380 réponses à ce sujet

[garrusfan1]

Gruntburner wrote...

If you think think that the EC can only make ending better, then you are an optimist and I welcome you to my table. If you are going to wait and see, you are a realist and I respect your caution and hope it turns out good for you. If you already know that EC is going to fail and nothing can convince you otherwise, you are a cynic and should leave because demanding a complete rewrite is insane and provides nothing constructive.

if you were talking to me they can make the ending bearable I am an optimist but I was saying I am actually getting a good feeling about ec but am trying to be cautios if you weren`t talking to me sorry

[garrusfan1]

Tazzmission wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Hahahaha did this guy just imply that Starchild is "creative"?

he is creative if you actually think about it for a second


the being of light was mentioned in me1 and dont tell me different


then in me2 you have a lil dlc title over lord wich basicly imo is a primitive version of sythnesis

me3. we learn tim wants to controll the reapers and successfully has done it with henry lawson with a signal

so in a way yea the endings do make sense

also note all the religious referances in me3 the asari temple for example


and who knows maybe soverighn did believe the reapers were just there and are without a creator

maybe the reapers fully evolved similar to the geth like legion because think when legion died to upload his code he said I instead of we meaning he considered himself a person instead of a platform

to each is own but the holo kid might have worked if thay had done it different IT for example could work or not just adding a ton of stuff in the last 5 minutes and having no choice and me personally would have liked it not to be so depressing

[garrusfan1]

Snout wrote...

It'll just be Hackett chatting over the radio while the Normandy's running away with EDI advising Jeff on some stuff.

Nowt special to see here.

NO don`t say that please don`t be true 

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

someguy1231 wrote...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: no amount of "clarification" can save the ending. Bioware has already made it clear the EC won't retcon or otherwise change the ending. Shepard still submits to the Catalyst, and the galaxy is still plunged into a Dark Age. So far, it looks like the EC is just going to be shallow fanservice that tries to deflect attention from the state of the galaxy and Shepard's character derailment by saying to the player, "Look, all of your favorite squadmates!"

Talk like this is what ruined the ending of Metal Gear Solid 4.

Snake destroys the patriots and sends the world into a technological dark age where things can evolve again naturally rather than along a predetermined path, keeping in line with the themes of control and genetic destiny the series was all about.

BUT then otakon comes and says "Hey snake good news, sunny made a virus that only destroyed the bad parts of technology and left all the good parts so now you dont have to feel sad for even a moment."

And then shepard, home to a disease that could kill all his friends and a large population of people in general realises that the only way to save them is to kill himself so the foxdie virus doesnt activate.  This is in line with the themes of self sacrifice that were the entire point of MGS3 and played with in MGS1 and even 4.  But then big boss shows up out of nowhere and says "Actually the foxdie was changed at the last minute so it only effects bad people and doesnt hurt any good people."

Do you see where I'm going with this?  MGS4 totally caved in to all the fanboys and little babbies and sacrificed creative vision and its own thematic consistency.  MGS1, 2, and 3 were amazing stories that left you with something at the end, MGS4 just kind of leaves you feeling like all that investment was a waste of time.  :-/

Making everything turn out good with no bad is called "pussing out" and can severely undermine the entire story leading up to that point because it casts all the previous sacrifices and threatening situations into a trivial light.  Whats the point of the story if all it accomplishes is turning off the things it brought up?  The fact that you can get through the suicide mission without anyone dieing immediately trivializes the threat of the collectors.  I was super happy and accomplished when i beat it, but then I felt kind of lame when I realised  "Well the collectors werent a big deal all you had to do was be the smart one."

Another puss out ending that ruined alot of what I loved about that series is Gurren Lagann.  They bring up all this stuff about how the evolution of a species will eventually lead to spiral energy overload and cause spiral nemesis, the destruction of the universe.  But then the main character goes "I bet it wont happen" and then kills the badguy and ends the series.  You're left thinking "Well I guess the entire point of the series was entirely trivial."  which is a ****ty way to end off.  It sacrifices thematic elements in favor of pandering levels of satisfaction.  Its disgusting and I just facepalm when I see these kinds of "expectations" out of people.  :-/  (I wonder how many of these peeps have ever gone through a truly impactful literary experience?)

Modifié par Doctor_Jackstraw, 19 mai 2012 - 07:12 .

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

----------

The only total problem with ME3's ending was a lack of followthrough.  It hurried us along without allowing us to wholly understand what was going on, and what the ultimate culmination of the story was.  It was rushed, and had content that needed to be there missing.  The same can be said about the game in general.  The ME2 characters (8 of the 12 at least) were severely lacking to varrying degrees and at best got a single cool scene (Grunt) and at worst were just confusing and hard to follow (Zaeed).  Carrying over small choices suffered.  only a handful of side characters carry through to this game, there arent any serious splits in how the story unfolds based on decisions that SHOULD impact it (Council decisions, Collector Base decisions, y'know, the two most important choices that were supposed to carry over and shape the main plot of ME3 in amazing ways that got people talking about these games so much)  And theres copious ammounts of automated dialogue where you'll be lucky to pick 3 out of 9 responses shepard has during a conversation, if any at all.  And even then your choice of responses are miniscule at best.

After EC I want them to make the main story as good and varried as tuchunka and rannoch.  Theres 8 permutations of the two games' big ending decisions and those decisions become severely negligible.  I think the female salarian counciler was probably the most interesting thing to come out of the splits in the main story changes.  The turian counciler and asari councilers didnt feel like different people from the previous set, choosing anderson didnt effect the citadel plot (Why not write it so the story continues in the absense of a human councilor, and udina's position is just reversed to trying to have an impact when humanity can't do anything, leaving him with gray hair and the desperate attitude he had in ME1, while still carrying out much of the same actions?)  There should have been another leg to the council situation ontop of that, you could save the council in ME1, or sacrifice them in a renegade way or neutral way.  The current "replacement" council feels like a good response to someone who picked neutral in me1, but what if there was an entirely human council option for those who picked renegade before, but their constant bickering, infighting, conflicting personalities, and pressure from trying to make the entire galaxy happy, causes shepard (and udina) to fall into similar positions, even if udina is on the council he could still have problems rallying fleets to earth, leading to his defection.  This is all time consuming work but its something we really needed bioware to follow through with in this game.  Its what they did with tuchunka (Mordin, Wrex, and the Data all have severe impacts on how that mission plays out)

And then theres the collector base, such a binary choice should have at least had a cosmetic effect on the game.  Destroying the base should have lead to the illusive man marking you as a liability and enemy, while saving it leads shepard feelign betrayed as cerberus turns on him for an unknown reason.  Not only that but they could have gone one step further and given cerberus enemies, the base, and kai leng some cosmetic differences based on if they're using reaper tech or collector tech.  Maybe even slightly altering the weapons they use to go from the normal set we get in the game to a more collector style group.  (imagine if the snipers used that ****ing particle beam, or if phantoms shot harbinger orbs at you, or if the atlas used scion and praetorian attacks on you)  It would also give MP a little more variety because we'd have a 4th enemy type out the gate.

Also it would have possibly made the kai leng encounter in cerberus hq a little bit interesting if he reaperized after shepard stabs him and walks away, and you end up fighting a suped up version of him similar to what happens to saren.  (Maybe even have him turn out like the deleted fight with the illusive man)  Having him turn into one kind of boss with reaper tech, and a varryingly different boss with collector tech.  This all would have been extra work, but it would have really made those choices feel like they impacted your game in severely unique ways.

I think there should have been a similar impact on the way the geth fight based on if you rewrote the heretics or destroyed them, but i've said what I needed to say.










tl;dr  The main story was rushed, it wasnt bad it was just rushed and didnt follow through on the promises we were given.  The council story ends up not really satisfying the choices available to it, and the cerberus story ends up the same way.  The krogan story turned out well, but the geth story ended up with a few spots of missed potential.Also the raccni thing.  That was a huge dissapointment.  Maybe if the fake raccni queen had been a boss encounter that would have made the way they did that make more sense narratively.  (Save the queen, get raccni in the ending, kill the queen, fight her doppleganger in a mission)



HEY BIOWARE can you make a dlc where theres a fight with the fake raccni queen?    The raccni really got a raw deal.


the krogan storylines and geth storylines not converging and impacting the ending really sucked, same for the me2 characters just sort of getting a vidcom.  the treatment of them in general was just kind of rotten.  


it was also lame that grunt didnt impact tuchunka (I really think he was a consideration for a squadmate but James got his slot, look at james' powers.  Those are grunt's powers, it would have been interesting if you had a situation in 3 where you could recruit grunt but only by sacrificing james in some big mission)



Miranda and Jacob should get a DLC mission where cerberus kidnaps and modifies them, you only have time to save one of them (and have them join your crew) and the other one becomes a boss fight in the mission.

Modifié par Doctor_Jackstraw, 19 mai 2012 - 07:20 .

[Ajensis]

Taboo-XX wrote...

(...)
Did you ever think that it can be fixed? That you've already decided to be unhappy? The game will never be perfect again but the best the Extended Cut can do is make it shine again. It can remove the grease from pan and allow it to be clear again. There will always be residue left over but it won't be as visible. In time, when people are happy and pleased emotionally, they will forget intellectual faults. It's no different from a marriage. You are aware of the faults but you love them anyway. That's how the brain works. Nothing is perfect but it can be a good experience.

Just wait and see what happens.

This is actually a good point. I've been telling myself not to expect the Extended Cut to fix anything, simply make the ending slightly less bad, because I'm sort of afraid of getting my hopes up, but maybe it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy if you don't keep an open mind.

Damn it, now I'll have to go ahead and start hoping again life is much easier when you don't hope! Although, maybe more boring too. <_<

Thanks for sharing your point of view 

Edit:

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

Talk like this is what ruined the ending of Metal Gear Solid 4.

(...)

I totally see what you're saying and I would agree, but to me, the ending of Mass Effect 3 didn't suit the rest of the game, or even the series. Snake killing himself would've arguably been a better ending - or at least carry a more emotional impact. And it would totally make sense since it was written in the cards since the beginning. It would've been a beautiful death. I was likewise prepared for Shepard to die too, but when it happened, I didn't see why it had to. Virmire was well-executed (in my opinion) too, because it made sense and was believable. Of course, the writers could've written it differently, but I really like that they didn't, I liked that they forced me to choose and how hard it was. Ashley (or Kaidan, but seriously... Ashley ) died with honour and it made sense. But here, at the climax of Mass Effect 3, it just doesn't make as much sense as it could have. And then the final insult where I see my Shepard taking a breath in a pile of rubble. It wasn't a good death and now it's not even a good survival-in-spite-of-perceived-death. It's just a weird thing in between

Also agree with the Collector base, would've liked it if there were a few casualties there no matter what. I actually played ME3 with a save in which I'd intentionally lost a few crew members, all because I felt it added more to the Suicide Mission that I had a few losses. It added more, as you touch upon yourself, to the enemy that they couldn't just be blown away without at least doing a bit of damage in return. We attacked their "homeworld", after all, and they were armed to the teeth! But that's not important, just wanted to say I agreed

Modifié par Ajensis, 19 mai 2012 - 07:49 .

[Tazzmission]

garrusfan1 wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Hahahaha did this guy just imply that Starchild is "creative"?

he is creative if you actually think about it for a second


the being of light was mentioned in me1 and dont tell me different


then in me2 you have a lil dlc title over lord wich basicly imo is a primitive version of sythnesis

me3. we learn tim wants to controll the reapers and successfully has done it with henry lawson with a signal

so in a way yea the endings do make sense

also note all the religious referances in me3 the asari temple for example


and who knows maybe soverighn did believe the reapers were just there and are without a creator

maybe the reapers fully evolved similar to the geth like legion because think when legion died to upload his code he said I instead of we meaning he considered himself a person instead of a platform

to each is own but the holo kid might have worked if thay had done it different IT for example could work or not just adding a ton of stuff in the last 5 minutes and having no choice and me personally would have liked it not to be so depressing

see i think the reason why the casper kid gets so much hate is because he has very little lines really


it was stated by hudson they had an orgin for him but removed it because he believed everything shouldnt be revealed

i think if they wouldve left that in it would be a different outcome with fans because it could have been epic and we just dont know


i can tell you for myself i thought that didnt sit right at all because the chaos stuff hes telloing us dosent help the player understand


i still think and i may be in the minority with this that the ending was really incomplete

Modifié par Tazzmission, 19 mai 2012 - 07:40 .

[Taboo]

Oldbones2 wrote...

Donnie Darko, Apocalypse Now, Return of the King, Last of the Mohicans, The French Connection and  Blade Runner,

I own all the bolded titles.

The French Connection does not have a Director's Cut. Do not talk about films you know nothing about.

I work with major studios sometimes. I know exactly what makes things profitable.

I work as an assistant to producers. I know exactly what I'm talking about.

[garrusfan1]

Tazzmission wrote...

garrusfan1 wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Hahahaha did this guy just imply that Starchild is "creative"?

he is creative if you actually think about it for a second


the being of light was mentioned in me1 and dont tell me different


then in me2 you have a lil dlc title over lord wich basicly imo is a primitive version of sythnesis

me3. we learn tim wants to controll the reapers and successfully has done it with henry lawson with a signal

so in a way yea the endings do make sense

also note all the religious referances in me3 the asari temple for example


and who knows maybe soverighn did believe the reapers were just there and are without a creator

maybe the reapers fully evolved similar to the geth like legion because think when legion died to upload his code he said I instead of we meaning he considered himself a person instead of a platform

to each is own but the holo kid might have worked if thay had done it different IT for example could work or not just adding a ton of stuff in the last 5 minutes and having no choice and me personally would have liked it not to be so depressing

see i think the reason why the casper kid gets so much hate is because he has very little lines really


it was stated by hudson they had an orgin for him but removed it because he believed everything shouldnt be revealed

i think if they wouldve left that in it would be a different outcome with fans because it could have been epic and we just dont know

then why reveal the reapers details you know I made a thread about it and I would say 95% of the people said they really wnted the reapers left a mystery or wouldn`t have cared either way if you want to read it its called  who wanted the reapers origins to remain a mystery   I think that is the right name 

[Landon7001]

IM so underwhelmed be this announcememnt.....does any one other than bioware love hackett and edi?? is this really a suprise to anyone? hacket is boring and gets tiring to see and hear all through me 3 {why was he faceless in me 1?} .....if it had been miranda, grunt,jacob that were announced and confirmed for ec GREAT awesome....but no....more characters i dont really care about that have already had over exposure in me 3.....great....

[garrusfan1]

Landon7001 wrote...

IM so underwhelmed be this announcememnt.....does any one other than bioware love hackett and edi?? is this really a suprise to anyone? hacket is boring and gets tiring to see and hear all through me 3 {why was he faceless in me 1?} .....if it had been miranda, grunt,jacob that were announced and confirmed for ec GREAT awesome....but no....more characters i dont really care about that have already had over exposure in me 3.....great....

dude hackett is awseome

[dreamgazer]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I have never seen an Extended Cut make a film worse and I have no reason to believe that this one will be either. 

I have no reason to believe this one will be either, at all, but you and I both know that there are many extended/expanded/director's cuts that have made a movie worse through redundancy, tonal shifts, character breaks, and generally unnecessary inclusions. Many make substantial and content-saving alterations, too, and it usually correlates with the effort put in and whether the creators stick to their original vision  (Donnie Darko excluded---man, you're talk about excising massive amounts of mystery in sci-fi there, through added exposition).

Henriksen coming back into the studio, and given an explanation as to why this needed to happen, suggests crucial and concentrated effort in my eyes.

[Taboo]

dreamgazer wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I have never seen an Extended Cut make a film worse and I have no reason to believe that this one will be either. 

I have no reason to believe this one will be either, at all, but you and I both know that there are many extended/expanded/director's cuts that have made a movie worse through redundancy, tonal shifts, character breaks, and generally unnecessary inclusions. Many make substantial and content-saving alterations, too, and it usually correlates with the effort put in and whether the creators stick to their original vision  (Donnie Darko excluded---man, you're talk about excising massive amounts of mystery in sci-fi there, through added exposition).

Henriksen coming back into the studio, and given an explanation as to why this needed to happen, suggests crucial and concentrated effort in my eyes.

Donnie Darko has a director's cut not an extended version.

A director's cut is what we have now. This is the version we were supposed to see. Richard Kelly included his cut because he was given that ability.

Whatever version you prefer is the best. 

It works the same way with The Exorcist. It changes the tone of the film but it doesn't really make it worse. Depending on which version you prefer you can achieve quite a different effect. The original is more doubt ridden and depressing. The Director's Cut (The Version You've Never Seen) changes the entire mood of the ending but putting in one conversation at the end. The overall plot is the same but the entire mood changes.

An Extended Cut restores plot points and can even remove some with the addition of extra footage. When I think of an Extended Cut I think of something like Bernardo Bertolucci's Novecento. It has several version but it only makes sense at it's original three hundred and fifteen minute length (Five hours and fifteen minutes).

The Extended Cut is not an attempt to make it worse, it is an attempt to remove some of the grease from the pan to make it shine again. When people are happy they forget logical faults. It's an age old trick.

[stevefox1200]

Honestly I have seen directors cuts that are worse

Many people complain that studios hold back artists but editors have their jobs for a reason

Sometimes someone can make your vision shine better than you can because you are far less likely to question your own vision

Modifié par stevefox1200, 19 mai 2012 - 09:07 .

[Taboo]

We have the director's cut now........

It was the version Hudson wanted..........

It IS his cut.

[stevefox1200]

Taboo-XX wrote...

We have the director's cut now........

It was the version Hudson wanted..........

It IS his cut.

good point....

[Tazzmission]

stevefox1200 wrote...

Honestly I have seen directors cuts that are worse

Many people complain that studios hold back artists but editors have their jobs for a reason

Sometimes someone can make your vision shine better than you can because you are far less likely to question your own vision

well some director cuts turned out good

look at the 2003 film dare devil it was god awful but the directors cut did it good to an extent and no i havent seen that version yet


worst case scenario they could create a expantion for single player regarding alot of the questions like how did my squad end up on the normandy wile they wer eon earth me with

they could even expand on a few hub worlds and imo i think tiptree is the world they crash on since joke rbasicly tells you he has a dad and sister there


from the wiki itself



Tiptree[/b] was a small human colony that was attacked by a small Reaper force. An asari commando unit was dispatched to evacuate it shortly after the Reaper invasion began in 2186, gathering colonists from across the continent as husks and marauder scouts were landed. Most of the team was destroyed.A survivor of the asari team, Aeian T'Goni, developed post-traumatic stress disorder after witnessing the slaughter of human farmers by Neaira, a fellow asari commando who had been turned into a banshee during the evacuation. The surviving humans in the colony were rounded up by Reaper forces and held prisoner at a farmhouse. T'Goni attempted to save them, but they had been indoctrinated, turning on T'Goni and Hilary, a human farmgirl whom T'Goni had managed to save earlier. T'Goni was forced to killed the farmers to prevent them from becoming husks or indoctrinated infiltrators. She was also forced to kill Hilary, whose whimpering after breaking her leg threatened to give away their hiding spot.Several evacuation ships carrying mostly children that had been sent off world by their parents before the attack were able to flee Tiptree, arriving at salarian colonies.Tiptree is the home planet of Joker and the current residence of his father and teenaged sister Hilary.
http://masseffect.wi...om/wiki/Tiptree

Modifié par Tazzmission, 19 mai 2012 - 09:13 .

[M0keys]

a great director's cut is for ridley scott's kingdom of heaven

anyone who didn't enjoy it in theaters should really check it out. it's almost a totally different movie.

[Taboo]

M0keys wrote...

a great director's cut is for ridley scott's kingdom of heaven

anyone who didn't enjoy it in theaters should really check it out. it's almost a totally different movie.

I rest my case. It isn't impossible people.

[dreamgazer]

Well aware of the distinction and the terminology, as well as the intent behind the director's cut defense (another form of "artistic integrity", actually), but thank you.

I also know what Kelly considers Donnie Darko's second cut: a visual companion, given validity by the "director's cut" marker. Doesn't change the impressions it leaves as a "explain it to me slower" version of the movie that knee-caps its biggest asset: enigmatic contemplation, based on science.

There are positive and negative examples of each, in both classic and contemporary cinema, but I'll save the rest of the forum from my yammering on about specific pieces of work. Mass Effect has the opportunity to deliver an extended cut that can, undoubtedly, make the content more palatable through clarity. But there's no reason to think that any form of reintegrated exposition is de facto "an improvement".

Perhaps this is their version of an intended director's cut, since they can't---or, more precisely, shouldn't---directly ascribe full credit to just one person. Creators' Cut, maybe. We'll find out.

[Taboo]

We have the director's cut now. Hudson has the final say on anything. That's how this works.

Clarify that Shepard survives= People shut up

Clarify that everyone doesn't die= People shut up

Clarify that the galaxy can recover= People shut up

It isn't that hard.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 19 mai 2012 - 09:23 .

[dreamgazer]

Taboo-XX wrote...

We have the director's cut now. Hudson has the final say on anything. That's how this works.

Clarify that Shepard survives= People shut up

Clarify that everyone doesn't die= People shut up

Clarify that the galaxy can recover= People shut up

It isn't that hard.

Agree completely there.

[Taboo]

dreamgazer wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

We have the director's cut now. Hudson has the final say on anything. That's how this works.

Clarify that Shepard survives= People shut up

Clarify that everyone doesn't die= People shut up

Clarify that the galaxy can recover= People shut up

It isn't that hard.

Agree completely there.

This is the minimum I expect. It's all they need. It fixes plot holes and will make the softies like me happy.

Pretty simple.

[incinerator950]

Taboo-XX wrote...

M0keys wrote...

a great director's cut is for ridley scott's kingdom of heaven

anyone who didn't enjoy it in theaters should really check it out. it's almost a totally different movie.

I rest my case. It isn't impossible people.

Not impossible, but time consuming.  Re-filming a movie and remaking a game are two different things.  It is possible, just peope don't generally want to, for good reason.

[shepskisaac]

Taboo-XX wrote...

We have the director's cut now. Hudson has the final say on anything. That's how this works.

Clarify that Shepard survives= People shut up

Clarify that everyone doesn't die= People shut up

Clarify that the galaxy can recover= People shut up

It isn't that hard.

Add "LI reunion" and at least 75% of people will be very happy. Let's be honest, the LI thing IS a significant part of the ending drama. People don't care about nameless Normandy crew members getting stranded. They care about LIs