395 réponses à ce sujet

[JBONE27]

BrotherWarth wrote...

When people defend the ending I just have to assume that they don't put much thought into it. The ending isn't bad because it was sad or lacked closure. The ending was bad because it was poorly written. An English professor would tell you why it's bad and give you a failing grade. There is objectively bad writing and that ending is an example of it.
I expected the crucible to be a big EMP that shut off all technology, so I was perfectly prepared for a "sad" ending. I never in my wildest dreams suspected a magic space God would lay down the worst troll logic on me and I would have to just have to say "...O-okay."

Part of it is because it lacked closure, but yes, it was poorly written, and wasn't affected by any choice you made.

[woodbyte]

@OP: Objectively no, it wasn't good.

In the first Deus Ex game it worked OK. Mind you it wasn't brilliant, but it fit the overall theme of the game.
But as an ending to Mass Effect? I'd say at best it did the series a disservice.

If you have some time I recommend watching Mass Effect 3 Ending: Tasteful, Understated Nerdrage (SPOILERS).
It talks at length on why the ending is fundamentally flawed by bringing it into the context of the entire series.

It's a bit long winded, but if you stick with it you might better understand why people are feeling this way.

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

 

This isn't hate you are seeing, quite the opposite.

Modifié par woodbyte, 09 avril 2012 - 05:02 .

[JBONE27]

woodbyte wrote...

@OP: Objectively no, it wasn't good.

In the first Deus Ex game it worked OK. Mind you it wasn't brilliant, but it fit the overall theme of the game.
But as an ending to Mass Effect? I'd say at best it did the series a disservice.

If you have some time I recommend watching Mass Effect 3 Ending: Tasteful, Understated Nerdrage (SPOILERS).
It talks at length on why the ending is fundamentally flawed by bringing it into the context of the entire series.

It's a bit long winded, but if you stick with it you might better understand why people are feeling this way.

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

 

This isn't hate you are seeing, quite the opposite.

Agreed, it's like if someone you loved was cutting herself, wouldn't you try to do everything you could to keep her from doing that?

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

We are talking about a game which is released in 2012 with high budget, not a game from 2000. ME3 ending is rushed and has no depth.

[lx_theo]

JBONE27 wrote...

Point 1: That's your oppinion, but I think most people would prefer seeing what we've worked hard to aquire acutally fight instead of just being numbers.

Point 2:  Why Most Gamers Start but Don’t Finish Video Games - Digg

Point 3:  
A)  I told you the major themes of Mass Effect and you brought up foreshadowing?  You don't actually know what themes are do you?
 So you prefer things to go from intesnely emotional to WTF? in less than a minute.
C)  Why should Shepard trust a little boy that (s)he knew for about one minute over, say, Shepard's LI?  Why did Shepard walk towards the explosion instead of shooting the tube from a save distance?  Why shoot the tube at all, how does shooting at something fix it?  Why didn't the Reapers just destroy the Crucible?  How did Admeral Hackett know Shepard was there when earlier he said that no one was around the beam?  Why was Joker flying away from the battle without Shepard?  Why was Shepard's LI not looking for him/her in the wreckage (this is especially true for Liara)?  How could that machine merge organic and synthetic DNA?  Since when do machines have DNA?  And of course the classic, "Sythetics always kill their creators, so to prevent that I created a race of synthetics to kill organics,"  which is roughly the equivalent to a dentist saying, "I'm going to take out all of your teeth, so your teeth won't fall out."

Point 1
Obviously we see what direction Bioware decided on. It can be argued either way.

Point 2
Means nothing to whether the negitivity is whats stopping them.

Point 3
A) I wasn't meaning literary themes if you want to be so anal about it. I meant it fell in line with the decisions adn other moral such of most of the stories throughout the game.
B)I didn't think it was WTF. Mainly because there wasn't much WTF to it. I expected that sort of ending to come, if you don't recall me saying hat already.
C) Ugh... I'm going through another person's list of these atm. I'll do some of these.
Why should Shepard trust a little boy that (s)he knew for about one minute over, say, Shepard's LI?
Exhaustion. Have you never had a point in life where you where so tired physically and mentally that when you are much more inclined to go along with things? If not, then you should get more life experiences. Not to mention, so much of it was out of Shepard's understanding that i doubt he had much information to counter what he was told.

 Why did Shepard walk towards the explosion instead of shooting the tube from a save distance?  
More dramatic scene? Doubt it would make much of a difference anyways.

Why shoot the tube at all, how does shooting at something fix it?  
Blows it up. Releases the energy.

Why didn't the Reapers just destroy the Crucible?  
Wasn't the fleet defending it.

How did Admeral Hackett know Shepard was there when earlier he said that no one was around the beam?
Wasn't it just hooked up? I doubt he'd have not noticed that. He probablt assumed Shepard got on board. If you assumed anyone did, who would have it been?

 Why was Joker flying away from the battle without Shepard?  Why was Shepard's LI not looking for him/her in the wreckage (this is especially true for Liara)?
These two are the only plothole I actually see as confusing. The Joker part could be explained as a series of events led to it. Why the others were on the ship at the end is what's confusing. 

 How could that machine merge organic and synthetic DNA?  Since when do machines have DNA?  
I assumed that it meant that they'd not be fused, but the fundamental idea, like DNA and whatever synthetics have (do they ever elaborate on how they are built in ME?) are made the same. Everyone is still the same, but the distinction between synthetic and organic becomes the same as, lets say, Human and Turian.

And of course the classic, "Sythetics always kill their creators, so to prevent that I created a race of synthetics to kill organics,"  which is roughly the equivalent to a dentist saying, "I'm going to take out all of your teeth, so your teeth won't fall out."
its a different way of thinking. If a person doesn't care for their teeth, they can see the upside of taking the teeth out. Not my problem if you're not open minded enough.

[SlyTF1]

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.

You sir, have sucessfully been indoctrinated. Congradulations.

[Arsenic Touch]

BrotherWarth wrote...

When people defend the ending I just have to assume that they don't put much thought into it. The ending isn't bad because it was sad or lacked closure. The ending was bad because it was poorly written. An English professor would tell you why it's bad and give you a failing grade. There is objectively bad writing and that ending is an example of it.
I expected the crucible to be a big EMP that shut off all technology, so I was perfectly prepared for a "sad" ending. I never in my wildest dreams suspected a magic space God would lay down the worst troll logic on me and I would have to just have to say "...O-okay."

Nailed it.

[lx_theo]

woodbyte wrote...

@OP: Objectively no, it wasn't good.

In the first Deus Ex game it worked OK. Mind you it wasn't brilliant, but it fit the overall theme of the game.
But as an ending to Mass Effect? I'd say at best it did the series a disservice.

If you have some time I recommend watching Mass Effect 3 Ending: Tasteful, Understated Nerdrage (SPOILERS).
It talks at length on why the ending is fundamentally flawed by bringing it into the context of the entire series.

It's a bit long winded, but if you stick with it you might better understand why people are feeling this way.

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

 

This isn't hate you are seeing, quite the opposite.

I thought it was good. I still think it was good. Like I said, it in no ways stands up to the rest of the series. But that alone does not make it bad.

I might read the article in a little bit.

As for the hate, I was meaning being directed at the ending, not the game. Actually, not the series, because I've seen people say they hate the game because of the ending even though it was a big improvement over ME2

[addiction21]

Jedi Sentinel Arian wrote...

We are talking about a game which is released in 2012 with high budget, not a game from 2000. ME3 ending is rushed and has no depth.

Games in 2000 were rushed and had no depth. Hell most every ending to a BIoWare game is ****. "I am the good guy and I won!!!"

KoTOR and ME1 was nothing but "were you good or bad" and DAO (while great) was trivial at best. I feel like I am the only person that remembers how lackluster the endings to BIoWare games have been.

For someone thats been on this and the old forums for over a decade it was always the characters, the dialogue, the journery and never the ending that got chated up.r

[FRANCESCO84Inn]

for you is good bro, this is your opinion, but is nacessary open one thread for this ?

[Udalango]

Jbone's ending idea would have been vastly better
Especially if you did certain things. like say If you side with the Salarians instead of the Krogans you get different results and so forth. There are hundreds of different outcome possibilities there.

[lx_theo]

FRANCESCO84Inn wrote...

for you is good bro, this is your opinion, but is nacessary open one thread for this ?

Yes. Balance and compromise is the optimum solution. I choose to counter the rampant negativity with a sliver of positivity. 

[Ruined Requiem]

Glad you enjoyed the ending OP. I'm just too confused to enjoy it myself, hopefully that DLC will change that.

[JBONE27]

Udalango wrote...

Jbone's ending idea would have been vastly better
Especially if you did certain things. like say If you side with the Salarians instead of the Krogans you get different results and so forth. There are hundreds of different outcome possibilities there.

Thank you, I thought so too, but certain people disagree with me.

[Udalango]

JBONE27 wrote...

Udalango wrote...

Jbone's ending idea would have been vastly better
Especially if you did certain things. like say If you side with the Salarians instead of the Krogans you get different results and so forth. There are hundreds of different outcome possibilities there.

Thank you, I thought so too, but certain people disagree with me.

And since you would almost have to be shown those results you get your closure on what happened based on your decisions.  Its killing two birds with one stone.  Instead of trying to force us this confusing nonsensical ending

[JBONE27]

Udalango wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

Udalango wrote...

Jbone's ending idea would have been vastly better
Especially if you did certain things. like say If you side with the Salarians instead of the Krogans you get different results and so forth. There are hundreds of different outcome possibilities there.

Thank you, I thought so too, but certain people disagree with me.

And since you would almost have to be shown those results you get your closure on what happened based on your decisions.  Its killing two birds with one stone.  Instead of trying to force us this confusing nonsensical ending

Exactly what I was thinking.

[lx_theo]

JBONE27 wrote...

Udalango wrote...

Jbone's ending idea would have been vastly better
Especially if you did certain things. like say If you side with the Salarians instead of the Krogans you get different results and so forth. There are hundreds of different outcome possibilities there.

Thank you, I thought so too, but certain people disagree with me.

Mind you, that could have been added no matter the method of stopping the Reapers, including the current one. The fact that its not there likely means a lack of resources to go that in depth in the ending.

This is one of the "closure" topics I can see Bioware adding in the Extended Cut.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

addiction21 wrote...

Jedi Sentinel Arian wrote...

We are talking about a game which is released in 2012 with high budget, not a game from 2000. ME3 ending is rushed and has no depth.

Games in 2000 were rushed and had no depth. Hell most every ending to a BIoWare game is ****. "I am the good guy and I won!!!"

KoTOR and ME1 was nothing but "were you good or bad" and DAO (while great) was trivial at best. I feel like I am the only person that remembers how lackluster the endings to BIoWare games have been.

For someone thats been on this and the old forums for over a decade it was always the characters, the dialogue, the journery and never the ending that got chated up.r

Wow you own this thread smart@s.

Comparing ME3 Ending with games like Fallout New Vegas, Mass Effect 2, and witcher is the proper compering, not with old games like KOTOR or Deus EX.

And I find KOTOR and NWN endings better than ME3 endings. Everything should be compared with similar examples of it's age/generation. It's like saying I don't like Ancient Persia because it was not democracy. <_<

[J RoD824]

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.

I find that the ending makes utterly no sense when the Indoctrination Theory is not taken into consideration, especially with the complete ending. Team members within BioWare have alluded to the theory on more than one occassion. I agree that some of the details brought up in defense of the theory are weak (like the infinite pistol ammo), but as a whole I believe it to be true.  BioWare has also stated that there was more to come and that we should be keeping our saves. This was said before the Retake Mass Effect movement took root. The ending as you see it provides no closure whatsoever, and makes no sense. Although I do not agree with some of the decisions Casey Hudson has made concerning this game, many of his coworkers consider him to be very intelligent, which doesn't mesh with your interpretation of the ending.

[JBONE27]

lx_theo wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

Udalango wrote...

Jbone's ending idea would have been vastly better
Especially if you did certain things. like say If you side with the Salarians instead of the Krogans you get different results and so forth. There are hundreds of different outcome possibilities there.

Thank you, I thought so too, but certain people disagree with me.

Mind you, that could have been added no matter the method of stopping the Reapers, including the current one. The fact that its not there likely means a lack of resources to go that in depth in the ending.

This is one of the "closure" topics I can see Bioware adding in the Extended Cut.

True, but if you eliminate the kid and everything that comes after, it will make room for that, and will please a lot of fans.

[garf]

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.

You had me until the last sentence. I'm glad you liked it. Don't tell me how to feel.

IMO the biggest sin was handing you your 'victory' on a bitter platter. You win because the dark hand behind the reapers 'let's' you win. You 'win' by starting a galactic dark age.

I'm glad you liked the ending. I'm happy you found it good. I did not. period.

Modifié par garf, 09 avril 2012 - 05:47 .

[Udalango]

lx_theo wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

Udalango wrote...

Jbone's ending idea would have been vastly better
Especially if you did certain things. like say If you side with the Salarians instead of the Krogans you get different results and so forth. There are hundreds of different outcome possibilities there.

Thank you, I thought so too, but certain people disagree with me.

Mind you, that could have been added no matter the method of stopping the Reapers, including the current one. The fact that its not there likely means a lack of resources to go that in depth in the ending.

This is one of the "closure" topics I can see Bioware adding in the Extended Cut.

But then you are still stuck with the lil walking contradiction machine star brat.  His logic is ridiculous it contradicts things the Reapers told you which only makes sense if the Reapers didnt know about Star brat which is totally lame, it makes ME1 pointless...Why did Sovereign have to do everything he did if star brat was in the Citadel the whole time
Adding a new main antagonist in the last 5 mins and only giving him 14 lines of dialouge was so incredibly dumb.  I cant think of any other awesome movie book or game that has ever done that.  Id assume cause it isnt a fun thing to read/play/watch.  Why make me hate something/one if they arent even what I should be hating?
I really wanted to just be against Harby.  Cause he was an established bad guy and he is the "Oldest Reaper" so he would make sense

[lx_theo]

Udalango wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

Udalango wrote...

Jbone's ending idea would have been vastly better
Especially if you did certain things. like say If you side with the Salarians instead of the Krogans you get different results and so forth. There are hundreds of different outcome possibilities there.

Thank you, I thought so too, but certain people disagree with me.

Mind you, that could have been added no matter the method of stopping the Reapers, including the current one. The fact that its not there likely means a lack of resources to go that in depth in the ending.

This is one of the "closure" topics I can see Bioware adding in the Extended Cut.

But then you are still stuck with the lil walking contradiction machine star brat.  His logic is ridiculous it contradicts things the Reapers told you which only makes sense if the Reapers didnt know about Star brat which is totally lame, it makes ME1 pointless...Why did Sovereign have to do everything he did if star brat was in the Citadel the whole time
Adding a new main antagonist in the last 5 mins and only giving him 14 lines of dialouge was so incredibly dumb.  I cant think of any other awesome movie book or game that has ever done that.  Id assume cause it isnt a fun thing to read/play/watch.  Why make me hate something/one if they arent even what I should be hating?
I really wanted to just be against Harby.  Cause he was an established bad guy and he is the "Oldest Reaper" so he would make sense

His logic is fine. Did you try thinking about it from his point of view. it makes plenty of sense that way.

As for why couldn't they get his help? Thats assuming he'd be willing to give his help until the Reaper's could not fulfill his plan anymore. He would have known that they could simply fly there if needed (like they did).

I saw him as the embodiment of the Reapers. Mind you he did say we a lot when referring to the Reapers.

[garf]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

SteamieHotPlayer wrote...

good? then you are the minority.

And thats supposed to change his enjoyment of it how? For not being a sheep he should enjoy it less?

Majority or minority is irrelevant here.

That's not what most people who defend the endings would have you believe. Ant-enders have been slapped in the face with the frozen 'vocal minority' trout to often for pro-enders to dismiss it as mere bagatelle when it proves patently untrue.

however. IMO you're right. Minority or Majority is not the issue. he's free to like it and tell us how he likes it. I take exception to him calling me ridiculous for falling to share  his opinion. 

[JBONE27]

Udalango wrote...

lx_theo wrote...

JBONE27 wrote...

Udalango wrote...

Jbone's ending idea would have been vastly better
Especially if you did certain things. like say If you side with the Salarians instead of the Krogans you get different results and so forth. There are hundreds of different outcome possibilities there.

Thank you, I thought so too, but certain people disagree with me.

Mind you, that could have been added no matter the method of stopping the Reapers, including the current one. The fact that its not there likely means a lack of resources to go that in depth in the ending.

This is one of the "closure" topics I can see Bioware adding in the Extended Cut.

But then you are still stuck with the lil walking contradiction machine star brat.  His logic is ridiculous it contradicts things the Reapers told you which only makes sense if the Reapers didnt know about Star brat which is totally lame, it makes ME1 pointless...Why did Sovereign have to do everything he did if star brat was in the Citadel the whole time
Adding a new main antagonist in the last 5 mins and only giving him 14 lines of dialouge was so incredibly dumb.  I cant think of any other awesome movie book or game that has ever done that.  Id assume cause it isnt a fun thing to read/play/watch.  Why make me hate something/one if they arent even what I should be hating?
I really wanted to just be against Harby.  Cause he was an established bad guy and he is the "Oldest Reaper" so he would make sense

I don't remember Harby being the oldest reaper, but yes, a final conflict with him doing his whole taunting thing, taking control of varrious husks, canabals, banshies, etc. while the alliance is pounding on him would have been a lot better.