13 réponses à ce sujet

[Hondo1946]

Bioware's decision that a bittersweet ending was the only proper ending to ME3 was, in my opinion, a poor decision. There's nothing wrong with the hero winning the last battle and surviving, and even earning a happy conclusion with the lady of his choice. ME3 is a superior game with great graphics, heart-pounding action, and addictive interaction between characters. Like all stories it boiled down to good triumphing over evil (assuming humans represented the good). The hero didn't need to make all the "right" decisions to come out in one piece after it was all over. For me, the various endings were a big letdown and very disappointing.

[Berkilak]

Where's the sweet part? As it is often pointed out, we can either commit genocide, mass molestation or enslave an entire species. Nothing but a bitter taste.

If it were bittersweet, no one would have a problem with it.

[shinyelf]

Berkilak wrote...

Where's the sweet part? As it is often pointed out, we can either commit genocide, mass molestation or enslave an entire species. Nothing but a bitter taste.

If it were bittersweet, no one would have a problem with it.

People are oversimplifying so they can hate easier.

Modifié par shinyelf, 02 mai 2012 - 03:14 .

[Eclipse merc]

Berkilak wrote...

Where's the sweet part? As it is often pointed out, we can either commit genocide, mass molestation or enslave an entire species. Nothing but a bitter taste.

If it were bittersweet, no one would have a problem with it.

Yeah, there was nothing "sweet" about it.

[Berkilak]

shinyelf wrote...

Berkilak wrote...

Where's the sweet part? As it is often pointed out, we can either commit genocide, mass molestation or enslave an entire species. Nothing but a bitter taste.

If it were bittersweet, no one would have a problem with it.

People are oversimplifying so they can hate easier.

No need to pontificate when you can get your point out more simply. Occam's razor applies here, in a way.

[Khayness]

Hondo1946 wrote...

For me, the various endings were a big letdown and very disappointing.

What is this various endings you speak of?

[NexusIsaac]

I myself have no real thing against the endings. Just the poor writing, and dumb simplification of the Reapers motives.
It would be great if there were a bittersweet ending and a happy ending.

[Chashan]

alleyd wrote...

Controlling the Reapers isn't Slavery IMO. You're preventing them completing total extinction so you have to stop them. They may be sentient beings, but leave no room for negotiation or other alternatives. So my choice would be Destroy or Control (Without the Indoc cop out). If you want to understand the motivations etc of the Reapers then destroying them outright might not be the best option.
The Reapers are Created beings and I think their Creator might be pissed that his billion year cycle of destruction was somehow brought to an end.

I, as well, kind of agree here.

"Enslaving" the Reapers as a "moral dilemma" is something I fail to see here. The Reapers aren't peoples, they are killdozers consisting of, if not powered by countless species they gooified - to call this "preservation" sounds awfully much like a euphemism to me. If Control truly were a simple matter of grabbing a controller and direct Reapers to clean up their mess, then switching on standby-mode for later use, I would have no qualms about taking it...

There are several problems with how it is presented, however:

1) Merely minutes before the apparition tells you of this blue pill, you tell Mr TIM that controlling the Reapers is an idea bound to fail. For Shepard, who was quite eloquent about persuading TIM that it was wrong - either via provoking TIM to let his guard down for a clean shot or by making him do a Saren -, to suddenly shrug and say he was "right after all" and not offer a rebuttal to this absurdity is...founded on shaky fundaments, to put it mildly.
This context alone is enough for me to not even consider choking on the blue pill, even if it were a simple controller-device...

2) ... which leads us to the other key problem: The "hook" that comes along with Control. The illusion is quite adamant that Shepard will die in its process, "lose everything". Shepard states the impossibility and insanity of striving to control the space-squids from outer space to TIM - why do a 180° there on the mere word of a thing that is rather obviously trying to crawl under Shepard's skin by assuming the form it does? Especially given the rather blunt consequence of pushing the blue button to Shepard's self...

Modifié par Chashan, 02 mai 2012 - 06:36 .

[Iakus]

Hondo1946 wrote...

Bioware's decision that a bittersweet ending was the only proper ending to ME3 was, in my opinion, a poor decision. There's nothing wrong with the hero winning the last battle and surviving, and even earning a happy conclusion with the lady of his choice. ME3 is a superior game with great graphics, heart-pounding action, and addictive interaction between characters. Like all stories it boiled down to good triumphing over evil (assuming humans represented the good). The hero didn't need to make all the "right" decisions to come out in one piece after it was all over. For me, the various endings were a big letdown and very disappointing.

This.

WIth a game that claims to be about choice and consequences, forcing the protagonist to the same sad conclusion regardless is just wrong.  It's part of the "pick a color, it doesn't matter which" problem with the endings.  Some people actually like happy endings, especially th eopnes they've earned.

[alfiejr]

Agree with OP, I would have replayed the SP a lot more than the only single completed run that I have right now. Yeah we all know war takes its toll but in a game where space magic can be created out nowhere then why they couldn't make a happy ending for the loyal fans of the trilogy. 

Modifié par alfiejr, 02 mai 2012 - 05:28 .

[LeBurns]

BioWarEA completely missed what the customer wanted and gave us what they thought was a good ending.

Note to BioWarEA, when a customer pays a company for a service or product they expect something that they actually want. When the company instead gives the customer something else and calls it art, exactly how long do you expect that person to remain your customer? Sure once in a great while you might surprise the customer and give them something they love, but more often than not you will miss the mark. Now if BioWarEA is a company that wants to make money then exactly how much risk are they willing to take to save their artistic integrity? Don't give me that "We'll just do what we want to and you'll thank me later" story, as that is obviously not happening.

[abaris]

LeBurns wrote...

BioWarEA completely missed what the customer wanted and gave us what they thought was a good ending.

No, they simply gave us what they could come up with after having written themselves into a corner. I can't imagine any professional writer being content with that, let alone consider it good.

The other explanation I could come up with would be even worse, since then someone fancied themselves as Kubrick's second coming.

Modifié par abaris, 02 mai 2012 - 06:02 .

[Berkilak]

abaris wrote...

LeBurns wrote...

BioWarEA completely missed what the customer wanted and gave us what they thought was a good ending.

No, they simply gave us what they could come up with after having written themselves into a corner. I can't imagine any professional writer being content with that, let alone consider it good.

The other explanation I could come up with would be even worse, since then someone imagined themselves as Kubrick's second coming.

It was actually written by two people, solely. Mac Walters, lead writer, and Casey Hudson, executive producer. If it had actually been a collaborative effort that took the entire talented writing staff into consideration, I'm sure that no one would be disappointed.

Modifié par Berkilak, 02 mai 2012 - 06:03 .