180 réponses à ce sujet

[Fixers0]

AlanC9 wrote...


ME1 has one big choice during the endgame that controls two cutscenes. Other than that the endgame is identical for everyone. ME2 .

Incorrect, your Paragon/Renegade scores also factors in what kind of ending sequence you recieve, plus the fact that the speech at the depends on your ending and who you choose for the councillors position. 

[Il Divo]

AlanC9 wrote...

So I guess the question this leads me to is: why is it that endgame designs which have worked for Bio forever, and worked in previous ME installments, have suddenly become unacceptable with ME3?

I think it comes down to a sense of scale. Much as I love KotOR, Jade Empire, and DA:O, the fact that they are single stories makes it easier to discard a lackluster ending. As a conclusion to a trilogy and as probably one of the most ambitious projects to come to gaming, ME3's ending fails remarkably at what Bioware initially set out to do, even more than KotOR/Jade Empire due to lack of cut-scene variation.
 
Basically, ME3's ending reeks of lazy all over when people wanted a sense of satisfaction. KotOR is a much better game, but my sense of investment was much greater as Commander Shepard, having two previous games of build-up.

Modifié par Il Divo, 03 juin 2012 - 06:33 .

[AlanC9]

Fixers0 wrote...
Incorrect, your Paragon/Renegade scores also factors in what kind of ending sequence you recieve, plus the fact that the speech at the depends on your ending and who you choose for the councillors position. 

More precisely, P/R is taken into account if you don't save the DA (unless you count the different color on the final screen). And yeah, you get a different final speech depending on who you pick.

@ Il Divo: whoops! I  forgot JE in my list above.

You've got a good point. In some areas ME1 and 2 got by without too much scrutiny because people assumed that ME3 would somehow handle all the consequences for the earlier games. I wonder if the lesson Bio will take away is "don't do trilogies."

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 juin 2012 - 06:55 .

[Fedelm]

Mango370 wrote...

Even though that article was brief, I actually like the sound of that than the full version of what we got in-game.
I'd probably dislike ME3 more if every single choice I made changed the ending...if I did one thing wrong (like, I dunno, punching the reporter in each game) I'd have to start the whole thing again, then realize I did something else wrong...agh.
But this ending doesn't seem as evil; the Reapers are having to do this for the future species, and they're defending the galaxy which they live in too...awesome.

There is another link with some more information:  http://www.oxm.co.uk...before-release/
In fact there is a resembling thread: http://social.biowar...ndex/10710021/1

LegionMan wrote...

 Seeing the chatter between forum
members about the merits of this scrapped ending reminds me:  we never
needed to know WHY the Reapers harvest the ME galaxy every 50k years.
 They are at their most threatening when we know as little about them as
possible - and whatever small tidbits the story might throw our way are
more bad than good.

I disagree. As a player I need to know why all this crap is happening. For example, when I'm reading a book, I know something that the main character doesn't know. This is the first point of view. The second is some kind of role-play point of view: if I were Commander Shepard I would want to know. It's hard to understand the motivation of such unfamiliar creatures, but it doesn't mean that we souldn't try. Though just for reason that everything unknown is frightening. And such a neglect for the real reasons is unnatural if we want to fight.

[Fixers0]

AlanC9 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...
Incorrect, your Paragon/Renegade scores also factors in what kind of ending sequence you recieve, plus the fact that the speech at the depends on your ending and who you choose for the councillors position. 

More precisely, P/R is taken into account if you don't save the DA (unless you count the different color on the final screen). And yeah, you get a different final speech depending on who you pick.

Nope, there is and Renegade/Coucil saved option, just search on youtube.

[Il Divo]

AlanC9 wrote...

@ Il Divo: whoops! I  forgot JE in my list above.

You've got a good point. In some areas ME1 and 2 got by without too much scrutiny because people assumed that ME3 would somehow handle all the consequences for the earlier games. I wonder if the lesson Bio will take away is "don't do trilogies."

It wouldn't be a terrible lesson. I've said before I want to see new IPs again, so that would be one way to do it. Based on dev comments anyway, it does seem like they're burnt out from working on the same project for so long.

[Tiggerous]

Does anyone remember how Gianna Parasini mentions people on Noveria were also researching something about dark energy? I think that that dark energy conclusion sounds much better that what we got. If Drew hadn't left he would have probably made it work really well.

[Favourite store on the CitadeI]

friendlybatarian wrote...

This sounds even stupider than what we got.

agree

[AlanC9]

Fixers0 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...
Incorrect, your Paragon/Renegade scores also factors in what kind of ending sequence you recieve, plus the fact that the speech at the depends on your ending and who you choose for the councillors position. 

More precisely, P/R is taken into account if you don't save the DA (unless you count the different color on the final screen). And yeah, you get a different final speech depending on who you pick.

Nope, there is and Renegade/Coucil saved option, just search on youtube.

Huh? Save the DA and the council's saved, don't and it isn't. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here. Are you just talking about different dialogs with the saved council? I may have blotted that out of my memory because I loathe morality meters so much.

Actually, I thought that the ME1 ending had too much variation. Having the council changed depending on Shepard's actions never made any sense at all. When JFK was assassinated the UK didn't become the leading power in NATO; the power relationships were still what they had been the day before.

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 juin 2012 - 10:33 .

[TheShogunOfHarlem]

I have mixed feelings about Drew's Ending. I hated the "Humans are more genetically diverse/special" subplot. Scientifically speaking Humans are the most genetically homogenous of all species on Earth. Knowing this, most aliens would have to be even more homogenous than we are.

Aside from that the Dark energy ending had pretty good potential. As it is explained currently, it's unimpressive but it's yards better than the current nonsensical ending.

[AmyMac]

Wow, this doesn't sound far off from the alt-ending I came up with to quell my dissatisfaction with the RGB ending. (Another idea I had was anti-Eezo ... exactly what it sounds like)

Dark Energy not only exists, but it makes up like 73-74% of the known universe. We don't know a lot about it, but it is hypothesized to be the main mechanism by which the universe expands. That alone makes a Dark Energy ending way, way, way better than the god-child catalyst. Given the ambiguities surrounding actual knowledge of dark energy, there would also be quite a lot of room for creative interpretation of its role in the universe and how organics and synthetics relate to said role.

All I can say now, is it's a damn shame they didn't put more effort into this, it clearly had a lot of potential.

[AlanC9]

I keep reading people saying that the ending had "potential." Meaning that it might have worked if they did something with dark energy other that what Karpyshyn said they were going to do with it? Or are you all OK with an ending that would have had one big final choice which we all would have made the same way, no information as to whether or not that choice was correct, and no real role for your earlier decisions in the endgame?

[AmyMac]

@ AlanC9,
It would have worked if they would have integrated more of the *actual* science of dark energy (what we know/don't know) about it into the plot, I think. The first 2 games sort of captured me like a mystery-novel with plot twists -- the Reapers, Cerberus, the Protheans, the present galactic community, the Citadel -- all are somehow related but we don't really know how. The DE ending definitely could have tied these together a lot better than the Catalyst ending.
As far as the final decision/player choices, I think previous choices could have been integrated into the conclusion/epilogue and it would have been satisfying. Squadmate deaths, NPC deaths, destruction of planets, possibly extinction of entire races as a result of player choices -- those are all things that could have been easily integrated into the end of the game.
One of the tag/promo lines for ME3 was "Not everyone will survive." So take something like the genophage cure ... you can effectively side with the krogans or the salarians. They could have made that choice result in the *complete* destruction of Thessia OR Palaven (depending on your choice), and it would have at least made the choice feel like it had real meaning instead of reducing it to numbers in the War Terminal.
Oh, and if you really, really screwed up (i.e. got most people killed in the suicide mission, etc), the Reapers should have won. Kinda like when you can make Shep die in the Suicide Mission.

[TheShogunOfHarlem]

AlanC9 wrote...

I keep reading people saying that the ending had "potential." Meaning that it might have worked if they did something with dark energy other that what Karpyshyn said they were going to do with it? Or are you all OK with an ending that would have had one big final choice which we all would have made the same way, no information as to whether or not that choice was correct, and no real role for your earlier decisions in the endgame?

My potential remark isn't really the high praise that you might be assuming it to be. After the Nonsense we got  with the current ending I would have take the DE ending over that since it at least makes sense. Since dark energy is rooted in actual science and is potentially stated to possibly be responsible for the "Big Rip" which hypothetically could permenently end the Universe in a REALLY catastrophic way it does have potential in that respect. (In regards to DE being a plot device)

The Reapers being revealed to be something more than just a one dimensional genocidal Villain could be an interesting twist. However much of what is presented in the DE ending is problematic. The aforementioned "Human Genetic diversity" subplot and the good point you bring up on a lack of multiple endings/prior choices mattering is an issue that would have to be resolved in drafting phase.  Remove the "humans are special" subplot, add more variations to the ending and really explain how potentially dangerous DE could be the the Galaxy and the Universe.

If I recall "the Big Rip" would tear the Universe apart to at least the subatomic level. Kinda scary when you think about it.

[Il Divo]

AlanC9 wrote...

I keep reading people saying that the ending had "potential." Meaning that it might have worked if they did something with dark energy other that what Karpyshyn said they were going to do with it? Or are you all OK with an ending that would have had one big final choice which we all would have made the same way, no information as to whether or not that choice was correct, and no real role for your earlier decisions in the endgame?

The real problem here with comparing the dark energy plot vs. what we have is that the the dark energy plotline is only an outline, which funnily enough is how the ME3 ending feels like; a basic idea which never evolved beyond a premise because no exposition is given.

If Karpyshyn's version had the same minimal amount of exposition as ME3 currently does, I don't think it would be fantastic, but simply as a premise I find Karpyshyn's vision to be less "WTF?", considering how the themes of ME3 play out. What really kills the ME3 plotline is the whole Shepard playing stupid and not inquiring about Geth, EDI, Organics vs. Synthetics, etc.

Edit: And as Shogun suggests, they need to discard the humans are special plot point. Just have this be another step in the continuing cycle.

Modifié par Il Divo, 04 juin 2012 - 05:33 .

[Iakus]

Il Divo wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

@ Il Divo: whoops! I  forgot JE in my list above.

You've got a good point. In some areas ME1 and 2 got by without too much scrutiny because people assumed that ME3 would somehow handle all the consequences for the earlier games. I wonder if the lesson Bio will take away is "don't do trilogies."

It wouldn't be a terrible lesson. I've said before I want to see new IPs again, so that would be one way to do it. Based on dev comments anyway, it does seem like they're burnt out from working on the same project for so long.

Agreed.

Mass Effect and Dragon Age have soured me on the whole concept of importing saves.  I think Bioware should go back to standalone games which don't influence each other.  Should provide more freedom to tell storries without worrying about how it's going to fit into future installments.  

I hope Mass Effect gets put on a shelf somewhere for a few years while they work on new projects.  Original projects

[Il Divo]

iakus wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

@ Il Divo: whoops! I  forgot JE in my list above.

You've got a good point. In some areas ME1 and 2 got by without too much scrutiny because people assumed that ME3 would somehow handle all the consequences for the earlier games. I wonder if the lesson Bio will take away is "don't do trilogies."

It wouldn't be a terrible lesson. I've said before I want to see new IPs again, so that would be one way to do it. Based on dev comments anyway, it does seem like they're burnt out from working on the same project for so long.

Agreed.

Mass Effect and Dragon Age have soured me on the whole concept of importing saves.  I think Bioware should go back to standalone games which don't influence each other.  Should provide more freedom to tell storries without worrying about how it's going to fit into future installments.  

I hope Mass Effect gets put on a shelf somewhere for a few years while they work on new projects.  Original projects

We'll be better off for it, I think. As an idea, the trilogy is great, but still insanely stressful. Bioware either needs originality (removing any worry about importing) or they have to bite the bullet, tell the fans to suck it up, and establish a set canon for each of their sequels. As long as I'm playing different characters with each game, I really wouldn't mind.

[Fixers0]

AlanC9 wrote...

Huh? Save the DA and the council's saved, don't and it isn't. I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here. Are you just talking about different dialogs with the saved council? I may have blotted that out of my memory because I loathe morality meters so much.

Here it is:

masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Storyline

Basically as follows:
- Council saved/Paragon.
- Council dead/Paragon
- Council saved/Renegade
- Council dead/Renegade. 

AlanC9 wrote...
Actually, I thought that the ME1 ending had too much variation. Having the council changed depending on Shepard's actions never made any sense at all. When JFK was assassinated the UK didn't become the leading power in NATO; the power relationships were still what they had been the day before.

Well, that was an attempt to give at least some form of consequence to Shepard's action throughout hinting, at least some formcharacter development, Praktically there isn't going to much difference it's just the way the council approaches Humanity/Shepard at that point,

It would actually be cool if your paragon/renegade score would alter some of the dialogue at the start of Mass Effect 2, reflecting on which kind of spectre during his/her (short) carreer. there could also be Neutral, or Paragde/Renegon dialogue if shepard didn't follow a specific path.

Modifié par Fixers0, 04 juin 2012 - 05:52 .

[Sajji]

Sejborg wrote...

 Dark energy? Sounds like space magic to me. 

Dark energy is founded in true, authentic science.

The dark energy elements were described all throughout Mass Effect 2. Collectors used dark energy in their tech.

[thepiebaker]

CmndrFisher wrote...

Shep could have stopped the Reapers (from processing humanity) in a great battle...The Battle for Earth/Retake Earth...then having done that, without interference from the kid or being sidelined by any space magic, the story moves or is continued on to defeat the Dark Energy threat. 

just going to point out that that sounds errely famiiar to fable 3's plot

build army
defeat tyrant
work to defeat threat that intends to destroy everything by either following the tyrants plans for defense or find a new way to save the people while being more morraly pure yet putting the people at higher risk

[nos_astra]

TheShogunOfHarlem wrote...
I have mixed feelings about Drew's Ending. I hated the "Humans are more genetically diverse/special" subplot. Scientifically speaking Humans are the most genetically homogenous of all species on Earth. Knowing this, most aliens would have to be even more homogenous than we are.

It's especially silly considering they made a point of telling us how traits like blond hair and blue eyes were dying out which seemed to make humans genetically less diverse than they are now. (Of course, the notion is basically just more stupid pseudo-scientific nonsense, so we could safely ignore it.)

Now, if humans were the most culturally diverse species, that I could get behind. It could have been used for a plot that evolves around what Javik says: Protheans lacked diversity which led to their downfall.

Embrace diversity. *cough*

Yeah, not sure the Dark Energy plot would have been much better. They made use of the human reaper which leads me to believe ME2's plot derailment was done on purpose.
I'm not impressed. Bioware can't seem to create a coherent narrative to save their lives. <_<

Modifié par klarabella, 04 juin 2012 - 10:16 .

[OlympusMons423]

If dark energy were a by-product of the technology of that time, such as every time you used the relays it somehow created more dark energy...then I think it would have created an interesting double edged sword to have us debate. But as a 2 choice ending in itself, its pretty shallow in game terms.

Good would be choosing life knowing that not caving in meant all these beings we united now, really had to work together and figure a way out of this problem. There you got ME4 as the main back drop. It's battling a force of nature. You'd still have to create something or someone to fight against. It still takes the hard way around around what should be a pretty basic story line.

Really, its was so basic and plain....we made choices...they should count for something. If we all were to be dropped into a black hole of dark energy, whats the point? However if you gave us 5 or 10 years to at least live out our last days...maybe then at least we get something out of it for everybody.

[Drake-Shepard]

People who complain dark energy is only 2 choices so poor;

.. The final choice can be 2 choices, but previous choices should compound onto it. The problem is the actual ending is 3 choices that don't take into account anything else.
It does not have to be like that...you can have 0 choice at the end scene and still have multiple endings

I have not played witcher 2...but i saw a clip showing 16 different ending cutscenes....i highly doubt there was a list of 16 choices at the end to choose from. Rather all the previous choices compounding onto the final choice (if there is one).

so telling the reapers...they can make the human reaper to solve the crisis, may result in the other races being left alone then we can get various cutscenes showing state of the galaxy. the consequence of that final choice(1) x rannoch (3) x tuchunka story arc (2) = 6
also you can reject the reapers and maybe try to fight them conventionally. 6 x 2 = 12

Also the assets you collect actually effects hammer team and sword fleet can make you fail earlier....then everyone dies. This can be done in the ending we have now;

hammer team fail + sword fleet fail + all fail = 3, 12+ 3 =15

ANyway i went off point. The point is argue dark energy on its merits .. not 'stupid cos 2 choices'.

I don't think dark energy is amazing but there is foreshadowing and means there is a point to ME2; the collectors, human reapers, 'we will find another way', humans are special, mordin talks about human diversity, haemstrom star, dark energy hints.

Dark energy would not seem lame if in the game because themes and dialogue throughout would reflect it properly. Will prepare you to make your decision. Not one line by vendetta and one line by rannoch reaper contradicting what happened 5 mins before.

ME3 ending is crap because it's not forshadowed well, not mentioned in ME1,2, contradicts the geth story arc. Dark energy would not suffer these problems

Modifié par Drake-Shepard, 04 juin 2012 - 11:27 .

[my Aim is True]

I sort of like the dark energy plot. It's a lot more interesting than the "we kill you to save you from synthetics" crap that we got.

My only problem is that ME really isn't good with science-Element Zero for instance is just pseudo-scientific babble that makes no sense- so they probably would have butchered it. Especially since Dark Energy is just a placeholder for some force we don't understand yet.

[Drake-Shepard]

my Aim is True wrote...

I sort of like the dark energy plot. It's a lot more interesting than the "we kill you to save you from synthetics" crap that we got.

My only problem is that ME really isn't good with science-Element Zero for instance is just pseudo-scientific babble that makes no sense- so they probably would have butchered it. Especially since Dark Energy is just a placeholder for some force we don't understand yet.

lol,  i agree..but you do know element zero is the whole point of mass effect.
Running a current through element zero causes the mass effect and give us space flight, weapons etc etc. a double play on word because what you choices should have a 'massive effect'.

Modifié par Drake-Shepard, 04 juin 2012 - 11:58 .