4048 réponses à ce sujet

[3DandBeyond]

Eretikas wrote...

Voodoo2015 wrote...
Choice One: Control you will be the new catalyst you become an god.

This choice have some benefits - you can pick a reaper as your new girlfriend.

Better get used to all that power because that's all that's keeping you warm at night.

[AresKeith]

 but do you really become the new Catalyst or just a puppet for the Starbrat 

[chevyguy87]

I agree with damn near everything BlueStorm83 and 3DandBeyond have posted, I swear you two should replace Casey and Mac, I sure as hell would rather play a revised ME3 if you two were at the helm.

I do not know if I can add anything additional that you two have not touched base upon already. But just for time's sake, I would like to throw my bid in. Aside from the awful (just plain awful) ending, the other thing that bothered me was the lack of character development and consistency. In my opinion, it was almost non-existent in ME3 with most of the characters.

To me the characters carried over from ME2 felt almost hollow. Zaeed and Kasumi I believe drew the shortest straws and got shafted the hardest. I didn't even know those two were in the game until I started my second playthrough, which is sad because they were two of my favs, they were both so different so dynamic and so unique. Harbinger also got punked, a big bad super evil antagonist turned into a paper tiger if you will.

I personally loved Samara, Thane, Legion, Kasumi and Zaeed. I was happy to see them all return because I had gone through all the trouble completing all of their loyalty quests and keeping them alive for the suicide mission. But after seeing how horribly they were all treated (still on the fence regarding Thane and Legion), it sickens me that Bioware invested more time in Glow Stick and the complete sham of an ending then it's existing knock em dead cast of brilliant characters and basic narrative coherence, letting the story shoot itself in both feet in the final 20 minutes or so.

Modifié par chevyguy87, 10 juillet 2012 - 11:40 .

[3DandBeyond]

@chevyguy87,
You are very kind.

I do wholeheartedly agree with you on the ME2 characters. I tend to feel they started character ignore mode with ME1 people into ME2, but that made some sense because no true blue Alliance person like Kaidan or Ashley was going to get onto a Cerberus ship and at least Wrex was there with a role that he and only he (Wreav, really?) was meant to fill.

I loved Zaeed and Kasumi was really special too in ME2. Hell, they all were IMO each in their own flawed way. Much as I love the ME1 ending, the race to get inside the Citadel beats much of London as I see it, and much as I love many of the poignant stories within all of the games, one of my all time favorite moments was at the end of ME2, in the shuttle bay when that ragtag group look up at Shepard and you just KNOW what they are thinking. No words needed and I will tell you I teared up. Jack, that completely walled off person, never given a chance to be alive-who made her alive? You know what she's thinking when looking at Shepard. All of them, you know.

I feel so cheated-that's a moment I wanted at the end of ME3. No words needed but man, we did it. Or if everything went to hell, sure a moment where Shepard knows they are just lost. Just some truly victorious or truly sacrificial or truly "we're screwed" moments.

They forgot about the characters and that's what made ME stand head and shoulders above other games. I've played games with some great stories, lots of dialogue, lots of combat, and even some intelligence to them, but I've never just plain cared about the characters, even the main one meant to be the player. They made ME great and made you want to play again and again-to revisit friends and sometimes to do better. I lost Garrus once and never did again.

I couldn't believe how short some of the missions were (or actually the face time) with ME2 characters. And Miranda, it was like they just kept bringing her in to say she didn't need Shepard's help. Zaeed was hidden away. Kasumi was invisible for most of her "mission" and even your decision from ME2 made no difference-she pieces together the stuff in the grey box. I also think it's so sad that all these people were just given the phone call goodbye moments in London.

I don't know how writers can go from some truly awesome thought-provoking really poignant moments to fists full of crazy and then think it's smart. To then say that it does fully answer all the questions and tie up the stories with the EC is laughable-I never asked these questions and I don't remember playing this story and I have played ME1, 2, and 3 (mostly prior to London on repeat plays) at least a half dozen times-I am sure I've played them more than that.

[chevyguy87]

3DandBeyond wrote...


They forgot about the characters and that's what made ME stand head and shoulders above other games.

 They made ME great and made you want to play again and again-to revisit friends and sometimes to do better.

Those two statements are the exact same reasons I took an interest into the ME series. It was refreshing to play a game where characters and story took higher priority then just shooting every living object in sight. ME3 sort of dumbed itself down to appease the kiddies who only want to kill everything. The combat was nice, but in my opinion, it took a bit away from the story elements of the game. I wouldv'e much rather talked with Legion about how the Geth would adapt/ what they would choose to accomplish once they achieved full intelligence instead of duking it out with four Geth Primes. (just my preference) 

[BlueStorm83]

--- A big thanks to Chevy. I do what I can.

To be very fair, it's a hell of a daunting task to have so many characters that can play out in so many different ways, and extend them into multiple games. Especially if they can live or die at different points. The time they gave us with Mordin and Legion was enough for me, but if only the other characters could have had just as much time. Granted, to actually DO that, Mass Effect 3 would have had to be like 7 DVDs long, and not come out for another 2 or even 3 years. But honestly? I'd have been FINE with that. And it would have given them plenty of time to make the game have an ending.

Now, is it practical to do that? Hells no. But if you're going to make a series where decisions and characters carry over from SPECIFIC things that happen in previous games, then that's what you signed up for. If you don't want to do that, make standalone games.

--- And just as a word of advice for the future, when you create a great new universe, don't jump right to Galaxy Threatening Crises. Give us stuff that can threaten a city, a country, maybe one of many planets. That way sequels can happen in the same UNIVERSE, in a different region, with different characters, and we can still love the same universe and the new characters and the new story, without you being forced to tie in the previous stories and characters and all. Otherwise you're forced to kill poor Kal'Reegar in an Email, and dammit, I loved that man!

[chevyguy87]

@BlueStorm83

Yes I agree it would be quite the task to go through and create separate side stories for the majority of the cast as well as give them all endings albeit keeping in mind the many variables that come with each cast member. A valid argument yes, but I still do not care for the fact that Bioware spent more time in Glow Stick boy who we never saw up until the end then building upon the all star cast that served them so well for 2.9 games.

I believe Jack was treated the best, I for one did not like her all that much in ME2 but in ME3 seeing her developed, better clothed and with actual hair made me enjoy her character a hell of a lot more seeing her in full potential. I swear seeing her now I just envision her picking up a Gibson Flying V guitar and just jamming out to Metallica or something.

The rest of the cast with the exception of our squad mates and a select handful of others sort of got left at the train station. Emily Wong got it the worst, killed off in a damned twitter post outside of the friggin game. And what ever happened to Bailey, Aria, the Council, the Rachni Queen etc? Nothing was ever mentioned of them. To me poor treatment of the cast makes or breaks the story. In this case ME3 is severely fractured character wise.

Modifié par chevyguy87, 11 juillet 2012 - 03:01 .

[The Twilight God]

chevyguy87 wrote...

@BlueStorm83

Yes I agree it would be quite the task to go through and create separate side stories for the majority of the cast as well as give them all endings albeit keeping in mind the many variables that come with each cast member. A valid argument yes, but I still do not care for the fact that Bioware spent more time in Glow Stick boy who we never saw up until the end then building upon the all star cast that served them so well for 2.9 games.

I believe Jack was treated the best, I for one did not like her all that much in ME2 but in ME3 seeing her developed, better clothed and with actual hair made me enjoy her character a hell of a lot more seeing her in full potential. I swear seeing her now I just envision her picking up a Gibson Flying V guitar and just jamming out to Metallica or something.

The rest of the cast with the exception of our squad mates and a select handful of others sort of got left at the train station. Emily Wong got it the worst, killed off in a damned twitter post outside of the friggin game. And what ever happened to Bailey, Aria, the Council, the Rachni Queen etc? Nothing was ever mentioned of them. To me poor treatment of the cast makes or breaks the story. In this case ME3 is severely fractured character wise.

I was wondering why they left out Wong. They just went on twitter and said, "Hey, she's died"? 

Mordin, Legion, Wrex, Miranda, Jack and Samara at least had good missions associated with them. Thane played an important role even though I wouldn't call the coup his mission. Jacob seemed thrown into his just for the sake of it. He didn't really "relate" to that mission in any way.

The only companions that were totally "useless" were the DLC squaddies. Kasumi and Zaeed seemed forced in just to become war assets, but it's to be expected given their DLC status. Did Zaeed ever say why he was so anti-cerberus now? Seemed like something other than their current activities.

[I Am Robot]

I think the ending was rushed. many of the things that happened in the trilogy where overlooked.

Modifié par Farid-Yoda-N7, 11 juillet 2012 - 05:14 .

[LeVaughnX]

Alright I'm confused about something maybe someone can clear it up for me plain and simple.

I bought a game that I expected to be good (as many people do when they have something they truly like) and I got a 15/10 game that was flawless in some aspects. I felt ""Oh wow they are really going to end this game on a high note way to go Bioware!"" but instead I got an A/B/C ending that was exactly what Casey Hudson stated and I quote ""We will not have"". Since then I put my controller down and kind of relived the past five years of my life; how I loved the Mass Effect franchise (books/games), and how the ending to ME3 took a massive dump on my soul. Now I tried to apply logic to this and said ""Maybe they are trying to show you that sometimes you are stripped from your freedoms of choice, or maybe this whole Indoctrionation thing is true."". I tried to rationalize why they would create such an epic ****-fest after working so hard on the main portion of the game, and I only came up with the fact that it wasn't real. The indoctrionation theory seemed to be the absolute best thing and even worth paying hard earned money for if they did it! When I heard about this "Extended Cut" I felt my love for Mass Effect return and I went ""Oh god maybe they do care!"". I felt that they actually gave two damns about the people who wasted all their money on a build up that never delivered - and then the excitement was gone.

They publically stated directly/indirectly that the Indoctrionation Theory was false and what not. Instantly I went ""Oh no they aren't going to just polish the ending and call it done will they?"" but thats exactly what I saw. Instead of fixing what was broken, they put a band-aid on it and called it a wrap. The extra scenes didn't exactly make the game feel any less broken, if anything it left me wanting my damn questions answered. I know a lot of people out there sat there and went ""Why the fu*k didn't they answer the questions that made this whole situation an oxymoron?!"".

How did Shepard survive?
How come he has unlimited ammo?
How did Anderson beat him to it?
How did TIM even get there?
How did Hackett know about Shepard being there?
How on Earth did their radios not break?
How come no one tried to rescue them?
How come the Normandy didn't try to "draw off" Harbinger with its big-ass main gun that tore Nazara a new ass?

I could go on and on and on about the flaws that never even got looked at, but no.....My question is this...

Why didn't Bioware just not release an extended cut - but spend time on making a fully opperational and loop-hole-free ending that gave us an epic battle, epic choices, and really made the game close on a note that you personally directed and controlled. If you did all you could then you would win - maybe Shepard would survive based on your actions. If you did the bare minimum and went "La-de-da" through out the game the Reapers would be seen terrorizing each planet, and maybe Shepard would die or even live through that hell.

But no..instead of an Expansion like "The Shivering Isles" they just half assed a few scenes and clips and some "stills". They didn't even bother to make an original face for Tali yet either...

So to sum it up...I disliked the original ending, I'm disgusted with the new one, and I'm ashamed of myself for having false hope that a game developer would care about their people enough to really do something wonderful for them. I don't appreciate the thought Bioware, as you clearly didn't think about the true fans in this one.

0/10 - Good luck with Dragon Age 3.

[katness]

I think that what I have to say will be a rehash of what a lot of others have said. But, since my husband is extremely sick of me talking about Mass Effect 3 and the series, I have nowhere else to vent.

I first just want to say how much I loved Mass Effect 1 and 2. The stories and character development of those two games were phenomenal. No other game has pulled me in so deeply as this series did. I would replay these games over and over again just because I loved it that much. The first ME was amazing in it's introduction of this ominous villains, The Reapers, that seemed an unstoppable force. Here we were, humanity being propped up against this immortal enemy and it was up to us to gather others to fight it. Then, at the end when we were actually able to defeat Sovereign, I started to get hope that this enemy would go down, but not without sacrifice. What a premise for a game!!

Then, the second one, you kill my character, resurrect her in an amazing opening sequence, and have me go on a suicide mission that filled me with honor and excitement. I can't even begin to describe how excited I was to fight the human baby reaper boss. Holy hell, that was terrifying and exhilarating all at the same time. Then, the whole end scene with the Reaper army awakening made me want to put on a Viking hat and scream, BRING IT ON ***TCHES!

But, alas, did I get to have it "brought on" by the "too complicated to comprehend" Reapers? No. Instead, I get Starchild, who insists that I totally ignore reason and logic and drink his crazy catalyst Kool-aid. I mean, really, he's a rogue AI that forced his creators to become the first Reaper! Against their will!! Why the hell am I supposed to listen to him?!?!!

I was happy that Bioware let me shoot him with the EC, but then reconfirms that I must listen to the little glowworm child by showing that by killing him we all are defeated. WTF?!

I knew what the EC was going to be as the developers clearly stated that they were not going to change the ending because they were satisfied with their endings and it would violate their artistic vision...blah blah blah. The only reason I played it was because it was free and I felt that Bioware owed it to me to at least complete the product I paid for. But, I actually feel that I would have been happier to have not played the game as it feels that they just added salt to my wounds.

I will give this to Bioware: I don't think there has ever been a game series that was at one time so loved that became so hated after 20 minutes of it. That is quite an accomplishment. I am sad that it was just 20 minutes that ruined the game, but it goes to show you how important an ending is to a story based game. Way to go Bioware...

[Postman778]

3DandBeyond wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

MTX99 wrote...

i'm not gonna get into very much detail. People will from now on and forever hate every game Bioware makes. People need to let DAII and ME3 go. At the core, they're not bad games. It's one thing to have an opinion. But people treat these games like they're a cancer. I don't even have to be psychic to tell you people, that your gonna hate ME4 or any other ME spin off. The extended cut gave you info and fixed what had to be fixed. There is no movie or game out there in existence, that is 100% plot hole free.

Go back and read just about any post I've made, then claim that the cavernous problems with the EC don't exist.

Thing is most of the people that are really ok with the EC endings now won't go into the depth and don't want to that you have.  And that's not because they are dumb people or don't have any right to an opinion.  It's merely that gaming companies have caused us all to expect little.  Endings do generally not satisfy and that's true.  But to say that we must accept that is BS.  How many free passes should companies get before it's ok to say "enough"?  First day DLC that was needed in the game and should have been in the game.  MP needed for SP, done to get you to pay for micro-transactions.  Artificial gametime extenders used in the game to make it seem longer than it is.  Horrible beginning.  Ending that breaks every rule of good storytelling and that basically insults the intelligence of the player.  Demoralizing, non-wins all the way around.  Artificial 3 choice spoke endings, not based on anything players did in 3 games-merely set up to funnel players into one of 3 (or 4) endings, rather than "real" endings based on decisions within the game.  Multiple examples of misleading information dispensed by the devs that were absolutely false.  The use of twitter to explain what is meant in the game and to refute things said in the game.

The EC fixed nothing but used a lot of words and new nonsensical scenes and slideshows to do it.  That's because it didn't and never was meant to address what was really wrong.  And as a consumer I have every right to continue to say "enough".

I'm tired of being told that mediocre is great and that ok is good enough, but that really horrible is normal so "deal with it."  The EC gave info that didn't address what was always wrong, but since it's now ok and cool looking that makes it fit the story better and that makes it some great ending worthy of being a part of ME?  Not in my opinion.

I want people to get a quad and actually act like the money they pay for this stuff matters.  Promises matter.  There is absolutely no possible way to play ME1 through to ME3 and say that the ME3 endings answered all or were worth all the stuff done before or that they fit in with the story thus far, because they don't.  No one has as yet given specific  instances of where anything the kid says has relevance in the games or where even the kid's existence is really foreshadowed in any meaningful way before Shepard "wakes up".  That stupid moment in the game when the kid even says just that, "wake up," is one of the most cringeworthy moments in the game.  Shepard is clearly not asleep.  Wake up-I think the kid should turn to the player and say that.

You are so right. You made so many perfectly posts about the ME series and what it is all about and why the ending doesn´t fit into it.
The ending of ME3 even with the EC is absolutly contradictory to everything we have "learned" throughout ME1 and ME2.
It was Sovereign who said "Rudimentry creatures of blood and flesh, you touch my mind".
I was talking to Sovereign, he has an individual name, he has a mind, has a different voice than harbinger, he even acts different than harbinger.

But the godchild explains that he is in control of the Reapers. So why is Sovereign not revealing the truth behind the cycle, if he is controlled by the child? I cannot see the godchild speaking through sovereign.
I don´t even know why the godchild refers to them as reapers because that was a name chosen by the protheans, while the Geth called them Nazzara, the old machines, but ok...

The Reapers where something mystical, something pure evil, so far beyond our comprehension we cannot even imagine. But in the end they were nothing but little pets.
I wonder if the writers of ME3 ever played ME1 and get a sense for the Reapers, but i doubt.

The ending doesn´t fit. Not before the EC and not with the EC.

The synthesise ending is the most creepy and crappy thing I have ever seen in an entire video game. First you make every Geth an individual and afterwards you make everyone and everything equal, including the geth? Where is individuality? You were talking about individuality and the own free will during ME1 and ME2 and even in ME3 until the end came up...

I for myself cannot accept the ending.

Looking forward to the Leviathan DLC. How does it fit into the whole scenery? A Reaper that destroys another Reaper (btw. during the fleet attacking sequence you can clearly see a Reaper hitting another Reaper from behind start at 5min, is that already a hint to the Leviathan DLC?).

If the Reapers are all controlled, how is Leviathan able to act on his own, destroying another Reaper? A Reaper, making choices on his own mind is a persiflage to the godchild making it absurd.

That stupid moment in the game when the kid even says just that, "wake
up," is one of the most cringeworthy moments in the game.  Shepard is
clearly not asleep.  Wake up-I think the kid should turn to the player
and say that.

It should be directed to the writers who should wake and go back to take a look upon ME1 and ME2 as well as the so called gaming press who dedicates ME3 with scores >90% without recognizing the end.

The end destroyed the whole ME- Series for me, so i have decided to delete ME1 - ME3. For me it is enough now, I have paid a lot of money and everything I got in the end was a headache...

(sorry for my english, I am not a native speaker)

[chevyguy87]

Personally, and in my own opinion Mass Effect should not have been a trilogy, it should at bare minimum have been at least 4 games. The universe is too large and the story is to expansive and detailed to cut it down to 2.9 games and end it so spectacularly wrong. Things get left out or even worse get displayed to us via email (which is pure laziness right there). For example what happened to Shepard's trial? I myself was looking forward to that, being able to either sway the committee with high paragon or tell them to kick rocks with high renegade and explain my actions.

That among other things that would have made ME3 on par with the other two games was left out. I liked how they did Tuchancka and Rannoch, you have the main story mission and a few side missions, why was that only limited to those two home worlds? I would have liked to spend more time on Thessia and Sur'Kesh and others. Would have been cool to go to the Elcor home world and such. Just wishful thinking I suppose.

The Reaper War in itself is kind of a big deal and to me ME3 made it feel super rushed and made it feel extremely short. The war should have been it's own game entirely. Then again that's where a problem rises, how would ME3 and ME4 have been split to where it would've made sense to end one and pick it up again with the other one. I guess I just wanted more of everything, since ME3 felt short and pacing was too fast IMO. ME3 just left too many things out and those things are what made the story feel rushed. The ending only solidifies that.

[Holy shnikeys]

Pinax wrote...

BlueStorm83 

---  To correct mister Walters' viewpoint, it is very possible for the writing team to tell a story that is not the story they have been telling all along.  That is, apparently, exactly what they've done.

Thanks a lot for this wall of text!

After mining in the net today and looking for some positive argumentation on the current endings I found out that the only one that may rationally explain the "event" on the Citadel without breaking the ME lore and the feeling it is just so wrong is the IT interpretation. I do not praise here the IT, just pointing this as the most convincing logical outcome if The Citadel ending is kept in the game as it is. Otherwise, the actual Catalyst, the conversation with him and it's conclusions are, just like you very well said, a part of some story we were never told.

I personally enjoy the story of Marauder Shields. It fits better with the lore and the previous games than the current (EC included) endings ever will.

[3DandBeyond]

chevyguy87 wrote...

Personally, and in my own opinion Mass Effect should not have been a trilogy, it should at bare minimum have been at least 4 games. The universe is too large and the story is to expansive and detailed to cut it down to 2.9 games and end it so spectacularly wrong. Things get left out or even worse get displayed to us via email (which is pure laziness right there). For example what happened to Shepard's trial? I myself was looking forward to that, being able to either sway the committee with high paragon or tell them to kick rocks with high renegade and explain my actions.

That among other things that would have made ME3 on par with the other two games was left out. I liked how they did Tuchancka and Rannoch, you have the main story mission and a few side missions, why was that only limited to those two home worlds? I would have liked to spend more time on Thessia and Sur'Kesh and others. Would have been cool to go to the Elcor home world and such. Just wishful thinking I suppose.

The Reaper War in itself is kind of a big deal and to me ME3 made it feel super rushed and made it feel extremely short. The war should have been it's own game entirely. Then again that's where a problem rises, how would ME3 and ME4 have been split to where it would've made sense to end one and pick it up again with the other one. I guess I just wanted more of everything, since ME3 felt short and pacing was too fast IMO. ME3 just left too many things out and those things are what made the story feel rushed. The ending only solidifies that.

Yes, exactly.  Thessia was handled with Liara crying, Shepard saying she could still do something and Liara jumping up to help refugees.  Shepard's emotional distress over a kid s/he met and said 2 sentences to was longer lasting than that.

I agree so much with you here.  And some of us have said this a lot-I totally felt that missions to bring everyone together should have been in one game (maybe an ME3 part 1) and the war in another (part 2).  If they were rushing to get a game out (by EA) then they needed to make the case with EA that this game had to be big.  EA is a business and they need convincing just like any boss does.  Just look at how long it takes for some other companies to get sequels out.  They could have made a real case for 2 separate games with DLC for each one.

The hunt for war assets is almost laughable.  You find whole fleets and some ships near worlds and wonder why they are where they are.

This type of treatment with 2 games for the ending could have worked well and would have allowed for that "bring it on" sense the ending never had.  Even if you choose the one thing that destroys the reapers you have no sense that you destroyed the reapers.  Sure you watch them plop over-wow, how exhilarating!  That made 3 games, several books, and all worth it. 

The devs used the message system in the game and then did use twitter to explain things-things that should have been in the game.  Twitter and the in game messaging are not substitutes for actual gameplay.  They started to do similar things in ME2 with Chorban's keeper data-we actually learn from him what one codex kind of says about the citadel and the keepers.  But they kept getting worse in ME3-throwing Diana Allers at us when I cared far more about Emily Wong.  Killing off Kal in a message-I chose to ignore this pile of garbage.  He was a hero, dammit and a great guy who stood by Tali.  But apparently Bioware has a real problem - they like to build up heroes and then throw them in the garbage.  And, twitter.  Twitter is the place all good devs go to explain plot holes they created by not remembering their own story.  My cousin who has never played these games remembers more of the story from me talking about it, than the devs sometimes seem to.

I recently played ME2 and there's a "hint" that pops up when sections are loading.  I almost laughed out loud at one that said (paraphrasing), "choices made in ME2 may have dire consequences in ME3".  I want them to name 1, just one real dire consequence any decision in ME2 caused in ME3.  Nothing done in ME2 has any real consequence, let alone a dire one in ME3.  Nothing done in ME1 or ME2 have any real impact on ME3.  These choices have impact on individual stories in some ways, but they do nothing to change what ultimately happens-the most important part of any story, the ending.  Cure or don't cure the genophage and the EMS evens out.  Save or don't save the Collector base, doesn't matter.  Rewrite the heretics?  Doesn't matter.

In fact, the list of what they decided never actually happened or what wouldn't matter is ridiculous.  They could just as easily have called ME3 some other name, like War in Space with characters with different names and players would still get the same endings as they now get, they wouldn't have needed any information from a previous game (not used anyway), because the devs meant for ME3 to basically be a standalone game.  This is the biggest lie of all-that this game was a Mass Effect game.  It wasn't.  It was one in name only.  Shepard was Shepard in name only.  And so on.  That's why the ending doesn't fit with the stories told before.

[Pinax]

Holy shnikeys wrote...

Pinax wrote...

After mining in the net today and looking for some positive argumentation on the current endings I found out that the only one that may rationally explain the "event" on the Citadel without breaking the ME lore and the feeling it is just so wrong is the IT interpretation. I do not praise here the IT, just pointing this as the most convincing logical outcome if The Citadel ending is kept in the game as it is. Otherwise, the actual Catalyst, the conversation with him and it's conclusions are, just like you very well said, a part of some story we were never told.

I personally enjoy the story of Marauder Shields. It fits better with the lore and the previous games than the current (EC included) endings ever will.

Me too, this is a version of the ending I'd love to see in the game!

What I only wanted to say is that if we analyze all the events in the game and we do not go into any fan fiction to patch the plot holes, the IT theory is the best one to logically explain what happened in the game, in line with the lore of ME series.

[Black_Ronin_8876]

I am fine with the extended cut.

What I like the most, is that there is no perfect ending. But every ending is kind of satisfying. I might explain that shortly:

Destroy: Reaper threat is gone but i sacrificed my Geth-friends
Control: Reaper threat is gone and everybody survives but I am a maniac thinking I can be God.
Synthesis: Reaper threat is gone and everybody lives happily together. But its kind of fake. Because I made that choice for everybody else and took away their free will. Many don't want to be half synthetic and others might not get over it and kill themselves.
Refusal: Thats just sad to me. I mean I had the option to save a galaxy but I didn't take the chance!?

I like that not everything is explained. I want to have some discussions about the possibilities. (to me indoctrintaion theory is not totally disproved and there are other points that can be discussed)

Now I have a little more insight of what will happen after my choice. (But it isn't an Ending like LOTR3. I was sitting in cinema 30 min after Aragorn got crowned and everything was fine. I dont care for those stupid hobbits and their chubby women and if the elves want to leave well p*** off. To me this is an example of a bad ending) 

Maybe the endings aren't different enough. All the choices I made in 3 games aren't presented one more time. But thats ok. I made those choices and they count. Just I don't see all of them in the end doesn't mean I haven't done them.

So these are some of my thoughts about the Extendet Cut. If somebody still hates those endings thats ok for me. I don't want to convince anybody, i just want to give some feedback.
Thx Bioware for a great trilogy which was filled with emotions and lots of fun to play!

PS: I see the possibility that after posting this I might be well done and not rare like before!
And please have mercy on my soul for my bad english. It's not my first language and I didn't had too much time writing this.

PPS: What would have been so great, if after killing the reaper on Rannoch (or anytime else during the campain) you as shepard could have said to the defeated reaper "Your words are as empty as your future! I am the vanguard of your destruction!" 

Modifié par Black_Ronin_8876, 11 juillet 2012 - 02:19 .

[sdinc009]

So I watched last night the X-Play review of ME 3 EC DLC, and wow. I used to have respect for them, but now not so much. In 3 minutes of review time I felt like I had to vomit up a ball of rage. Did they even play through the game? I was simply dumb struck. I've seen them give bad reviews before so WTF? Why are they calling a crap topped sundae chocolate mousse? And the repetitive mention of setting a presidence is infuriating. This in no way sets any presidence!!!! Artists, authors, musicians, playwrites, film makers, and even game developers have changed their works before so what's so earthshattering about Bioware doing the same thing that's been done since, well, FOREVER! Oh, and to set a standard for comparison, film would be considered a far more difficult storytelling medium to alter compared to video games that allow for DLC. Now, I believe most would consider Ridley Scott a great movie Director, given his track record of accomplishments, yes? Blade Runner has 7 versions!! That movie has arguably more endings than ME 3 pre-DLC and comes close post-DLC. To even make the claim that the EC DLC or even going all out and completely changing the ending sets any presidence is total BS. IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE BEFORE! So, no more respect for the gaming reviewers after this whole crap fest. I'll get my reviews straight from the horses mouth ie: the people that actually played the game without a bias.

[3DandBeyond]

Black_Ronin_8876 wrote...

I am fine with the extended cut.

What I like the most, is that there is no perfect ending. But every ending is kind of satisfying. I might explain that shortly:

Destroy: Reaper threat is gone but i sacrificed my Geth-friends
Control: Reaper threat is gone and everybody survives but I am a maniac thinking I can be God.
Synthesis: Reaper threat is gone and everybody lives happily together. But its kind of fake. Because I made that choice for everybody else and took away their free will. Many don't want to be half synthetic and others might not get over it and kill themselves.
Refusal: Thats just sad to me. I mean I had the option to save a galaxy but I didn't take the chance!?

I like that not everything is explained. I want to have some discussions about the possibilities. (to me indoctrintaion theory is not totally disproved and there are other points that can be discussed)

Now I have a little more insight of what will happen after my choice. (But it isn't an Ending like LOTR3. I was sitting in cinema 30 min after Aragorn got crowned and everything was fine. I dont care for those stupid hobbits and their chubby women and if the elves want to leave well p*** off. To me this is also a good example of a bad ending) 

Maybe the endings aren't different enough. All the choices I made in 3 games aren't presented one more time. But thats ok. I made those choices and they count. Just I don't see all of them in the end doesn't mean I haven't done them.

So these are some of my thoughts about the Extendet Cut. If somebody still hates those endings thats ok for me. I don't want to convince anybody, i just want to give some feedback.
Thx Bioware for a great trilogy which was filled with emotions and lots of fun to play!

PS: I see the possibility that after posting this I might be well done and not rare like before!
And please have mercy on my soul for my bad english. It's not my first language and I didn't have too much time writing this.

PPS: What would have been so great, if after killing the reaper on Rannoch (or anytime else during the campain) you as shepard could have said to the defeated reaper "Your words are as empty as your future! I am the vanguard of your destruction!" 

Your English is just fine.

Actually the words my Shepard said to the dying reaper I figured were pretty awesome as is-my Shepard said that synthetics and organics need not always fight each other.

I would take exception with your thinking (you have a right to it, I just don't agree) that there is no perfect ending and say there is no good ending in my opinion.  That's because the things you cite that are kind of not so good are really very bad and totally go against what all Shepards would do.  No Shepard even a renegade would want to be turned into the reaper god.  A renegade would so much want to have the power maybe but would also want to be alive to enjoy it, so forget about it.  No paragon would choose it and the things that my paragon reaper Shepard said after I tried control are definitely things no paragon Shepard would say.  It also says that people cannot be trusted to handle and determine their own future.  Why save the galaxy then?  It's not worth it if people need the reapers around to fix things and defend everyone because they can't do it on their own.

Synthesis is forced on people that may not want it-in legal terms it actually is an assault.  It is similar to control because it says people need augmentation in order to be similar to synthetics so that they won't fight with them.  Stupid.  It also assumes that everyone thinks that tech creates perfection and that everyone wants to be perfect.  Stupid.  It also is said by the kid to be inevitable-that evolution will ultimately lead to synthesis.  Stupid.  Synthetics are not naturally occurring and evolution is not going to all of a sudden meld organics and synthetics into one type of life.  I don't believe this would happen anymore than I believe that tomorrow I will be able to make toast in my ear. 

It also says that people are basically stupid and need to be artificially advanced-not a wise thing to do.  Advancing people before they are culturally ready and before it is earned causes stagnation.  The true measure of a person is in overcoming adversity-it builds character, it reinforces values, and it leads to diversity.  The last thing is what made humans (in the game) way more important than other species.  If "perfection" is achieved, there is nothing left to aim for.  But, what the hell, people are too stupid to work things out on their own so they need augmentation to perfect them.  Stupid.

Destroy.  This kills the best examples of why the kid is wrong-EDI and the geth.  A Shepard can make them be alive-or rather help them to self-determine.  This is something Control and Synthesis both say that people should not be trusted to do.  Shepard proves it is the right thing for people, the best thing for people and that it is the best way to also achieve unity, through the diversity of ideas and the choice to work together.  Destroy allows Shepard to kill the reapers (the real problem), but in so doing Shepard must kill EDI and the geth (the real solution).  Stupid.

Refusal would make the most sense if it wasn't instant death for all.  It wasn't included as a serious choice-it is there to say players are idiots if they don't like the choices that are sooooo awesome and cooool looking.  Who cares if they don't fit the rest of the story when they look cool?

Finally about LotR.  The first book, sort of a prologue to the story is The Hobbit.  But even without that, the stories are told from a Hobbit's point of view.  The elves were a big part of the story always.  So, the ending included people that were always in the story and that's a bad ending?  ME3's ending in contrast introduces a totally new character we've never seen or heard of before in any tangible way and it totally takes the player away from trying to defeat the reapers, the real foes of 3 games-the guys we were trying to get past geth and collectors to fight.

How about for an ending of LotR they just dumped everybody right in the middle of the battle for Mordor and all of a sudden an elephant was having a conversation with some circus clowns?  And the clowns say that the elephant can make a choice that determines the outcome of the story and battle.  That's what the ending of ME3 was like.

LotR ended with Hobbits and Elves and humans and the war won, lives lost, a new beginning, and so on.  It used characters and themes evident throughout the stories.  Everyone that had anything at stake in that world was there to fight and they fought.  Frodo was going away with friends and Sam returned home.  The epilogue.

ME3 should have ended with Asari, Krogan, Turians, Salarians, and all the others and with natural in game choice the war won or lost.  It should have featured war assets in real use and with interactivity it should have involved the player in those fights which also helped to determine the outcome.  And then there should have been a real epilogue with the meaning of what had happened fully explored.  Great stories do not say, "guess what happens next."  They want you to fully know what does and they push you right into that.  They also pay homage to their heroes and don't treat them like garbage at the end.  I do think that LotR would have been far less satisfying if it had merely ended with Aragorn being crowned and the Hobbits and all being honored.  It worked well to see what then happened to Sam and Frodo-it was their story more than anyone else's.  And ME3 was Shepard's story more than anyone else's, but the best that might be hoped for Shepard is to end up alone in a pile of rubble, faceless and gasping and burnt and torn.

[comrade gando]

bluestorm 83 is 100% correct on all fronts, and I'll add my voice to the rage.

These endings are pathetic, just straight up. extended cut does not make them any better, all it does is come up with some contrived explanations (and I know they're contrived because in the actual release it was just never explained, only until the fans got wind of this excuse for an ending did they do something about it) for big time gaps in the plot. You had it going so well bioware, WTF HAPPENED?! The last 20 minutes of this game is just a gang initiation of plot holes, inconsistencies, handwaving, throwing out of story elements, and overall poor story quality. You told us there wouldn't be a "reaper off" button, well there is. You told us there wouldn't be A, B, C endings, well there is. You told us the rachni would play a huge role in the ending, well they didn't. You said we'd get answers to everything, well we didn't. You said we would get closure, we didn't.

You said our choices would matter... they didn't.

And that's the worst part: my choices didn't matter. You're telling me I played through this entire trilogy just to have some random unexplained ghost punk kid with all the power in the universe apparently for no reason give me the power to alter the laws of physics and reality with zero explanation on exactly how the hell it's all happening? in the last 20 minutes!?

This is the worst ending I've ever seen in a video game. ever.

[3DandBeyond]

sdinc009 wrote...

So I watched last night the X-Play review of ME 3 EC DLC, and wow. I used to have respect for them, but now not so much. In 3 minutes of review time I felt like I had to vomit up a ball of rage. Did they even play through the game? I was simply dumb struck. I've seen them give bad reviews before so WTF? Why are they calling a crap topped sundae chocolate mousse? And the repetitive mention of setting a presidence is infuriating. This in no way sets any presidence!!!! Artists, authors, musicians, playwrites, film makers, and even game developers have changed their works before so what's so earthshattering about Bioware doing the same thing that's been done since, well, FOREVER! Oh, and to set a standard for comparison, film would be considered a far more difficult storytelling medium to alter compared to video games that allow for DLC. Now, I believe most would consider Ridley Scott a great movie Director, given his track record of accomplishments, yes? Blade Runner has 7 versions!! That movie has arguably more endings than ME 3 pre-DLC and comes close post-DLC. To even make the claim that the EC DLC or even going all out and completely changing the ending sets any presidence is total BS. IT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE BEFORE! So, no more respect for the gaming reviewers after this whole crap fest. I'll get my reviews straight from the horses mouth ie: the people that actually played the game without a bias.

They make their money by giving good reviews and they are a part of IGN which is a part of CBS Interactive which through channels has a relationship with EA games.

I'm not suggesting conspiracy theories here, but what I am saying is that xplay is like all media today.  There are a handful of companies that create all media, news, and entertainment today.  This is why almost every paid for review site gave ME3 10 out of 10 or 5 out of 5, while at the same time fans were giving it 1s and at best 3s out of 10.  The disparity speaks volumes. 

It is so true that this sets no precedent.  What it hopefully will do is get game buyers to wake up and value their money.  Game devs take them for granted and reviewers help them do it.  Paid reviewers constantly work very hard not to say games stink-big name games.  Games are apparently sacrosanct, untouchable and if changed due to fans' requests are somehow dirtied.  Except it's been done before.

It was an anomaly a few years back when a very small game was well-received by players.  Reviewers ignored it.  Fans built the hype and it started to take off and became a huge success, because of fans, not reviewers and not even the devs.  Fans. 

Fans need to make their money count and need to not allow for all games to be dumbed down just to make the jobs of paid reviewers easier.  The dumber the game, the less they need to think or care.

[3DandBeyond]

comrade gando wrote...

bluestorm 83 is 100% correct on all fronts, and I'll add my voice to the rage.

These endings are pathetic, just straight up. extended cut does not make them any better, all it does is come up with some contrived explanations (and I know they're contrived because in the actual release it was just never explained, only until the fans got wind of this excuse for an ending did they do something about it) for big time gaps in the plot. You had it going so well bioware, WTF HAPPENED?! The last 20 minutes of this game is just a gang initiation of plot holes, inconsistencies, handwaving, throwing out of story elements, and overall poor story quality. You told us there wouldn't be a "reaper off" button, well there is. You told us there wouldn't be A, B, C endings, well there is. You told us the rachni would play a huge role in the ending, well they didn't. You said we'd get answers to everything, well we didn't. You said we would get closure, we didn't.

You said our choices would matter... they didn't.

And that's the worst part: my choices didn't matter. You're telling me I played through this entire trilogy just to have some random unexplained ghost punk kid with all the power in the universe apparently for no reason give me the power to alter the laws of physics and reality with zero explanation on exactly how the hell it's all happening? in the last 20 minutes!?

This is the worst ending I've ever seen in a video game. ever.

In many ways the EC makes the endings worse.  It shows they really had no explanation as to what some things meant and they did just take what people thought they might mean and used that-what it looks like they did is they created a bare minimum ending and said it was intellectual and left room for speculation.  So, they created a clusterf***k.  People began to say, "it's stupid and it probably means xyz."  The writers then cherry picked what sounded cool to them from what fans said, and went with it.  It's obvious.  That Joker running away and having teammembers on the jungle planet scene was so ridiculous and couldn't be fixed, so they did fundamentally change it.  That means they had no clear idea of what they were trying to say about it.

Same thing with Hackett contacting Shepard on the radio.  Same thing with Shepard standing there listening to a pile of crap and then taking some stupid pill and never refuting what the kid says. 

They then released the EC and only added explanations (excuses) and answered questions that never challenged what they seemed to be trying to say-people are idiots that will never learn to get along (with synthetics) no matter what.  They have no original ideas and need to be fed reaper tech forever or be changed by reaper tech or kill those that show this isn't true.  Because they are stupid.  How do we know they are stupid?  Because the main character of 3 games that was not introduced until the very end of the last game says so.  And because he is so intelligent and wise and honorable, he should know so we should of course just accept him with open arms-forget about even trying to prove that you are even stupider by shooting this great "hero" of all Mass Effect or by denying that his choices are super smart and fix everything.  You want to be smart, don't you?  Make a choice so that EA can upload your data and let Bioware know just how intellectual you are.

Yay, I got to play a game about just how stupid and futile everyone and everything is.  Where can I buy more like this?

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 11 juillet 2012 - 03:42 .

[Black_Ronin_8876]

3DandBeyond wrote...

I do think that LotR would have been far less satisfying if it had merely ended with Aragorn being crowned and the Hobbits and all being honored.  It worked well to see what then happened to Sam and Frodo-it was their story more than anyone else's.  And ME3 was Shepard's story more than anyone else's, but the best that might be hoped for Shepard is to end up alone in a pile of rubble, faceless and gasping and burnt and torn.

Thats exactly where I disagree. I don't want that kind of nice ending. I fought the most horrible war ever and thats why the ending needs to have this bitter taste.

ME and ME3 especially is more like a Greek Tragedy and it fits my feelings I have about it. The Hero has tried everything to achieve the best outcome but in the end he has only achieved choices which are imperfect. He made sacrifices along the way hoping that these will make the outcome good. But at the end of the road all his options are flawed. Like you said, the best outcome is that he ends up in a
pile of rubble gasping for air. Thats perfect to me! I don't want to be that shining hero. I hope that Shepard dies in this humiliating way. He did the greatest and got the worst. Thats tragedy (sadly thats often life).

In short: IMO the ending of  LotR was too long and too fabulous. ME3 with the extended cut is adequate in length and dark enough. Which is contrary to your opinion .

Concerning the importance of war assets for the outcome I am totally with you. They should be more crucial for the outcome, espacially some choices from ME1 and 2. But if they were, you would p*** off your new customers. So there is a compromise needed. Definitely there are some downsides with it.

The statement "Great stories do not say, "guess what happens next."" is not 100% true but neither is the opposite. I have read and seen many great stories which leave you kind of alone with the answers.

[G00N3R7883]

My extended cut feedback is a bit late, because I used it as an excuse to play through the entire series from start to finish. And I basically cut myself off from the forums for a fortnight to avoid spoilers, so I don't know what the overall reaction has been.

I'm fairly satisfied with the endings now. I mean they're not perfect (for example I'll always wish that the War Assets could have been used in a similar way to the ME2 suicide mission and I still don't like how the entire plot changes in the last 5 minutes because of the starkid) but at least they're not full of plot holes anymore.

My main problems pre-extended cut were
- lack of companion closure, specifically that I didn't even know if they survived or not.
- plot hole regarding relays destruction should mean all life in the galaxy has been wiped out.
- movements of the Normandy was unclear
- just the atmosphere of the ending

And now
- Companions have closure because of seeing them alive on the Normandy or in the slides.
- The relays are now "damaged" rather than "destroyed".
- We see Shepard call in the Normandy to extract companions, we see the Normandy at the Crucible, we see Hackett order the retreat ... it all flows so much better now*,
- The speeches from Hackett/Shepard/Edi give us an upbeat victory celebration, while at the same time the Normandy memorial scene gives us that bittersweet remembering the fallen moment as well. The whole thing is much more emotionally fulfilling.

*The only problem I have now with the Normandy is that the conduit approach feels a bit wierd when we've got Shepard standing still in the middle of a warzone, having a casual conversation with 2 squadmates while Harbinger is blowing stuff up all around (but conveniently not shooting the Normandy which is at this point a stationary target). But whatever, I can live with it.

I also appreciate the fact that Starkid now gives more information about his origin and the choices. Its not a big deal for me personally because my Shepards will always pick destroy no matter what the leader of the enemy says. But from a technical point of view, more information is good for the player.

Oh and it seems like the 4000EMS multiplayer issue has been resolved because I got the breath scene even though I was nowhere near a perfect run and I've never played multiplayer. So that's satisfying as well.

Modifié par G00N3R7883, 11 juillet 2012 - 04:37 .

[sdinc009]

http://blogs.bettor....-Update-a170192