154 réponses à ce sujet

[George-Kinsill]

 I know there is a split between anti-enders and pro enders mainly surrounding the idea of a dark/bittersweet ending. The pro-enders seem to think that a dark ending is fitting for Mass Effect and since they played their Shepard that way, it makes the ending for them better. Most anti-enders seem to agree that a dark/bitersweet ending should be an ption, along with a happy ending. Pro-enders then counter that a happy ending would diminish the value of the possible dark ending.

However, I believe the belief that the dark ending would be diminished by the option for a happy ending is false. In fact, a dark ending would be enchanced by the option for a happy ending. This is because it is your choice and those that get a dark ending will have to live (or die) with the fact that it is thei fault, not someone else's, that you got the dark ending.

In the curren endings, you get a dark (and I think poorly executed) dark ending no matter what. All the Mass Relays blow up, your crew is stranded on a reandom planet, Shepard is most likely dead, and none of the allied races will see their home planets ever again. While this is all sad, the sadness is diminshed by the anger fans feel; they did not have a choice in the matter, there is no way to stop it and if you played countless hours of multiplayer, all you get is a scene of Shepard breathing and some how surviving implausibly.

If the mass relays blew up though because you were not prepared, made bad decisions or recruited the wrong allies, this anger towards BioWare would be pretty much non-existent as you could only blame yourslef. The death of your friends and allies are on your hands.

One of the most common ways to get over someone's death is with the knowledge that it was not your fault; you couldn't do anything to stop it. While it will take some time to acept this fact, it will be accepted eventually. If you had a choice in the matter, you could not get over the deaths/consequences with this logic.

Something that did this right is ME2's suicide mission. On my first playthrough, I decided to do a few side quests before going on the SM. Because of this, half my crew died, including Kelly Chambers, which meant my fish would die too. Due to my poor decisions, my crew died. It was  MY fault. I had to live with that guilt, making it hurt far mor than if they died no matter what.

I even had a friend who is a huge Talimancer that accidentally got her killed in the SM on his first/canon playthrough. It was his poor choice in fire team leader that got her killed (he chose Legion). He was greatly tempted to load a save file to save her, but he decided against it to not lessen the consequences of his choices. Even though everyone else lived, this created a true bittersweet ending for my friend. Tali's death was on his hands.

Essentially, the possibility of a happy ending gives the player more choice. More choice results in more ownership and responsibility. This equates to personal responsibility for the end result. ME3's endings lacked a possible happy ending, so the dark endings lacked the sense of ownership, diminishing their value.

As for people who disagree and still hld onto the belief that there cant; be a happy ending as it would diminsish the ending, I hae 2 more things to sa:

1. No ending is going to truly be happy. Billions died, earth, Palaven, Thessia and a crap ton of other worlds are ruined. Friends are dead and much of what was lost will never be replaced. It will only be happy in the sense the Reapers are dead and you minimized what losses where you could.

2. If you are the type of person that will choose the happy ending if given the choice and thus needs BioWare to take away the option for a happy ending, don't ruin ME for the rest of us. Mass Effect is about choices. If you can't handle choice and need to be gien a dark ending, play a game like Nier, which has very dark/bittersweet endings but they are all wonderfully executed.

If you read all of that, thank you, and please give your thoughts.

[LucasShark]

Thankyou: It amazes me how few people grasp the value of contrast in gaming storytelling or atmosphere.

[Omanisat]

I agree, there should be an option for a happy ending. It's not like it would be unprecedented for the series. The whole of ME2 was spent telling you "it's a suicide mission, people gonna die, gonna loose people." But with proper preparation it's entirely possible to achieve a happy ending.

[George-Kinsill]

Oh forgot to mention; yes, the SM was a little to easy to get the optimal ending, but all BioWare had to do for ME3 was make an optimal ending harder to get, WITHOUT HAVING TO PLAY MULTIPLAYER!

[sistersafetypin]

Honestly, I think pro-enders saying that a happy ending would diminish the "dark" ending; is like someone saying gay marriage will diminish "regular" marriage

[Toxic Waste]

sistersafetypin wrote...

Honestly, I think pro-enders saying that a happy ending would diminish the "dark" ending; is like someone saying gay marriage will diminish "regular" marriage

Bad comparison IMO, but not here to talk politics.

When I did Rannoch the first time I lost Tali. I was shattered. Replayed the level to save her, but she still died...at her own hands the second time. As shocked as I was I still thought it was very nicely done. It wasn't until my second play through that I managed to save everyone, and I was not even trying.

Tuchunga, Wreave is the leader and I don't like him. He made it easy to not cure the genophage. My Paragon Shep was about to shoot Mordin in the back to keep him from realesing the cure. I didn't want to do it, but I had to in order to stop him I was ready for that dark ending in that chapter of the game. But then I got an option that stopped the cure and kept Mordin alive. Mind you I was looking for the dark side of that part of the game and my shep is a paragon.

I personaly don't mind that Shep dies. Makes it more beliveable. My problem with the ending is that it makes no sence to me.

The scene at the end (when you do the MP part) where you see someone breathing, could be a happy ending ... if it made sence.

Dark or light, happy or sad I don't care. Just have it make sence is all I ask.

[Gyroscopic_Trout]

Agreed.

Is a noble sacrifice really all that noble if you don't have a choice in it?

[Ageless Face]

 Yet what does a dark ending mean for you? Will it mean for you that Shepard looses, and the reapers will take over the
galaxy? Does a happy ending include everybody live including Shepard?

I understand why people want the sort of happy ending with Shepard and all the others being saved. I do. But I don't want it. I know I could simply not pick it or something. But if there IS a happy ending, then it means all the other ones are actually bad. I don't want my Shepard to barely win (or in the worst case, loose) the war with countless bodies if I choose the wrong option, I want the galaxy to be saved with her heroic death while saving everyone she could. For me, that's a happy ending.  

I don't mind having the option of a disney ending, even if I won't choose it. But will that mean a happy ending is the only way to surely win? Or if I finished the game to perfection, will I be forced to choose the happy ending?

Shouldn't the ending we already have be destroy is having a reunion with the squad, Shepard lives happily ever after but with a cost? Shouldn't the choice control be about saving everyone with costing Shepard's life and making him/her trapped in the catalyst's body? Shouldn't synthesis be about Shepard sacrificing him/herself in order to bring a new era for the galaxy?

In Dragon Age: origins for example, By making the hero live you did what can be a horrible mistake... Yet you don't even feel the difference. That can certantly be called a happy ending, even if it's only an illusion. Couldn't destroy for example be similar in that aspect?

I'm sorry if I sound egoistical. I really don't want to be. But making only one happy end, even if it'll not be one of the three choices, will ruin the point of having the choices. 

Modifié par HagarIshay, 30 mai 2012 - 06:27 .

[tomcplotts]

I'm one of those people that thinks a rainbow farting unicorn ending trivializes the seriousness of the Reapers. I'm also one of those grumpasauruses that finds the LI obsession during the gameplay as well as the end a little creepy.

But if there's a way to keep a "happy" option in there to please the players that really need this, I'm all for it. As long as I can avoid it without sabotaging my own gameplay. And that's where I think the problem with this is. How do you access a happy ending? If it's by massing enough points, then those of us who would prefer something a little more balanced would have to shave our own accomplishments to "darken the game down".

This is one of those issues where I do think the story has to go the way the writers envision it for better or worse, because I don't think you can have radically different endings without significantly affecting someone's game. On the other hand, the sheer nihilism on display for the current ending is even worse than the dancing Ewoks ending some people were hoping for.

[incinerator950]

Happy ending option will look like a poor bartering tool to placate people. It still doesn't fix that the entire final two hours is all bad writing, from Thessia to Buzz Aldrin.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Hold up OP not all Anti- Enders thinks there should be a rainbows and Unicorns ending, I want an ending the gives a proper conclusion and fits thematically with Mass effect. I can live with Shepard having to sacrifice himself as long as I am shown it was worth it. You know it is possible to have a happy bittersweet ending if Shepard dies.

[knightnblu]

LucasShark wrote...

Thankyou: It amazes me how few people grasp the value of contrast in gaming storytelling or atmosphere.

It isn't the contrast, it is that such people believe they are right and anyone who doesn't share their opinion is wrong. Those who love the endings would not have to download the DLC at all and could play the game to their own delight. But they don't want that either. In short, they want you to believe as they do.
 
It is groupthink at its worst.

[ohiocat110]

Well, life tells you that sometimes you can do everything right and still fail. Shepard isn't god, he's one guy/gal trying to make one last desperate play to save what's important to him. Shepard doesn't really understand the Reapers or the tools he's using to stop them, he's just trying to stop them. Desperate actions should have desperate consequences. It would be foolish to have the epilogue being Shepard and Garrus knocking back a cold one on the Citadel saying "hey, remember when we killed the Reapers? *laugh*".

Destroy Perfect is pretty gosh darn happy considering what's at stake. Earth has been reset to the 1800's, but still has the knowledge to rebuild. Apparently Shepard even survives. More than that and it's starting to look like a sitcom..."and everything went back to just the way it was before".

[darkchief10]

ohiocat110 wrote...

Well, life tells you that sometimes you can do everything right and still fail. Shepard isn't god, he's one guy/gal trying to make one last desperate play to save what's important to him. Shepard doesn't really understand the Reapers or the tools he's using to stop them, he's just trying to stop them. Desperate actions should have desperate consequences. It would be foolish to have the epilogue being Shepard and Garrus knocking back a cold one on the Citadel saying "hey, remember when we killed the Reapers? *laugh*".

Destroy Perfect is pretty gosh darn happy considering what's at stake. Earth has been reset to the 1800's, but still has the knowledge to rebuild. Apparently Shepard even survives. More than that and it's starting to look like a sitcom..."and everything went back to just the way it was before".

1800's with a bunch of stranded foreign species

[Kunari801]

George-Kinsill wrote...
...As for people who disagree and still hld onto the belief that there cant; be a happy ending as it would diminsish the ending, I hae 2 more things to sa:

1. No ending is going to truly be happy. Billions died, earth, Palaven, Thessia and a crap ton of other worlds are ruined. Friends are dead and much of what was lost will never be replaced. It will only be happy in the sense the Reapers are dead and you minimized what losses where you could.

2. If you are the type of person that will choose the happy ending if given the choice and thus needs BioWare to take away the option for a happy ending, don't ruin ME for the rest of us. Mass Effect is about choices. If you can't handle choice and need to be gien a dark ending, play a game like Nier, which has very dark/bittersweet endings but they are all wonderfully executed. 

Well said OP.   I agree, there should have been a scale of  Bittersweet-to-Happy endings like in ME2.  

[George-Kinsill]

HagarIshay wrote...

 Yet what does a dark ending mean for you? Will it mean for you that Shepard looses, and the reapers will take over the
galaxy? Does a happy ending include everybody live including Shepard?

I understand why people want the sort of happy ending with Shepard and all the others being saved. I do. But I don't want it. I know I could simply not pick it or something. But if there IS a happy ending, then it means all the other ones are actually bad. I don't want my Shepard to barely win (or in the worst case, loose) the war with countless bodies if I choose the wrong option, I want the galaxy to be saved with her heroic death while saving everyone she could. For me, that's a happy ending.  

I don't mind having the option of a disney ending, even if I won't choose it. But will that mean a happy ending is the only way to surely win? Or if I finished the game to perfection, will I be forced to choose the happy ending?

Shouldn't the ending we already have be destroy is having a reunion with the squad, Shepard lives happily ever after but with a cost? Shouldn't the choice control be about saving everyone with costing Shepard's life and making him/her trapped in the catalyst's body? Shouldn't synthesis be about Shepard sacrificing him/herself in order to bring a new era for the galaxy?

In Dragon Age: origins for example, By making the hero live you did what can be a horrible mistake... Yet you don't even feel the difference. That can certantly be called a happy ending, even if it's only an illusion. Couldn't destroy for example be similar in that aspect?

I'm sorry if I sound egoistical. I really don't want to be. But making only one happy end, even if it'll not be one of the three choices, will ruin the point of having the choices. 

You raise a valid point; there should be a great variety of endings, some of which could be on the happier end of the scale whereas others are on the darker end. For example, the ending could have included a part where you have to create a decoy force to shift Harby's attention from the crucible. The less you prepare, the more people and crew mates required to sacrifice themselves. Mabe though, if you prepare enough, it will be less but you'll still have to sacrifice. If you are the type of person who wants a noble sacrifice, your shep could sacrifice him/herself and allow their crew to get on the crucible and destroy the Reapers. 

This is just an idea, but something like this would have been apprciated or some choice in the matter.

[George-Kinsill]

tomcplotts wrote...

I'm one of those people that thinks a rainbow farting unicorn ending trivializes the seriousness of the Reapers. I'm also one of those grumpasauruses that finds the LI obsession during the gameplay as well as the end a little creepy.

But if there's a way to keep a "happy" option in there to please the players that really need this, I'm all for it. As long as I can avoid it without sabotaging my own gameplay. And that's where I think the problem with this is. How do you access a happy ending? If it's by massing enough points, then those of us who would prefer something a little more balanced would have to shave our own accomplishments to "darken the game down".

This is one of those issues where I do think the story has to go the way the writers envision it for better or worse, because I don't think you can have radically different endings without significantly affecting someone's game. On the other hand, the sheer nihilism on display for the current ending is even worse than the dancing Ewoks ending some people were hoping for.

The current endings trivialize the Reapers far more than a happy ending could. They are defeated with a Reaper off switch, are enslaved to the Catalyst, who is really in control, can be defeated with a cain, and even the most unprepared Shepard defeats them; there is no way the Reapers can win.

The current endings have the weaknesses of both dark and happy endings and the strengths of neither.

[Iakus]

I like the way OP thinks.

That is all.

[crimzontearz]

yeah ...no

see most of the people who liked the dark endings will cry out if an alternative is given...apparently invalidating their preference somehow

[MzAdventure]

Endings in themselves are inherently bittersweet... it doesn't take much to tip them over into "bitter" only...

[George-Kinsill]

ohiocat110 wrote...

Well, life tells you that sometimes you can do everything right and still fail. Shepard isn't god, he's one guy/gal trying to make one last desperate play to save what's important to him. Shepard doesn't really understand the Reapers or the tools he's using to stop them, he's just trying to stop them. Desperate actions should have desperate consequences. It would be foolish to have the epilogue being Shepard and Garrus knocking back a cold one on the Citadel saying "hey, remember when we killed the Reapers? *laugh*".

Destroy Perfect is pretty gosh darn happy considering what's at stake. Earth has been reset to the 1800's, but still has the knowledge to rebuild. Apparently Shepard even survives. More than that and it's starting to look like a sitcom..."and everything went back to just the way it was before".

In destroy perfect, the mass relays are gone, the citadel is destroyed, the Geth and Edi, whom I befriended, are dead. Races are stranded on Earth that will never see their home planets again. Shepard will never see his crew again. The eezo from the battle will most likely make Earth unlivable and if not, Earth still is ruined beyond repair. This is not happy.

Also, apparently Shepard is a god/messiah with the current endings; no matter what, he is a legend and destroys all the Reapers. He can go in with minimal allies, make all the worst decisions with his pants down and still destroy/control the Reapers. No matter what, fate will not allow Shepard to fail. He reeks of a messiah reference. With an array of options, from Reapers win to optimal victory, that would make Shepard far more human and less god like.

[Kreid]

I'm with ohiocat here, a "perfect" ending would simply diminish the value of the sacrifice many characters have done thought the games, having Shepard reunite with the gang with the Relays intact and everybody alive but the Reapers would really cheapen the whole point of the story. desperate choices, big consequences, that's how it is.

[Allan Schumacher]

1. No ending is going to truly be happy. Billions died, earth, Palaven,
Thessia and a crap ton of other worlds are ruined. Friends are dead and
much of what was lost will never be replaced. It will only be happy in
the sense the Reapers are dead and you minimized what losses where you
could.

I don't think this works for the same reason that many have said the current endings are unsatisfying because they're less emotionally invested in the faceless masses and the fact that the future no longer needs to worry about systemic extermination at the hands of the Reapers.


The problem I have with a situation like the Suicide Mission is that the ending is effectively a game score.  Especially given how easy it can be to achieve, not achieving a nearly flawless playthrough more says "You didn't win as well as you could have if only you had played better."

I prefer endings that are qualitatively similar.  That is, an ending where it's not as obvious which one is the "more ideal result."

My preference for a "happier ending" would have preconditions that involve making more difficult choices (not just playing the game better or more thoroughly) at earlier points of the game (ideally significantly earlier parts of the game to prevent save scumming).  In fact, I'd even make it more interesting and set up the situation that the only way to have a "happier ending" would be for Paragons to have to choose a renegade option earlier in the game, and for Renegades to have to make a paragon option.  Make it so that if you want things to work out, sometimes you have to make choices you don't think are appropriate choices at other points.  (I'm actually not a fan of morality scoring systems like Paragon/Renegade because I think they make decisions that could be interesting just academic: "This gives me Paragon?  I'm picking that").


As for player choice, I am more just a fan of "does the game react to my choice in some capacity" as opposed to "I'd prefer to choose specifically how the narrative proceeds."  I think this has been the one thing I've learned the most since frequenting the forums though, as it seems many people (at least people on the BSN) prefer their choice to be more along the lines of "How would you like to proceed through the game" as opposed to difficult choices with no obvious good outcome.  As an example, while I think it's interesting for the crew to all die in ME2, it's really a situation that requires the player to consciously make "bad" game decisions in order to achieve.  That's less interesting in my opinion, but it is indeed a "choice" we can allow.

[EricHVela]

@Allan I dunno if it's that.

There's evidence that suggests (and not any more than just suggests) there were supposed to be things that showed how we affected the progress of the ending, such as having one or more Hammer sequences that didn't fail. Even if we killed Wrex, the Krogan are still present for the Hammer Massacre. No amount of TMS changes that scene. The video files actually have "fail" tacked onto them.

It's that once we get to the Hammer Scene, nothing changes no matter what the player did. There's no feedback to the player's efforts except which choices the player can make at the very end.