154 réponses à ce sujet

[GreyLycanTrope]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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."

That effectivly makes the EMS and War Assets pointless, and that was a fair amount of content in the game, with the fetch quests and such.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 31 mai 2012 - 12:54 .

[JayneD]

Agreed fully. Happy ending wont ever be rainbows and unicorns (though I would love that).

[Vigilant111]

Its just a matter of preference, different people have different ideas of what a happy ending would be, some prefers a more complex and balanced ending, some prefers a more simple and primary ending, some prefers drama and others do not, the issue is not about being happy, its just no closure, gamers feel cheated, and it is quite disconcerting watching the ending that is clouded by a melancholy overtone, and I think the Normandy crashing scene is just a way to provide solace that there is yet hope or whatever which is done really badly due to plot holes

[Luigitornado]

I want a happy ending.

A happy ending where your Shepard comes out alive, but your love interest dies a horrible death.

There is your happy ending.

[crimzontearz]

good Lord

I seriously find that the more I read these forums the angrier I get

[shodiswe]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

THANK YOU. I've been saying this for weeks/months in the "happy ending" threads. The response has been, invariably, "Y U NO LIKE HAPPY??"

To be fair, I've entirely underestimated the level of emotional investment some players have (I don't mean this as a diss either... I actually consider myself a player that gets emotionally invested too) and what their expectations were.  I didn't follow ME3's development (and especially not the hype) at all, so I went into the game blind.

I just want to make it clear that though I feel there are strengths in having endings that are all relatively equivalent in their outcomes, the fact that people found the ending disappointing is not lost on me.

My biggest problem with the ending was the dialogue with the catalyst, I would have wanted more options to voice a differen't view or simply disgust for everything the reapers stand for... Or a renegade interrupt to have shepard go stright for the destroy pipes as soon as it's hinted. That would have made the endings more personal and satisfactory imo. An ending isn't just about how it end but how you got there and the values that influenced the ending, and thus making it personal.
It feelt like I lost control over shepard and got railroaded and when you're playing an interactive story where you get used to having a lot of options and opportunities to be a jerk, a saint or a realist looking for the best options in any given situation.

Sure there were more things I had issues with but seeing all the storytelling elements that you have been pampered with for 3 games getting torn away from you is very dissapointing. Even if  yelled or started singing or acting mentaly insane in front of the catalyst I would still have had the same options but at least it would have been a more playerdriven story if different options are given. Just standing there listening to the catalyst and then.. I don't know. 
Sure it's possible t could have been your shepards response to the really poor options given. But the selection and possibility to object to the catalysts views, it was dissapointing.

There was no epic boss fight... and there was no epic battle of the minds or verbal warfare. The reapers dealt the cards and you had to make your pick, no more no less.
The difference between Mass effect and games like; Quake, Doom; Halo... Has been the interactive storytelling and due to the design and writing of that last confrontation it was almost completely thrown out the window.

Modifié par shodiswe, 31 mai 2012 - 01:57 .

[Comguard2]

We can talk about this again and again, we will never get a conclusion - the ending is just not clear and open to endless interpretations.

Everyone dies vs. Mass Relays didn't kill anyone
Destruction of galactic civilization vs. the will rebuild
Reapers can't win vs. "Crucible destroyed" counts as a Reaper victory

What we can objectively see in the ending: Shepard wins in every ending (puts an end to the Reaper threat - buy DLC!), Joker survives in every ending, Stuff glows in three different colors. That's it. No more questions are answered.

This was not an end, it was a stop. What we got were just pseudo-bitter endings that didn't satisfy anyone. After several months we're still trying to make sense out of it.

We have to face the ugly truth: the ending will remain a mystery and we can only hope that the EC puts some clarification on it.

[ChickenMan77]

crimzontearz wrote...

good Lord

I seriously find that the more I read these forums the angrier I get

I hear you brother. Conversational boss battles..LOL..Might want to put some actual conversation choices in the final then...

[Jason Ralph]

I went in expecting Shepard & squad to have to pay the ultimate sacrifice. The fact anyone survives astounds me. Add on the various conversations with Garrus (sacrificing 10,000 to save 10,000), and I felt like I was headed towards a no win situation like in "Arrival": stop the Reapers or save a species. I choose Destroy, and felt horrible the Geth were destroyed (provided me with the second most war assets), however, that's been my goal since ME1's ending.
I still think that some of the more cooler endings will never be touched (Shepard turning into a Reaper being an example; have to have 2,050 if you saved the Reaper base in ME2, or 2,350 if you destroyed it) will never be experienced. And I find that to be sad.

[ReXspec]

Nonsensical ending =/= dark, deep, artistic ending.

At best, the current ending we got was obscure and ambiguous. We don't know what synthesis actually does, we don't know what control means for us vs. the Reapers, we don't know what destroy means as far as technological destruction goes, we don't know if destroy means that just Reaper related tech is destroyed, or if it sends the entire Galaxy back to a proverbial Dark Age.

Hypothetically speaking though, if the endings made sense, if everything matched what I imagine for my head-canon, than yes, OP. I agree with you. The endings you get should reflect the choices you made, their consequences, and how your Shep interacted with the rest of the Galaxy. Even for a talimancer like myself, who wants to build a house for her on Rannoch, I still recognize the fact that I sacrificed half the crew of the Normandy in ME2 to gain the loyalty of Legion. I still feel the decision I made to sacrifice Ashley in order to save Kirrahe and Kaiden. I still feel the losses and sacrifices I made throughout the series.  Victory would taste bittersweet because of that.

"Drink deep of victory, and remember the fallen..."

That would be the perfect ending for me...

Modifié par ReXspec, 31 mai 2012 - 02:43 .

[jmarkows]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Fallout 1 and Planescape: Torment are both endings that are not happy. Fallout 1 is probably the most poignant ending I've ever experienced, and it's easily one of my favourite games of all time. It might also be of interest that these two games also allow you to complete them by circumventing the boss fight entirely (and in fact, IMO, have rather bland boss fights and the significantly more interesting options are the ones that avoid the fight). Deus Ex is another one of my all time favourites, and it's a game where all three endings are decidedly open ended and there's no real boss fight either.

I know exactly what you are referring to with Fallout 1, Allan, but the difference here IMHO is that Fallout 1, while very poignant as you pointed out, left you with a sense of accomplishment and self satisfaction at the ending.  Mass Effect 3 is emotionally stirring, but it stirs them for all the wrong reasons.

If it was necessary to have all dark endings and no "sunshine and puppies", then so be it, but I want to be able to put the game down and feel good about the journey I undertook and the end result when I got there, just like Fallout 1.

[ed87]

The Dark Knight didnt have a happy ending but i loved how it ended. The final message that "sometimes people deserve better than the truth" really put the button on tying all the plot together to make a coherent whole.

ME3 didnt even attempt to tie the main themes of the series into the ending. They were too busy trying to be ambiguous

[crimzontearz]

seriously

WTF is wrong with wanting the option for a happy ending?

let me repeat myself...THE OPTION for a happy ending.

Also, Chemiclord, I happen to be perfectly ok with golden endings and I find grimdark and bittersweet-hold-the-sweet endings to be a forced "we are mature and different" cliche of more recent times...BUT.. you are right. If you have to go with the "hero sacrifice" ending and blah blah blah be upfront about it. Like with Halo Reach, any fan knew that Reach=FUBAR...

[Kunari801]

JustifiablyDefenestrated wrote...
...  I thought one of the most powerful moments in any game I've ever played was when I had to choose between Ashley and Kaidan on Virmire. I literally had to walk away from the computer for twenty minutes before I could decide... 

I had a similar reaction to the end of ME3, but I think that it wasn't as effective because I was unclear on exactly what I was choosing...  I didn't mind not having a "happy" ending, but it did feel as if the final decision didn't have the weight that it should have, if only because it was unclear what the choices meant and how they fit into the context of other decisions in the game.

Well said!  I too had a hard time picking between Ash & Kaidan on Virmire and it was a very powerful moment and really got me to love Mass Effect even more than I did by that point.  

Same for ME3, I was in love with ME3, Anderson's death was another great moment in gaming and I thought that I was going to bleed out next to him while watching our allies beat the Reapers.  That would have been a perfect bittersweet ending.  Nope, then Star-brat and the RBG, I had to walk away from the keyboard and I too was annoyed and unclear on what the choices truely ment. 

[Iakus]

Jason Ralph wrote...

I went in expecting Shepard & squad to have to pay the ultimate sacrifice. The fact anyone survives astounds me. Add on the various conversations with Garrus (sacrificing 10,000 to save 10,000), and I felt like I was headed towards a no win situation like in "Arrival": stop the Reapers or save a species. I choose Destroy, and felt horrible the Geth were destroyed (provided me with the second most war assets), however, that's been my goal since ME1's ending.
I still think that some of the more cooler endings will never be touched (Shepard turning into a Reaper being an example; have to have 2,050 if you saved the Reaper base in ME2, or 2,350 if you destroyed it) will never be experienced. And I find that to be sad.

I had the oppostie impression.  The conversations I had told me that survival would be difficult, but possible.

Talking to Eve, she gives you the crystal she used to dig her way out of her own grave in her shaman initiation "remember, in the darkest hour, there's always a way out"

I refused to drink with Chakwas, telling her we'd both be there for the anniversary of teh first toast.

Shepard and Ash (LI) boosted each others' spirits with the line "Let's get it done, and go home"

Garrus' "retire somewhere warm and get rich off the vid rights" after the war.

The game was full of danger and death, but also of promise.  That if you choose carefully, you can come out the other side.  Like a more difficult version of the Suicide Mission.

[SaladinDheonqar]

Agree 100%.

[George-Kinsill]

Belisarius09 wrote...

I don't feel like we got either one. We didn't get a happy ending but we didn't get a dark bitter-sweet ending either.

We got a shallow/hollow victory ending.

They said there would be an option where the reapers won, there isn't. A bitter sweet ending would be we lose, reapers win, but we successfully plant Liara's time capsule giving hope for the future. We are together with our LI in the final moments as we see Harbinger enter the atmosphere and aim his red laser at our position and then the screen goes black.

Something like that.

What we currently have is not bitter sweet. There's nothing sweet about it, and the only bitter thing is the fanbase. What we currently have is a hollow victory, where the Reapers lost, but no one feels like we won.

I feel the exact same way. A hallow ending is a good way to describe teh endings, and your idea for a bittersweet ending is great. I wish it would have been an option, as it definitely would have been appropriate.

[George-Kinsill]

Shajar wrote...

Also managed to get Tali killed during first run on ME2/ME3. I knew i should not trust Miranda, she just cant handle those swarmers. Results, lots of man tears.
Chose geth because of annoying Gerrel, Tali died. Again lots of man tears.
Managed to contine without load game, but rushed game to end so i can start again fresh

First time game is always too dramatic haha

Exactly what I am talking about. In your case, I'm sure Tali's death is more poignant than Legion's or Mordin's death, especially since you caused them. Sure, you can try to improve it on the next playthrough, but you'll always have that feeling that you killed the one you loved, not the game. 

[M0keys]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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").

i disagree

i think mass effect is about giving people what they want in a highly emotional manner, and generally doesn't punish them for making the "wrong choice" (an exception being the suicide mission.) 

basically, it allows them to live out their fantasies, whatever those fantasies may be for themselves or their specific build of Shepard, and what happens to the world should make them feel like there's conflict on a character/story basis. there will be things that challenge your beliefs, but even if you take a sub-optimal choice, good things can happen there too as long as it works on an emotional basis. for example, you can kill mordin at tuchanka, but it's still a highly emotional event.

having some obscure "pick the opposite of your beliefs early on" choice dictate your happy ending seems completely unfair. the game should work with the player, not against. we're here because we want to shape the galaxy in a way that satisfies us. just like we have the illusion of choice, we also have the illusion of conflict. we know it's pre-written, but we allow ourselves to get lost in it, right?? the illusion is a constant and it's a part of the art of the series, and  should be an illusion that's executed well regardless of decisions... they might execute differently, but not poorly or half-heartedly

think of it like this..

in a movie, you have to trust the director and screenwriter to give you the emotional effect you desire
in a game like mass effect, the director and screenwriter have to write the possibilities that trust the players to find the drama that works best for them.

if a player is given that power, to choose the story that affects them the most, and later they discover that power was betrayed at some arbitrary point in the game, they'll abandon you because they now know you don't trust them anymore.

[Kunari801]

George-Kinsill wrote...
Exactly what I am talking about. In your case, I'm sure Tali's death is more poignant than Legion's or Mordin's death, especially since you caused them. Sure, you can try to improve it on the next playthrough, but you'll always have that feeling that you killed the one you loved, not the game.  

I thought Mordin's death was good.  He died a hero curing the genophage, he choose to do it of his own free will.  It was a very powerful death to me.

Legion's was very abrupt, too abrupt, but it fit with the character and was another heoric sacrifice.   It was too fast, Legion should have had a few goodbye words with Shepard too and not just Tali.  

When we get to the end, Shepard doesn't get to make a heroic sacrifice, all three colors are distasteful and repulsive.  They leave (most) of us players with a hollow victory and no sense of closure. 

Modifié par Kunari801, 31 mai 2012 - 05:36 .

[Kreidian]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

How do you define enjoyment?

I *love* it when a game can illicit an emotional reaction from me. I think it's exceptionally powerful. Whether it be anger, happiness, sadness, or anything like that, I enjoy it. What do you have to say to all the people (and they do exist) that do enjoy the endings to Mass Effect 3? Are they just wrong? Did we fail them on a fundamental level? If we didn't fail them, well then things become a lot muddier don't they?  Keep in mind that I'm still a consumer of video games myself.  I find the Modern Warfare games disinteresting, though there's something about Diablo that keeps me coming back (Hardcore mode...) and I love it when a game can make me pause and think about the decision that I'm actually going to make.

Fallout 1 and Planescape: Torment are both endings that are not happy. Fallout 1 is probably the most poignant ending I've ever experienced, and it's easily one of my favourite games of all time. It might also be of interest that these two games also allow you to complete them by circumventing the boss fight entirely (and in fact, IMO, have rather bland boss fights and the significantly more interesting options are the ones that avoid the fight). Deus Ex is another one of my all time favourites, and it's a game where all three endings are decidedly open ended and there's no real boss fight either.

I like a game series like Mass Effect because I like being immersed in the story. Because of that I'm able to overlook aspects of the gameplay that really aren't all that fun for me, because it did stuff like that so well. Two of the weakest parts of ME1 and ME2 or me are the boss fights. I thought it was silly to still have to fight Saren after he puts the gun to himself, and it made me roll my eyes and conclude "I guess we just need a boss fight." ME2 is just the same, where I feel the ending would have been superior if they had just skipped over the fight with the reaper at the end.

As for us not liking games, I'll just disagree. I applied at BioWare because I *love* gaming. I've had my run ins with gaming compulsion growing up and found a way to leverage my passion into a career. I booked time off for Alpha Protocol and Deus Ex Human Revolution, and more recently there's others around work that have taken time for games like Skyrim and Diablo 3.  Gaming talk permeates throughout the office.

If there's one thing game development has taught me is that no matter how amazing you make something, someone is always going to hate it. By the same token, no matter how crappy you make something, someone is always going to love it. Just saying that there are people out there that love the ending doesn't justify it in any way. It doesn't justify the horrible writting and design of the last ten minutes of the game. Nothing changes the fact that pulling out new concepts and characters -  none of which makes any sense - at the end of a story is just bad writting. Nor does it excuse the fact that the ending of ME3 goes completely against the themes of the entire Mass Effect series as a whole.

I'm happy for those folks out there that enjoyed the current ending, I wish I could enjoy ME3 as much as they apperently do. However, most of the people who played the game - including everyone that I've talked to personally that played it - all say that the ending was horrible. Which means for most of the Mass Effect fans out there, the ending failed to accomplish its most basic function, which was to entertain its audience.

That in itself is only part of the issue, the fact is most of the fanbase isn't angry just because they want a happy ending, alot of this rage comes from one simple thing; frustration. The fanbase knows that BioWare is better then this. The rest of the game is so amazing, and it's frustrating to know that the game as a whole would be a completely amazing if not for the horrible misstep at the end.

When fans talk about the suicide mission they're just giving an example of what they expected. At a minimum you could have just copied that and everything would have been amazing. Your issues with the suicide mission are entirely valid, I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but at least that would have worked. What we got instead simply doesn't work.

The frustration is made worse because BioWare's response to all of this is to blame the fans for your failure. Apperently it's our fault for "not getting" the ending, and we are just entitled whiners for expecting a game we payed for to actually entertain us. We should apperently be happy that BioWare promised something completely different for the ending and instead gave us the exact opposite. Even the EC DLC is being presented as a way to "explain and clarify" the ending, because apperently the fanbase is too stupid to understand how amazing the current ending is and therefore we need it explained to us. Regardless of your intentions that is the message that the fans have been getting.

This is what my comment about not liking games was directed to. If you
found the comment disrespectful then I appologize. My point is simply
that right now it seems that for BioWare devs just having fun isn't good
enough, and it's more important to come up with more grandios,
enigmatic, and "artistic" experiences then to simply ask if your fans
will actually have fun with it.

In the end you've taken the stance of superiority over your fans and supporters. You're sending the message to the fans that happy endings are just so beneath you, and that your amazing artistic integrity is more important then making games enjoyable. It's pure hubris.

If BioWare could just admit they messed up on the ending then this wouldn't be an issue. If you could just entertain the idea that it's possible you got it wrong; That would quell a great deal of the rage and frustration you're seeing now. Even if you still wanted to support the current endings.

Go ahead and say that you felt the current endings are valid for the story you were trying to tell. ( Though I personally still don't understand how anyone would consider the current ending to be remotely valid in the context of the rest of the game. ) So long as you can also admit that you recognize that the endings did not work and were a mistake for the majority of your fans.

If BioWare could do that, if I knew you were working on the EC DLC with that in mind - where you would actually be willing to CHANGE the ending to something that works instead of Clarifying something that doesn't - then I could go back to actually enjoying ME3. I could actually enjoy everything else that the game has to offer right now secure in the fact that the biggest problem it has is being worked on in a positive direction. Even if development for that took longer, even if I had to pay for it to cover the development costs, in the end I would have a worthwhile gaming experience. Unlike now where the gaming experience just ends with the fact that none of it matters and it's pointless to even play the game cause all three choices in the end suck equally bad.

[Allan Schumacher]

If there's one thing game development has taught me is that no matter how amazing you make something, someone is always going to hate it. By the same token, no matter how crappy you make something, someone is always going to love it. Just saying that there are people out there that love the ending doesn't justify it in any way.

No, but it doesn't mean we should outright dismiss what the smaller group is saying. I think it's also hubris to completely overlook the issues that people may have had with a game like Baldur's Gate 2 even if the majority really like it.

In the end you've taken the stance of superiority over your fans and supporters. You're sending the message to the fans that happy endings are just so beneath you, and that your amazing artistic integrity is more important then making games enjoyable. It's pure hubris.

I think this is just an interpretation and it's a bit unfair to make such a sweeping statement based upon the quality of the endings.

If this was actually the case, wouldn't story arcs like Tuchanka and Rannoch have played out very differently than what is provided? Or are those moments that we weren't displaying any sort of artistic integrity and just giving the fans what they wanted (i.e. those story arcs aren't actually what anyone on the team wanted?)

[nightcobra]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

If there's one thing game development has taught me is that no matter how amazing you make something, someone is always going to hate it. By the same token, no matter how crappy you make something, someone is always going to love it. Just saying that there are people out there that love the ending doesn't justify it in any way.

No, but it doesn't mean we should outright dismiss what the smaller group is saying. I think it's also hubris to completely overlook the issues that people may have had with a game like Baldur's Gate 2 even if the majority really like it.

In the end you've taken the stance of superiority over your fans and supporters. You're sending the message to the fans that happy endings are just so beneath you, and that your amazing artistic integrity is more important then making games enjoyable. It's pure hubris.

I think this is just an interpretation and it's a bit unfair to make such a sweeping statement based upon the quality of the endings.

If this was actually the case, wouldn't story arcs like Tuchanka and Rannoch have played out very differently than what is provided? Or are those moments that we weren't displaying any sort of artistic integrity and just giving the fans what they wanted (i.e. those story arcs aren't actually what anyone on the team wanted?)

see it in this prism though:

saved tuchanka and rannoch, good.

then the ending happens, mass relays go Boom and right now we only have one moment in the games that explains what happens when a relay goes boom. *the controlled explosion explained through twitter doesn't count, that kind of explanation should have been in the game*

there ya go, the hard work you did to save the two planets was overwritten the moment the ending happened as they are now space dust.

Modifié par nightcobra8928, 31 mai 2012 - 08:05 .

[TheOptimist]

crimzontearz wrote...

seriously

WTF is wrong with wanting the option for a happy ending?

let me repeat myself...THE OPTION for a happy ending.

Also, Chemiclord, I happen to be perfectly ok with golden endings and I find grimdark and bittersweet-hold-the-sweet endings to be a forced "we are mature and different" cliche of more recent times...BUT.. you are right. If you have to go with the "hero sacrifice" ending and blah blah blah be upfront about it. Like with Halo Reach, any fan knew that Reach=FUBAR...

Indeed.  I shudder to think that in the last 10 years or so I've played only 5 RPGs with an honest to goodness happy ending if you do everything right: Suikoden V, Kingdom Hearts 2, Jade Empire, Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance and FE: Radiant Dawn (I'd include ME1 and 2, but we know how that eventually turned out).  Maybe there are more and I've simply missed them, but those are the ones I know of. Now, in all five games, you have to work your butt off to get the best ending, but the possibility existed, and I loved it.

To any burgeoning game programmers/writers out there, I PROMISE a market exists for games where the protagonists can actually win.  I don't need every game series catered to me.  I get that there's a market for grimdark and bittersweet.  But seriously, can we get a AAA RPG game title with an ultimate ending that doesn't try to invoke wrist-slitting depression?

Modifié par TheOptimist, 31 mai 2012 - 08:09 .