449 réponses à ce sujet

[ArchLord James]

Remain Civil, refrain from name calling or generalizing, and simply address the blatantly obvious errors that Strange Aeons pointed out in this post on another thread. Defend the endings if you dare! Consider this a debate competition. This guy just absolutely nailed what is wrong with the endings, and everyone who hates the endings should unify behind these reasons why the endings are terrible, not the weak "our choices dont matter" line.

Strange Aeons Wrote:

I've posted this before, but here is my take:

What’s truly baffling about the ending is that each variation manages to disregard completely the specific lessons of the previous events in its own unique way.
 
The explanation of the Reapers and the destroy (red) ending in particular might resonate if there were actually some ongoing tension about the latent danger of synthetics…except that everything we saw in the last two games teaches us exactly the opposite.  I'm not talking about what people imagine might, maybe, possibly could happen sometime in the future; I'm talking about what the game actually shows us.  They go to great lengths to establish that synthetics are alive and capable of growth and selflessness and friendship and individuality and love just in time for Shepard to murder them all.  It’s like ending Pinocchio with Geppetto stuffing him into a wood chipper.

Then there’s the (blue) option to ASSUME DIRECT CONTROL of the Reapers.  This scenario requires us to ignore that (at least if you were a paragon) you just spent the entire previous game arguing with the Illusive Man that using the Reapers’ tactics of subjugation against them was morally abhorrent.  Shepard says outright that he will not sacrifice his soul for victory.  In fact, in the scene literally just prior to this we explained to the Illusive Man that attempting to control the Reapers is evil and insane and doomed to failure.  So persuasive was Shepard’s argument that the Illusive Man shot himself in the head to escape the horror of what he had become.  Now let’s just go ahead and try the same thing ourselves.  What could possibly go wrong?

The most horrific outcome of all is the synthesis (green) ending, which would have us accept that Shepard transforms the galaxy’s entire population against their will into man-machine hybrids, akin to the monstrous Reapers and their minions whom we just spent three games fighting.  You know, minions like Saren and the Illusive Man and the entire Prothean race who were turned into man-machine hybrids and thereby became slaves of the Reapers.  He does this based on the assurances of a mysterious entity who admits it is working with the Reapers and who hastily appeared out of nowhere just as Shepard arrived at the weapon that could potentially defeat them.  Sounds legit.

So, after stuffing the myriad choices we’ve made throughout the series into a blender and homogenizing them into a single “readiness” number, the defining gameplay mechanic of the series (the dialogue wheel) vanishes at the most crucial moment and this player-driven epic is reduced to three choices: genocide, becoming a monster that violates every ethical principle you’ve lived by, or raping the entire galaxy.

And then you die.

And then the game is deliberately obscure about how your choices impact not only the galaxy but, far more importantly, the characters whom you have come to love and who are the lifeblood of the game.

The identity of Mass Effect is not in its visual style or its gameplay, which has changed substantially over the course of the series.  It’s not even in its story, because there is no one story: every Shepard is different.  The defining vision of Mass Effect, without which it is nothing, is its unprecedented interactivity that allows you to shape your own story—and, this being a video game, significantly affect the outcome if you played well enough.

That’s what the last two games did, and it’s precisely what ME3’s ending failed to deliver

[Psile_01]

I agree with everything you've said, but sadly this point has been made in different ways since the games came out and it has not deterred people from supporting the ending. Not that I seek to deny anyone their right to have their own opinion about the ending, or anything for that matter. However, even as I defend anyone's right to like or dislike the ending, I personally hated it and can't understand the other side's point of view. I doubt this thread will have any more impact than the countless other threads/videos/comics/demotivators that speak to the same points.

Well worded though.

[Sisterofshane]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

All of these are incredibly, amusingly easy to attack, but I don't really have the time. I'm playing Myst IV!

If you accept the Catalyst's Logic and prophecy, then the ending makes sense.  Simple as that.

At least that's the only real counterpoint I've ever heard

[xsdob]

[removed becaue I contridicted my 'why should anyone accept the challenge?' post and took the challenge.]

Modifié par xsdob, 04 mai 2012 - 11:27 .

[Byrdman]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

All of these are incredibly, amusingly easy to attack, but I don't really have the time. I'm playing Myst IV!

Yet you had time to read the OP and post your response.  Its kinda like the guy that pushes someone, then backs out of the ensuing fight going "It ain't worth my time man, ain't worth my time"

[Velocithon]

[ItsNotMyProblem]

Here's the difference I've noticed...

Pro-Enders can't answer the questions that have gone unanswered, and they agree that they are indeed unanswered questions that anyone would want answers to...even them.

The difference between us lies on how much that matters to us. It matters a lot to me. In fact, it made the whole ending crap. To a pro-ender, they might say, "Yeah, it'd be nice to know, but I'm ok with it. I like speculating".

[EnvyTB075]

xsdob wrote...

Why should anyone take this challenge?

Just because you have the most defeatist attitude to absolutely everything....

[xsdob]

[removed because being a downer really isn't worth doing all the time;)]

Modifié par xsdob, 03 mai 2012 - 05:01 .

[zambingo]

Nothing is shown that says Starchild is anything other than "an assassin's mark trying desperately to talk his self out of being killed". Starchild's logic is broken, it's implications of doom unfounded. Shepard has one mission, end the Reaper threat. Destroy.

BUT GETH? ONOSE EDI?!

Starchild is a lying sack. He told you Shep would should die too. And unless the EC shows otherwise there are no scenes that show the Geth and EDI dying when choosing Destroy.

ALL ENDINGS RELAY BOOMS NOVA?

Not necessarily. Just because one manner of destroying/disabling a relay results in explosive doom diarrhea doesn't mean that every manner of destroying/disabling a relay results in the same exact mushroom stormcloud of dangerousness. We don't know how that fictional technology works or what the Crucible did.

NO RELAYS WAYS TO GET HOMES?

Liara's Papa has dialogue that displays the Asari might know how to make a Relay... or at least a primitive one. In addition who's to say other means of faster than faster than light travel can't be created? Necessity is the mother of invention and desperation is MacGyver's daddy.

IN SHORTS, khaki shorts to be precise:

WHY SO SERIOUS? Glass half empty? Only doom can be so? Why can't you try on Captain Optimist's pants? They're stretchy pants, one size fits all. So comfy.

Modifié par zambingo, 03 mai 2012 - 04:35 .

[Wabajakka]

Sisterofshane wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

All of these are incredibly, amusingly easy to attack, but I don't really have the time. I'm playing Myst IV!

If you accept the Catalyst's Logic and prophecy, then the ending makes sense.  Simple as that.

At least that's the only real counterpoint I've ever heard

This. End of argument.

[Psile_01]

zambingo wrote...

Nothing is shown that says Starchild is anything other than "an assassin's mark trying desperately to talk his self out of being killed". Starchild's logic is broken, it's implications of doom unfounded. Shepard has one mission, end the Reaper threat. Destroy.

BUT GETH? ONOSE EDI?!

Starchild is a lying sack. He told you Shep would should die too. And unless the EC shows otherwise there are no scenes that show the Geth and EDI dying when choosing Destroy.

ALL ENDINGS RELAY BOOMS NOVA?

Not necessarily. Just because one manner of destroying/disabling a relay results in explosive doom diarrhea doesn't mean that every manner of destroying/disabling a relay results in the same exact mushroom stormcloud of dangerousness. We don't know how that fictional technology works or what the Crucible did.

NO RELAYS WAYS TO GET HOMES?

Liara's Papa has dialogue that displays the Asari might know how to make a Relay... or at least a primitive one. In addition who's to say other means of faster than faster than light travel can't be created? Necessity is the mother of invention and desperation is MacGyver's daddy.

IN SHORTS, khaki shorts to be precise:

WHY SO SERIOUS? Glass half empty? Only doom can be so? Why can't you try on Captain Optimist's pants? They're stretchy pants, one size fits all. So comfy.

The problem with everything you've stated is that it basically requires the player to guess at what is going to happen. Are the mass relays going to be rebuilt? Is most of the international fleet going to die a horrible starving death? What, exactly, is going to happen to your crew? Answer: we don't know. Every argument is just as valid as the last because we are combing though every codex entry and inane line of dialogue trying to find out. At the end of the day we don't know so it leaves more questions than answers which is always a fail ending.

edit: grammar

Modifié par Psile_01, 03 mai 2012 - 04:39 .

[Janeaba-]

Velocithon wrote...

[Russalka]

I wish people stopped misusing that gif.

[Iakus]

zambingo wrote...

Nothing is shown that says Starchild is anything other than "an assassin's mark trying desperately to talk his self out of being killed". Starchild's logic is broken, it's implications of doom unfounded. Shepard has one mission, end the Reaper threat. Destroy.

BUT GETH? ONOSE EDI?!

Starchild is a lying sack. He told you Shep would should die too. And unless the EC shows otherwise there are no scenes that show the Geth and EDI dying when choosing Destroy.

Unfortunately, the Starchild may well be telling the truth,. or close to it.

Unlike the BLue and Green endings, the Destroy ending does not show EDI stepping out of the Normandy with Joker (ast least, not in the one I got) And while Shepard can survive, the EMS required to get it is obscenely high (impossible to achieve without multiplayer or an iOS app) and even then Shep's condition besides "alive" is impossible for us to ascertain.

[Erield]

Orange Tee wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

All of these are incredibly, amusingly easy to attack, but I don't really have the time. I'm playing Myst IV!

If you accept the Catalyst's Logic and prophecy, then the ending makes sense.  Simple as that.

At least that's the only real counterpoint I've ever heard

This. End of argument.

Yup.  If you accept the Star Child's logic and words as face value and absolute truth, then it's fine.  You just have to ignore the parts where what he is telling you directly runs counter to what the game has shown you.  You just have to let 14 lines of dialogue change how you feel about what 3 games have shown you, and what you have directly experienced over the course of those games.

[ArchLord James]

Strange Aeons wrote...

They go to great lengths to establish that synthetics are alive and capable of growth and selflessness and friendship and individuality and love just in time for Shepard to murder them all.  It’s like ending Pinocchio with Geppetto stuffing him into a wood chipper.

 I would just like to add to this point that it is more like Gepetto throwing Pinocchio into a wood chipper AFTER PINOCCHIO BECAME A REAL BOY! So its not wood chips flying out the back its blood and bone. Think back to the game and remember the last moments you have with legion and edi.

Legion: Does this unit have a soul?

Tali: . . .Yes . . .

Legion: Kee'lah Seh'lai

EDI: Thank you Shepard for finally helping me realize what it means to be alive (paraphrase)

2 synthetic life forms who are just beginning to process what it means to truly be sentient life. Shepard says "your welcome now into the chipper you go!" It is literally just after the final leaps toward becoming fully recognized sentient beings are taken! Right after they become real boys. Wow Pinocchio is such a good analogy for this.

[UnstableMongoose]

Psile_01 wrote...

The problem with everything you've stated is that it basically requires the player to guess at what is going to happen. Are the mass relays going to be rebuilt? Is most of the international fleet going to die a horrible starving death? What, exactly, is going to happen to your crew? Answer: we don't know. Every argument is just as valid as the last because we are combing though every codex entry and inane line of dialogue trying to find out. At the end of the day we don't know so it leaves more questions than answers which is always a fail ending.

edit: grammar

All of the questions you raise are intimately affected by the hundreds of decisions regarding characters, history, and civilization that the player's Shepard makes over the course of the three games. Any authorial dictation as to how these played out would be unable to adequately accomodate for the vast array of choices made throughout the game.

They clearly hint that there are immense challenges to be overcome, but they also, through much of the dialogue that others have mentioned and game lore, hint that it is possible for a united galaxy to overcome these challenges (building new relays, quantuum entaglement, Quarian liveships, vast number of garden worlds like Eden Prime in nearby Alliance space, etc.). Exactly how depends on your Shepard and the decisions they have made on a microscopic scale. Essentially, BioWare left the player with the freedom to answer the question, "what would the galaxy that my Shepard shaped do from here on?"

The possibility of an ending like Dragon Age: Origins' is precluded by the vast number of choices that would have to be accomodated for. This left BioWare with three options:

• Completely deprive the player's actions of any meaning and write in an ending that happens in an exact sequence no matter what the player has done.
• Try to write in multiple endings, but be unable to account for everything and have many playthroughs receive an ending that does not follow logically from the decisions their Shepard has made
• Bring the game to a common critical point where the efforts of the player are recognized and the primary goal is accomplished, but rather than concluding in an authoritative manner, hand the epilogue entirely over to the players for speculation.

In my mind, Choice 3 is the choice that most reflects BioWare's dedication to both the story that they were telling and the fans who made Mass Effect possible. And that's precisely what they did. It provides the largest amount of respect for the authority and intelligence of your fanbase, and properly recognizes the significance of the choices made by everyone's character.

Modifié par UnstableMongoose, 03 mai 2012 - 04:50 .

[Calamity]

Erield wrote...

Orange Tee wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

All of these are incredibly, amusingly easy to attack, but I don't really have the time. I'm playing Myst IV!

If you accept the Catalyst's Logic and prophecy, then the ending makes sense.  Simple as that.

At least that's the only real counterpoint I've ever heard

This. End of argument.

Yup.  If you accept the Star Child's logic and words as face value and absolute truth, then it's fine.  You just have to ignore the parts where what he is telling you directly runs counter to what the game has shown you.  You just have to let 14 lines of dialogue change how you feel about what 3 games have shown you, and what you have directly experienced over the course of those games.

You said it.

[zambingo]

iakus wrote...

Unfortunately, the Starchild may well be telling the truth,. or close to it.

Unlike the BLue and Green endings, the Destroy ending does not show EDI stepping out of the Normandy with Joker (ast least, not in the one I got) And while Shepard can survive, the EMS required to get it is obscenely high (impossible to achieve without multiplayer or an iOS app) and even then Shep's condition besides "alive" is impossible for us to ascertain.

Psile_01 wrote...

The problem with everything you've stated is that it basically requires the player to guess at what is going to happen. Are the mass relays going to be rebuilt? Is most of the international fleet going to die a horrible starving death? What, exactly, is going to happen to your crew? Answer: we don't know. Every argument is just as valid as the last because we are combing though every codex entry and inane line of dialogue trying to find out. At the end of the day we don't know so it leaves more questions than answers which is always a fail ending.

Both totally fair. We don't know anything about what could happen or what state anything is in.

But we don't need to know about what could be under the circumstance of us being Shepard.

We have one mission. End the Reaper threat. As the OP says correctly everything in the games argue against everything that dumb Glowbug wants to insist is so. Knowing this, us... Shepard... we have one choice. Personality alignments don't even matter. We are the proverbial blunt instrument at this point. There is one chance to end the Reaper threat.

A lot of people are concerned about EDI and the Geth with Destroy, no matter what we want to argue could happen to them, look at their growth in the games. At that point, with those options; EDI would destroy the Reapers. Legion (who still technically exists "in spirit") would destroy the Reapers.

Control = Play God
Synthesis = Play God
Destroy = Kill "the ****** who's been Playing God" and give Life back to the universe.

As such I always like to think my "action hero" Shep always utters one last oneline:

"Starchild, I'm Commander Shepard and I am your grim reaper." [destroy]

Modifié par zambingo, 03 mai 2012 - 05:02 .

[sol7402]

I loved Enders Game. Not sure why being pro-Ender is such a bad thing.


Oh ... you mean ME3 game end. Well, that just sucked.

[ArchLord James]

UnstableMongoose wrote...

Psile_01 wrote...

The problem with everything you've stated is that it basically requires the player to guess at what is going to happen. Are the mass relays going to be rebuilt? Is most of the international fleet going to die a horrible starving death? What, exactly, is going to happen to your crew? Answer: we don't know. Every argument is just as valid as the last because we are combing though every codex entry and inane line of dialogue trying to find out. At the end of the day we don't know so it leaves more questions than answers which is always a fail ending.

edit: grammar

All of the questions you raise are intimately affected by the hundreds of decisions regarding characters, history, and civilization that the player's Shepard makes over the course of the three games. Any authorial dictation as to how these played out would be unable to adequately accomodate for the vast array of choices made throughout the game.

They clearly hint that there are immense challenges to be overcome, but they also, through much of the dialogue that others have mentioned and game lore, hint that it is possible for a united galaxy to overcome these challenges (building new relays, quantuum entaglement, Quarian liveships, vast number of garden worlds like Eden Prime in nearby Alliance space, etc.). Exactly how depends on your Shepard and the decisions they have made on a microscopic scale. Essentially, BioWare left the player with the freedom to answer the question, "what would the galaxy that my Shepard shaped do from here on?"

The possibility of an ending like Dragon Age: Origins' is precluded by the vast number of choices that would have to be accomodated for. This left BioWare with three options:

• Completely deprive the player's actions of any meaning and write in an ending that happens in an exact sequence no matter what the player has done.
• Try to write in multiple endings, but be unable to account for everything and have many playthroughs receive an ending that does not follow logically from the decisions their Shepard has made
• Bring the game to a common critical point where the efforts of the player are recognized and the primary goal is accomplished, but rather than concluding in an authoritative manner, hand the epilogue entirely over to the players for speculation.

In my mind, Choice 3 is the choice that most reflects BioWare's dedication to both the story that they were telling and the fans who made Mass Effect possible. And that's precisely what they did. It provides the largest amount of respect for the authority and intelligence of your fanbase, and properly recognizes the significance of the choices made by everyone's character.

Mongoose, you have completely missed the point. Nobody here is arguing about the technical difficulty encountered by a branching storyline. Of course it is difficult, we get it! However, I personally dont give a damn about epilogues and finding out what happens in the future of a fictional galaxy. All I want is to have a good time with what I am shown and given and not be forced to make a decision that makes me feel like stalin/mao/and hitler rolled into one.

Sure an epilogue and story is nice, but I think most people's problems with the ending are not clarity/choices/closure but they are the morally repugnant endings which contradict themselves. This is a completely seperate issue from the challenges that a branching storyline may have created. Unless your trying to say that the best way to write yourself out a corner is to try to make the reader/player feel like hitler, I think you stumbled into the wrong thread with your irrelevant points.

[Psile_01]

UnstableMongoose wrote...

Psile_01 wrote...

The problem with everything you've stated is that it basically requires the player to guess at what is going to happen. Are the mass relays going to be rebuilt? Is most of the international fleet going to die a horrible starving death? What, exactly, is going to happen to your crew? Answer: we don't know. Every argument is just as valid as the last because we are combing though every codex entry and inane line of dialogue trying to find out. At the end of the day we don't know so it leaves more questions than answers which is always a fail ending.

edit: grammar

All of the questions you raise are intimately affected by the hundreds of decisions regarding characters, history, and civilization that the player's Shepard makes over the course of the three games. Any authorial dictation as to how these played out would be unable to adequately accomodate for the vast array of choices made throughout the game.

They clearly hint that there are immense challenges to be overcome, but they also, through much of the dialogue that others have mentioned and game lore, hint that it is possible for a united galaxy to overcome these challenges (building new relays, quantuum entaglement, Quarian liveships, vast number of garden worlds like Eden Prime in nearby Alliance space, etc.). Exactly how depends on your Shepard and the decisions they have made on a microscopic scale. Essentially, BioWare left the player with the freedom to answer the question, "what would the galaxy that my Shepard shaped do from here on?"

Correct me if I am reading this wrong, but isn't this essentially saying that we still have to guess at how the galaxy will react? All you did was say that we can take into consideration the choices that we have made, which I sort of assumed everyone was doing anyway.

The possibility of an ending like Dragon Age: Origins' is precluded by the vast number of choices that would have to be accomodated for. This left BioWare with three options:

• Completely deprive the player's actions of any meaning and write in an ending that happens in an exact sequence no matter what the player has done.
• Try to write in multiple endings, but be unable to account for everything and have many playthroughs receive an ending that does not follow logically from the decisions their Shepard has made
• Bring the game to a common critical point where the efforts of the player are recognized and the primary goal is accomplished, but rather than concluding in an authoritative manner, hand the epilogue entirely over to the players for speculation.

In my mind, Choice 3 is the choice that most reflects BioWare's dedication to both the story that they were telling and the fans who made Mass Effect possible. And that's precisely what they did. It provides the largest amount of respect for the authority and intelligence of your fanbase, and properly recognizes the significance of the choices made by everyone's character.

I agree, Dragon Age Origins had a great ending because it told you exactly what the consequences of your actions were. Who did you choose to be the dwarf king? Well, here's how that turned out for them. Who did you choose to be the Fereldan king/queen? Well, here's how that went. The list goes on and on, and all they needed to do it were a few slides at the end and some last convos with your party members. DAO actually managed to keep all of your choices meaningful and allowed for further games to be produced in the series. Yeah, those games had to take place in a different setting because it was impossible to factor in all the choices from DAO, but so what? You got a single meaningful story that branched into multiple possibilities. ME3 had the potential to do the same thing because it was the last game in the series. They didn't have to worry about making more, and so didn't have to worry about having a unified starting point for the next game. They could end it however they wanted, in as many different ways as they wanted and close the book. Instead, they went for option 1. It doesn't matter if you sided with the quarians, the geth, or made peace because rannoch is now completely out of reach. Yeah, it is nice for whoever is still on Rannoch but all those quarian/geth soldiers who followed you to defend  your planet are trapped  there. For how long? We. Don't. Know. We can guess, but we don't really know for sure and all the speculation and fan-fic in the world doesn't take the place of clean, concise story telling that ties up loose ends.

[thefallen2far]

To the OP:

Janeaba- wrote...

Velocithon wrote...