450 réponses à ce sujet

[LaraUE]

I would have PREFERED little blue kids and settling down with Liara but if I can't have that I want an ending I understand.

[Helios969]

nedpepper wrote...

DeadpoolBub wrote...

There should have been a multitude of endings. Ranging from the Reapers winning to the Reapers losing, but Shepard having to sacrifice him/herself to do win. Or an ending where Shepard wins but he loses the Normandy & all of your squadmates & a "happy" ending where Shepard & the squad gets to live.

It robs the story and it ultimately NULLIFES any choices you make, because you can go back to a previous save and change it.   Choices should have consequences.  It's why the DA2 team decided that you couldn't save Leandra.  It kept the narrative in place smoothly.

Thing is, people want choices, but when they don't turn out like they wanted, unlike real life, they can just go back and do it over again.  And that cheapens it somehow.  And don't say people don't do that.  How many people here went through all three endings just to see which one they liked the best?  Meh.  Make your choice...and live with it.  That's what makes CHOICES fun.  But if everyone goes back to save Leandra and everyone goes back to get that perfect ending, the choices become meaningless.

So I shouldn't have a choice because it cheapens it for you?

[Hjelsao]

I wanted a happy ending, but I would have been perfectly content with a bittersweet one that made sense.

[Seifer006]

this thread is pointless

@OP you assume people wanted an happy ending. I was expecting Shepard to die. I expected ME3 game as a whole to better since I've spent the last 7yrs having my choices to actually have impact and consequences --- when in all nothing really mattered ie Rachni choice just to give an example

anyway - thread is pointless OP wants attention

[DieHigh2012]

nedpepper wrote...

DeadpoolBub wrote...

There should have been a multitude of endings. Ranging from the Reapers winning to the Reapers losing, but Shepard having to sacrifice him/herself to do win. Or an ending where Shepard wins but he loses the Normandy & all of your squadmates & a "happy" ending where Shepard & the squad gets to live.

This reminds me of a heated argument about Dragon Age 2.  Gamers were furious that they weren't able to "choose" to save Mama Hawke.  I think it was David Gaider who responded and said that there WAS going to be a choice, but the problem became the idea that everyone would just go back to old save to fix whatever they messed up so Mama Hawke would live.  And what does that really say about choices?  It says the choices you want don't matter if you can go back to a previous game save and change the bad decisioin.  

I get that it's "your" game and if you want something, you should be able to do it.  But it cheated the story of Hawke and so they basically took the choice out of your hands.  I'm not sure when in development they made that decision.  But the psychology behind it is that no one wanted to see Leandra die and so they would sacrifice hours of game play to fix it. 

If you offered the ulitmate happy ending where Shepard and squad mates survive, EVERYONE would pick it on that first play through.  And then it would become like ME 2 where people played and just let squad mates die for fun.  

It robs the story and it ultimately NULLIFES any choices you make, because you can go back to a previous save and change it.   Choices should have consequences.  It's why the DA2 team decided that you couldn't save Leandra.  It kept the narrative in place smoothly.

Thing is, people want choices, but when they don't turn out like they wanted, unlike real life, they can just go back and do it over again.  And that cheapens it somehow.  And don't say people don't do that.  How many people here went through all three endings just to see which one they liked the best?  Meh.  Make your choice...and live with it.  That's what makes CHOICES fun.  But if everyone goes back to save Leandra and everyone goes back to get that perfect ending, the choices become meaningless.

So you are saying that by taking away the choice it makes choice more meaningful, even though it no longer exist in the situation? That's some weird logic friend.

Sounds to me you have one way of playing a video game while others choose to play their own way. Removing choice does not make it more meaningful...

Honestly it just sounds like you want everyone to play like you do, you know limit their choices...

[NedPepper]

M25105 wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

M25105 wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

Deemz wrote...

I don't personally understand why somebody would not want a happy ending. I generally use my entertainment time for things that lift my spirits. You don't have to look any further than the evening news if you want to be depressed.

Not that I have a problem with people that want a dark and depressing ending. I just don't understand it.

yy

I guess Cormac McCarthy should change the ending of The Road.  Oh, wait, he's telling a dystopian future story that is filled with loss and violence.  A happy ending would have destroyed the entire narrative of that book.  It applies to Mass Effect as well.  I remember talking to friends before the game was released and we kept saying, "this is going to be tough.  Nobody is getting out of this one."   Some characters did.  That, in itself, was above my expectations.  Everything in the advertising, from Liara' prophetic, "This is it, isn't it? This is the end" speech let you know there was no happy ending to come. 

Again, I'm going to bring up Saving Private Ryan.  That movie's entire narrative rests on Tom Hanks getting home to his wife. He doesn't.  I don't hate the film because of that.  It's A WAR STORY.  It was sad.  It was supposed to be sad.  It wasn't some cheap writing ploy.  It was real.  And it stirred emotion in people. 

Didn't see "Take Back Saving Private Ryan" campaigns, did you?  No.  Because that would have robbed Spielberg of the story he was trying to tell.    Sometimes good people die to protect the world for a good cause.  Are you going to tell me that that doesn't apply to Shepard?

Dude, those are films. Mass Effect is a game. When you complete a game, the general thing is make sure you get a sense of accomplishment beating the game.

Ah, so we're back to this argument.   That in a game you must "win"?  Or defining what video games when they have evolved?  How is a story based game any different from a film or a movie? 

That argument is just vague.

No it's not. When you play a game the idea behind it, is to have a good time from start to finish. That when you get to the game over stage, you're like "Man that was awesome, let's play again!". That's why the game needed an option for a happy ending, cause newsflash, most of us don't give a crap about super duper sad endings that are "meaningful". The game is already sad, Thessia, Palavan and Earth is in ruins as is many other planets and billions are dead. That's why we're pissed off that the game didn't end on a positive note of us building a new future, instead we got the usual run of the mill, depressing ending crap, like it's some form of mature writing.
The whole game series was about overcoming the impossible, to stand up and show the Reapers that we wouldn't go down, that we wouldn't kneel and it would be their turn to die.

That endings have to be dark and all that crap, that's a fallacy in itself too. Who the hell woke up and decided that only depressing endings were a good way of writing? Hence my title, cause I'm sure as hell, that in this forum community, some here are afraid to be labeled as immature for wanting a "Disney" ending. We don't play video games to pissed on at the end, by some failed nihilistic writer who gets inspired by ****ty death metal bands, we play games to have fun, be entertained and feel awesome.

Mass Effect 3 ending, didn't make us feel awesome, all it did was make us feel "What the **** just happened?"

I don't want to waste my or your time arguing about this.  I've read The Road numerous times because it touches something beautiful even in despair.  And I'm not some emo kid who cuts himself as alluded to earlier.  Talk about straw men...

So, you play games for Mario to save Princess Peach from Bowser every time or similar, the hero wins and you feel validated.  Nothing wrong with that.  I don't.  Agree to disagree.  But I will say that I find it strange you ever thought this franchise was going to have a happy ending.  I NEVER got that feeling. 

[Helios969]

^sour grapes^

[Averdi]

I'd like the option of a happy ending. Ideally, it should be one of a range of endings depending on choices and performance throughout the series. Happy shouldn't be the only ending.

[NedPepper]

Helios969 wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

DeadpoolBub wrote...

There should have been a multitude of endings. Ranging from the Reapers winning to the Reapers losing, but Shepard having to sacrifice him/herself to do win. Or an ending where Shepard wins but he loses the Normandy & all of your squadmates & a "happy" ending where Shepard & the squad gets to live.

It robs the story and it ultimately NULLIFES any choices you make, because you can go back to a previous save and change it.   Choices should have consequences.  It's why the DA2 team decided that you couldn't save Leandra.  It kept the narrative in place smoothly.

Thing is, people want choices, but when they don't turn out like they wanted, unlike real life, they can just go back and do it over again.  And that cheapens it somehow.  And don't say people don't do that.  How many people here went through all three endings just to see which one they liked the best?  Meh.  Make your choice...and live with it.  That's what makes CHOICES fun.  But if everyone goes back to save Leandra and everyone goes back to get that perfect ending, the choices become meaningless.

So I shouldn't have a choice because it cheapens it for you?

No.  I was giving an example from a dev in DA2 that I think applies here.  But yes, in my personal opinion, if you can undo your choice because you don't like the result, it cheapens the entire POINT of having choices.  I love choices, good or bad.  I live with them. That's just me.  I feel like it's cheating (and also a giant waste of time) to go back to a previous save 10 or 20 hours of gameplay before because the choice you made didn't end the way you wanted it.  It's just my OPINION.

[NedPepper]

Helios969 wrote...

^sour grapes^

I can play the name game.  I think you're not emotionally mature enough to play a game with morally gray areas.  It's easy to just to throw insults, isn't it?  Does it add to the conversation?  No.

[Helios969]

nedpepper wrote...

Helios969 wrote...

^sour grapes^

I can play the name game.  I think you're not emotionally mature enough to play a game with morally gray areas.  It's easy to just to throw insults, isn't it?  Does it add to the conversation?  No.

Sorry, we all don't want the same nihilistic ending you enjoyed.

[DieHigh2012]

nedpepper wrote...

Helios969 wrote...

^sour grapes^

I can play the name game.  I think you're not emotionally mature enough to play a game with morally gray areas.  It's easy to just to throw insults, isn't it?  Does it add to the conversation?  No.

Morally gray? Really?

The story of Shepard is pretty black and white. You know top right or bottom right.

I'm glad you like depressing endings, and I hope these endings fit your Shepard. They did not mine. My choices were completely invalidated by the "pick your color" endings. I'm glad you feel like your Shep got the ending he/she deserved, mine did not.

My shep has made a career of doing the impossible while accomplishing the best possible outcome. Why all of a sudden is he forced to pander to a godchild and wipe out galactic civilization? You know the very thing he has been fighting to preserve since ME1...

Modifié par DieHigh2012, 28 mai 2012 - 12:41 .

[unoriginalname1133]

nedpepper wrote...

Helios969 wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

DeadpoolBub wrote...

There should have been a multitude of endings. Ranging from the Reapers winning to the Reapers losing, but Shepard having to sacrifice him/herself to do win. Or an ending where Shepard wins but he loses the Normandy & all of your squadmates & a "happy" ending where Shepard & the squad gets to live.

It robs the story and it ultimately NULLIFES any choices you make, because you can go back to a previous save and change it.   Choices should have consequences.  It's why the DA2 team decided that you couldn't save Leandra.  It kept the narrative in place smoothly.

Thing is, people want choices, but when they don't turn out like they wanted, unlike real life, they can just go back and do it over again.  And that cheapens it somehow.  And don't say people don't do that.  How many people here went through all three endings just to see which one they liked the best?  Meh.  Make your choice...and live with it.  That's what makes CHOICES fun.  But if everyone goes back to save Leandra and everyone goes back to get that perfect ending, the choices become meaningless.

So I shouldn't have a choice because it cheapens it for you?

No.  I was giving an example from a dev in DA2 that I think applies here.  But yes, in my personal opinion, if you can undo your choice because you don't like the result, it cheapens the entire POINT of having choices.  I love choices, good or bad.  I live with them. That's just me.  I feel like it's cheating (and also a giant waste of time) to go back to a previous save 10 or 20 hours of gameplay before because the choice you made didn't end the way you wanted it.  It's just my OPINION.

Then don't go back and replay it. I also try to live with the choices I made during a certain playthrough, but I see no problems with doing things differently in another file. To me, that's one of the best parts. If all the choices are left in, we both win. You can do your single playthrough, and I can try to tinker with things to see what happens. Whatever you do is no skin off my nose, and vice versa. But with less choices, only you win. 

Also, even if everyone gravitates towards a happy ending option, so what? As long as some kind of happy ending isn't the only option, and the outcomes arise logically from the choices we made, we can all do what we want and everyone wins. Forcing endings to only be happy or sad means that someone loses.

Besides, Bioware directly stated ME3 would have "wildly different endings," so it seems natural for players to expect lots of meaningful choices.

Modifié par unoriginalname1133, 28 mai 2012 - 05:51 .

[Merlin 47]

Helios969 wrote...

Sorry, we all don't want the same nihilistic ending you enjoyed.

Well said, Helios. Yeah...I DID expect going into this trillogy to have a happy ending to it.  I STILL want one for it....yeah, I said it. And, if I knew what I do now about how the entire trillogy would end, I wouldn't have gotten involved with it, because the letdown of that ending....I just can't replay the game. I've tried....on several occasions....I just can't do it. I get past Mars and I start to think of how it all ends...and I just can't bring myself to go through that pain again.

So yes....I want my happy ending....I know the EC won't give us that....but I cling to that small sliver of hope...because I don't all three endings to be "nihilistic".

[NedPepper]

Helios969 wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

Helios969 wrote...

^sour grapes^

I can play the name game.  I think you're not emotionally mature enough to play a game with morally gray areas.  It's easy to just to throw insults, isn't it?  Does it add to the conversation?  No.

Sorry, we all don't want the same nihilistic ending you enjoyed.

Point: Completely missed. 

I'll give you an example.  I would have probably gone for that happy ending too if it had been there.  Just from a basic pyschological need that all humans have that everything should work out in the end.  But to HATE a game because it doesn't you offer you that?  I don't understand that.

And don't assume you know anything about me:  My favorite films:  The Third Man.  Labyrinth.  Jaws.  Magnolia.  Harvey.  John Carpenter's Halloween.  Dr. Strangelove.  All very different.  Same with my literature.  Same with the games I play.

There's nothing wrong with happy endings, as I've said.  I just don't believe it was necessary in this particular story.  The end.

[Zix13]

Sure I want the possibility of a happy or at least bittersweet ending. However, I care so much more about the ending being coherent and consistent with the rest of the series.

[Iakus]

saracen16 wrote...

iakus wrote...

What's wrong is it's not just their story.  Over and over, they've told us that these were our Shepards, there is no "canon" and that our choices mattered.  We were supposed to get wildly divergent endings based on choices made over five years and three games.

No offense, but it is naive to assume that it really is "our Shepard". We only have control over Shepard insofar as to how we played each game and how the developers took our feedback. It is ultimately their decision as to which feedback they incorporate and how. And they did deliver: if you haven't been paying attention for the rest of the 30 hours or so of gameplay, you'll see that our choices did matter... or does that mean nothing to you now?

I'm just repeating what we've been told here.  This isn't Assassin's Creed where we're just doing the action-y bits of a story the game's telling us.  We were outright told that what we did would have consequences, including regarding the ending.  If you require quotes from developers asserting this I'm sure I or others can provide them.

But in the last ten minutes, everything we accomplished over three games amounted to nothing.  No dialogue options, no choices, just colors.

And as for wildly divergent endings, the entire game is the ending, not the last 10 minutes. Have a longer memory, will you? How did the genophage arc finish? Did Conrad get the girl? Was peace established between the quarians and the geth? It is inhumanly impossible to cram all these in the last 10 minutes.

That's kinda laughable given that we were also told thast ME3 was a "great" place to start the series.  This was downgraded from their original "the best" place to start.

The ending the best place to start?  Really?  Pick a story and stick with it, Bioware!

Instead we get funnled down a single multicolored tube to their ending.  We've been strung along on empty promises that what we did in the game mattered, that.  In the last few minutes, control was torn completely away from us and we were told 'This is how your Shepard ends.  But I'll let you pick the color"

Spare me the trollish, retarded mantra. The ending involved more than just a show of "colors". If you actually paid attention, you've already seen what Shepard accomplished throughout the entire trilogy. You're telling me that all these game hours meant nothing? They did, and the journey was just as important if not more than the destination.

I feel insulted.

Insulted?  I feel likewise.

I defy your branding my description "trollish"  SWpirited, sure.  Maybe even a bit exagerated.  But still essentially accurate.  Nothing I did in the trilogy in any playthrough altered the ending.  My full paragon run and another's full renegade run would end in exactly the same place.  The only change possibly being the color of the explosion.

[Iakus]

nedpepper wrote...

No.  I was giving an example from a dev in DA2 that I think applies here.  But yes, in my personal opinion, if you can undo your choice because you don't like the result, it cheapens the entire POINT of having choices.  I love choices, good or bad.  I live with them. That's just me.  I feel like it's cheating (and also a giant waste of time) to go back to a previous save 10 or 20 hours of gameplay before because the choice you made didn't end the way you wanted it.  It's just my OPINION.

Funny, I think it adds replayability to a game.

"I wonder what happens if I do this instead?"  

[Ridwan]

Seifer006 wrote...

this thread is pointless

@OP you assume people wanted an happy ending. I was expecting Shepard to die. I expected ME3 game as a whole to better since I've spent the last 7yrs having my choices to actually have impact and consequences --- when in all nothing really mattered ie Rachni choice just to give an example

anyway - thread is pointless OP wants attention

Sure do, and I got yours.

[Aurora313]

I want a happy ending. Not ashamed to admit. I think Shepard's earned it!

[Ridwan]

nedpepper wrote...

Helios969 wrote...

nedpepper wrote...

Helios969 wrote...

^sour grapes^

I can play the name game.  I think you're not emotionally mature enough to play a game with morally gray areas.  It's easy to just to throw insults, isn't it?  Does it add to the conversation?  No.

Sorry, we all don't want the same nihilistic ending you enjoyed.

Point: Completely missed. 

I'll give you an example.  I would have probably gone for that happy ending too if it had been there.  Just from a basic pyschological need that all humans have that everything should work out in the end.  But to HATE a game because it doesn't you offer you that?  I don't understand that.

And don't assume you know anything about me:  My favorite films:  The Third Man.  Labyrinth.  Jaws.  Magnolia.  Harvey.  John Carpenter's Halloween.  Dr. Strangelove.  All very different.  Same with my literature.  Same with the games I play.

There's nothing wrong with happy endings, as I've said.  I just don't believe it was necessary in this particular story.  The end.

You keep going back to films. Films and games aren't the same. When I watch a film, it's not rocket science to figure out whether or not it's a dark film. But I choose to watch it (and pay money) any way, cause I know what I'm getting into. Films and games AREN'T THE SAME.

With games like Mass Effect YOU make your story. The ending of ME2 was either super sad, killing all your squad members and Shepard dying in the end, or freaking awesome, with nearly everyone alive (apart from nameless crew members) nodding at you, making you feel like a boss. As it damn well should be. If you can't understand why games need to make their players feel awesome, then the concept of replayability eludes you. And the same can be said for the writers of the ending. If you want to throw your nihilistic trash at people, at least do it in poetry or books that will never sell beyond a small niche audience.

It's the reason why games like Diablo 2 (haven't played 3 yet), New Super Mario Bros. Wii, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Left 4 Dead 2 keep selling. It's fun, you feel great when you finish it. Games like Heavy Rain, might be viewed as "artistic" and all that crap, but they're failures. The profit they make from that game, when you compare it to their development costs is laughable and you can be damn sure, that publishers and developers will think twice before doing something like this again, unless it's done very cheaply.

This thread has already hit 17 pages, by people admitting they wanted a happy ending, before it was always, I wanted a meaningful, didn't care it was sad. If the people on BSN feels like that, you can bet the COD playerbase, that people here for some reason despise, feels the same too.

[MidnightRaith]

saracen16 wrote...

MidnightRaith wrote...

Well, of course it is. Many people asking for a happy ending aren't asking for it be illogical. However, ending a game of a horribly dreary note just to be "hip" is asking for problems as well. Hell, we are still talking about its problems here. ME3 it seems wanted to stray so far from an ideal ending that it went from one extreme to the other. Options would have been ideal here. People want to sacrifice Shepard? Should have been in the game. People want to lose? Should have been in the game. People want to keep the promises they made to their LI or just have Shepard continue with their life? Should have been in the game.

And what the **** is wrong with being different?! Just because they have their own story to tell doesn't mean that they're doing it for the sake of uniqueness. They're telling a story, and they didn't want it to be forgettable.

If you think that they did it just for the sake of being "hip", then you're thinking too small.

So, telling a story just for the sake of being different is okay to you as well? First of all, they did want to be hip about it. Bioware copied an already tried ending that didn't fit their own plot. This isn't Deus Ex. Let's let Deus Ex be Deus Ex. This type of ending fit that media, in Mass Effect it was contrived and poorly done.

You are the one thinking too small, I'm afraid. You don't tell a story for the sake of making it unforgettable. Honestly, they already had a shot at making an unforgettable story and they blew it. Mass Effect started out with a purpose. They had themes they were obviously using to tell us something. However, Bioware then abandoned nearly all of their themes in favor of the over used Technological Singularity theory (which is not by any means unique and therefore makes your assumption wrong) and directly contradicted other themes they had been using. If they had just stuck with the path they were already on, we could have had something amazing. As it is, Mass Effect might just be lost to time eventually. The only thing people will remember out of this is the fan outrage and the ending. Not the story as a whole or the characters or the themes. And that is a damn shame.

[mauro2222]

M25105 wrote...

You afraid you'll be labeled as immature? That you like Disney endings?

Come on, don't give me that crap with "I only like dark and depressing endings" you and I both know, we wanted Shepard to chug a beer with his team and celebrate their victory over a dead reaper corpse.

Oh please.

If people truly enjoy of sadness and depression, they aren't having a healthy life

Yes, I love happy endings or a simple happy situation... I'm a big stupid immature who loves happy things

And is utterly stupid to think that Shepard surviving and having kids, or whatever the hell people want, is a happy ending that ruins the "war" feeling... the galaxy is messed up, billions are dead, friends are dead, the kid will probably haunt Shep until his death. Disney ending my ass. <_<

Modifié par mauro2222, 28 mai 2012 - 08:26 .

[Akugagi]

I'm sorry if I am generalising here lol

I think everyone had this "spectrum of endings" in their mind the whole time. On the very right there's the perfect good ending and on the left there's the worst possible ending, where everyone dies; the ending wouldn't have been tied with being Paragon or Renegade (as in being Renegade doesn't automatically fetch you the ending where everyone dies).
Renegade would've probably just been more sacrificial to get results, and Paragon probably trying too hard to save everyone (maybe even ending up dead himself just to save the others, like the

Spoiler

ultimate sacrifice in dragon age:origins

.). Then there's the middle, where people survive, but important people might die etc.

I think alot of people expected that the ending would be like a suicide mission to define what would happen to the galaxy. People would live or die according to their actions, and if they chose wrong, the whole galaxy would be obliterated.
At least I got the image of being able to choose your ending from what was said in the pre-release developer interviews.

Instead, pretty much the whole mass effect universe gets destroyed. Yeah, sure I knew such an ending would've been possible and I was ready to get my Shepard killed. I had it in the back of my head every single moment that I had to make a choice. I always kept thinking what'd happen if I chose wrong.

But I never ever would've believed that there would be just the "galaxy gets ****ed; the end" -ending with different colours. After I saw the "different" endings, rather than having a "spectrum of endings" in my mind I had a spectrum of colours.

I'm convinced by the indoctrination theory. If the extended cut will just revolve around the same bull**** without clearing any illogicalities and misconceptions in a senseful matter, I will just refuse to believe it and rather believe the indoctrination theory and be happy lol. Too bad the indoctrination theory ending leaves us just speculating of what would happen next, as the game just ends in a "cliffhanger".

But in the end it doesn't even matter. Oh now I feel like listening to some Linkin Park.

Modifié par Akugagi, 28 mai 2012 - 08:29 .

[christrek1982]

it's A GAME the point is to win and feel good about it if Bioware wanted to do film or book then go do films or books. Non of what people have said so far tells me why I shouldn't get an ending that makes me happy Shep live LI so on amongst others. As a point to EMS and the fetch quests.  in truth what people are saying is that I'm not aloud my choice in a game about choice and that I must conform and fall in line.

at last the ones who want a happy end what it amongst many but the ones that don't what that ending  just sing a mantra of it's Biowares story or artistic vision or whatever.

As for choice cheapening the game because players take advantage of it. Well if someone hasn't got the self control to play the game properly then how is that my problem?

so you tell me who is being selfish?

Modifié par christrek1982, 28 mai 2012 - 11:43 .