249 réponses à ce sujet

[lucidfox]

My thoughts exactly. Weekes' Q&A seems like a poorly-conceived afterthought in an attempt to quell the crowd. A retcon, if you will. This is not the only case where Walters' and Weekes' opinions differ. (Walters said most Citadel residents died, and Weekes said they were saved by... uhhh... space magic?)

That's some strong artistic integrity in there, when even the original writers can't agree on what the ending means.

[recentio]

jumpingkaede wrote...

"It's going to make some people extremely happy. It's going to make some people angry. But that's part of it, right? To invoke the emotion putting some of these stories to bed will naturally bring up.".

Was there anyone who was "extremely happy" from this ending? Anyone?

I've read some transhumanists raving about how happy they were to force their Synthesis viewpoint on every being in the galaxy without their consent.

[jumpingkaede]

lucidfox wrote...

My thoughts exactly. Weekes' Q&A seems like a poorly-conceived afterthought in an attempt to quell the crowd. A retcon, if you will. This is not the only case where Walters' and Weekes' opinions differ. (Walters said most Citadel residents died, and Weekes said they were saved by... uhhh... space magic?)

That's some strong artistic integrity in there, when even the original writers can't agree on what the ending means.

Well the original writer i.e. Walters knows what he wanted.

Weekes is looking at it from the outside it seems, just like the fans.  And he seems confused.  Just like the fans. 

recentio wrote...

I've read some transhumanists raving about how happy they were to force their Synthesis viewpoint on every being in the galaxy without their consent.

Interestingly enough, I'm playing Deus EX: HR now and the ME3 ending would tie in nicely to that game.  All the foreshadowing elements are there, transhuman conflict, moral and ethical questions involved in synthetic implants and what that means for evolution.

Which makes sense, of  course.  Since it's the ending to Deus Ex. 

Modifié par jumpingkaede, 10 avril 2012 - 06:47 .

[omntt]

Red Dust wrote...

When Tolkien was ready to release the first book in his new trilogy "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of The Ring", he moved into print a new copy of his already popular book The Hobbit with a heavily edited "Riddles in the Dark" chapter, to more seamlessly bridge the two works.

Tolkien had no artistic integrity, which is why in 60 years no one will remember him. But we'll totally be talking about Bioware and Mass Effect.

[Nerevar-as]

jumpingkaede wrote...

recentio wrote...

I've read some transhumanists raving about how happy they were to force their Synthesis viewpoint on every being in the galaxy without their consent.

Interestingly enough, I'm playing Deus EX: HR now and the ME3 ending would tie in nicely to that game.  All the foreshadowing elements are there, transhuman conflict, moral and ethical questions involved in synthetic implants and what that means for evolution.

Which makes sense, of  course.  Since it's the ending to Deus Ex. 

Have you played the original? I found ME3 endings very familiar.

[Ieldra]

recentio wrote...

jumpingkaede wrote...

"It's going to make some people extremely happy. It's going to make some people angry. But that's part of it, right? To invoke the emotion putting some of these stories to bed will naturally bring up.".

Was there anyone who was "extremely happy" from this ending? Anyone?

I've read some transhumanists raving about how happy they were to force their Synthesis viewpoint on every being in the galaxy without their consent.

Just as the Destroyers make the decision for everyone that it's better to die than to live as a hybrid?
Or as the Controllers make the decision for everyone that they need a synthetic guardian?

Shepard is standing at a fulcrum of events. Fate has placed him there to make a decision that affects all intelligent life in the galaxy. He can't deny the responsbility. Preferring the Destroy ending for the stated reason alone is buying into status quo bias, not considering that a good denied is an evil. Organic or synthetic life is nothing special, life is something special, and the games make the point again and again that synthetics are people.

I am not happy with several aspects of the endings - particularly the forced destruction of the universe. But I would not remove any of the three options for the final choice. They all raise interesting questions, and to remove any one would unbalance the choice.
   

[jumpingkaede]

Nerevar-as wrote...

jumpingkaede wrote...

recentio wrote...

I've read some transhumanists raving about how happy they were to force their Synthesis viewpoint on every being in the galaxy without their consent.

Interestingly enough, I'm playing Deus EX: HR now and the ME3 ending would tie in nicely to that game.  All the foreshadowing elements are there, transhuman conflict, moral and ethical questions involved in synthetic implants and what that means for evolution.

Which makes sense, of  course.  Since it's the ending to Deus Ex. 

Have you played the original? I found ME3 endings very familiar.

Yeah.  Just playing DX:HR now which is why I mentioned it.  The game is a completely different feel, which suits a completely different ending.  DX is bleak and dark and hopeless.  

[jumpingkaede]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Organic or synthetic life is nothing special, life is something special, and the games make the point again and again that synthetics are people. 

Uhm...

In my game I got to the end and I was told categorically that synthetics were special; they are, in fact, destined to destroy all organic life in the galaxy. They aren't even really people, they're just an inevitable evil.  Every synthetic you kill now is an organic life you save in the future.

Did we play the same game?  

[Yalision]

Well that's cool. In my galaxy the relays didn't explode, just got damaged by the blue shockwave. Oh and my galaxy still has the Citadel. So I'm good.

[elarem]

Thank you Eain I thought that I remembered that quote.

As for the EC all they have to do to keep their 'artistic integrity' is make two new epilogue scenes clarifying the Control and Synthesis choices. The stargazer and child remain with the Destroy ending. These new epilogues will of course be the slightly more hopeful and happier endings as the galaxy will not be in such a bad condition as with Destroy ending. Still bad but not a wasteland as such.

[GBGriffin]

MoZedK wrote...

GBGriffin wrote...

Relax. It all takes place in Shepard's head. Everything from the beam to the credits never happened. The galaxy is fine.


( )

OK, it all happned in Shepards head, lets take that in the the Suppose _____ exercise.

If that is the case, then he is laying on the ground doing nothing... How can he then choose what happens?
It the galaxy then all right or is it just the reaper delaying Shepard and killing all others.
But then why do you see the Normany escape?

It dosent make sence and if full of holes, that is slippery to drop down in.

So BW have to be carefull what they do with that.

Yes I do think now after alot of thinking that it is they way to go if you do not change the ending. By be carefull of the mine field of holes you can drop in to.

Dident want to make it to long just wanted to show you some holes in that.

As confusing as that was to read, I actually don't believe the ending takes place in Shep's head.

Some people do though and are "committed" enough to see it explained that way in the EC. I am not one of them pushing for this interpretation that the end of ME3 never actually happened at all

Modifié par GBGriffin, 10 avril 2012 - 07:20 .

[Versidious]

Nerevar-as wrote...

jumpingkaede wrote...

recentio wrote...

I've read some transhumanists raving about how happy they were to force their Synthesis viewpoint on every being in the galaxy without their consent.

Interestingly enough, I'm playing Deus EX: HR now and the ME3 ending would tie in nicely to that game.  All the foreshadowing elements are there, transhuman conflict, moral and ethical questions involved in synthetic implants and what that means for evolution.

Which makes sense, of  course.  Since it's the ending to Deus Ex. 

Have you played the original? I found ME3 endings very familiar.

I didn't even like those in Deus Ex, but at least they fitted the game.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

So this time I think I'll do the ultimate in an artistic approach. Make sure the relays actually blow up due to not having a completed Crucible thus laying waste to the entire galaxy! Think of the art involved! No one gets off the Normandy in the end. Shepard doesn't go down in history because there is no history left! Shepard is now insane!

[iSpider-Man]

read the title then i thought hmmm a mass effect game in a fallout wasteland? idont know itd be awesome if they exclude space magic.

[Noatz]

To be fair, he could just be talking about the damage done by the Reapers to the various worlds... Earth, Palaven and Thessia were pretty much trashed, as were most of the colonies if the planetery descriptions were any indication.

[oothal]

I think it is pretty clear that Bioware is backtracking on the ending.

Bioware knew that some fans would be upset, hence the more stringent forum rules relased just a few days before the game. Though I think they underestimated greatly the reaction.

If you look up the definition of sociopath you might find it interesting.

[Versidious]

Ieldra2 wrote...

recentio wrote...

jumpingkaede wrote...

"It's going to make some people extremely happy. It's going to make some people angry. But that's part of it, right? To invoke the emotion putting some of these stories to bed will naturally bring up.".

Was there anyone who was "extremely happy" from this ending? Anyone?

I've read some transhumanists raving about how happy they were to force their Synthesis viewpoint on every being in the galaxy without their consent.

Just as the Destroyers make the decision for everyone that it's better to die than to live as a hybrid?
Or as the Controllers make the decision for everyone that they need a synthetic guardian?

*snip*

I'm sorry, but, whilst I believe that cybernetic transhuman progression is the future of human evolution, and the best solution to the 'technological singularity' in real life, I don't think that forcing it on everyone is ethical. Effectively, you are fundamentally altering what everyone in the galaxy is at once, without their consent. Imagine trillions of Alex Jensens who didn't ask for this!! In contrast, you are faced with the genocide of a synthetic race (Although in some cases you may have wiped them out in favour of the Quarians anyway, which makes this the most ethical choice), but only one, and in the other, you are faced with no death at all, just sending the Reapers away, which would normally be the most ethical choice, as noone actually dies! Excluding of course the extinction-level event resulting from the pieces of the Citadel crashing to Earth...   :-P

[moater boat]

Eain wrote...

Actually whatever hope remained for the indoctrination theory is killed by that one statement of Walters. The galaxy is a wasteland, period. There can't be post ending DLC, because the galaxy is messed up. It's not in Shepard's head, it happened.

I don't hold out much hope for the IT anymore, but I don't think this statement completely disproves it at all. Regardless of whether or not the relays actually did blow up, the whole galaxy is pretty messed up by the time the Earth mission starts.

[M0keys]

Total Biscuit wrote...

Hasn't he said he's burnt out on Mass Effect now?

Oh, brave wonders!

[STEEEEVE]

Red Dust wrote...

When Tolkien was ready to release the first book in his new trilogy "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of The Ring", he moved into print a new copy of his already popular book The Hobbit with a heavily edited "Riddles in the Dark" chapter, to more seamlessly bridge the two works.

Tolkien had no artistic integrity, which is why in 60 years no one will remember him. But we'll totally be talking about Bioware and Mass Effect.

Post of the year.

[RogueBot]

Yeah, I figured Bioware's current optimistic attitude regarding the post-ME3 galaxy was just a result of negative feedback. Heck, it said the game files that Stargazer came 10,000 years after ME3, so... yeah, it's pretty obvious that it was their intention for the galaxy to be shot to ****.

[MegaSovereign]

*Sigh*

He was talking about the fact that a lot of planets took heavy damage from the Reaper invasion.

[M0keys]

lucidfox wrote...

My thoughts exactly. Weekes' Q&A seems like a poorly-conceived afterthought in an attempt to quell the crowd. A retcon, if you will. This is not the only case where Walters' and Weekes' opinions differ. (Walters said most Citadel residents died, and Weekes said they were saved by... uhhh... space magic?)

That's some strong artistic integrity in there, when even the original writers can't agree on what the ending means.

Probably because Walters and Hudson completely locked Weekes and the rest of the writing team out of ending creation. No participation, no peer review, nothing.

Probably why Weekes has all these differing opinions. He didn't want it to be the End of The Galaxy.

[Garlador]

So... the galaxy is a wasteland, and it was Shepard, OUR Shepard, who made it that way.

Good going, "hero".