9 réponses à ce sujet

[streamlock]

A common theme I see reoccuring is the what if "happy/unhappy/bitter" argument on ME3's ending.  

From an overarching standpoint, I don't see the rational on this argument.

Lets say, for the sake of argument that the crucible was non-funtional and the allied fleets/sheppard defeats the reapers, somehow, someway.

Earth is trashed.  Every major city and industrial center is wrecked.  God knows how much of the population is dead, dying, or being rendered into reaper mush.  Her colonies are trashed.  Her fleets are shadow of thier former glory.  The amount of eezo released in the final battle would afflict the children of the survivors with horrific birth defects (some minor fraction would be biotic)

Thesia is wrecked.
Palavian is wrecked
Who knows about the Selarian homeworld.
The entire galactic infrastructure crushed.

Just about the entire galaxy is a post apocolyptic wasteland.  Billions, maybe trillions dead.

No matter what happened at the end, this is an undeniable reprecussion of the reaper invasion.  It's a war story.  War sucks.  Even in the most rainbow and unicorn filled ending fans have come up with would not change this.

In short, lay off the happy ending BS.  Wanting a couragous, heroic closure for the protoganist and thier team/LI, (living or dead) over the pseudo imagary interpretationalist Greek tradegedy crap that was delivered is not asking for a 'happy' ending. 

The happy ending debate is a non-issue.  Unless war torn wastelands is your idea of happy times.  In which case, stay the hell away from politics, and us.

[Allan Schumacher]

I think people consider it a happy ending in the same way that many aren't concerned with what effect stopping the cycle has on the future: the players aren't emotionally connected to the faceless statistics on Earth, Thessia, Palaven, and so forth.

Many posters have stated that they just want to know if Shepard reunites with his/her LI, how the squad is doing and so forth. I don't think it's fair to understate their perspective of what is a happy ending simply because of the other, external consequences of the war.

[Allan Schumacher]

I think the number who are concerned about just the Squad or the LI are few and I think even those people are more upset with the lack of logic way the LI and Sqaud story gets tied up in the ending.

I'd be skeptical that it was a few. After I beat the game I lurked on the twitters and the boards, and on the twitter especially it was probably the most frequently occurring comment that I felt came up. I don't think it comes up as much on the BSN though.

For myself, and I didn't run any official numbers, those upset with the ending tend to fit into one (or more) generalized categories:

- Those upset with the Catalyst and how he was presented
- Those upset with the lack of closure and immediate aftermath of what happened
- Those upset that the ending ends on a decidedly less than happy note.


Just my observations anyway.

[Allan Schumacher]

Doxie99 wrote...

I'd say that A LOT of people are in all three of those categories.

For myself the main problem was that my response after it was over was "....what?"

That's fair.  In fact, being upset at one part will predispose someone to being more upset at other parts.  Not even of the endings but at the entire product.

A lot of threads critiquing other aspects that, in my opinion, would have been muted if people weren't already upset at the ending.

But I think it's unfair towards those that are upset that completing the game wasn't the pleasant (whether it be too unhappy, or how it didn't feel like winning, or whatever) experience they were looking for as them being just a few. I've seen enough "All that 99% of us want" posts/comments that discuss one of the three buckets I stated as the primary reason for doing something about the ending.

[Allan Schumacher]

TMA LIVE wrote...

I feel like Bioware should have made a tag line:

"Want a happy ending with Shepard and your LI? Commit Genocide."

I know you're just poking some fun, but I think that the idea of Shepard making a decision that is less awesome for the entire galaxy in order to save himself and/or the people he cares about, is exceptionally powerful and interesting, so I don't think that the idea that you jokingly present is a bad idea in the slightest.

I would enjoy an ending that put me in a decision where, to do the most good for the galaxy, it would take some level of sacrifice from myself and/or my favourite party members (no sending Vega to be the hero because you don't like him type of stuff), whereas saving Shepard and/or the people Shepard cares most about would come at a cost for the rest of the galaxy.  Still winning, but less overtly winning.

It's a meaningful choice because no choice is clearly superior to the other, with meaningful consequences that will hit home with the player.  When I talk about games wanting "Choice and Consequences" this is the type of stuff that I really enjoy.  It doesn't come across too often though, unfortunately.

[Allan Schumacher]

And you have to admit, genociding an entire race to save yourself, let alone stopping the Reapers, goes a bit beyond "some level of sacrifice"

My comments were actually more generally speaking, as opposed to whether or not the ME3 ending actually did or did not provide it. Although since you mention it, at what level of sacrifice is it sufficient (and more importantly, equivalent)? What would you suggest?

[Allan Schumacher]

iakus wrote...


I find it hard to say sepcifically.  But this might give a little insight.

In DAO, I do not really find "The Dark Ritual" to be my "best" ending.  I actually think "Redeemer" is.  That's the one where you let Loghain atone for his actions by slayiing the archdemon and sacrificing himself.

When sacrifice is demanded in stories I read (or play) I prefer them to be made by characters who know full well wht is being asked of them and choose to do so anyway.  That's what makes Mordin's death so powerful.  He knew what was going to happen to him if he went up that elevator.  Or Legion, knowing he would be destroyed uploading that code, but did so anyway.  Or even Thane, terminally ill, certainly in no shape to fight, but doing so anyway, knowing his death was a virtual certainty.

I agree that those that make the most out of their deaths, ensuring that they don't "die for nothing" are powerful.  But ultimately it's their choice, which actually lessens the choice for Shepard.  It simplifies it for him.  I enjoyed the choices in DAO, and while I find offering Loghain the opportunity, even he acknowledges that it's cliche.  Choosing between the possibilities of yourself, Alistair, or doing the unknown and having Morrigan do the Dark Ritual with you I think is a more interesting choice.  Do you sacrifice yourself?  Do you sacrifice Alistair, even if he may not want to, or do you risk that Morrigan have a child that is the embodiment of an Old God?

So to save Shepard, I would say the sacrifice should ideally be someone else willing to trade places with Shepard.  Or at least be willing to take the death.  Anderson or The Illusive Man would have made fine choices (imo, there are few stories better than that of a redeemed villain, and few stories as tragic as a fallen hero) but they both have the distinct disadvantage of being dead.  Other friends may also be suitable:  Liara, Joker, James, or other current or former squadmates.  Possibly others.

Redeemed villain doesn't have to be a bad outcome, and it could have worked for ME3 so I don't want to make it sound like I'm completely against the idea.  But I find self-sacrifice to be an easier choice,.  If presented with an opportunity to sacrifice yourself or a group of people, the choice of sacrificing yourself is easier because you can come to terms with it.  If the choice is between an unwilling person that you care about, and that same group of people who's intent you're unsure of, suddenly the choice is trickier.  If TIM offers to sacrifice himself, then it becomes almost a no-brainer like Loghain.

Imagine a situation on Earth where Shepard and his LI are pressing the Citadel, and it's a mad dash to do so as Reapers are busting up Sword Fleet like mad.  They have cut off the Geth and are systematically exterminating them at an accelerated rate.  You get to a control panel and start hitting a sequence of control panels powering conduits that begin charging up the Crucible.  The more power conduits you get going, the faster the Crucible will fire, which will spare the Geth from total destruction.  During this your LI is wounded and pulled up lame.  The Crucible is powering up, but there's still another power conduit that needs charging.  The situation is unstable and the only way to save yourself and the LI is to go now.  So the player needs to decide whether their fate, and the possible future they may have with their friends is worth sacrificing in order to ensure the survival of the Geth.  Throw in a third choice, in that Shepard can still charge up the final conduit and save himself, abandoning his LI.

It even fits in with the Paragon/Renegade split, with Paragon being saving the Geth, with Renegade being the more selfish choice.

Now I'm not a writer by any means so I don't think this is written all that well, but I would leave it to someone more skilled to set up the situation for the counterpoint to sacrificing the Geth.  It doesn't need to be SHepard and LI together.  Maybe LI is cutoff and Shepard can choose to go to LI instead to save the LI from being collected or some other horrible fate, or maybe it's some faction of others unwilling to die.

That's what makes killing the geth such a monstrous act.  While it is theoretically possible that they might reach a consensus to be wiped out if it meant the destruction of the Old Machines.  But they were not given that choice.  It just happened to them out of the blue.  For a game that's all about self determination, the ending is the ultimate removal of choice.

That's what I find so interesting though.  By making that choice, Shepard ensures self-determination for every other species in the galaxy.  For a game that is all about self determination, I think it fits quite well... how much are you willing to pay to guarantee the destruction of the Reapers and achieve the specific goal you've set out for.  If the Geth signoff on it saying "Yo dude, we're totally cool with this" then the choice becomes easier.  There's no real cost and hence nothing to make you evaluate whether the cost is worth it.



Anyways it's late and I'm rambling now I think haha.  I'm not saying that the ending can only be good/interesting if the Geth are sacrificed.  I just really like the situation because we have a synthetic race that was fighting for their own autonomy and even had an ally sacrifice itself so they'd achieve individual sentience.  Factor in that they also demonstrated a willingness to side with the Reapers (who were all for the genocide of humans, asari, turians, etc.) in order to save themselves, and it becomes even more interesting and a choice that opens itself to a lot of scrutiny as to whether or not it's worth it.

Cheers.

Allan

[Allan Schumacher]

Except, there wasn't that option. I had gladly taken it, but see the thing is... there was Legion. I care about Legion. Actually enough to have a Geth Avatar. And i did my very best to reunite the Geth and the Quarians. The whole story behind the geth was they didn't want to die. Someone i considered a Friend gave their life to save their people.

I understand that that specifically wasn't an option. It's a bit tricky to follow but my thoughts in this thread include both "general" discussion about what types of choices I find interesting/challenging, as well as thoughts on the destroy choice as it stands in ME3.

Sorry for the obfuscation.

[Allan Schumacher]

It could still end in Shepards death for all i care.. i was prepared for it and i want Shepards story to be ended, one way or the other.. but what you wrote is basically what we got in ME2 and its basically what i thought we'd get for ME3 but on a much larger scale with every major decision playing a part deciding between peoples lives and deaths.

I disagree, because the ME2 ending is more of a "how well did you play the game" since everyone can survive at the end. I think my example is more along the lines of Shepard having to make a choice on who lives and who dies. Shepard never needs to make this choice in ME2.

Funny you should mention that, but in the game Alpha Protocol, there's a situation very much like this.  A young woman and possible LI is kidnapped by a terrorist group as you are attempting to stop them from blowing up a museum.  At one point you must choose whether to go after her or the bomb.  Saving her means hundreds of innocent people die.  Defusing the bomb saves the tourists but means watching her get gunned down before your eyes in retaliation for your actions.

Alpha Protocol is one of the most well written and reactive storylines I have played in years.  I was very disappointed that many didn't seem to like the combat mechanics (especially since I felt that how the skills progressed was very similar to the original ME) because I would have liked to see Obsidian rewarded for that fantastic piece of writing.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 21 avril 2012 - 07:49 .

[Allan Schumacher]

They are generalizations, there's going to be people that don't just fit in perfectly.

I think your perspective is too dismissive to the large amount of fans upset that Shepard can't really win and that the ending is a downer. There's no shortage of people that have explicitly stated that they'd love an ending where Shepard reunites with his LI. People that want blue babies, to build the house on Rannoch, etc..


I think your post, however, is quite reflective of the idea that the people disappointed in the ending are only really united in the fact that they would like changes to the ending. There's a large fracture over WHY they want the endings changed, and HOW they'd like the endings changed too.

There's a lot of posts saying "All we really want is a happy ending" (well that ignores other factions) on top of "99% of are mad because of the Catalyst! (which ignores other factions in and of itself).

If I had the time and capacity I'd run the numbers, but I think that any person that feels their one issue is the most representative of why people are upset is being myopic to all the issues being presented.