86 réponses à ce sujet

[Drake_Hound]

Come back and talk again when you imported your beloved character ...
Instead of playing Bioware Canon version , that you can also watch on youtube .

And eating up others explanation about space cake ...
Cause frankly your choices didn´t matter , everything you did didn´t matter.
You are stuck with 3 options , no renegade or paragon interrupts.

No way to kill that freaking starchild or spank his bottom .
Since he control the reaper lets just kill him as renegade option .
If it is a cataclyst the hell with cataclyst , wasn´t from ME1 we shape our own destiny and choices.
To ME3 look man it doesn´t matter , I the writer have decided this is the ending and your destiny .
And thank you for the money , now go play multiplayer and buy my DLC .

[JBONE27]

RyuujinZERO wrote...

someone else wrote...

ah yes, this thread again...

Yeah, and once again the IT believer is skirting the issue of the Normandy; none of them will ever tell me what that scene is about (pro-tip: because it makes no god-damn sense, either in the IT hypothesis or literally)

Actually, if IT were true, then the Normandy ending would make sense.  We are seeing either what the Reapers want Shepard to see, or we are seeing what Shepard's oxygen deprived brain (remember Shepard is near death, but if the Reapers are able to control his implants and mind they can use her as a weapon) wants to see.  It's basically a near death experience, but instead of bright lights and clouds, it's Joker and Shepard's closest friends in a garden paradise.

[Volus Warlord]

The ending?



Don't get me wrong, I loved most of the game. But the end just felt like a slap in the face in a multitude of ways. No, it wasn't tugging your heartstrings like shooting Moridin in the back or watching Thane die was. It was just painful. It did not inspire thought and emotion so much as agony and contempt.

[Stealth3]

OP is troll and a ****ing idiot.

[StarAce905-2]

From the Patrick Weekes thread http://social.biowar.../index/11155956 :

-Will long-distance superluminal travel still be possible post-Ending? (will Tali or Wrex or Garrus see their homeworlds again? Will everyone starve?)

Galactic civilization will rebuild. The mass relays were not necessary for interstellar flight. Remember, what does it say in the Codex about the speed of ships? That's right, 12 lightyears per (day? hour? minute?). And that's only the cruising speed, not the maximum speed.

^ Pretty much ensures that the ending really happened.

[Falen]

Me I am lucky.  My shepard is still out there fighting the good fight.  How could this be you might ask.  Well it's simple.  I didn't buy ME3.  I usually wait for a bit to let the dev team get the bugs out.  But this is EA\\DA2 all over again.  So my shepard is still out there.  My money is still in my pocket.  My faith in EA/Bioware is in the wind.
By now.

[Volus Warlord]

StarAce905-2 wrote...

From the Patrick Weekes thread http://social.biowar.../index/11155956 :

-Will long-distance superluminal travel still be possible post-Ending? (will Tali or Wrex or Garrus see their homeworlds again? Will everyone starve?)

Galactic civilization will rebuild. The mass relays were not necessary for interstellar flight. Remember, what does it say in the Codex about the speed of ships? That's right, 12 lightyears per (day? hour? minute?). And that's only the cruising speed, not the maximum speed.

^ Pretty much ensures that the ending really happened.

But the Mass Relays were more than just a convenient means of travel. They were a symbol, an icon of the ME universe, something that set it apart from other SciFi. They were a part of ME's identity.

[Gnaeus.Silvanus]

ME3 Ending is a Piece of **** Art! Damn it!

[JBONE27]

StarAce905-2 wrote...

From the Patrick Weekes thread http://social.biowar.../index/11155956 :

-Will long-distance superluminal travel still be possible post-Ending? (will Tali or Wrex or Garrus see their homeworlds again? Will everyone starve?)

Galactic civilization will rebuild. The mass relays were not necessary for interstellar flight. Remember, what does it say in the Codex about the speed of ships? That's right, 12 lightyears per (day? hour? minute?). And that's only the cruising speed, not the maximum speed.

^ Pretty much ensures that the ending really happened.

True, unless, the thing fired, and the reapers knew what it did... Oh that is too brilliant.  I'm giving the writers too much credit.

[Oldbones2]

wolfwarp wrote...

 I have invested 50 hours on my first ME3 play through.  I have heard many people complain about the ending.  And said things like ME3 is 99% great but the ending sucks.  Because of such awareness, I would say that my 50 hours journey is somewhat dampened, knowing well that however much time I put into ME3, I would be disappointed.

Now that I have seen the endings (plural), I say BioWare has taken a huge risk in writing the final episode of one of the sci-fi greatest franchise.  If everyone was to get it at first, it would not have worked.  The first time I saw the ending, I did not get it.  I still like it, because it is different.  I pondered upon it and felt something is missing.  So read what others think and have another go with the ending again.

So, to those who are still progressing with the game, don't let what other say about the ME3 ending affects your play through (or affects your decision to purchase).  Have an open mind and do some online research thereafter.  Not here to defend the ending, or anything really.

PS. For those who think I am a BioWare fanboy, I am actually not.  I am still upset that DA:O patch 1.04 took forever to arrrive, and it did not fix the problem.  Or that DA2 game.  Or the fact that I have missed Arrival DLC and hence missing a crucial link between ME2 to ME3.  And Day 1 DLC ... and more.

Spoiler alert, this link explains -> 
 

I think you are right OP.  ME 3 is art. 

It
fits the vague definition of art.  It certainly has artistic moments
and I wouldn't say that because it is a new medium (video games) that
discount it from ever being art.  People said film wasn't art when it
first appeared.




Art is a fluid and now shifting
concept that is only really defined by personal perception and taste. 
For instance I find most rap music to be annoying and vulgar.  Doesn't
make rap music not art, it just means I don't like Rap music.  Some
people think Graffiti is art, others think it is vandalism.  But whether
or not Mass Effect is art shouldn't be the issue. 




Because not all art is good.

I
know, I know, that's ignorance talking all art has value.  Except it
doesn't.  Art only has the value we put on it.  And since the most
commonly used value is currency, its really one of the few consistent
ways to judge art.

Simply put, ugly as it is, if a piece of art is worth money, then its good.  If now, well then you may still have art, but whether it is any good or not is relatively subjective.



Mass Effect's price has been in a freefall for weeks and its
only a little over a month old and you can get a brand new copy (never
opened) for half its original price.

Gamer stores are flooded with used copies sold for even less.

Dozens, maybe hundreds of full refunds have been given to people who purchased this art over the last month.



What does all this mean about Mass Effect 3's status as art?

Nothing.

Or at least nothing conclusive.

People will argue over whether is is good or bad and no one will be able to prove it either way.


But here's the thing Mass Effect 3 is also a product.  And its on the ground of it being a falsly advertised product that most people are seeking a change to the ending.

And that's a pretty valid argument to make.




Post Script.

A couple of things to keep in mind about art in general.


Simply saying this is art it
cannot be challenged or changed especially by anyone but the original
artist goes against the very nature of art.

Art has in the past and will again in the future be changed because of a public outcry or opinion.

Look at Fashion models Harry Potter or Lady Gaga or look at films that cut content from the Director's orginal vision in order to make a lower rating.

The people that say that changing the ending to a video game will forever alter ANYTHING, are doing nothing more than fearmongering. 

[kbct]

Gatt9 wrote...

kbct wrote...

Swordfishtrombone wrote...

I don't believe that ANY gaming company would take such a stupid risk as to release an incomplete ending on purpose, one that requires conspiracy-thinking to somehow decode from little hints into something approaching coherency. If IT was right, Bioware would have come out and said so right after the first person "figured it out", rather than let the dissatisfaction and anger towards them grow.

Agreed. Probably the strongest argument against the IT theory is simple business sense. It would be crazy to attempt from a business perspective. Plus, we now have evidence the ending suffered from budget and time constraints. Also, we know the ending wasn't vetted by the BioWare team.

IT theory is interesting, but it was not planned.

Devils' Advocate...

-As a buisness plan,  it could have been regarded as genius,  if it had been handled properly.  That would've been the most epic plot twist in gaming,  and highly successful,  if EA had approached it correctly and not claimed this was the "End of the trilogy".  The intent was to generate a viral hype by having people wonder what happened with the cliffhanger ending,  but because people thought it was the absolute end,  it backfired.  If EA had announced earlier that they intended to continue ME,  and hadn't claimed this was the end of the story,  it likely would've worked.

-Our "Evidence" is a random person who posted things on a message board post-firestorm.  Assuming the poster was truthful,  do you think an EA employee would admit the intention to manipulate gamers into buying DLC through an incomplete ending at this point?  Or do you think he'd say "We ran out of time"...

-Especially considering they were using a pre-existing engine which significantly cuts development time,  and they had an extra 6 months.  It wasn't budget and time constraints.

The IT theory gives the writers a potential way out of this situation, but in order for it to be considered genius, it needs to have been planned. Otherwise, it's only serendipitous.

No evidence suggests that it was planned. From the sticky above it says, "The extended cut DLC will expand on the existing endings, but no further ending DLC is planned."

IT theory needs more than few cinematic scenes and an epilogue to resolve itself.

Or we can assume it was planned, but scrapped because of the fan response. That means they're deliberately lying to us. With a company with so large, the truth will get out from someone at some point. That's a huge risk to take. I personally don't think they are deliberately lying to us.
 
True, we don't have hard evidence about resource constraints, only circumstantial evidence.

According to a fan that talked to a senior writer at PAX: "Their vision was essentially what you saw, but with more focus on the details. They wanted players to use their lore knowledge and look carefully at the subtle differences in the endings to piece together what happened. They were running out of money so they could not as effectively represent that."
 
Also, the paraphrased answers from a person that questioned Weekes at PAX basically pointed to a number of time and money constraints as well.

So, from the evidence I've seen so far, the ending was as they intended, but it wasn't completed to their satisfaction do to financial and/or time constraints.

However, you might be right, but I need more evidence to consider it.

Modifié par kbct, 10 avril 2012 - 02:52 .

[Harley_Dude]

It's a great theory and the vid makes it almost believable but then I realize the end was written by someone that uses as much hair gel as Pauly D.

[vindrow1]

Gnaeus.Silvanus wrote...

ME3 Ending is a Piece of **** Art! Damn it!

You are correct, sir!

It is a piece of art, a big, steaming pile of it:D

[gearseffect]

Ahhh Yes the Artistic BS angle. EA and Bioware continue to say it's art and all this cr@p is BS. It reminds me of a situation that happened early this year and left me as a fan crushed and with no pride in displaying my love for my favorite team.

If you don't live in the USA and/or don't watch and fallow the NFL you probably won't get my comparison and even then you may have to be a fan of the same team I am,
I am a fan of the Ind. Colts and after the epic disaster season they had the owner went and fired everyone he could in the office and coaching area, anyone who was an anyone, while telling the fans this "There is some rebuilding we have to do to our origination but rest assured the coming changes won't be near as drastic as this"

Oh boy was Jimmy full of BS because he then fired all the players and did not even attempt to trade them at all for anything WTF? then he told fans this "We have to make some big changes to be the same team we were two seasons ago"

WTF? And they hope to do that how? They team has no talent unless your counting that over rated #4 D-bag kicker from my home state of South Dakota.

Both EA/Bioware and the Colts Owner Jimmy Irsay's actions/statements are all a bunch of Bullsh!t that makes one scratch their head and say

"Umm yeah you guys really make me ashamed to have given you any of my money and loyalty. I am not so stupid and blind that as a fan I walk around thinking your all Mr. Perfect Mr Gold. No I'm not fooled by you and your stupid dumb ideas of how to make something the best you can. Because you fumbled plain and simple. I hang my head in shame at this once great thing I grew to love and be a fan of. Because Shame is what it is, it's fallen from grace and my pride is gone"

Granted I can still enjoy ME1 and 2 and some of ME3 but the Colts ohh man I am going to be on sad NFL fan for years to come, my team is gonna be the laughing stock of the NFL like they were before #18 Manning brought the team to greatness.

[NYG1991]

I find it disturbing whenever somebody likes the ending based on IT.

It's a great theory with some valid points. But it's basically fanfic. That said, I wouldn't mind it if they implemented it somehow.

[Ashilana]

wolfwarp wrote...
Not here to defend the ending, or anything really.

    

So, you like the ending... but you aren't defending it?

[gearseffect]

Volus Warlord wrote...

The ending?



Don't get me wrong, I loved most of the game. But the end just felt like a slap in the face in a multitude of ways. No, it wasn't tugging your heartstrings like shooting Moridin in the back or watching Thane die was. It was just painful. It did not inspire thought and emotion so much as agony and contempt.

Could you please make me one of these with the my NFL team's logo? They are the Indianapolis Colts and I hang my head in shame at the season that are in store for my beloved team. It's back to being the laughing stock of the NFL.

Anyway sorry if ya need me to PM ya the logo or something ya know just PM, 2012 a year that makes me hang my head in shame at many beloved things.

[OH-UP-THIS!]

FlashedMyDrive wrote...

RyuujinZERO wrote...

someone else wrote...

ah yes, this thread again...

Yeah, and once again the IT believer is skirting the issue of the Normandy; none of them will ever tell me what that scene is about (pro-tip: because it makes no god-damn sense, either in the IT hypothesis or literally)

The Normandy scene is a symbolic representation of the uplifting freedom of breaking free from indoctrination as well as the subsequent crash back to reality.

Duh.

WHA?

Uh huh. yeah, OKAAAAY then, moving on, nothing to see here.


Addendum: I actually entertained the IT theory for some time, that DID NOT CHANGE MY OPINION OF THE END THOUGH! IT BLOWS, stinks and is an artsy steaming pile, of something.

Modifié par ohupthis, 10 avril 2012 - 03:29 .

[JBONE27]

ohupthis wrote...

FlashedMyDrive wrote...

RyuujinZERO wrote...

someone else wrote...

ah yes, this thread again...

Yeah, and once again the IT believer is skirting the issue of the Normandy; none of them will ever tell me what that scene is about (pro-tip: because it makes no god-damn sense, either in the IT hypothesis or literally)

The Normandy scene is a symbolic representation of the uplifting freedom of breaking free from indoctrination as well as the subsequent crash back to reality.

Duh.

WHA?

Uh huh. yeah, OKAAAAY then, moving on, nothing to see here.


Addendum: I actually entertained the IT theory for some time, that DID NOT CHANGE MY OPINION OF THE END THOUGH! IT BLOWS, stinks and is an artsy steaming pile, of something.

I disagree.  IT is a pile of mud, a litteral ending is a pile of ****.  Neither of them are very good, but I'd rather get mud on my shoe.

[Gatt9]

kbct wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

kbct wrote...

Swordfishtrombone wrote...

I don't believe that ANY gaming company would take such a stupid risk as to release an incomplete ending on purpose, one that requires conspiracy-thinking to somehow decode from little hints into something approaching coherency. If IT was right, Bioware would have come out and said so right after the first person "figured it out", rather than let the dissatisfaction and anger towards them grow.

Agreed. Probably the strongest argument against the IT theory is simple business sense. It would be crazy to attempt from a business perspective. Plus, we now have evidence the ending suffered from budget and time constraints. Also, we know the ending wasn't vetted by the BioWare team.

IT theory is interesting, but it was not planned.

Devils' Advocate...

-As a buisness plan,  it could have been regarded as genius,  if it had been handled properly.  That would've been the most epic plot twist in gaming,  and highly successful,  if EA had approached it correctly and not claimed this was the "End of the trilogy".  The intent was to generate a viral hype by having people wonder what happened with the cliffhanger ending,  but because people thought it was the absolute end,  it backfired.  If EA had announced earlier that they intended to continue ME,  and hadn't claimed this was the end of the story,  it likely would've worked.

-Our "Evidence" is a random person who posted things on a message board post-firestorm.  Assuming the poster was truthful,  do you think an EA employee would admit the intention to manipulate gamers into buying DLC through an incomplete ending at this point?  Or do you think he'd say "We ran out of time"...

-Especially considering they were using a pre-existing engine which significantly cuts development time,  and they had an extra 6 months.  It wasn't budget and time constraints.

The IT theory gives the writers a potential way out of this situation, but in order for it to be considered genius, it needs to have been planned. Otherwise, it's only serendipitous.

No evidence suggests that it was planned. From the sticky above it says, "The extended cut DLC will expand on the existing endings, but no further ending DLC is planned."

IT theory needs more than few cinematic scenes and an epilogue to resolve itself.

Or we can assume it was planned, but scrapped because of the fan response. That means they're deliberately lying to us. With a company with so large, the truth will get out from someone at some point. That's a huge risk to take. I personally don't think they are deliberately lying to us.
 
True, we don't have hard evidence about resource constraints, only circumstantial evidence.

According to a fan that talked to a senior writer at PAX: "Their vision was essentially what you saw, but with more focus on the details. They wanted players to use their lore knowledge and look carefully at the subtle differences in the endings to piece together what happened. They were running out of money so they could not as effectively represent that."
 
Also, the paraphrased answers from a person that questioned Weekes at PAX basically pointed to a number of time and money constraints as well.

So, from the evidence I've seen so far, the ending was as they intended, but it wasn't completed to their satisfaction do to financial and/or time constraints.

However, you might be right, but I need more evidence to consider it.

I don't have much time,  but I'll try to follow up tomorrow.  For tonight,  consider...

Why did the end talk about having another Shepherd story to tell?  If the plan was to end Shepherd's story,  then why did the end of the game talk about more Shepherd?

Consider the recurring child, his purpose was never explained,  nor was the vision of them both burning,  and the dreams are very out of context.  One kid dies,  Shepherd's having nightmares,  but the collector base didn't bother him even though there were hundreds of kids in there?

Why was Joker in a Mass Relay during the crux of the most important battle in human history,  and no one on the Normandy argued?  Not even your love interest,  or the rest of your team?

I contend it's because the intent was to setup DLC,  and Mass Effect 4,  and the IT is a very strong case for it.  Also,  keep in mind,  EA would've slapped a gag order on this once it started blowing up.

But you're right,  it will come out,  I'd imagine 2 years tops.

[Romantiq]

The only piece of art in this game was stolen stock photo from DeviantArt of Tali's face. Everything else is poop with JJA lighting

[Samuel Beckenbach]

u should rename the thread as ME3 ending is a piece of ****

[Ianamus]

Mass Effect 3's ending wasn't big, artistic, clever, sophisticated or "thought-provoking"

It was just convoluted, nonsensical and downright crap

Modifié par EJ107, 10 avril 2012 - 06:32 .

[RyuujinZERO]

JBONE27 wrote...

RyuujinZERO wrote...

someone else wrote...

ah yes, this thread again...

Yeah, and once again the IT believer is skirting the issue of the Normandy; none of them will ever tell me what that scene is about (pro-tip: because it makes no god-damn sense, either in the IT hypothesis or literally)

Actually, if IT were true, then the Normandy ending would make sense.  We are seeing either what the Reapers want Shepard to see, or we are seeing what Shepard's oxygen deprived brain (remember Shepard is near death, but if the Reapers are able to control his implants and mind they can use her as a weapon) wants to see.  It's basically a near death experience, but instead of bright lights and clouds, it's Joker and Shepard's closest friends in a garden paradise.

Then that opens up another problem: There was no ending

if Shepard is hallucinating at that stage, then the story never finished. And that violates the single biggest promise that the devs made; they wouldn't end ME3 on a cliffhanger to leave way for a sequel or DLC after the game.