4048 réponses à ce sujet

[tamperous]

cgvhjb wrote...

I only post this again because I'm curious what people think.

Anyway personally I would have loved it if the refusal option would have ended with the united fleets slowly turning the tide of battle and pushing back the reapers until there was a full route going on and the Star Child/Catalyst only then realizing that his assumptions of what Organic/Synthetic life are actually capable of were wrong and he had been committing genocide under false assumptions. He'd be staggered by the implications of this and the sheer scope of his mistake and Shepard would walk over to him and have some great line about how life is about overcoming the odds and surpassing your limitations. The Catalyst would then vow to make things right in whatever way it could and leave to try and restore the harvested races/civilizations on uninhabited planets across the galaxy giving birth to a even more astounding and amazing future with all of those in it.

Or something along those lines, something that shows that Shepard is more than just a plot device who can conveniently use a deus ex machina solution to a problem. He got everyone where they are and damn it he's going to finish things on his own terms standing on his own two feet, now that would have been kinda awesome.

Yes but it was never they "artistic vision" for a solution to be reached by co-operation and trust between people that are different. Solutions can only come from some sort of Godlike intervention which involves smiting a race, replacing god with yourself (presumably more benevolant but human and ultimately corruptable), or manipulating everyone's genetics against their will.

Hudson, Walters, It's not that I don't understand your art, it's that I understand it too well and reject it completely. I intend to be rejecting it every time a new piece comes out for sale from now until the end of days.

[FataliTensei]

Just watched it all and I would personally like to thank Bioware for even taking the time to do this. However with that said I still feel like the endings are sub-par, just like most of ME3. I personally despise that in the refuse ending no matter what everyone just dies and you fail. It shows that in the end unless we do what the Catalyst wants and follow his choices only will we succeed. That pretty much still sours the series for me and I will not be buying any DLC for the Single Player Campaign. Bioware you tried to pull yourself out from under a building you and EA blew up, I think you managed to do so, but you ended up losing your legs in the process. You will never be able to stand on your own again because your foundation is gone. Only with the assistance of a major company like EA will you survive, which is what they wanted in the first place.

[IanPolaris]

LazyTechGuy wrote...

I actually like the idea that you can't defeat the Reapers with brute force. You just can't. They have a pretty big head start on life. I know you want to shoot the Reapers in the face, but you can't. You have to beat them by going to the source (oh... now the Matrix connection is coming into play).

Why not?  Oh I agree that for most cycles there wouldn't be enough force, but the Reapers themselves know they are far from invincible.  That's WHY they try to cripple the C3I as part of their initial attack in most cycles.  However we know that Reapers can be defeated conventially.  Not easily no, but it can be done.

Given enough time, resources, and galactic unity, I see no intrinsic reason why the Reapers can't be beaten and the star-gazer scene after refusal (which I regard as non-canonical) seems to strongly imply that the cycle after yours using Liara's data does just that.  Beats the Reapers conventionally.

-Polaris

[DaveDash_]

The new endings look like they did the best out of a bad situation (ie, a flawed storyline).

Overall I'm reasonably happy with those endings. Major plotholes leading up to the endings still remain, and a bit of Deus Ex Machina still exists, but they simply just can't change that now.

I think to make the endings better, Sheppard himself should have been the catalyst, ie, someone whose will was so indomitable, and someone so determined, that he managed to make it to the end through sheer willpower, thus becoming the crucible. He was the first, and thus, he gets to choose what happens to the galaxy.

Modifié par DaveDash_, 26 juin 2012 - 02:22 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Sia_Sinblade wrote...

tamperous wrote...

Thomas477 wrote...

I liked the EC, despite hating the originals.

Yes there wasn't a LI reunion and there werent my little blue children but it has done enough for me to trust Bioware again, albeit cautiously. Still don't understand the significance of that planet the Normandy crashed on, apart from it being the Stargazer(s?) planet.

Apart from that, is it confirmed that Shepard does live, given specific conditions are met?

Still the root problem with reunion exists. You have to commit a genocide to get it. I would not IRL kill an entire race to just to reunite with my LI, Having a video game contrive a choice so that's the only way it could happen is not my idea of any type of happy ending. It's just an ending.

Sorry, but I just have to chime in here.

You don't commit genocide to see your LI.

You commit genocide to save the entire galaxy. Big difference, IMHO.

Other than that, haven't played the new endings yet. Wait and see.

No, the EC firmly establishes that the galaxy is saved no matter which of the original endings you pick.

The only advantage genocide gives you is that you live. So in a way, you are committing genocide in order to see your LI...

However, it's still possible that your Shepard believes that committing genocide is the only way to save the galaxy. It's just that the other new endings show us that the galaxy is in good shape no matter what you picked.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 26 juin 2012 - 02:19 .

[Gameon1979]

cgvhjb wrote...

I only post this again because I'm curious what people think.

 

This would have been good. I like it.

[Mobius-Silent]

blta wrote...

I can't get rid of the feeling that IT was planned somehow, and is now scrapped and replaced by the 100% literal endings. :/ I actually liked the original endings for leaving room for interpretation (I admit, maybe they are just written very poorly, can't deny that), something that is impossible now.
I also don't like how this happy green synthesis space magic stuff is supposed to be the mega disney ending... does still not make any sense to me, how all synthetics can get at least partly organic and vice versa.

I really liked the IT. :/

Take another look, most of the "proof" was outright lies, misunderstandings of game lore or just plain baseless assumptions. Let go if it, it was never intended.

[Freakiq]

I loved what they did with this, had the game shipped with these endings I for one think the fan reaction would have been far more positive, at least mine would.

Thank you Bioware for making Mass Effect what it should have been.

[tamperous]

Sia_Sinblade wrote...

tamperous wrote...

Thomas477 wrote...

I liked the EC, despite hating the originals.

Yes there wasn't a LI reunion and there werent my little blue children but it has done enough for me to trust Bioware again, albeit cautiously. Still don't understand the significance of that planet the Normandy crashed on, apart from it being the Stargazer(s?) planet.

Apart from that, is it confirmed that Shepard does live, given specific conditions are met?

Still the root problem with reunion exists. You have to commit a genocide to get it. I would not IRL kill an entire race to just to reunite with my LI, Having a video game contrive a choice so that's the only way it could happen is not my idea of any type of happy ending. It's just an ending.

Sorry, but I just have to chime in here.

You don't commit genocide to see your LI.

You commit genocide to save the entire galaxy. Big difference, IMHO.

Other than that, haven't played the new endings yet. Wait and see.

True enough. But from a metagaming perspective if you choose based only on the possibility of getting back with your LI you are. 

[tholloway93]

after now watching all 3 it sounds like the catalyst is telling you synthesis is the best option for everyone, the control video i feel shows that is the best solution that the reapers are shepard's own space police and destroy is 'yay shepard lives.'

anyone care to share their views on that? lol

[Sia_Sinblade]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Sia_Sinblade wrote...

tamperous wrote...

Thomas477 wrote...

I liked the EC, despite hating the originals.

Yes there wasn't a LI reunion and there werent my little blue children but it has done enough for me to trust Bioware again, albeit cautiously. Still don't understand the significance of that planet the Normandy crashed on, apart from it being the Stargazer(s?) planet.

Apart from that, is it confirmed that Shepard does live, given specific conditions are met?

Still the root problem with reunion exists. You have to commit a genocide to get it. I would not IRL kill an entire race to just to reunite with my LI, Having a video game contrive a choice so that's the only way it could happen is not my idea of any type of happy ending. It's just an ending.

Sorry, but I just have to chime in here.

You don't commit genocide to see your LI.

You commit genocide to save the entire galaxy. Big difference, IMHO.

Other than that, haven't played the new endings yet. Wait and see.

No, the EC firmly establishes that the galaxy is saved no matter which of the original endings you pick.

The only advantage genocide gives you is that you live. So in a way, you are committing genocide in order to see your LI...

However, it's still possible that your Shepard believes that committing genocide is the only way to save the galaxy. It's just that the other new endings show us that the galaxy is in good shape no matter what you picked.

Ahem...how is Shep supposed to know all of this. You guys are looking at this from YOUR perspective. YOU know what each choice results in. Shepard doesn't. How is she supposed to know everything is happy happy in any one given ending?

She makes a choice based on the situation at hand.

[Pr3ying M4nt15 360]

That was a hell of a lot better than it was before. It was more or less what I expected. Not what I truely wanted but enough to turn a horrible cruel ending into a bittersweet one.

I wanted a concrete scene of the Normandy crew and ME1 or ME2 LI reuniting with Shepard even if it was a still image. Unfortunately I didn't get that and we got the same breath scene. The only reason I can assume it didn't happen is because Bioware doesn't want to overshadow the Synesis ending which they clearly favour and encourage as the ideal solution.

As small as it was, to see hope in the LI and the Normandy taking off, and hope to rebuild the universe and that the relay's aren't utterly destroyed / just damaged. Those helped me feel a lot better about the ending, and I felt a happy but sad emotional connection to the ending that I didn't feel before. As opposed to the bitter angry feelings I felt before.

Modifié par Pr3ying M4nt15 360, 26 juin 2012 - 02:23 .

[BalooTheBear]

I think I can live with the destroy ending. They fixed some of the plot holes and it does lead the way to future Shep and LI reunion. I'd have loved to have seen it, but the changes imply it and head cannon can do the rest which is fine.

ALso I still think, even after seeing the new endings, that my shep would have chosen destroy. It sucks having to loose the Geth but it destroyed the reapers, which is what she always would have done. The galaxy can rebuild, but on their own terms. Not through the reapers.

I liked the change to the catalyst. worked better having it as an Ai program that was supposed to facilitate communication between the two groups but then with cold computer logic decided this and forced their creators to become the first reapers.

It's still not marvellous. But I can live with it.

I would have liked individual cast voice oververs for their characters, saying what happened next but thats the sort of speculation/ head cannon I can live with.

Modifié par BalooTheBear, 26 juin 2012 - 02:23 .

[Dethan17]

While I respect the vision had for the Trilogy I look at this character they've created, Shepard, putting us at the helm of a character faced with adversity on an astronomical level, who at the same time be it due to my actions refused to give up or give in, and due to his ideals and conviction paved his own way with that "yeah you have set our fate on certain doom, but I'm going to prove you wrong and forge my own destiny". Even adding the option to choose none of the choices given almost feels more offensive and unsatisfying than how it was originally. It's basically like taking Shepard's 90+ hours spanning 3 games and the obstacles he's overcome and the lives that have been sacrificed as well as saved, and giving him the middle finger.

[LazyTechGuy]

IanPolaris wrote...

LazyTechGuy wrote...

I actually like the idea that you can't defeat the Reapers with brute force. You just can't. They have a pretty big head start on life. I know you want to shoot the Reapers in the face, but you can't. You have to beat them by going to the source (oh... now the Matrix connection is coming into play).

Why not?  Oh I agree that for most cycles there wouldn't be enough force, but the Reapers themselves know they are far from invincible.  That's WHY they try to cripple the C3I as part of their initial attack in most cycles.  However we know that Reapers can be defeated conventially.  Not easily no, but it can be done.

Given enough time, resources, and galactic unity, I see no intrinsic reason why the Reapers can't be beaten and the star-gazer scene after refusal (which I regard as non-canonical) seems to strongly imply that the cycle after yours using Liara's data does just that.  Beats the Reapers conventionally.

-Polaris

You don't get time, resources and galactic unity.  We're kinda lucky we got some time at all throughout ME3.  Almost like they were purposely waiting and mocking you with whatever forces you gather up.  In fact, probably doing their job for them.  You're bringing everyone to them for one-stop genocide. 

Though, the Reapers (Catalyst) underestimated the Crucible.  You're more than just brute strength.  You're taking out the army by going for the leader because otherwise, this army is pretty efficient at what they do.

Modifié par LazyTechGuy, 26 juin 2012 - 02:24 .

[bleetman]

You know, I've got to ask. That annoying bullcrap teaser shot of Probably-Shepard taking a gasp and then it cutting to black. You know, the one that for some reason made it into the EC seemingly unaltered? That's right at the end, yes? After all the narrated epilogue stuff, and the memorial wall scene, and the repaired Normandy taking off. After all that. Gasp, cut to black. Right? It didn't just play it out of order for me?

So, Shepard's just been lying in rubble slowly dying all that time? Did nobody mount a search party?

[WastedHeart]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Sia_Sinblade wrote...

tamperous wrote...

Thomas477 wrote...

I liked the EC, despite hating the originals.

Yes there wasn't a LI reunion and there werent my little blue children but it has done enough for me to trust Bioware again, albeit cautiously. Still don't understand the significance of that planet the Normandy crashed on, apart from it being the Stargazer(s?) planet.

Apart from that, is it confirmed that Shepard does live, given specific conditions are met?

Still the root problem with reunion exists. You have to commit a genocide to get it. I would not IRL kill an entire race to just to reunite with my LI, Having a video game contrive a choice so that's the only way it could happen is not my idea of any type of happy ending. It's just an ending.

Sorry, but I just have to chime in here.

You don't commit genocide to see your LI.

You commit genocide to save the entire galaxy. Big difference, IMHO.

Other than that, haven't played the new endings yet. Wait and see.

No, the EC firmly establishes that the galaxy is saved no matter which of the original endings you pick.

The only advantage genocide gives you is that you live. So in a way, you are committing genocide in order to see your LI...

However, it's still possible that your Shepard believes that committing genocide is the only way to save the galaxy. It's just that the other new endings show us that the galaxy is in good shape no matter what you picked.

I completely disagree that destroy only has one advantage over the others. In synthesis you have still forced the entire galaxy to become synthetic/organic hybrids and not everyone is going to be happy about that. And in control you have to presume that Shepard will be able to control the Reapers forevermore and that people will be happy with the Reapers still being around. Destroy comprehensively ends the threat without having to alter life as we know it in any way and, imo, is what most of the galaxy would have chosen given the option. The geth dying is awful, but that doesn't mean destroy doesn't have certain other advantages over the other ends that have nothing to do with Shepard living.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Sia_Sinblade wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Sia_Sinblade wrote...

Sorry, but I just have to chime in here.

You don't commit genocide to see your LI.

You commit genocide to save the entire galaxy. Big difference, IMHO. .

No, the EC firmly establishes that the galaxy is saved no matter which of the original endings you pick.

The only advantage genocide gives you is that you live. So in a way, you are committing genocide in order to see your LI...

However, it's still possible that your Shepard believes that committing genocide is the only way to save the galaxy. It's just that the other new endings show us that the galaxy is in good shape no matter what you picked.

Ahem...how is Shep supposed to know all of this. You guys are looking at this from YOUR perspective. YOU know what each choice results in. Shepard doesn't. How is she supposed to know everything is happy happy in any one given ending?

She makes a choice based on the situation at hand.

Sure, but she has no reason, other than a personal hunch, to believe that Destroy is any more likely to work than Synthesis or Control. She has no reason to believe that it's the only way to save the galaxy, so she commits genocide on a hunch.

I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that's what happens: you get to live if you're willing to commit genocide based on nothing but a personal instinct. Bioware said a sacrifice had to be made for shepard to live, and that sacrifice is genocide.

Most people who picked destroy seem fine with the idea of killing the Geth to get to see their LI again.

[I-AM-KROGAN]

 Does anyone know who the second flashback is? Like i mean i got EDI and my friend got thane. Why did we get those?

[tamperous]

Sia_Sinblade wrote...


Ahem...how is Shep supposed to know all of this. You guys are looking at this from YOUR perspective. YOU know what each choice results in. Shepard doesn't. How is she supposed to know everything is happy happy in any one given ending?

She makes a choice based on the situation at hand.

We are judging this on a meta-gaming perspective because we are critiquing the game design. Was it right to have this as the only way for a reunion to happen. Not whether the choice was right for an in-game character.

[The5Virtues]

cgvhjb wrote...

I only post this again because I'm curious what people think.

Anyway personally I would have loved it if the refusal option would have ended with the united fleets slowly turning the tide of battle and pushing back the reapers until there was a full route going on and the Star Child/Catalyst only then realizing that his assumptions of what Organic/Synthetic life are actually capable of were wrong and he had been committing genocide under false assumptions. He'd be staggered by the implications of this and the sheer scope of his mistake and Shepard would walk over to him and have some great line about how life is about overcoming the odds and surpassing your limitations. The Catalyst would then vow to make things right in whatever way it could and leave to try and restore the harvested races/civilizations on uninhabited planets across the galaxy giving birth to a even more astounding and amazing future with all of those in it.

Or something along those lines, something that shows that Shepard is more than just a plot device who can conveniently use a deus ex machina solution to a problem. He got everyone where they are and damn it he's going to finish things on his own terms standing on his own two feet, now that would have been kinda awesome.

Would have been nice, didn't have a snowballs chance in hell of actually being in the game.

[nitefyre410]

Vikali wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

Vikali wrote...

Galbrant wrote...

Yeah that refusal ending was disgustingly petty.

How? In refusal the next cycle killed the reapers. How is that petty?

 


The entire tone of it...  the speech then  Shepard just standing there and doing nothing.  It came off as Mac Walters and Casey  Hudson  taking a dig at the fan base for refusing what they calmed as their genius. It was not taken seriously  as an option at all.  

Well, I personally found it bitter sweet. Escpeiaclly after basically shoving a barrell down Starkid's throat.

 

True  it was bittersweet, no cutscenes of the  crew fighting their last fight, not  Hackett going down with the ship.  It just felt tacked on... at least to me.

[GreyWardenNathan]

Freakiq wrote...

I loved what they did with this, had the game shipped with these endings I for one think the fan reaction would have been far more positive, at least mine would.

Thank you Bioware for making Mass Effect what it should have been.

i think the reaction would have been the same. maybe not quite as bad but a lot of complaints came from the start of priority earth to the rgb ending. i think the ec is better recieved because of how bad the originals were so anything people can grab to make it slightly more sense makes the ec seem a lot better when its probably average along with 75% of the game

[Sia_Sinblade]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Sia_Sinblade wrote...

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Sia_Sinblade wrote...

Sorry, but I just have to chime in here.

You don't commit genocide to see your LI.

You commit genocide to save the entire galaxy. Big difference, IMHO. .

No, the EC firmly establishes that the galaxy is saved no matter which of the original endings you pick.

The only advantage genocide gives you is that you live. So in a way, you are committing genocide in order to see your LI...

However, it's still possible that your Shepard believes that committing genocide is the only way to save the galaxy. It's just that the other new endings show us that the galaxy is in good shape no matter what you picked.

Ahem...how is Shep supposed to know all of this. You guys are looking at this from YOUR perspective. YOU know what each choice results in. Shepard doesn't. How is she supposed to know everything is happy happy in any one given ending?

She makes a choice based on the situation at hand.

Sure, but she has no reason, other than a personal hunch, to believe that Destroy is any more likely to work than Synthesis or Control. She has no reason to believe that it's the only way to save the galaxy, so she commits genocide on a hunch.

I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that's what happens: you get to live if you're willing to commit genocide based on nothing but a personal instinct. Bioware said a sacrifice had to be made for shepard to live, and that sacrifice is genocide.

Most people who picked destroy seem fine with the idea of killing the Geth to get to see their LI again.

I don't quite see the point you are making. I am merely saying that no, Shepard does not stand there and says: "Hmm gosh, if I want to boink Liara again, I have to kill an entire race...oh fine, let's do that."

She stands there and has to decide what option is the best for the future of the galaxy. She doesn't KNOW what we know. If she picks Destroy, she believes it is the only way to make sure the Galaxy is a safer place for the future.

Anyway, totally off topc here. I just don't like to see metagaming brought in.

[LazyTechGuy]

Can someone elaborate on the Normandy scene during the Conduit Run? What happens now? Normandy comes in and your squadmates leave? Why? What's said to make them okay with that? Is the entire Hammer squad just watching you say goodbye before they make a run? Or are they being flung around in the background by Harbinger while you have a moment?