4048 réponses à ce sujet

[ZombieGambit]

I abstained from playing the EC after it was released because I wanted to start a new character and "do it right". I was not disappointed. I already thought the original ending was great, but this DLC tied up a few lingering questions and made it that much better.

It was fantastic, thank you, BioWare.

[3DandBeyond]

_ThePaSch_ wrote...

BW go out of their way to basically create a new ending that shows the aftermath, the crew's fate, doesn't leave the Normandy stranded anymore AND retcons the relays being destroyed... and of course, there are still people moaning and complaining about it. Wow.

I was very disappointed with the original ending(s). Now, I just played the EC, and I really like it! The endings now actually differ, show the impact of your choices, adapt to your personal story. Sure, they don't branch into, like, a billion different ways, based on how many drinks you decided to drink in the Normandy or on the Citadel, or whatever. But I find it to be a huge improvement over the color filters of the original endings.

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...

He could just tell his Reapers to start helping everyone and share their vast knowledge and hand out flowers like the Control ending. Or he could just push his little self-destruct button and blow up all his Reaper buddies like Destroy. Anything would be better than the solution that won't work anymore.

Why should he? It's not in his interest to help the organics in any way. All he cares about is how to stop the "chaos".
Basically, all he's saying is "If you have a better idea, go ahead and try. But I'll stay out of it - you will have brought whatever happens upon yourself." You refuse to do anything? Don't want to choose? "Fine. Then I'll decide - and since you didn't have any better ideas, I might as well continue doing what I have been doing."
What I actually find weird is his "My solution does not work anymore". Why wouldn't it work anymore? Wipe 'em all out, process the organics into a Reaper and let the new species go their merry way. They'll evolve, create new synthetics, they'll turn against them and then it's reaping time again. Yes, in the current cycle, synthetics and organics ARE fighting alongside each other - that's why he gives Shepard a choice in the first place.

People are pissed about how Shepard doesn't survive. Well, that's fine, your opinion, but I don't care too much - he sacrifices his life so the galaxy may live. Whether he decides to control, to destroy or to "combine", he dies a heroic death to save his friends, squadmates and basically every single life in the galaxy.

My problem with the original ending was that it didn't give closure at all. You sacrifice yourself to destroy the reapers, but that results in the destruction of the Mass Relays, blowing entire systems to hell and stranding every fleet in the Sol system. You sacrifice yourself to control the reapers, but that results in the destruction of the Mass Relays, blowing entire systems to hell and stranding every fleet in the Sol system. You choose synthesis, sacrifice yourself, but that results in the destruction of the Mass Relays, blowing entire systems to hell and stranding every fleet in the Sol system. What?!

The Extended Cut added that closure. You see the inhabitants of the galaxy work together to rebuild what has been lost. You see them triumph, celebrate. You see them flourish. And you see them honor Shepard as the hero, the martyr, who made that all possible.

The EC only works in comparison to the original endings.  And understand this-BW didn't go out of their way to make it just for fun.  They did it because of real concerns that must have existed as it relates to profitability.

Your complaints over the original endings were only a small part of what was considered to be wrong with them.  The insertion of a completely new antagonist at the end was a major concern as well as endings that didn't fit with choices made all along the way.  On top of that was the insertion of artificial choices that had nothing to do with how you played the game.  None of that has changed.

I didn't particularly need clarity and explanation for something that was awful to begin with.  In fact, explaining it made it all more awful to me, because it solidifies the idea that someone thought this was good.

Casey Hudson said the EC didn't fundamentally change anything and he's right.  All we have are more words, slideshows and lots more colors.  Oh, and incredibly ridiculous retconning of things that in some places are more ridiculous.

Horrid choices that Shepard could reject throughout the game now are options that Shepard must pick in order to solve his enemy's problem.  And the game ends the conflict with a conversation with the biggest mass murderer of all time-Shepard making a choice is tacitly agreeing with this murderer.

You even say it, the kid isn't there to help organics.  Of course he isn't.  He even indicates when he describes Synthesis that he believes (though he states it as truth) that organics seek perfection through tech.  Seems pretty clear he thinks people want to be like "him".  He's been attempting synthesis that has not worked, so he thinks the ultimate eventual "end" to evolution is something he "likes".  Again, kind of full of himself. 

And sacrifice or martyrdom for the good of the galaxy?  Well, you might want to look over just what good was done.  Control-reapers live, police the galaxy, wipe out conflict, repair and create things like relays.  What conflict will they be wiping out?  Which "many" will they serve.  And with reapers creating tech and as overseers why would people need to learn to do anything for themselves?  All tech always had been based on reaper tech-people never developed anything independently.  And yes, everyone should be all smiles since they now have reaper neighbors that have people goo in them (maybe a family member) and husks and other creatures running around.  Fun times.  It also sounds very ominous and my paragon Shepard said things no paragon would.  Shepard is no longer Shepard.

Synthesis is not a win, not unless you think everyone would be overjoyed to be artificially augmented with tech at a possible molecular level.  And early advancement of people never caused any problems before in the game, did it?  Ever hear of the Krogan?  And all advancement imparted is again based upon reaper tech and not on anything independently created by people-stuff not based on reaper tech.  It's also forced on people without consent.

Destroy is an incomprehensible mess.  No one can say definitively what it will do based on what the kid says because what he says is contradictory and senseless.  And Shepard's sacrifice, well is ambiguous.  EDI and the geth however are no longer considered people and are expendable.  If they were humans and Shepard had the choice of killing all humans to save the rest of the galaxy, I daresay people would think far differently about it.

And Refuse is the only ending that allows for the idea of self-determination, self-reliance, and doesn't require capitulation with the enemy.  It also seeks to leave people's bodies, minds, and souls intact, and it needs to be punished.  This is demented.  All the endings are actually punishment.  You decide you want the galaxy to survive so you must punish the galaxy for that. 

But what BW did is to sugar coat really horrific ideas and show "happy" scenes at the end and rewrite all the destruction so it's destruction lite and it's acceptable.  A Shepard lives scene is too sappy sweet for many because this is dark and war is hell, but the utopia scenes at the end of 3 choices and refuse is not too sappy sweet at all?  Especially when Shepard just actualy condemned the galaxy and didn't save it.

And if you do compare the EC again to ME1 and 2 and even major parts of ME3, it still does not fit because it ignores the major themes throughout the game and uses one very minor issue that is even poignantly solved in ME3.

The goal of ME1, 2, and parts of 3-unite the galaxy (including synthetics and organics if possible) to destroy the reapers.
The goal of ME3's ending-have one person help solve the enemy's problem of inevitable war between synthetics and organics).

These are the major things as I see it that still exist upon which the awful choices are based:

The kid's solution so far to help find peace has been to create war, to prevent conflict where synthetics will destroy organics he has sent synthetics to destroy organics, to rid the galaxy of chaos he has created chaos.  And in order to ensure that organics will never advance far enough to create synthetics that might destroy them, he has seeded the galaxy with tech that will help organics advance and create synthetics that he thinks might destroy them.  And where synthetics are not advancing themselves with the idea to destroy organics, he has had reapers change their programming so they want to destroy organics.  This is pure logic.

[SimonM72]

Thanks for the extended Cut fix;

In my opinion it does save the trilogy and makes it replayable again, essential for repeat interest.
It didn't embrace the Indocrination Theory, a shame in my opinion considering all the build-up of lore of Indocrination over the trilogy. It would of been one of (if not THE) greatest mindf*ck in videogame history, so thats a shame, along with no little blue babies (potentially i really wanted to see Shepard's and Liara's daughter).

But the extended cut is adequate, I'm not wild over a montage of still artwork over FMV scenes that you could of worked up with more time / effort, but it will do, it saves the trilogy and makes it replayable again and your choices making a difference, and thats what was important - so thank you.

[Dr. Megaverse]

3DandBeyond wrote...

_ThePaSch_ wrote...
BW go out of their way to basically create a new ending that shows the aftermath, the crew's fate, doesn't leave the Normandy stranded anymore AND retcons the relays being destroyed... and of course, there are still people moaning and complaining about it. Wow.
I was very disappointed with the original ending(s). Now, I just played the EC, and I really like it! The endings now actually differ, show the impact of your choices, adapt to your personal story. Sure, they don't branch into, like, a billion different ways, based on how many drinks you decided to drink in the Normandy or on the Citadel, or whatever. But I find it to be a huge improvement over the color filters of the original endings.

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...
He could just tell his Reapers to start helping everyone and share their vast knowledge and hand out flowers like the Control ending. Or he could just push his little self-destruct button and blow up all his Reaper buddies like Destroy. Anything would be better than the solution that won't work anymore.

Why should he? It's not in his interest to help the organics in any way. All he cares about is how to stop the "chaos".Basically, all he's saying is "If you have a better idea, go ahead and try. But I'll stay out of it - you will have brought whatever happens upon yourself." You refuse to do anything? Don't want to choose? "Fine. Then I'll decide - and since you didn't have any better ideas, I might as well continue doing what I have been doing."What I actually find weird is his "My solution does not work anymore". Why wouldn't it work anymore? Wipe 'em all out, process the organics into a Reaper and let the new species go their merry way. They'll evolve, create new synthetics, they'll turn against them and then it's reaping time again. Yes, in the current cycle, synthetics and organics ARE fighting alongside each other - that's why he gives Shepard a choice in the first place.
People are pissed about how Shepard doesn't survive. Well, that's fine, your opinion, but I don't care too much - he sacrifices his life so the galaxy may live. Whether he decides to control, to destroy or to "combine", he dies a heroic death to save his friends, squadmates and basically every single life in the galaxy.
My problem with the original ending was that it didn't give closure at all. You sacrifice yourself to destroy the reapers, but that results in the destruction of the Mass Relays, blowing entire systems to hell and stranding every fleet in the Sol system. You sacrifice yourself to control the reapers, but that results in the destruction of the Mass Relays, blowing entire systems to hell and stranding every fleet in the Sol system. You choose synthesis, sacrifice yourself, but that results in the destruction of the Mass Relays, blowing entire systems to hell and stranding every fleet in the Sol system. What?!
The Extended Cut added that closure. You see the inhabitants of the galaxy work together to rebuild what has been lost. You see them triumph, celebrate. You see them flourish. And you see them honor Shepard as the hero, the martyr, who made that all possible.

The EC only works in comparison to the original endings.  And understand this-BW didn't go out of their way to make it just for fun.  They did it because of real concerns that must have existed as it relates to profitability.
Your complaints over the original endings were only a small part of what was considered to be wrong with them.  The insertion of a completely new antagonist at the end was a major concern as well as endings that didn't fit with choices made all along the way.  On top of that was the insertion of artificial choices that had nothing to do with how you played the game.  None of that has changed.
I didn't particularly need clarity and explanation for something that was awful to begin with.  In fact, explaining it made it all more awful to me, because it solidifies the idea that someone thought this was good.
Casey Hudson said the EC didn't fundamentally change anything and he's right.  All we have are more words, slideshows and lots more colors.  Oh, and incredibly ridiculous retconning of things that in some places are more ridiculous.
Horrid choices that Shepard could reject throughout the game now are options that Shepard must pick in order to solve his enemy's problem.  And the game ends the conflict with a conversation with the biggest mass murderer of all time-Shepard making a choice is tacitly agreeing with this murderer.
You even say it, the kid isn't there to help organics.  Of course he isn't.  He even indicates when he describes Synthesis that he believes (though he states it as truth) that organics seek perfection through tech.  Seems pretty clear he thinks people want to be like "him".  He's been attempting synthesis that has not worked, so he thinks the ultimate eventual "end" to evolution is something he "likes".  Again, kind of full of himself.  
And sacrifice or martyrdom for the good of the galaxy?  Well, you might want to look over just what good was done.  Control-reapers live, police the galaxy, wipe out conflict, repair and create things like relays.  What conflict will they be wiping out?  Which "many" will they serve.  And with reapers creating tech and as overseers why would people need to learn to do anything for themselves?  All tech always had been based on reaper tech-people never developed anything independently.  And yes, everyone should be all smiles since they now have reaper neighbors that have people goo in them (maybe a family member) and husks and other creatures running around.  Fun times.  It also sounds very ominous and my paragon Shepard said things no paragon would.  Shepard is no longer Shepard.
Synthesis is not a win, not unless you think everyone would be overjoyed to be artificially augmented with tech at a possible molecular level.  And early advancement of people never caused any problems before in the game, did it?  Ever hear of the Krogan?  And all advancement imparted is again based upon reaper tech and not on anything independently created by people-stuff not based on reaper tech.  It's also forced on people without consent.
Destroy is an incomprehensible mess.  No one can say definitively what it will do based on what the kid says because what he says is contradictory and senseless.  And Shepard's sacrifice, well is ambiguous.  EDI and the geth however are no longer considered people and are expendable.  If they were humans and Shepard had the choice of killing all humans to save the rest of the galaxy, I daresay people would think far differently about it.
And Refuse is the only ending that allows for the idea of self-determination, self-reliance, and doesn't require capitulation with the enemy.  It also seeks to leave people's bodies, minds, and souls intact, and it needs to be punished.  This is demented.  All the endings are actually punishment.  You decide you want the galaxy to survive so you must punish the galaxy for that.  
But what BW did is to sugar coat really horrific ideas and show "happy" scenes at the end and rewrite all the destruction so it's destruction lite and it's acceptable.  A Shepard lives scene is too sappy sweet for many because this is dark and war is hell, but the utopia scenes at the end of 3 choices and refuse is not too sappy sweet at all?  Especially when Shepard just actualy condemned the galaxy and didn't save it.
And if you do compare the EC again to ME1 and 2 and even major parts of ME3, it still does not fit because it ignores the major themes throughout the game and uses one very minor issue that is even poignantly solved in ME3.
The goal of ME1, 2, and parts of 3-unite the galaxy (including synthetics and organics if possible) to destroy the reapers.The goal of ME3's ending-have one person help solve the enemy's problem of inevitable war between synthetics and organics).
These are the major things as I see it that still exist upon which the awful choices are based:
The kid's solution so far to help find peace has been to create war, to prevent conflict where synthetics will destroy organics he has sent synthetics to destroy organics, to rid the galaxy of chaos he has created chaos.  And in order to ensure that organics will never advance far enough to create synthetics that might destroy them, he has seeded the galaxy with tech that will help organics advance and create synthetics that he thinks might destroy them.  And where synthetics are not advancing themselves with the idea to destroy organics, he has had reapers change their programming so they want to destroy organics.  This is pure logic.

Well said!  Especially:

3DandBeyond wrote...
And if you do compare the EC again to ME1 and 2 and even major parts of ME3, it still does not fit because it ignores the major themes throughout the game and uses one very minor issue that is even poignantly solved in ME3.

The whole Geth/Quarrian storyline, which was so beautifully crafted, seems almost like an exercise in futility in the way it's relevance was casually tossed aside in favor of the Catalyst's broken logic. 

[V-rcingetorix]

@EXMugamy

The Leviathan DLC is not supposed to "change the endings." IGN originally stated that the Leviathan ending would "change the ending," but BioWare requested they retract such a statement and instead state that there would be "additional dialogue."

[sdinc009]

Sovereign330 wrote...

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...

The refuse/reject ending is particularly comical. After proclaimimg with his drama that Shepard's success in arriving on the Citadel means "my solution [the Reapers] won't work anymore," if you refuse to make a choice, the Star Kid says "So be it" and then "The Cycle continues." But I thought you just said your solution won't work anymore. Oh yeah, you're an idiot.

The reason the Catalyst reverted back to its original solution was because even though it was exposed to new possibilities, shep (the only person there at the time who could enact a new solution) chose not to. hence why the catalyst deemed the proper course of action to resume harvest

So a million year old AI that states that it's solution won't work anymore chooses to continue a course of action that itself acknowledges won't work instead of picking the choices itself presents? Yup, we're going full retard logic now!

[V-rcingetorix]

EC...interesting. Overall makes it better, but not good. Missed opportunities, I'll make a list for potential writers making DLC.

1. Indoctrination: This could've been used to show that Shepard, in the last few missions, has been fighting for the wrong side, and only the extreme efforts of his squad saves him. Better heads than mine have worked out other potentials with this particular practice.

2. Crucible: This is the biggest tactical advantage in the history of the Reapers, and it's ignored. It's like finding a room temperature super-conductor, and using it to make non-stick cooking implements.

3. Cerberus: Evil, yes. My Shepard hated Cerberus from ME1 on out. But it was a little sudden, going from "saving the colonies" to harvest the colonies.

4. Harbinger: Harbinger was the new Sovereign after ME2. We loved to hate him, he was the big baddie, the kahuna of Reapers, the Emperor of Evil. He gets only one line? "So Be It?" What kind of come down is that after his threats all throughout ME2?

5. Geth: Really under-utilized here. I see Krogan, Asari, Salarian and human forces in London, but no Geth. I don't see the Geth fleet coming to save Earth (incoming fleet scene was downright EPIC btw), and I don't hear much of anything about Geth ground forces other than a Crucible reference and an e-mail from a soldier who was freaked out by a Geth Prime.

6. Thanix Cannon: This thing should be on every Dreadnought and Frigate, if not on everything that has wings and a rocket engine. Manufacturing a few thousand of these babies are what "industrial colonies" are for, and what Councilor Udina promises to do right at the very beginning.

7. Heavy Weapons: I can see why they aren't used so much in ME3, but wouldn't having a biotic squad armed with maybe a few pistols and 10-12 CAIN launchers be a highly potent force against ANY Reaper force? A Cain took down a Hades Cannon, big as it is, why aren't there more of them around?

8. ME2 squad: There was a missed opportunity with the lack of ME2 squadmates. They had a great deal of backstory already present, and needed only a little more to keep current with ME3...and nothing. Two or three scenes (four if you count Miranda) and the squad that was the backbone of the Suicide Mission in ME2 is done.

These all combined with the ending to make the game less than it could've been. But, maybe these are just future DLC (hint hint)? Hope so.

[EXMugamy]

Why Harbinger says "Serve us" or something like this?? And why 1M1 appearance in the citadel??

[.50CalBrainSurgeon]

3DandBeyond wrote...


And sacrifice or martyrdom for the good of the galaxy?  Well, you might want to look over just what good was done.  Control-reapers live, police the galaxy, wipe out conflict, repair and create things like relays.  What conflict will they be wiping out?  Which "many" will they serve.  And with reapers creating tech and as overseers why would people need to learn to do anything for themselves?  All tech always had been based on reaper tech-people never developed anything independently.  And yes, everyone should be all smiles since they now have reaper neighbors that have people goo in them (maybe a family member) and husks and other creatures running around.  Fun times.  It also sounds very ominous and my paragon Shepard said things no paragon would.  Shepard is no longer Shepard.

Synthesis is not a win, not unless you think everyone would be overjoyed to be artificially augmented with tech at a possible molecular level.  And early advancement of people never caused any problems before in the game, did it?  Ever hear of the Krogan?  And all advancement imparted is again based upon reaper tech and not on anything independently created by people-stuff not based on reaper tech.  It's also forced on people without consent.

Destroy is an incomprehensible mess.  No one can say definitively what it will do based on what the kid says because what he says is contradictory and senseless.  And Shepard's sacrifice, well is ambiguous.  EDI and the geth however are no longer considered people and are expendable.  If they were humans and Shepard had the choice of killing all humans to save the rest of the galaxy, I daresay people would think far differently about it.

And Refuse is the only ending that allows for the idea of self-determination, self-reliance, and doesn't require capitulation with the enemy.  It also seeks to leave people's bodies, minds, and souls intact, and it needs to be punished.  This is demented.  All the endings are actually punishment.  You decide you want the galaxy to survive so you must punish the galaxy for that. 

But what BW did is to sugar coat really horrific ideas and show "happy" scenes at the end and rewrite all the destruction so it's destruction lite and it's acceptable.  A Shepard lives scene is too sappy sweet for many because this is dark and war is hell, but the utopia scenes at the end of 3 choices and refuse is not too sappy sweet at all?  Especially when Shepard just actualy condemned the galaxy and didn't save it.

And if you do compare the EC again to ME1 and 2 and even major parts of ME3, it still does not fit because it ignores the major themes throughout the game and uses one very minor issue that is even poignantly solved in ME3.

The goal of ME1, 2, and parts of 3-unite the galaxy (including synthetics and organics if possible) to destroy the reapers.
The goal of ME3's ending-have one person help solve the enemy's problem of inevitable war between synthetics and organics).

These are the major things as I see it that still exist upon which the awful choices are based:

The kid's solution so far to help find peace has been to create war, to prevent conflict where synthetics will destroy organics he has sent synthetics to destroy organics, to rid the galaxy of chaos he has created chaos.  And in order to ensure that organics will never advance far enough to create synthetics that might destroy them, he has seeded the galaxy with tech that will help organics advance and create synthetics that he thinks might destroy them.  And where synthetics are not advancing themselves with the idea to destroy organics, he has had reapers change their programming so they want to destroy organics.  This is pure logic.

Initially I was appalled by the original ending. However, with the extended cut ending, I actually found the Control and Destroy endings acceptable.

Control is too often associated with the goals of the Illusive Man: dominance and subjugation. However, I belive that Shepard's idea of control is completey different from TIM's idea. Shepard only takes control of the Reapers to stop their harvest of sentient life. I view the Control ending from a very libertarian perspective: Shepard only takes control of the Reapers so that organic and synthetic life can have free will and self-determination. Throughout the series, Shepard has championed individuality and free will, and I doubt he/she would use the Reapers to micromanage the future of galactic society.  If his/her mindset is intact after taking control of the Reapers, I suspect he/she would still hold these philosophical ideas, even in thew new form of a bunch of extra-galactic death squids. 

The Destroy ending is also equally acceptable. A common arguement I have seen agains the destruction arguement is that Shepard is commiting xenocide against synthetics. However, the destruction ending is a sure-fire way to end the Reaper threat once and for all. The death of synthetic life in this situation can be seen as "the cold hard calculus of war." Earlier in the game, Shepard discusses this prospect with Garrus and they both realize that the victory against the Reapers will involve the sacrifice of billions, in this case synthetics. It is a grim ending, but justifiable given the desperation and constraints involved with fighting the overwhelming and technologically superior Reapers. 

Although I support the new Control/Destroy endings, I still find the Synthesis ending to be an unrealisitic and unbelievable crock of ****. It is simply too utopian and idealistic to somehow believe that placing green circuits into organic life gives them understanding of synthetic minds. Not to mention the ability to modify all organic life on a whim is outside the realm of the believable within Mass Effect canon. 

The endings are not optimal. Shepard dies in Control and doesn't get to retire to a tropical island with his/her love interest. The Reapers are destroyed in the Destroy ending, but so too are other synthetics. However, consider this: when was the last time a confllict on the scale of the Reaper war had an optimal ending? 

These are my personal thoughts and imputs into the matter. I would appreciate it if debate, controversey and discussion were kept civil. Thank you. 

[3DandBeyond]

.50CalBrainSurgeon wrote...


Initially I was appalled by the original ending. However, with the extended cut ending, I actually found the Control and Destroy endings acceptable.

Control is too often associated with the goals of the Illusive Man: dominance and subjugation. However, I belive that Shepard's idea of control is completey different from TIM's idea. Shepard only takes control of the Reapers to stop their harvest of sentient life. I view the Control ending from a very libertarian perspective: Shepard only takes control of the Reapers so that organic and synthetic life can have free will and self-determination. Throughout the series, Shepard has championed individuality and free will, and I doubt he/she would use the Reapers to micromanage the future of galactic society.  If his/her mindset is intact after taking control of the Reapers, I suspect he/she would still hold these philosophical ideas, even in thew new form of a bunch of extra-galactic death squids. 

The Destroy ending is also equally acceptable. A common arguement I have seen agains the destruction arguement is that Shepard is commiting xenocide against synthetics. However, the destruction ending is a sure-fire way to end the Reaper threat once and for all. The death of synthetic life in this situation can be seen as "the cold hard calculus of war." Earlier in the game, Shepard discusses this prospect with Garrus and they both realize that the victory against the Reapers will involve the sacrifice of billions, in this case synthetics. It is a grim ending, but justifiable given the desperation and constraints involved with fighting the overwhelming and technologically superior Reapers. 

Although I support the new Control/Destroy endings, I still find the Synthesis ending to be an unrealisitic and unbelievable crock of ****. It is simply too utopian and idealistic to somehow believe that placing green circuits into organic life gives them understanding of synthetic minds. Not to mention the ability to modify all organic life on a whim is outside the realm of the believable within Mass Effect canon. 

The endings are not optimal. Shepard dies in Control and doesn't get to retire to a tropical island with his/her love interest. The Reapers are destroyed in the Destroy ending, but so too are other synthetics. However, consider this: when was the last time a confllict on the scale of the Reaper war had an optimal ending? 

These are my personal thoughts and imputs into the matter. I would appreciate it if debate, controversey and discussion were kept civil. Thank you. 

Where was I uncivil?  I appreciate it when someone actually explains what they like and not just calls anyone else an idiot, self-entitled, whiner, or many of the even worse names I see innocent comments garner.  If I seemed to be less than civil there was no intent, but based on what I've seen said to people and had said to me, nothing I said rises to any such level as that.  I even had someone once imply I am an idiot because I don't know what suicide means-I had to inform this individual that my sister committed suicide so yes, I do know.  So, really I prefer civil myself.  People on here feel they can say anything to anyone.  If perhaps you think it uncivil to form questions that are directed back, they are not meant that way but are actually part rhetorical because I am finding the game at fault and not you or anyone else.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 09 août 2012 - 05:49 .

[.50CalBrainSurgeon]

I didn't mean to imply you were uncivil. My apologies. I've just seen other people start rude flame wars. Your arguement was valid and civil. We may disagree, but at least we've kept the discussion on reasonable ground. 

Modifié par .50CalBrainSurgeon, 09 août 2012 - 06:20 .

[3DandBeyond]

.50CalBrainSurgeon wrote...

I didn't mean to imply you were uncivil. My apologies. I've just seen other people start rude flame wars. Your arguement was valid and civil. We may disagree, but at least we've kept the discussion on reasonable ground. 

No problem.  I do like respectful discussion.  All is opinion.  And often the problem is the insult is directed at an idea formed in the game (what I take issue with) and not any person's opinion of it.  We see things from different perspectives (what Legion might appreciate), many eyes viewing the same thing. 

The endings become such a hot button issue because real emotions are evoked within the game.  We simply have loved some things.  I loved Shepard the most.  I didn't ever expect super silly happiness, but would have liked closure for My Shep.  Shepard is the player's avatar-the player in the game.  BW knew and said people would be unhappy to see Shep go-the end of the story arc.  This means they knew not providing every type of appropriate ending would leave some people hurt and angry.  That is, sure some Shepard dies, Shepard sacrifices, all is lost endings, but one possible decent goodbye ending.  A real face to face kind of moment where we can imagine hard times ahead and maybe eventual happiness, but a win for now, a smile for friends, and a goodbye to players that really enjoyed the ride.  If Bioware was to understand one thing about the game it was the tie people had to Shepard.

The face import bug really got people up in arms, youtube videos of people's own Shepards acting out in the game, and different websites where people posted their face codes so others could try different Shepards.  Shepard mattered to a lot of people.  And no one ever said they only wanted one ending with victory and Shepard running around in daisy fields.  They wanted and were told there'd be a wide variety of endings, and because people are different, many just plain needed a happier ending.  The galaxy is in pieces and needs fixing, but one brief scene of Shepard alive and recovering.

The torso scene makes no sense.  The dialogue for it, the kid explaining it is ambiguous.  The scene BW now says is ambiguous so people can imagine if Shepard lives or dies.  It's basically a joke.  So, people that did need something better still don't have an end to their game.  I'm one of those and it's really sad that it comes down to how little I'd now be willing to have added to it to make it passable.  The rest is ridiculous to me and no way to end a game and story that was about unity and perseverance. 

[comrade gando]

I heard leviathan wont fix that train wreck of an ending. So that dlc is about as useless as boobs on a bull.

[comrade gando]

I heard leviathan wont fix that train wreck of an ending. So that dlc is about as useless as boobs on a bull.

[comrade gando]

I heard leviathan wont fix that train wreck of an ending. So that dlc is about as useless as boobs on a bull.

[Eretikas]

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...
Or he could just push his little self-destruct button and blow up all his Reaper buddies like Destroy.

Probably he tried, but failed because ghosts can't push buttons. If Shepard refuses to press the button then ghost must wait another 50 000 years for control panel to open so he can invite somebody else who is made from the matter. Basically, this entire massacre, which spreads through countless cycles, continues because glow stick boy can’t convince anybody to press that damn button.

I think this video is appropriate (Shepard could perform same moves before choosing refusal option ):
http://www.youtube.c...AkqCls4A#t=0m7s

Modifié par Eretikas, 09 août 2012 - 08:08 .

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

_ThePaSch_ wrote...

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...

He could just tell his Reapers to start helping everyone and share their vast knowledge and hand out flowers like the Control ending. Or he could just push his little self-destruct button and blow up all his Reaper buddies like Destroy. Anything would be better than the solution that won't work anymore.

Why should he? It's not in his interest to help the organics in any way. All he cares about is how to stop the "chaos".
Basically, all he's saying is "If you have a better idea, go ahead and try. But I'll stay out of it - you will have brought whatever happens upon yourself." You refuse to do anything? Don't want to choose? "Fine. Then I'll decide - and since you didn't have any better ideas, I might as well continue doing what I have been doing."
What I actually find weird is his "My solution does not work anymore". Why wouldn't it work anymore? Wipe 'em all out, process the organics into a Reaper and let the new species go their merry way. They'll evolve, create new synthetics, they'll turn against them and then it's reaping time again. Yes, in the current cycle, synthetics and organics ARE fighting alongside each other - that's why he gives Shepard a choice in the first place.

If that is the case (that, regarding Star Kid, "It's not in his interest to help organics in any way."), then why would he offer the Destroy ending?  Doesn't that leave ONLY organics?  So if he is willing to allow only organics to survive, then go ahead, push your self destruct button.  Or, if you can't push buttons because you are a ghost kid, tell Harbinger to push the button, or send some husk you created from an organic to do it.  After all, we need to listen to the Star Kid, he really just wants to fix the "chaos" and he's doing oh so very well at it.

No living Shepard, no single player DLC for me.  Unless BioWare learns (like every other business) that betraying your customers comes with a price, you can't expect to get the gaming experiences you want.  If game companies believe that they can just co-opt the game press, launch advertising stunts and the sales will follow regardless of the quality of the game and narrative, the number of truly rewarding game experiences will become increasingly rare.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

Eretikas wrote...

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...
Or he could just push his little self-destruct button and blow up all his Reaper buddies like Destroy.

Probably he tried, but failed because ghosts can't push buttons. If Shepard refuses to press the button then ghost must wait another 50 000 years for control panel to open so he can invite somebody else who is made from the matter. Basically, this entire massacre, which spreads through countless cycles, continues because glow stick boy can’t convince anybody to press that damn button.

I think this video is appropriate (Shepard could perform same moves before choosing refusal option ):
http://www.youtube.c...AkqCls4A#t=0m7s

LOL.  The Broke Brother himself, MC Hammer!  Awesome.  Frankly, that isn't a bad head canon (since that's all Bioware gave us anyway).  Plus, it would show Shepard's growth in an area that is all too often overlooked--his dancing.  Perhaps the "chaos" Star Brat was referencing was really Shepard's dancing in ME1 and ME2.  Then, after seeing Shepard's Hammertime moves he might just give up, figuring that the Universe was finally perfect.

Hammer might have been financially bankrupt, but never as bankrupt as the narrative plot surrounding the Star Kid.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

comrade gando wrote...

I heard leviathan wont fix that train wreck of an ending. So that dlc is about as useless as boobs on a bull.

Agreed.  Useless.  You still end up with one of the only two ending that make any sense.  Refuse or the rubble pile.  Doesn't matter what you do or what happens in any DLC.  Same sorry endings.

[3DandBeyond]

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

I heard leviathan wont fix that train wreck of an ending. So that dlc is about as useless as boobs on a bull.

Agreed.  Useless.  You still end up with one of the only two ending that make any sense.  Refuse or the rubble pile.  Doesn't matter what you do or what happens in any DLC.  Same sorry endings.

Actually bull boobs are what drive bull bra sales.

So maybe DLC is less useful.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

3DandBeyond wrote...

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

I heard leviathan wont fix that train wreck of an ending. So that dlc is about as useless as boobs on a bull.

Agreed.  Useless.  You still end up with one of the only two ending that make any sense.  Refuse or the rubble pile.  Doesn't matter what you do or what happens in any DLC.  Same sorry endings.

Actually bull boobs are what drive bull bra sales.

So maybe DLC is less useful.

Probably.  It's all bull****, actually.

As for the DLC, I understand that one company executive (let's call that person "Nonu Endings") said only Star Brat dialogue is affected by the useless DLC.  So you get the rubble again.

Only the financial impact of slow sales will cause some financial analyst at EA to look down the corporate ladder and force the Nonus of the world to give players what they want.

Modifié par PuppiesOfDeath2, 09 août 2012 - 10:19 .

[BlueStorm83]

V-rcingetorix wrote...

@EXMugamy

The Leviathan DLC is not supposed to "change the endings." IGN originally stated that the Leviathan ending would "change the ending," but BioWare requested they retract such a statement and instead state that there would be "additional dialogue."

If all it will be is "additional dialogue" then I suppose I can "watch it on youtube."

[BlueStorm83]

.50CalBrainSurgeon wrote...

Initially I was appalled by the original ending. However, with the extended cut ending, I actually found the Control and Destroy endings acceptable.

Control is too often associated with the goals of the Illusive Man: dominance and subjugation. However, I belive that Shepard's idea of control is completey different from TIM's idea. Shepard only takes control of the Reapers to stop their harvest of sentient life. I view the Control ending from a very libertarian perspective: Shepard only takes control of the Reapers so that organic and synthetic life can have free will and self-determination. Throughout the series, Shepard has championed individuality and free will, and I doubt he/she would use the Reapers to micromanage the future of galactic society.  If his/her mindset is intact after taking control of the Reapers, I suspect he/she would still hold these philosophical ideas, even in thew new form of a bunch of extra-galactic death squids. 

The Destroy ending is also equally acceptable. A common arguement I have seen agains the destruction arguement is that Shepard is commiting xenocide against synthetics. However, the destruction ending is a sure-fire way to end the Reaper threat once and for all. The death of synthetic life in this situation can be seen as "the cold hard calculus of war." Earlier in the game, Shepard discusses this prospect with Garrus and they both realize that the victory against the Reapers will involve the sacrifice of billions, in this case synthetics. It is a grim ending, but justifiable given the desperation and constraints involved with fighting the overwhelming and technologically superior Reapers. 

Although I support the new Control/Destroy endings, I still find the Synthesis ending to be an unrealisitic and unbelievable crock of ****. It is simply too utopian and idealistic to somehow believe that placing green circuits into organic life gives them understanding of synthetic minds. Not to mention the ability to modify all organic life on a whim is outside the realm of the believable within Mass Effect canon. 

The endings are not optimal. Shepard dies in Control and doesn't get to retire to a tropical island with his/her love interest. The Reapers are destroyed in the Destroy ending, but so too are other synthetics. However, consider this: when was the last time a confllict on the scale of the Reaper war had an optimal ending? 

These are my personal thoughts and imputs into the matter. I would appreciate it if debate, controversey and discussion were kept civil. Thank you. 

---  One quick input about your control ending...  While MY Shepard went into control planning to control the Reapers right into a Black Hole, the things he says after, in the epilogue... reveal that he's not saying anything, because he's DEAD.  Some NEW conciousness, a Reapard, or a Reatard, or whatever you want to call it, that THINKS it used to be Shepard is going to police the universe, to save "The many."  The many?  Who's the Many?  Well, since I cured the Genophage, The Many will very soon be the Krogan.  So the Reapers and the Krogan.  Wrex won't live forever.  What happens when some dickwad takes over after Wrex dies?  Uh oh.  Now the Krogan want more systems, as they historically do when they overpopulate.  What do the Reapers do?  Support the Many!  **** the Batarians.  **** the Salarians.  **** the Quarrians, the Elcor, the Hannar, the Volus, the Asari, the Turians.  **** humans!  The Many Krogan need more ****ing SPACE!!!

I would have been fine with a monologue that just said some kind of "I will follow through with the plans I had for the Reapers all along," kind of line, to let us ASSUME that the things that WE want the Reapers to do will be done.  I want the Reapers to go fornicate themselves with an iron stick, and had Sheapaerd said that, I could assume it.  Instead, I see him using the Reapers for something I would NOT have them do: be a crutch to people.  I HATE that crap.  If you want something, you get it or you make it yourself.  To quote Adrock Thurston, "Don't beg for things.  Do it yourself, or else you won't get anything."

So your Libertarian Shepard is 100% valid... before you grab the Spark Gap Generator and disintegrate.  Then whatever results... well, that's kinda left up to whatever that thing is.

---  Also!  Bull****Kid says that everything Shepard is will be made into the Reaper Intelligence, or whatever, right?  So, wouldn't the Reapers then just be screaming "Oh ****, oh ****, why did I grab the lightning generator!?  This hurts so much!  AAAAAAAH, NOW I'M DISINTEGRATING!!!!!" forever and ever?

[V-rcingetorix]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

V-rcingetorix wrote...

@EXMugamy

The Leviathan DLC is not supposed to "change the endings." IGN originally stated that the Leviathan ending would "change the ending," but BioWare requested they retract such a statement and instead state that there would be "additional dialogue."

If all it will be is "additional dialogue" then I suppose I can "watch it on youtube."

"agreed"

[Reclusiarch]

Awesome ending is awesome. Thanks Bioware!