other words .... i payed 10 dollars for arrive when it added no value to the story.... great...

Uh, what does that even mean? It added value because it adds context for why Shepard was arrested.

coulda of just been arrested for being with Cerberus? How can people play 3 without arrive...
Then again harbringer was the main idea behind arrive... and well we see where that went...

[Zany Jedi]

I'm very much inclined to call this thread dead because Godwin's law has been initiated.

[refuse81]

The biggest plot hole in my opinion was that, as Shepard was dying, the Catalyst lifts him up to the Crucible platform, tells him to wake up and hands him the keys to their destruction. That is the definition of not fitting the theme for me. At what point during the series do the Reapers imply that they will let you decide their fate?

[MaverickPerry]

webhead921 wrote...
Reported;)

OH SHI

[Annora]

MaverickPerry wrote...

Anastassia wrote...

This is incorrect. I did play Arrival, and what I remember being established was that plowing an asteroid into a Mass Relay to destroy it wipes out the star system. But it's already been said by more than one BioWare employee that the Mass Relays don't explode the way you all assume they do, and that your interpretation of it was something they didn't anticipate because it's incorrect.

Then BioWare failed, not the players lack of "interpretation". It's their job to deliver an ending - not because I said so, but because they promised it and we bought that promise with $60-$120. If at the end of Lord of the Rings, just before they drop the ring into the mountain, Frodo and Sam dress up in drag and start singing the Nyan Cat theme song, Gandlaf flies in having sex with Ronald McDonald, and the screen goes black, I'd say that was an unfair  "ending". I certainly wouldn't say, "It's up to the veiwers to interpret the ending. Tolkein wrote a perfect story. You know, artisitic integrity and all that."

There's a certain innate expected level of quality required, especially after buying three games, countless DLCs, and six years. 

I'm sorry that the ending upset you so, it's never fun to feel like you didn't get your money's worth. However, that analogy to LOTR is both ridiculous and unfair. No one dressed in drag, and there was certainly no clown sex or Nyan Cat.

I bought the game on the promise that it was the end of Shepard's story, and it delivered. I never assumed the Mass Relays blew up the galaxy, and I was right. I didn't much care for the Normandy scene, but they've already agreed to extend the ending to provide closure and context. They're doing what they should be doing, and continuing to berate them for the ending not being what you wanted it to be is selfish and uncalled for. There is no consensus in your own movement about what the ending should be. People want a darker ending, people want the Catalyst retconned out, others want a happy ending, others want tne extension, others don't even want it to end. They can't please all of you.

[CronoDragoon]

refuse81 wrote...

The biggest plot hole in my opinion was that, as Shepard was dying, the Catalyst lifts him up to the Crucible platform, tells him to wake up and hands him the keys to their destruction. That is the definition of not fitting the theme for me. At what point during the series do the Reapers imply that they will let you decide their fate?

Apparently the difference between the Catalyst's Reaper solution being A-OK and not working anymore was Shepard stumbling forward a few feet onto the elevator.

[SealKudos]

refuse81 wrote...

The biggest plot hole in my opinion was that, as Shepard was dying, the Catalyst lifts him up to the Crucible platform, tells him to wake up and hands him the keys to their destruction. That is the definition of not fitting the theme for me. At what point during the series do the Reapers imply that they will let you decide their fate?

This bothered me as well.

Shepard was gone; the Catalyst wouldn't work.  Why would Starchild HELP Shepard end his solution?

I guess one could argue that Casper the Genocidal Ghost was convinced that Organics had come far enough to choose their own solution, but still... odds are they only got that far because of Shepard, who was damned near dead anyway.

[ProdigalKnight]

I thought it was good as well, flawed, but good nonetheless.
It really comes down to, "To each their own."

[Foulpancake]

wow dude your arguments are worse than justifying Jar Jar Binks... to quote yourself "Irrelevant", i really stopped reading in the beginning with the anderson parts, Ok so its "ok" to overlook anderson and shepard both walking to the beam, what about how Anderson's mic is ok to contact you but not let anyone know he was alive? "OMG they're all dead!" Anderson: "nope, im here"...really?

Just stop arguing now, half of your arguments are "doesn't seem important" or "can be taken in many ways" , just terrible...terrible terrible terrible

[AIR MOORE]

refuse81 wrote...

The biggest plot hole in my opinion was that, as Shepard was dying, the Catalyst lifts him up to the Crucible platform, tells him to wake up and hands him the keys to their destruction. That is the definition of not fitting the theme for me. At what point during the series do the Reapers imply that they will let you decide their fate?

What... you don't remember Shepard saying:


"You exist because we allow it, you will end because we demand it." and the Reaper et all simply acquiesce this line of thought...


Forgetful aren't we? LULZ.

[MegaSovereign]

refuse81 wrote...

The biggest plot hole in my opinion was that, as Shepard was dying, the Catalyst lifts him up to the Crucible platform, tells him to wake up and hands him the keys to their destruction. That is the definition of not fitting the theme for me. At what point during the series do the Reapers imply that they will let you decide their fate?

That bothered me a bit as well.

I guess it was because the Catalyst's solution no longer worked and so he hoped that he could convince Shepard to choose Synthesis (and he needed Shepard to do this).

[viperabyss]

MegaSovereign wrote...

You can't argue in speech but you can certainly ignore the Catalyst's wishes of choosing Synthesis.

You can always use the Crucible to destroy the reapers ----which was what you were trying to do since the start of the game. CLEARLY the Catalyst DID NOT WANT Shepard to choose Destroy (or even Control for that matter).

And there were many things in the ME series that you were forced to do against your free will. Not EVERYONE who has seen Freedom's Progress will  conclude that "working with Cerberus is the only way to stop the Collectors." For pete's sake, they're a TERRORIST organization.

But here's the problem: all three choices are based on us accepting his assumption: the synthetics will kill organics. Choosing the Destroy ending does not mean you defy his logic, it just means you accept his assumption, and accept the risk involved in destroying the Reaper. What if I don't want to use the Crucible? What if I want to tell him that his solution has became a problem in itself? Where's the choice to do that?

And when I say "not accepting anyone's logic", I'm not talking going on missions that you don't want to go on. I mean in no part of the trilogy (excluding the ending of ME3) where you're forced to accept someone's assumption and logic at face value. Of course, not everyone who have seen Freedom's Progress will conclude that working with Cerberus would be the only way, but all ME2 players have gone on to that mission, and concluded that Collector does exist, no? Shepard (or you) actually went to a colony where the civilians were abducted, and you saw actual footage of Collectors. Did you have to take Illusive Man's words for it? No, because you saw it with your own damn eye.

Now back to ME3 ending: did we see organics vs. synthetics playing out in the trilogy? No. Did we see synthetics attempting to wipe out the organics (excluding the Reapers, and Reaper controlled entities)? No. Did we see Reaper's actions actually prevented organics from being wiped out? No. We haven't seen anything. We haven't heard anything. Suddenly we're forced to work with someone who controls the Reapers, "because he says so"?

[Sesshaku]

The ending was good......mmmmmm


Your joke was good .


Also, the one who posted that awesome gif.

Here's another well known gif that could also apply to ME3 ending.

Modifié par Sesshaku, 10 avril 2012 - 12:32 .

[SiriusXI]

Prodical95 wrote...

I thought it was good as well, flawed, but good nonetheless.
It really comes down to, "To each their own."

No, it doesn't. There are valid arguments for the fact that the ending is bad. This is an objective view if objectivity even exists.

But maybe the term is wrong. There are valid arguments for the fact that the ending is "broken"! Whether you think a broken ending can still be good, then yes, I'll accept your opinion.

[DannyGloverfromPredator2_]

 @ Amioran
I'm going to keep this brief and try to be clear:

• The Order vs. Chaos theme is not a major established theme of the series from a gameplay/actions of the gamer perspective. It is introduced exclusively as the logic behind the principle antagonists. A good story should not at the last possible second pull the rug out from a reader/participant and tell them "everything you've been fighting for is wrong - the logic of the bad guys is actually correct" - the logic of villians is something to be questioned and proved wrong, not something adopted by the writers as the major theme at the climax.
• Bringing Joyce and Milton to the table in the context of evaluating the ending of ME3 is ridiculous. Joyce is obtuse throughout the entirety of Ulysses. He designed the novel to be an extraordinarily heavy read with allusions to music, literature, religion, mythology, etc. etc. weaved into the intricately and deliberately complicated narrative; many find the book to be more of an exercise in intellectual arrogance than really enjoyable. Paradise Lost is a Biblical epic written in the 17th century. Therefore, it builds upon and alludes to much of Christian mythology and western tradition - these allusions require a fair amount of background reading/understanding to fully grasp, but are clearly evident throughout the poem.  The Mass Effect Series, however...
• ...are a collection of video games. They tell a story, which has some solid depth to it, particularly in the realm of character development and user (gamer) participation via choices made through the series. The games include many archetypal characters (and villains), but don't contain significant literary/cultural allusion at any point. The story is meant to be straight forward and build upon the universe created within, not indirectly and obscurely refer to other works (literature, other games, music, etc.).  The medium, narrative structure, reader/gamer involvement, goals of the writer, and necessary background knowledge are completely different between this series of video games and the works of Joyce and Milton.
• The gamer participation and importance conveyed throughout the series on the importance of YOUR actions as Shepard is undone if Order vs. Chaos is really the big theme we're all supposed to buy into. That undermines hundreds of hours of engagement, and because of the interactive nature of video games, comes across to many as a betrayal.
• Repeatedly asserting that many people are basically too stupid or not well read enough to get the theme does not make you correct about either: a) Order vs. Chaos being THE theme or many people being ignorant.

Modifié par DannyGloverfromPredator2 , 10 avril 2012 - 12:37 .

[Jagri]

SealKudos wrote...

refuse81 wrote...

The biggest plot hole in my opinion was that, as Shepard was dying, the Catalyst lifts him up to the Crucible platform, tells him to wake up and hands him the keys to their destruction. That is the definition of not fitting the theme for me. At what point during the series do the Reapers imply that they will let you decide their fate?

This bothered me as well.

Shepard was gone; the Catalyst wouldn't work.  Why would Starchild HELP Shepard end his solution?

I guess one could argue that Casper the Genocidal Ghost was convinced that Organics had come far enough to choose their own solution, but still... odds are they only got that far because of Shepard, who was damned near dead anyway.

This one can be explained too! While he/she was at the panel he/she hit the "Easy" button. I mean come on guys who would think the game would end that easly right?

Modifié par Jagri, 10 avril 2012 - 12:37 .

[Zany Jedi]

Sesshaku wrote...

The ending was good......mmmmmm


Your joke was good .


Also, the one who posted that awesome gif.

Here's another well known gif that could also apply to ME3 ending.