227 réponses à ce sujet

[zenoxis]

 I would fire him because he flat out lied to everyone. Lying is not a good business practice.

[Hudathan]

j78 wrote...

I have a legitimate question for you and others who enjoyed the ending .what was the point of ME1 if the whole time star child was living in the attic of the citadel. Serene and sovereign would have had no problem With accomplishing their mission right .Just call star child on his cell and tell him to open up and bing bam boom ? This is one of the reasons I cannot buy this ending . It makes no scenes to me but if you have solution to this I would be overjoyed to hear it .

The Catalyst is implied to not directly control anything. It informs Shepard of the 'new possibilities' made possible by the Crucible but can't physically make changes. The Reapers, the Keepers, and the Citadel/relays are obviously one giant autunomous system. It could mean that whoever the Catalyst was originally is now gone and only preserved in the form of a simple voice. Or, it could mean that the Catalyst merely observes in order to avoid the creator vs created conflict it set out to prevent in the first place. Reapers and Keepers all go about performing their tasks through out the cycles with no interference from any master in order to keep the motivation pure.

[Sundance31us]

IsaacShep wrote...
They also think Bioware will release public apology and Casey Hudson will resign and beg for forgiveness. Space Magic in ME3's ending is nothing compared to the  fantasy world of entitlement and 1st world problems some people here live in.

LOL win.

[LordJeyl]

Tight Budgets, pressuring time lines, bugs a plenty and a partridge in a pair tree. Whatever Casey Hudson had to work with, it doesn't matter. We paid for what he promised he would bring to our table, and we were hit with his final product hard. I for one didn't get what he promised, and unlike many others, I was not all that blown away by the product as a whole.

Gene Roddenberry gave us Star Trek, but he was by no means it's best writer. It wasn't until Paramount booted him off the film franchise's producer role that Star Trek started to mean something again. Star Trek Nemesis tried to do something like that when Rick Berman changed the creative team around with different talent. Only problem was he left himself in charge and managed to successfully killed the film franchise for years to come. Just because one starts a legacy doesn't mean they can't also destroy it. I for one will never play any of the Mass Effect games again since I believe the Legacy has been significantly tarnished. If he thinks a hero is someone who easily conforms to a genocidal entity who is wrong, that person wasn't a hero at all.

[Kanon777]

The Angry One wrote...
Every time someone with that troll-tag banner says this, I consider it a personal victory.

You consider a victory everytime you annoy someone, and you dare call others "trolls"...

[The Angry One]

tobito113 wrote...

Wrong, Patrick Weekes never got the same ammount of hate Casey got in this forums, if he did what Patrick did, people like you would be trashing him at every chance, dont deny it

Hate. Really.
Have you ever thought that the reason Hudson has earned the annoyance of many is because he won't talk to us, and instead uses PR statements that appear dismissive of the issue?

You just convince yourself that we're unreasonable and work from there don't you.

Ugh... i failed at ignoring your idiocy again.

Thank you for continuing to demonstrate why so many of us consider your banner a troll-tag.

[The Angry One]

tobito113 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Every time someone with that troll-tag banner says this, I consider it a personal victory.

You consider a victory everytime you annoy someone, and you dare call others "trolls"...

I consider it a victory when people who continually misrepresent and insult me leave me alone.
Which is something you have yet to do, by the way.

[Phategod1]

The Angry One wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

The ending being bad is not, 

The term bad it totally subjective, To me Licorice is bad, but some people love it. You can say the same thing about The Ending, ****'s, Korean cars anytthing. so just because something is Bad  To you, or the masses or the minority the simple FACT  that you can find one person  who likes what you find bad destroys the notion of BAD=FACT.

Nope, it's objectively bad because it violates the core themes of Mass Effect.
It violates Shepard's core character.
It's laden with plot holes and nonsensical scenes, such as the Normandy scene which is heavily disliked even by people who like the ending.

That still does not make anything you said a fact. The simple fact that you can not say EVRYONE disliked it makes it an opinion. 

[nitefyre410]

UnstableMongoose wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Every time someone with that troll-tag banner says this, I consider it a personal victory.

Then you have no understanding of what a victory is. But fear not, I can provide you with the resources to get you started on your path to knowledge. Happy hunting!

 

*/lurke*
Oh... dropping the Art of War... **** just got real...

though  I suggest being careful that can be turned against you.. 
*lurke* 

Modifié par nitefyre410, 09 avril 2012 - 08:02 .

[kidbd15]

Hudathan wrote...

j78 wrote...

I have a legitimate question for you and others who enjoyed the ending .what was the point of ME1 if the whole time star child was living in the attic of the citadel. Serene and sovereign would have had no problem With accomplishing their mission right .Just call star child on his cell and tell him to open up and bing bam boom ? This is one of the reasons I cannot buy this ending . It makes no scenes to me but if you have solution to this I would be overjoyed to hear it .

The Catalyst is implied to not directly control anything. It informs Shepard of the 'new possibilities' made possible by the Crucible but can't physically make changes. The Reapers, the Keepers, and the Citadel/relays are obviously one giant autunomous system. It could mean that whoever the Catalyst was originally is now gone and only preserved in the form of a simple voice. Or, it could mean that the Catalyst merely observes in order to avoid the creator vs created conflict it set out to prevent in the first place. Reapers and Keepers all go about performing their tasks through out the cycles with no interference from any master in order to keep the motivation pure.

Too much speculation for the ending to a 100+ hour trilogy.  Too many "maybes" "coulds" "mights".  I don't want to speculate, this isn't a 2 hour movie, I want to know what happened, especially in a series like Mass Effect, where they try to rationalize EVERYTHING.  This is a conclusion, where all my questions were advertised to be answered, not give me more questions.

[Hudathan]

kidbd15 wrote...

Too much speculation for the ending to a 100+ hour trilogy.  Too many "maybes" "coulds" "mights".  I don't want to speculate, this isn't a 2 hour movie, I want to know what happened, especially in a series like Mass Effect, where they try to rationalize EVERYTHING.  This is a conclusion, where all my questions were advertised to be answered, not give me more questions.

I got good news for you!

blog.bioware.com/2012/04/05/mass-effect-3-extended-cut/

[The Angry One]

Phategod1 wrote...

That still does not make anything you said a fact. The simple fact that you can not say EVRYONE disliked it makes it an opinion. 

The essential quality of the ending is not dependant on everyone liking it or not.
If you refer to the Normandy scene, I have yet to talk to a single person who can honestly say it made sense.

[Phategod1]

The Angry One wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Every time someone with that troll-tag banner says this, I consider it a personal victory.

You consider a victory everytime you annoy someone, and you dare call others "trolls"...

I consider it a victory when people who continually misrepresent and insult me leave me alone.
Which is something you have yet to do, by the way.

Stop presenting your Opnions as facts and you'll be left alone. 

[Ubergrog]

First things first, Mr. Hudson did not "make" Kotor or ME. A huge team of dedicated individuals did.

Also, remember that as of right now, the KOTOR universe will never have a SP game ever again, because they decided it would be a brilliant idea to release an MMO, which destroys entire genra's for the sake of regular cash flow.

Mass effect's ending is still in the air, and all this talk of "it was totally planned out this way" i find suspect, however, Mr. Hudson should be terminated for the sake of all the horrible PR he has generated around himself. His name is quickly becoming radioactive, and his behavior before, during and after release was absurd and horribly ill advised.

[Hudathan]

Stop feeding.

[LordJeyl]

Hudathan wrote...
The Catalyst is implied to not directly control anything.

So the Catalyst can control magic elevators, but he can't make the Citadel do what it was designed to do. What's the point of that function? What is something was to go wrong and the Reapers ended up being destroyed? Why would the Catalyst purposefully make itself incapable of not continuing the cycle?

Modifié par LordJeyl, 09 avril 2012 - 08:06 .

[AxisEvolve]

tobito113 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Every time someone with that troll-tag banner says this, I consider it a personal victory.

You consider a victory everytime you annoy someone, and you dare call others "trolls"...

It's not her fault that pro-plotholers can't handle people criticizing Bioware.

The ending lovers lobbying for less options in Mass Effect 3 is what's really annoying.

We all begged Bioware to give us more options/RPG elements since the beginning, but now that is goes against your agenda it's "No, stick to your artistic vision that I just so happen to agree with at this moment in time".

Maybe they should rename "Action mode" to "Put your faith in Bioware's Artistic Vision" mode. I don't see why that wouldn't make Pro-Enders happy. People who dislike the ending can have the "RPG mode" or "In character Shepard who's choices matter" mode.

[nitefyre410]

LordJeyl wrote...

Tight Budgets, pressuring time lines, bugs a plenty and a partridge in a pair tree. Whatever Casey Hudson had to work with, it doesn't matter. We paid for what he promised he would bring to our table, and we were hit with his final product hard. I for one didn't get what he promised, and unlike many others, I was not all that blown away by the product as a whole.

Gene Roddenberry gave us Star Trek, but he was by no means it's best writer. It wasn't until Paramount booted him off the film franchise's producer role that Star Trek started to mean something again. Star Trek Nemesis tried to do something like that when Rick Berman changed the creative team around with different talent. Only problem was he left himself in charge and managed to successfully killed the film franchise for years to come. Just because one starts a legacy doesn't mean they can't also destroy it. I for one will never play any of the Mass Effect games again since I believe the Legacy has been significantly tarnished. If he thinks a hero is someone who easily conforms to a genocidal entity who is wrong, that person wasn't a hero at all.

  

^ I do believe I like this one  here. 

[Ownedbacon]

Hudathan wrote...

j78 wrote...

I have a legitimate question for you and others who enjoyed the ending .what was the point of ME1 if the whole time star child was living in the attic of the citadel. Serene and sovereign would have had no problem With accomplishing their mission right .Just call star child on his cell and tell him to open up and bing bam boom ? This is one of the reasons I cannot buy this ending . It makes no scenes to me but if you have solution to this I would be overjoyed to hear it .

The Catalyst is implied to not directly control anything. It informs Shepard of the 'new possibilities' made possible by the Crucible but can't physically make changes. The Reapers, the Keepers, and the Citadel/relays are obviously one giant autunomous system. It could mean that whoever the Catalyst was originally is now gone and only preserved in the form of a simple voice. Or, it could mean that the Catalyst merely observes in order to avoid the creator vs created conflict it set out to prevent in the first place. Reapers and Keepers all go about performing their tasks through out the cycles with no interference from any master in order to keep the motivation pure.

It is implied that the Reapers follow the same strategy when harvesting the galaxy. If the Catalyst doesn't control anything how can he simply give control over to Shepard with the two handles protruding from the Citadel?

Most of what you talked about is speculation. If the Catalyst has the ability to give control to Shepard or let Shepard destroy the Reapers wouldn't there be some level of power that the Catalyst has? It would only make sense that the Catalyst could have taken on the responsiblities of the Vanguard.

[Kanon777]

Phategod1 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Every time someone with that troll-tag banner says this, I consider it a personal victory.

You consider a victory everytime you annoy someone, and you dare call others "trolls"...

I consider it a victory when people who continually misrepresent and insult me leave me alone.
Which is something you have yet to do, by the way.

Stop presenting your Opnions as facts and you'll be left alone. 

That will never hapen

[Phategod1]

The Angry One wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

That still does not make anything you said a fact. The simple fact that you can not say EVRYONE disliked it makes it an opinion. 

The essential quality of the ending is not dependant on everyone liking it or not.
If you refer to the Normandy scene, I have yet to talk to a single person who can honestly say it made sense.

But who dictates its quality, the determination of that quality is ......wait for it......OPINION.

Modifié par Phategod1, 09 avril 2012 - 08:12 .

[The Angry One]

Phategod1 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

tobito113 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Every time someone with that troll-tag banner says this, I consider it a personal victory.

You consider a victory everytime you annoy someone, and you dare call others "trolls"...

I consider it a victory when people who continually misrepresent and insult me leave me alone.
Which is something you have yet to do, by the way.

Stop presenting your Opnions as facts and you'll be left alone. 

They're not opinions. They are objective truth. Don't like it? Tough.
You are free to disagree with me as long as you're not insulting, by the way.

[kidbd15]

Phategod1 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

The ending being bad is not, 

The term bad it totally subjective, To me Licorice is bad, but some people love it. You can say the same thing about The Ending, ****'s, Korean cars anytthing. so just because something is Bad  To you, or the masses or the minority the simple FACT  that you can find one person  who likes what you find bad destroys the notion of BAD=FACT.

Nope, it's objectively bad because it violates the core themes of Mass Effect.
It violates Shepard's core character.
It's laden with plot holes and nonsensical scenes, such as the Normandy scene which is heavily disliked even by people who like the ending.

That still does not make anything you said a fact. The simple fact that you can not say EVRYONE disliked it makes it an opinion. 

TAO is not saying everyone disliked it, but instead the ending is "bad" in that it doesn't follow what ME series has set itself to be about.  There are a lot of instances in the ending that don't make sense, that makes you question what is going on, and completely disregards what Shepard has been up to that point.  I'm not sure how you cannot consider something like that to be "bad".  

[The Angry One]

Phategod1 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Phategod1 wrote...

That still does not make anything you said a fact. The simple fact that you can not say EVRYONE disliked it makes it an opinion. 

The essential quality of the ending is not dependant on everyone liking it or not.
If you refer to the Normandy scene, I have yet to talk to a single person who can honestly say it made sense.

But who dictates its quality, the determination of that quality is ......wait for it......OPNION.

Quality in the context of the previous games.