419 réponses à ce sujet

[AdamJenson]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
I agree 100%.  I put myself into that role as well-that's what good storytelling is all about.  It's also part of what's so bad at the end.  That Shepard is no longer me, because I would have tried something, anything other than doing what that kid said.

Tried what, exactly?

I can see Shepard arguing more, but in the end the device does what it does. Shep can either use it in one of the three ways it works, or not use it at all.

Arguing is one thing.
Talking to Hackett or other members fo the fleet (Hackett could still communicate with Shepard on the Citadel, remember) Just hearing what others have to say about each ending would have added some variation.

What would the geth say about the Red ending?  How about EDI and Joker?

What would Jacob or Miranda say about Blue?  

What would Mordin say about Green?  Well, besides some high-pitched salarian laughter followed by a "No seriously"

At the very least, these endings need to be reworked to make it seem like SHepard is making an affirmative choice, rather than being herded towards them by the Catalyst.

ANd make them less brutal on Shepard and the galaxy.  We're supposed to feel like we accomplished something, not like the Starchild gave us Earth, but not before beatin Shepard up and taking his lunch money.

What would Mordin say about "green"?  He'd say, "Impossible.  Requires god-like magic powers that do not exist.  Is a lie."

[AlanC9]

Harorrd wrote...

Every Bioware up to date untill Dragon age 2 had several endings to their games, either good, or bad

This is nonsense.

BG1 had one and only one ending. No variation whatsoever. The TotSC expansion didn't change the ending

BG2-- same thing. The ToB expansion had an ending with one big choice and different flavors depending on your alignment.

NWN OC: One ending.

SoU: One ending.

[AdamJenson]

AlanC9 wrote...

Harorrd wrote...

Every Bioware up to date untill Dragon age 2 had several endings to their games, either good, or bad

This is nonsense.

BG1 had one and only one ending. No variation whatsoever. The TotSC expansion didn't change the ending

BG2-- same thing. The ToB expansion had an ending with one big choice and different flavors depending on your alignment.

NWN OC: One ending.

SoU: One ending.

Glad I didn't play any of them.  Certainly not worth replay given that info.

[SinnSly]

As long as I gotta work my ass off to get a happy ending I want it...


I despise the f*cking 'ending' they have now.

[Benchpress610]

3DandBeyond wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting a happy ending. I know that what someone considers "happy" is a matter of opinion. I remember the rather "spirited" topics between the people who wanted their idea of a happy ending and those who wanted a more realistic, gritty ending. Simply defeating the Reapers is happy enough for some, but others like me want a reunion with the crew and Shepard's LI. The first and second games had that, but apparently it became taboo somewhere between 2 & 3. If the EC fixes that for me, I'm back on board. Am I a shallow person? Maybe, but I like what I like.

I just want to know what perversity is it that says the only authentic ending is a sad soul-crushing one?  Like you I want what we generally think of as happy in real life.  I don't know too many people that run around in real life hoping today's the day they get to have that sadly forever after ending.  Truth is, we get enough sad along the way.  In my games, if not my other forms of entertainment, I want happy or the possibility of it.

Happy ending is a relative term and it means different things for different people. I won’t pretend to speak for everyone, but generally speaking, must of us human beings strive to find happiness in life. And we can find happiness in many different ways as we are as varied as there are leaves on trees. Some here argue that a happy ending should be avoided as there is not such thing in real life… I say “bunk”.
 
Last Friday as I was walking out of my office, I felt happy. I had finally resolved a problem at work that had been bugging me for weeks. It had rained earlier and as I was walking towards my car I noticed a rainbow in the southern sky. The air felt clean and fresh after the thunderstorm and the butterflies were flying about. It was a glorious summer afternoon. I took a deep breath filling my lungs with the clean air, and for a moment I felt I was the luckiest man alive. After three grueling weeks of frustration, I felt compensated and I was looking forward to the long holiday weekend with barbecue in my backyard with friends and family. So yes, if there can be happy endings in real life, why not in a GAME?
 
If a videogame is purposely designed without the possibility of winning, then the designers are defrauding the gamers. For a game to have any value there must be the possibility of a CLEAR VICTORY however hard it should be to achieve, but it must be there, otherwise it becomes un-replayable. So no there is nothing wrong with a chance for happy, satisfying ending, it is essential.  

Modifié par Benchpress610, 30 mai 2012 - 09:10 .

[Il Divo]

Benchpress610 wrote...

If a videogame is designed purposely without the possibility of winning, then the designers are defrauding the gamers. For a game to have any value there must be the possibility of a CLEAR VICTORY however hard it should be to achieve, but it must be there, otherwise it becomes un-replayable. So no there is nothing wrong with a chance for happy, satisfying ending, it is essential.  

I'm not sure I see why. Not that there's anything wrong with a happy ending, but there's no rule which makes happiness/success an "essential" element to a video game. A satisfying ending, for example, doesn't require either of those two other ingredients. Look at Red Dead Redemption's ending, an example commonly lauded. Marston's goal is to build a new life, for himself and his family, and to prevent his son from going down the road of a bandit. He ultimately fails at both, but thematically the game still works very well.  

Again, not saying this would have worked for Mas Effect, but to extend this logic to "every game" is a hell of a stretch.

Modifié par Il Divo, 30 mai 2012 - 03:12 .

[Benchpress610]

Il Divo wrote...

Benchpress610 wrote...

If a videogame is designed purposely without the possibility of winning, then the designers are defrauding the gamers. For a game to have any value there must be the possibility of a CLEAR VICTORY however hard it should be to achieve, but it must be there, otherwise it becomes un-replayable. So no there is nothing wrong with a chance for happy, satisfying ending, it is essential.  

I'm not sure I see why. Not that there's anything wrong with a happy ending, but there's no rule which makes happiness/success an "essential" element to a video game. A satisfying ending, for example, doesn't require either of those two other ingredients. Look at Red Dead Redemption's ending, an example commonly lauded. Marston's goal is to build a new life, for himself and his family, and to prevent his son from going down the road of a bandit. He ultimately fails at both, but thematically the game still works very well.  

Again, not saying this would have worked for Mas Effect, but to extend this logic to "every game" is a hell of a stretch.

That doesn't invalidate my point. But just let me ask you a question and it requires a simple yes or no answer: Did you feel like you won in ME3?
 

[AdamJenson]

Il Divo wrote...

Benchpress610 wrote...

If a videogame is designed purposely without the possibility of winning, then the designers are defrauding the gamers. For a game to have any value there must be the possibility of a CLEAR VICTORY however hard it should be to achieve, but it must be there, otherwise it becomes un-replayable. So no there is nothing wrong with a chance for happy, satisfying ending, it is essential.  

I'm not sure I see why. Not that there's anything wrong with a happy ending, but there's no rule which makes happiness/success an "essential" element to a video game. A satisfying ending, for example, doesn't require either of those two other ingredients. Look at Red Dead Redemption's ending, an example commonly lauded. Marston's goal is to build a new life, for himself and his family, and to prevent his son from going down the road of a bandit. He ultimately fails at both, but thematically the game still works very well.  

Again, not saying this would have worked for Mas Effect, but to extend this logic to "every game" is a hell of a stretch.

THE best ending for a game is to model it on Half-Life and FEAR.  In both, the protagonist survives, he has "won" but it is mixed...he has won...so it seems.  In fact, he has only won a battle, not the war.  The game allows for more games later but dosn't REQUIRE more.  

Just a fact .  Half-Life (1 and 2) and F.E.A.R (1 and 2): best endings - "bittersweet" in both cases, protagonist not gone, room for another game in the line IF DESIRED.  Models to live by.  Player isn't left hollowed out and sucked of soul.  Enthusiasm for game and even replay retained.  

Hard to get into replaying something when you KNOW all your efforts end in FAIL (death is the ultimate fail).

Modifié par AdamJenson, 30 mai 2012 - 03:28 .

[3DandBeyond]

AdamJenson wrote...


What would Mordin say about "green"?  He'd say, "Impossible.  Requires god-like magic powers that do not exist.  Is a lie."

Mordin actually had plenty to say about it in ME2-might have had to have a certain type of Shepard, but there's a point where Shepard goes into the lab and can ask about the Collectors and Mordin says they are organic synthetic constructs that cannot be fixed.  Everything replace by tech.  Soul replaced by tech.  He specifically says that such a thing as synthesis causes all life to stagnate.  I know what he'd say.

Further, I know what a logical Shepard would say upon meeting the star kid.  I know what any person would say.  They'd tell the kid to hit the off switch.  It's the game that doesn't allow any real logical protest when Shepard is faced with the reaper keeper kid.  He's been controlling them, they have been his solution (gee, where have I heard that before?) and when Shepard gets to the Citadel, the kid needs Shepard's help so he can implement his new solution.  How the heck does Shepard know this kid doesn't just want to make people goo faster?  This is just so ridiculous.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Benchpress610 wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Benchpress610 wrote...

If a videogame is designed purposely without the possibility of winning, then the designers are defrauding the gamers. For a game to have any value there must be the possibility of a CLEAR VICTORY however hard it should be to achieve, but it must be there, otherwise it becomes un-replayable. So no there is nothing wrong with a chance for happy, satisfying ending, it is essential.  

I'm not sure I see why. Not that there's anything wrong with a happy ending, but there's no rule which makes happiness/success an "essential" element to a video game. A satisfying ending, for example, doesn't require either of those two other ingredients. Look at Red Dead Redemption's ending, an example commonly lauded. Marston's goal is to build a new life, for himself and his family, and to prevent his son from going down the road of a bandit. He ultimately fails at both, but thematically the game still works very well.  

Again, not saying this would have worked for Mas Effect, but to extend this logic to "every game" is a hell of a stretch.

That doesn't invalidate my point. But just let me ask you a question and it requires a simple yes or no answer: Did you feel like you won in ME3?
 

Haha, well I didn't feel much of anything in Mass Effect 3's ending, which is one reason I hate it so much.

But jokes aside, no, I didn't. The implementation of the Star Child, Shepard carrying the idiot ball (more than usual), and the horribly framed three choices all had me going "wtf".

[BaladasDemnevanni]

AdamJenson wrote...

THE best ending for a game is to model it on Half-Life and FEAR.  In both, the protagonist survives, he has "won" but it is mixed...he has won...so it seems.  In fact, he has only won a battle, not the war.  The game allows for more games later but dosn't REQUIRE more.  

Just a fact .  Half-Life (1 and 2) and F.E.A.R (1 and 2): best endings - "bittersweet" in both cases, protagonist not gone, room for another game in the line IF DESIRED.  Models to live by.  Player isn't left hollowed out and sucked of soul.  Enthusiasm for game and even replay retained.  

Hard to get into replaying something when you KNOW all your efforts end in FAIL (death is the ultimate fail).

Admittedly, Half-Life is a great model, in many ways. Episode 2's ending still gives me shivers.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

By the way:

<--Il Divo.

Didn't realize that I was posting on my Mass Effect 3-account.

[AdamJenson]

3DandBeyond wrote...

AdamJenson wrote...


What would Mordin say about "green"?  He'd say, "Impossible.  Requires god-like magic powers that do not exist.  Is a lie."

Mordin actually had plenty to say about it in ME2-might have had to have a certain type of Shepard, but there's a point where Shepard goes into the lab and can ask about the Collectors and Mordin says they are organic synthetic constructs that cannot be fixed.  Everything replace by tech.  Soul replaced by tech.  He specifically says that such a thing as synthesis causes all life to stagnate.  I know what he'd say.

Further, I know what a logical Shepard would say upon meeting the star kid.  I know what any person would say.  They'd tell the kid to hit the off switch.  It's the game that doesn't allow any real logical protest when Shepard is faced with the reaper keeper kid.  He's been controlling them, they have been his solution (gee, where have I heard that before?) and when Shepard gets to the Citadel, the kid needs Shepard's help so he can implement his new solution.  How the heck does Shepard know this kid doesn't just want to make people goo faster?  This is just so ridiculous.

That's easy!  ALL toddlers like to play (and eat) playdough!  Of course this annoying child wants to make more "people goo", ie, reaper playdough.  He's a KID!  

I was going beyond the bit Mordin said about everything "replaced by tech".  I was getting into the actual mechanics of changing ALL life everywhere without even any direct contact, just green light, into some tech-organic synthesis.  This is a truly omnipotent god power.  POOF!  Thou art a techie!  

I don't have as much an issue with the mix and match of tech and organic (Deus Ex:HR is all about that and ANYONE in ME with any tech addons or replacement organs or limbs is such a tech-organic amalgam of varying extents).  But there is a clear and simple mechanism for this that doesn't require god power magic to do.  Just medical tech.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...


BG2-- same thing. The ToB expansion had an ending with one big choice and different flavors depending on your alignment.

ToB expansion endings:

Claim powers of Bhaal to become a god of evil
Claim powers of Bhaal to become a god of Good
Reject divinity and live life as a mortal

Every companion in your group (of which there are sixteen possible) gets an epilogue, with special ones linked to the Bhaalspawn for those who were romanced.

A game that came out nearly fifteen years ago has more ending variation, not to mention more satisfying endings than ME3

[Kenshen]

AdamJenson wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Harorrd wrote...

Every Bioware up to date untill Dragon age 2 had several endings to their games, either good, or bad

This is nonsense.

BG1 had one and only one ending. No variation whatsoever. The TotSC expansion didn't change the ending

BG2-- same thing. The ToB expansion had an ending with one big choice and different flavors depending on your alignment.

NWN OC: One ending.

SoU: One ending.

Glad I didn't play any of them.  Certainly not worth replay given that info.

They are great games and many find them replayable.

Too add to the list Jade Empire only has 2 different endings, Kotor has 2, DA:O has 3 (I think been awhile since i played it).  So it isn't like games need to have a ton of different endings but the key is to do the few you have right.

[Iakus]

aryon69 wrote...

They are great games and many find them replayable.

Too add to the list Jade Empire only has 2 different endings, Kotor has 2, DA:O has 3 (I think been awhile since i played it).  So it isn't like games need to have a ton of different endings but the key is to do the few you have right.

Indeed, looking forward to the rerelease

BTW, Jade Empire has a third ending, though it's more of an Easter egg.  You can surrender at the end.  And you are honored for sacrificing yourself for the good of the Empire.

DAO has four endings, with extra details afterwards based on how you played.

The Warden dies (Ultimate Sacrifice)
Allistair dies (Knight Commander)
Logain dies (Redeemer)
Old God Baby  (Dark Promise)

None of which are really a "best" ending.  All have strengths and weaknesses.  It's all in how you roleplay it.

Modifié par iakus, 30 mai 2012 - 04:16 .

[Il Divo]

Still, I'd rather avoid listing Jade Empire's easter egg ending altogether. It ends with Master Li basically laughing at you, cementing the idea that you screwed everything up. Certainly not a template that I would want Bioware following in designing its endings for ME3.

I also think the God Baby is a cop-out ending for DA:O. The problem was that they really did nothing to emphasize the fact that the player basically side-stepped his duty as a Grey-Warden. It could have worked if they had spent more time attempting to emphasize the grey nature of your actions (Ex: Genophage plotline, ME3-style). There was nothing for me (as a player/character) to feel guilty about in the God Baby ending.

Modifié par Il Divo, 30 mai 2012 - 04:26 .

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

I also think the God Baby is a cop-out ending for DA:O. The problem was that they really did nothing to emphasize the fact that the player basically side-stepped his duty as a Grey-Warden. It could have worked if they had spent more time attempting to emphasize the grey nature of your actions (Ex: Genophage plotline, ME3-style). There was nothing for me (as a player/character) to feel guilty about in the God Baby ending.

To be fair, when looking thrugh the Dragon Age boards, that seems to be one of the most popular topics that people want to see visited in sequels.  Though I'm not sure how it can be done since it's only in one of the four possible endings.

And Dark Promise, unlike Jade Empire's surrender, is a legitimate ending.  It gets referred to in Witch Hunt, it has an achievement attatched to it.  It's one of the four "See all possible endings" achievements.  

Though my favorite ending is Redeemer 

[3DandBeyond]

Benchpress610 wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Benchpress610 wrote...

If a videogame is designed purposely without the possibility of winning, then the designers are defrauding the gamers. For a game to have any value there must be the possibility of a CLEAR VICTORY however hard it should be to achieve, but it must be there, otherwise it becomes un-replayable. So no there is nothing wrong with a chance for happy, satisfying ending, it is essential.  

I'm not sure I see why. Not that there's anything wrong with a happy ending, but there's no rule which makes happiness/success an "essential" element to a video game. A satisfying ending, for example, doesn't require either of those two other ingredients. Look at Red Dead Redemption's ending, an example commonly lauded. Marston's goal is to build a new life, for himself and his family, and to prevent his son from going down the road of a bandit. He ultimately fails at both, but thematically the game still works very well.  

Again, not saying this would have worked for Mas Effect, but to extend this logic to "every game" is a hell of a stretch.

That doesn't invalidate my point. But just let me ask you a question and it requires a simple yes or no answer: Did you feel like you won in ME3?
 

The best outcome is the win.  In a game such as this the goal is the destruction of the foe, the survival of the hero, the survival of all else most dear to the hero.  Therefore, because at its essence this is a very simple story of good vs. bad and the triumph over evil beings, and the story has always made you believe the hero survives and that it's possible to bring your team home alive, the only win ending is the totally happy ending.

Failure is the failure to do something.  Fail to survive but save the galaxy-well, there's failure there.  It's not a clear cut win.  The goal in my opinion was never just about saving the galaxy, though that was the biggest part.  If that was all it was about then Shepard was always expendable (the devs had even considered this) and just as Maelon could substitute for Mordin or Wreav for Wrex, then there should have been a Stafford character that took over for Shepard.

I'm not saying that doesn't mean they could not have created (or even still create) alternate endings, it's just that I agree that any ending that is not full blown happy is not a total win ending.  And like Benchpress, I do think we play games to win them.  The knight gets the princess because it isn't enough to just defeat the dragon.

[3DandBeyond]

AdamJenson wrote...

That's easy!  ALL toddlers like to play (and eat) playdough!  Of course this annoying child wants to make more "people goo", ie, reaper playdough.  He's a KID!  

I was going beyond the bit Mordin said about everything "replaced by tech".  I was getting into the actual mechanics of changing ALL life everywhere without even any direct contact, just green light, into some tech-organic synthesis.  This is a truly omnipotent god power.  POOF!  Thou art a techie!  

I don't have as much an issue with the mix and match of tech and organic (Deus Ex:HR is all about that and ANYONE in ME with any tech addons or replacement organs or limbs is such a tech-organic amalgam of varying extents).  But there is a clear and simple mechanism for this that doesn't require god power magic to do.  Just medical tech.

Yes, agreed.  It's amazing just how "all purpose" that Crucible beam is.  It does it all.  Control, destroy, synthesis you name it.  And no one knew what they were making so it made sense that it would turn out as it did. 

The whole thing is god power being given to Shepard by something he takes at see through face value.  No wonder it just feels awful at the end.  Glow boy god, brainless Shepard, multipurpose beam, and more.  It never could add up to anything sensible.

[Benchpress610]

3DandBeyond wrote...
The best outcome is the win.  In a game such as this the goal is the destruction of the foe, the survival of the hero, the survival of all else most dear to the hero.  Therefore, because at its essence this is a very simple story of good vs. bad and the triumph over evil beings, and the story has always made you believe the hero survives and that it's possible to bring your team home alive, the only win ending is the totally happy ending.

Failure is the failure to do something.  Fail to survive but save the galaxy-well, there's failure there.  It's not a clear cut win.  The goal in my opinion was never just about saving the galaxy, though that was the biggest part.  If that was all it was about then Shepard was always expendable (the devs had even considered this) and just as Maelon could substitute for Mordin or Wreav for Wrex, then there should have been a Stafford character that took over for Shepard.

I'm not saying that doesn't mean they could not have created (or even still create) alternate endings, it's just that I agree that any ending that is not full blown happy is not a total win ending.  And like Benchpress, I do think we play games to win them.  The knight gets the princess because it isn't enough to just defeat the dragon.

I like that the knight gets the princess.
 
In the words of our friend BlueStorm83 from the “we are listening” thread:
I’m paraphrasing
“I want and end where Shepard steals Harbinger’s girlfriend and then kick his ass up and down the block, and Jesus is there to help him.”  
 

[AdamJenson]

Benchpress610 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
The best outcome is the win.  In a game such as this the goal is the destruction of the foe, the survival of the hero, the survival of all else most dear to the hero.  Therefore, because at its essence this is a very simple story of good vs. bad and the triumph over evil beings, and the story has always made you believe the hero survives and that it's possible to bring your team home alive, the only win ending is the totally happy ending.

Failure is the failure to do something.  Fail to survive but save the galaxy-well, there's failure there.  It's not a clear cut win.  The goal in my opinion was never just about saving the galaxy, though that was the biggest part.  If that was all it was about then Shepard was always expendable (the devs had even considered this) and just as Maelon could substitute for Mordin or Wreav for Wrex, then there should have been a Stafford character that took over for Shepard.

I'm not saying that doesn't mean they could not have created (or even still create) alternate endings, it's just that I agree that any ending that is not full blown happy is not a total win ending.  And like Benchpress, I do think we play games to win them.  The knight gets the princess because it isn't enough to just defeat the dragon.

I like that the knight gets the princess.
 
In the words of our friend BlueStorm83 from the “we are listening” thread:
I’m paraphrasing
“I want and end where Shepard steals Harbinger’s girlfriend and then kick his ass up and down the block, and Jesus is there to help him.”  
 

Now come on folks, you KNOW the movie "Princess Bride" would have been WAY better if just as the hero Westley was about to kiss Buttercup at the end he got hit with an arrow through the throat and fell over dead.  It would have been "serious" and "bittersweet" and all full of "artistic expression" and "artistic integrity" and hipster.  Hipster makes everything better.  

Just ask any hipster (before you grab him by the neck and back of pants and toss his skinny @ss over the railing of a bridge and listen to him scream like a little girl all the way down...)

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

To be fair, when looking thrugh the Dragon Age boards, that seems to be one of the most popular topics that people want to see visited in sequels.  Though I'm not sure how it can be done since it's only in one of the four possible endings.

And Dark Promise, unlike Jade Empire's surrender, is a legitimate ending.  It gets referred to in Witch Hunt, it has an achievement attatched to it.  It's one of the four "See all possible endings" achievements.  

Though my favorite ending is Redeemer 

It's legitimate in the sense that Bioware was at least taking themselves seriously when they wrote it. The problem is I felt like nothing was lost in that scenario. That's why I like using the Genophage arc as a counter-example. Whatever you do, Shepard is forced to give something up. There are scenarios where you sacrifice friendships, betray allies, to obtain both Salarian and Krogan support and I felt that I'd screwed Wrex over by making that call.

The Dark Promise never does that. Now, if they really wanted to add some interesting implications, they should have had Riordan walk in as Morrigan explains the plan to you. This would have provided tension in just what you may happen by sparing the Old God's soul. As it stands, the Dark Ritual has no consequence attached to it that it felt like a cop-out to obtain the happy endings again.

Modifié par Il Divo, 30 mai 2012 - 06:16 .

[Kenshen]

iakus wrote...

aryon69 wrote...

They are great games and many find them replayable.

Too add to the list Jade Empire only has 2 different endings, Kotor has 2, DA:O has 3 (I think been awhile since i played it).  So it isn't like games need to have a ton of different endings but the key is to do the few you have right.

Indeed, looking forward to the rerelease

BTW, Jade Empire has a third ending, though it's more of an Easter egg.  You can surrender at the end.  And you are honored for sacrificing yourself for the good of the Empire.

DAO has four endings, with extra details afterwards based on how you played.

The Warden dies (Ultimate Sacrifice)
Allistair dies (Knight Commander)
Logain dies (Redeemer)
Old God Baby  (Dark Promise)

None of which are really a "best" ending.  All have strengths and weaknesses.  It's all in how you roleplay it.

Oh yeah I forgot you could surrender to Master Lee at the end and how in the world did I forget the old god baby.  Well I guess I know what I am doing this weekend other than the yard work I have been putting off.

[AdamJenson]

CDProjekt RED just announced sci-fi RPG for the late 2013, early 2014 period. Fully customizable character, classes, heavy influence by Bladerunner (Shadowrun and Ghost in the Shell). Morally ambiguous choices, choices having consequences, large world. Maybe they will hit the ending without going all "bittersweet" and aiming for "speculations from everyone". It's almost certain to lack a certan RGB quality.