84 réponses à ce sujet

[Pelle6666]

True, true. There are more controversy in the ME3 endings though if IT is correct since we were all cheated in a way. =P I would love it if that is how BW wants to play it!

[Locutus_of_BORG]

Deltoran wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...

HL2 was not the conclusion of the storyline it was an installment of. Nor was it full of plot and thematic inconsistencies.

This...

:facepalm: This...

HL2's story isn't even done yet, while ME3's is...

Modifié par Locutus_of_BORG, 23 mai 2012 - 04:48 .

[Arisugawa]

DinoSteve wrote...

Deltoran wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...

HL2 was not the conclusion of the storyline it was an installment of. Nor was it full of plot and thematic inconsistencies.

This...

This...

/Thread

I'd like to add that interference on the part of the G-Man was also established in the first Half-Life, so his appearance at the end of the second game did not seem thematically inconsistent or out of place as the appearance of the Catalyst did in Mass Effect 3. He was also introduced as at the beginning of the second game as being a powerful interloper who was using Freeman for his own purposes.

I understand why the comparison between HL2 and ME3 is being made here, but I don't believe it works. Had the G-Man been an entirely new character, never seen in HL or HL2 prior to the point where he freezes Freeman and Alyx at the Citadel, I think the outrage on the part of Valve's fans would have been comparable to that of BioWare's.

Modifié par Arisugawa, 23 mai 2012 - 04:57 .

[iorveth1271]

Half Life 2 ended with a cliffhanger, of course. You know why? It wasn't the last part of the story so a continuation through the Episodes is absolutely fine. How you got the link between HL2 and ME3 is completely above me in this case.

[AlienSpaceBats]

Hl2 didn't have the same level of personalization, player choice and immersion. Also, the ending (whilst abrupt) was excellent and in keeping with the theme of the series.

[SirCroft]

It's called a cliffhanger. ME3's ending wasn't a cliffhanger.

[iamthedave3]

The difference is they prime you for it. You're under the G-Man's thumb the whole way through, and he's constantly shown watching Freeman's progress.

It also helps that G-Man's dialogue is wonderfully written and voice acted, and he's a key part of the story from both games. The same cannot be said of the Starchild...

Even if that HAD been Half Life 2's ending I'd have been satisfied. The One Free Man is a contracted employee of the G-Man. I like the irony.

[RuthlessGravity]

It had an ending, I guess the credits did not convince you enough!

[draken-heart]

everyone is Talking IT/bad writing. what if instead of putting in the real ending of the war they ended with the reapers trying to control Shepard? and the choices determine if Shepard lives and the fate of the reapers:

1) destroy-Shepard gets up and reapers are defeated (with high enough EMS).
2) Control-Shepard dies but the reapers' barriers are back-lashed and the reapers are defeated.
3) Synthesis- Shepard is controlled by reapers but one of the Squadmates Kill her/him and the reapers are defeated.

[Versidious]

It's been said a lot, but I like the sound of my own voice/sight of my own text, so I'll say it again: HL2 was not billed as the climax of a trilogy. It ended on a cliffhanger, which I expected it to. Unfortunately, so did ME3, which was supposedly a finale.

"THE GALAXY'S JUST CHANGED DRAMATICALLY AND EVERYTHING'S EXPLODED! WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT? HAVE FUN SPECULATING, SUCKERS!"

[NS Wizdum]

SirCroft wrote...

It's called a cliffhanger. ME3's ending wasn't a cliffhanger.

Exactly. The ending of Mass Effect 3 approached the cliff, and then a little blue kid came out of nowhere and punted you off the edge. There was no hanging involved, only freefall.

Modifié par NS Wizdum, 23 mai 2012 - 06:04 .

[The Cheat]

NS Wizdum wrote...

SirCroft wrote...

It's called a cliffhanger. ME3's ending wasn't a cliffhanger.

Exactly. The ending of Mass Effect 3 approached the cliff, and then a little blue kid came out of nowhere and punted you off the edge. There was no hanging involved, only freefall.

I don't know why, but I laughed out loud pretty hard imagining this as I read it.

[Shajar]

Half Life 2 hasn't end yet. Episode 3 coming in year 3002211

[Montana]

matt-bassist wrote...

 If you recall you managed to stop Dr Breen... and then G-Man freezes time, teleports in and the game ends.

It was only carried on in an EXPANSION pack Episode 1... which we all had to PAY FOR.

So IF IT is true, and DLC will reveal the TRUE ending, BioWare is certainly not the first to try it. 

Was there such a s***storm when HL2 ended so abruptly?

There was supposed to be a HL3.

HL2 wasn't the ending of the HL series, therefore it's ok to end on a cliffhanger.

That's the difference.

[NS Wizdum]

Tony77A wrote...

matt-bassist wrote...

 If you recall you managed to stop Dr Breen... and then G-Man freezes time, teleports in and the game ends.

It was only carried on in an EXPANSION pack Episode 1... which we all had to PAY FOR.

So IF IT is true, and DLC will reveal the TRUE ending, BioWare is certainly not the first to try it. 

Was there such a s***storm when HL2 ended so abruptly?

There was supposed to be a HL3.

HL2 wasn't the ending of the HL series, therefore it's ok to end on a cliffhanger.

That's the difference.

There is still a Half Life 3, they are just working on Valve Time.

Also, if Bioware is looking for a new way to structure their company, so that they can actually reinforce good quality ideas, read the Valve Employee Handbook:
http://boingboing.ne...l-describe.html 

[DukeOfNukes]

I've heard it said that part of the reason Mass Effect 3's ending was particularly bad because it ended on a philosophical note, when the series wasn't philosophical. I'm inclined to agree.

G-man is a bit of a douche...but he was present at the end of HL1 as well. As was pointed out earlier, he doesn't pop in and say "The Combine are my solution to the chaos of human evolution."

The problem with the ME3 ending isn't that it's abrupt, it's that it's counter to what the series was about. It was scripted, full of plot holes and logic fallacies, and wasn't effected by my choices, which is what they've said was going to happen since 2006.

Episode 1 wasn't really an expansion pack...at least, not exactly. It was Valve trying something new...episodic content. There was a 6 year gap between HL and HL2...Ep1 came out 2 years later, and Ep2 came out 1 year later. The Episodes together were essentially supposed to be Half-life 3...just released in pieces so they didn't have such long wait times.

[palker]

Did not you know that Shepard was employed by the G-Man and than put into ME Universe to fight reapers?
I have a proof
They misspelled his name in the end but other than that it is clear as crystal. And of course those were 90s so he is just measly corporal other than that it is him space Jesus err Commander Shepard.

Modifié par palker, 23 mai 2012 - 06:45 .

[Kajan451]

matt-bassist wrote...

Was there such a s***storm when HL2 ended so abruptly?

1) People were busy raising said storm over the very fact that you had to download a portion of the game as DRM mechanisem. They were to busy complaining about DRM in general (oh how i wish those times back).

2) HL2 is an FPS, they never have real good endings. They aren't played for their story either. They are played to "kill **** ".. and HL2 provided very good on that regard. Story in FPS happens as sideeffect, so you have a reason to blow up ****.

The main differance however remains in the target audience and why people buy these games. ME was bought by people for Storyline and Choices that were supposed to matter. Because it was said to be an interactive movie.

HL2 was bought for its FPS experiance. Story was secondary anyway and the conclusion of destroying the Portal Device was sufficient conclusion to the atmosphere.

Noone i know expects a story in a FPS game, including me. I buy FPS games to kill **** . I buy games like Mass Effect to get a rich and interesting story told. In FPS gamemechanics matter the most, i want stuff shown blow to bits and pieces.

Just like Movies. When i am in the mood for an Action Movie i don't really care about Story. If the Story is good on top of stuff blowing up and action playing along, then its a great movie. Thats FPS to me, and all the people i know.

But if i go ahead and want to see something like a Drama, i expect story. Thats Roleplaying games to me.

And Mass Effect certainly, at least to me, was a Science Fiction Action Drama. Meaning i want Science Fiction, i want some explosions and action, but most importantly i want story.

HL2 on the other hand was a Science Fiction Action (Thriller). Perfectly fine for HL2 to end with the final boss being defeated or rather his plan foiled. Especially since its not the last in the line.

HL2 was never the end. There was more to come (and now that i think about it, its about time to be continued). And noone complained about the end of ME2, except for Terminator.

[Blazer]

You know what other game had a bad ending? Fallout 3.
You know what they did ? They changed the games ending in a paid expansion.
You know what they didnt do? Claiming it was artistic and blaming the fans for not getting it right.

Modifié par Blazer, 23 mai 2012 - 07:31 .

[GreenDragon37]

 Half-Life 2 was not marketed as the "epic conclusion" to the tale of Gordan Freeman. Mass Effect 3, however, was marketed as an "epic conclusion" to the tale of Commander Shepard, and they failed spectacularly. My Shep went out like a damn complacent ****, not a bad-ass.

Also, Half-Life 2's ending fit thematically with the series. The G-man has been the true "catalyst" *cringes* for the events that transpired in HL1. Gordan is supposed to be under his thumb for purposes you aren't aware of. In other words, the G-man works with Half-Life because he is an established character and his actions are well established. Mass Effect 3's ending with the Catalyst makes no sense because we are introduced to the Catalyst at the last minute.

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 23 mai 2012 - 07:59 .

[Unit-Alpha]

Blacklash93 wrote...

HL2 was not the conclusion of the storyline it was an installment of. Nor was it full of plot and thematic holes/inconsistencies and space magic.

Yep.

[Peranor]

The Cheat wrote...

NS Wizdum wrote...

SirCroft wrote...

It's called a cliffhanger. ME3's ending wasn't a cliffhanger.

Exactly. The ending of Mass Effect 3 approached the cliff, and then a little blue kid came out of nowhere and punted you off the edge. There was no hanging involved, only freefall.

I don't know why, but I laughed out loud pretty hard imagining this as I read it.

I have to agree, that was pretty funny

[Daniel_N7]

Fingertrip wrote...

Half Life, the most overrated game series ever.

Allow me to use this quote as an entry point to this discussion. Respectfully, this is wrong. The first Half Life was a landmark in gaming. I don't even know what year it was - and yes, I suppose I'm an old gamer - but HL had a completely different approach to what you used to see in terms of storytelling and environmental design. Lets not forget this is a 1st person shooter, not a RPG. But you had a story that unfolded as the game progressed, and the environment offered a believable setting, a military complex that you had to escape from in the middle of the direst circumstances. Also, the enemy AI was really good (for the time), especially military opponents.

HL was fairly irregular though. The third part of the game, when Gordon Freeman traveled to the alien planet - I don't remember the name, Xenoland whatever - was kind of lame. And the end boss was terrible. Anyone remember that? The big alien baby boss fight? )

HL2 was a continuation of these ideas. City 17 is an incredible creation and the game has some classic moments in game history.

The ending, which is the issue being raised here, wasn't brilliant, or at least fully satisfying, but several factors probably come into play to explain why it didn't trigger such a negative reaction. In a way the end of the game comes full circle with the beginning. You are brought by the Illusive Man, sorry, by the G-Man, from somewhere, and you go back to nowhere... at least that's what you believed until Episode 2 came out.

Also, your connection to Gordon is completely different to what you have with your Shepard(s). Gordon is given to you, a voiceless canvas, without body. HL is a journey, more than a game centered on character development.

Mass Effect is a series about creating a character and embarking on relationships, making choices and seeing the consequences. Your investment in ME is huge, if you've been here since the previous games and/or have become a fan. Also, ME2, with its flaws (it has a few) made you see the consequences at play in a remarkable, memorable fashion, in the final mission. So people went into ME3 with those expectations.

Certainly, the entire game is (supposed to be) a series of acts where you see those consequences at play. But everyone expected the final mission to be the climax of that journey.

The fact that the end of ME3 is one of its most linear moments, with a rather poor resolution - choose color for ending - and contradictory (or at least poorly presented) consequences, brought everyone down.