266 réponses à ce sujet

[Metalunatic]

Destroy still ends with the vague breath scene. No reunion. I am disappointed.

[CrAzY2010]

I have to admit, I am pleased with the additions they have made. There are few moments in video games that truly make me feel sad, Mordin, Legion, Thane and getting Tali away from the beam before the charge with Shep as her LI. It's sad EDI and the geth didn't make it in my playthrough, they will be remembered ;_;

Bravo, Bioware, bravo.

Modifié par CrAzY2010, 26 juin 2012 - 02:46 .

[Kick In The Door]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

corporal doody wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

JeosDinas wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I hope this topic gets closed soon.

Because you disagree? Grow up, you child.

Sorry? I didn't read the sarcasm in the OP. I've edited my post. And what if I disagree? What are you going to do about it?

there was no sarcasm.

i even typed no sarcasm.

In that case I hope it get closed.

Mad!

Haters gonna hate.

[krol146]

Dr Bob UK wrote...

It's very difficult to tell whether someone is being sarcastic or not on a forum. Especially on this forum.

Just what i was thinking. Personally, i am very satisfied with the new DLC. No big changes, but i never had any problems with the ending itself either. I just wanted some explanations for a few plot holes, and thats what i got. So thumbs up Bioware.

[sp0ck 06]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I hope this topic gets closed soon. What a horrible ending. If you don't want to violate the right of self-determination then you have to commit genocide. It is about time that writers watched some WWII footage to learn what these two concepts mean.

Pick Control then?  Or just maybe build some new geth?  I'm sure the quarians could swing it.

[Confused-Shepard]

Bioware saved the ending but Mass Effect 3 overall is a badly written story. I am sorry.

[Vexille]

Destroy breathe ending gives an implied reunion with LI and a happily ever after... thank you bioware, you actually gave me a happy ending for ME3

[1490]

VERY satisfied, myself. They filled in almost all of the plot holes and they answered most of the important questions. I like how they were able to still keep the theme of sacrifice no matter what ending you choose, but now it doesn't feel like everything everyone has done to help you was completely in vain.

Most of all though, the game now leaves you with a GOOD feeling rather than one of despair. Before the EC, I turned off the game feeling very sad. As the credits role now and I write this, I can't get the ear to ear grin of my face.

Bioware: well done.

[Gravbh]

fluffywalrus wrote...

I can understand the hate for the Destroy ending, but all of the options require (generally, at least) unconventional sacrifices in order to defeat the Reapers. I haven't seen the EC content yet, but I assume it's merely better explained rather than having major ideological changes.

With Destroy, you also destroy the geth and EDI. You basically sacrifice any progress you made toward solving the organics vs synthetics conflict peacefully.

With Synthesis, you override every living species' right to determine their own future and you basically desecrate the biological makeup of their species. In a way, you work against what you fought for through the entire series...strength in unity and diversity. In this ending, you decide unity is more important then diversity.

With Control, you're taking a hold of power that no one is willing to wield. Through Mass Effect, Shepard has succeeded largely due to her/his leadership and ability to bring everyone together. The power is peripheral, but with the control ending, you're taking such a decisive power and merely sending the Reapers away. They're not defeated, no one is aware of what Shepard accomplished, and one could easily imagine the discord between species that would pop up quickly from that. The unity would likely falter and despite the Reaper threat still being imminent as far as they know, the Unity angle was a failed endeavour. It's just too much power for a single entity to wield, and it's too much of a risk to trust the starchild AI that you won't end up becoming like the Illusive man, or worse, won't end up becoming like the starkid AI. There's too much left on the plate.

Every ending has something that Shepard has to sacrifice on top of her/his life. That's just how it is, and I always thought it was a good idea, just poorly executed.

I'm hoping the EC will work to improve that, and from what I have read, it does

Someone gets it. If there was no downside to one of the endings, that would be the de facto best one. There has to be a negative for each one. Otherwise there is no debate(speculations?) about which is better.

[Jerrybnsn]

The crucible was never intended to work LOL! Why couldn't you have put this in the original ending? Love the slideshows.

[Mysten]

I was enjoying the ending immensely. I was all set to rank it as one of my favourite endings ever and then...

Liara hugging EDI.

Best ending ever. No doubt.

Well done, Mass Effect team. Well done.

[BecBec]

I hated the original endings, but the EC made them much more tolerable for me personally. A great improvement, so thank you Bioware.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Gravbh wrote...

fluffywalrus wrote...

I can understand the hate for the Destroy ending, but all of the options require (generally, at least) unconventional sacrifices in order to defeat the Reapers. I haven't seen the EC content yet, but I assume it's merely better explained rather than having major ideological changes.

With Destroy, you also destroy the geth and EDI. You basically sacrifice any progress you made toward solving the organics vs synthetics conflict peacefully.

With Synthesis, you override every living species' right to determine their own future and you basically desecrate the biological makeup of their species. In a way, you work against what you fought for through the entire series...strength in unity and diversity. In this ending, you decide unity is more important then diversity.

With Control, you're taking a hold of power that no one is willing to wield. Through Mass Effect, Shepard has succeeded largely due to her/his leadership and ability to bring everyone together. The power is peripheral, but with the control ending, you're taking such a decisive power and merely sending the Reapers away. They're not defeated, no one is aware of what Shepard accomplished, and one could easily imagine the discord between species that would pop up quickly from that. The unity would likely falter and despite the Reaper threat still being imminent as far as they know, the Unity angle was a failed endeavour. It's just too much power for a single entity to wield, and it's too much of a risk to trust the starchild AI that you won't end up becoming like the Illusive man, or worse, won't end up becoming like the starkid AI. There's too much left on the plate.

Every ending has something that Shepard has to sacrifice on top of her/his life. That's just how it is, and I always thought it was a good idea, just poorly executed.

I'm hoping the EC will work to improve that, and from what I have read, it does

Someone gets it. If there was no downside to one of the endings, that would be the de facto best one. There has to be a negative for each one. Otherwise there is no debate(speculations?) about which is better.

The problem is that there are dozens of people on this forum alone who consider Destroy an unambiguously happy ending, either ignoring the genocide and EDI's death or chosing not to care about it. You can see that happen in this very thread: the vast majority of people who pick destroy care only about their own happiness, and thus they consider this genocidal ending a completely happy one. You can see evidence of it in this very thread, and in dozens throughout this forum.

That's what's frustrating to me.

If Shepard didn't live in any of the endings I feel that considerations about the endings would be undertaken more seriously. The same thing might well be true if Shepard lived in all the endings, who can say?

[AngryFrozenWater]

Kick In The Door wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

corporal doody wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

JeosDinas wrote...

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

I hope this topic gets closed soon.

Because you disagree? Grow up, you child.

Sorry? I didn't read the sarcasm in the OP. I've edited my post. And what if I disagree? What are you going to do about it?

there was no sarcasm.

i even typed no sarcasm.

In that case I hope it get closed.

Mad!

Haters gonna hate.

If you understand the concept of hate so well then maybe you can figure out this:

Control transforms you in an undead reaper dictator. The reapers win and are ready to strike in the future and repeat their genocidal tricks again. Shepard condones everything the reapers have done in the past by keeping them "ready". Shepard's allies didn't ask you to become TIM, but to destroy the reapers. That's another violation of the right of self-determination.

Synthesis violates the right of self-determination by forcing the racial identity of his allies into something different. Everyone is happy, because it also seems to mess with your mind. Nobody complains about it. A kind of utopian pipe dream that elitist Shepard feels like is a good idea. The reapers go off-the hook and fly into the sunset.

Destroy exterminates the geth, who just became your ally, were rebuilding the quarians' homeworld and immune system. To get rid of the reapers just requires one more genocide.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 26 juin 2012 - 03:09 .

[PNKSKRA]

Agreed! I was mostly disappointed since I thought the endings initially were cut too short, but this fixed it!

They definitely gave me all the closure I needed. I went with the destroy ending knowing that was what the initial goal for my Shepard and her crew. And with this extended cut it just made me further satisfied with my decision.

I took a peek at the other endings and I'd have to say that I enjoyed the Control ending as my second best Synthesis was peaceful as it should be, but with the control factor, it's neat knowing Shepard is portrayed as a god like persona. Haha.

As for the Rejected ending. That was just crazy. Shepard was a BAMF for just saying no to the starchild. But it was nice they incorporated that for those who chose that way and they did a nice epilogue for it as well in conclusion to that action.

[Omega One]

Disappointed.
Not about the ending. Its the damage that I have to wait months for this ending.

[avenging_teabag]

pants witch wrote...

avenging_teabag wrote...

I've not even played the EC, but Jesus H. Christ. Stop freaking whining, you big freaking baby.

Uncalled for.

Nope. If that person's Shepard is so principled that he couldn't sacrifice the geth no matter what, he would pick destroy or synthesis. Yes, that Shepard won't live, but them's the breaks: sometimes you pick your principles, and sometimes you pick your well-being. That persons entire spiel is: I WANNA BE A SHINING PARAGON OF VIRTUE AND I WANNA KEEP MY HIDE TOO! GIMME MY CAKE NAO!

It's people like that who, among other things, stop the games from becoming something more than puerile wish fulfillment.

Modifié par avenging_teabag, 26 juin 2012 - 03:23 .

[fluffywalrus]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Gravbh wrote...

fluffywalrus wrote...

I can understand the hate for the Destroy ending, but all of the options require (generally, at least) unconventional sacrifices in order to defeat the Reapers. I haven't seen the EC content yet, but I assume it's merely better explained rather than having major ideological changes.

With Destroy, you also destroy the geth and EDI. You basically sacrifice any progress you made toward solving the organics vs synthetics conflict peacefully.

With Synthesis, you override every living species' right to determine their own future and you basically desecrate the biological makeup of their species. In a way, you work against what you fought for through the entire series...strength in unity and diversity. In this ending, you decide unity is more important then diversity.

With Control, you're taking a hold of power that no one is willing to wield. Through Mass Effect, Shepard has succeeded largely due to her/his leadership and ability to bring everyone together. The power is peripheral, but with the control ending, you're taking such a decisive power and merely sending the Reapers away. They're not defeated, no one is aware of what Shepard accomplished, and one could easily imagine the discord between species that would pop up quickly from that. The unity would likely falter and despite the Reaper threat still being imminent as far as they know, the Unity angle was a failed endeavour. It's just too much power for a single entity to wield, and it's too much of a risk to trust the starchild AI that you won't end up becoming like the Illusive man, or worse, won't end up becoming like the starkid AI. There's too much left on the plate.

Every ending has something that Shepard has to sacrifice on top of her/his life. That's just how it is, and I always thought it was a good idea, just poorly executed.

I'm hoping the EC will work to improve that, and from what I have read, it does

Someone gets it. If there was no downside to one of the endings, that would be the de facto best one. There has to be a negative for each one. Otherwise there is no debate(speculations?) about which is better.

The problem is that there are dozens of people on this forum alone who consider Destroy an unambiguously happy ending, either ignoring the genocide and EDI's death or chosing not to care about it. You can see that happen in this very thread: the vast majority of people who pick destroy care only about their own happiness, and thus they consider this genocidal ending a completely happy one. You can see evidence of it in this very thread, and in dozens throughout this forum.

That's what's frustrating to me.

If Shepard didn't live in any of the endings I feel that considerations about the endings would be undertaken more seriously. The same thing might well be true if Shepard lived in all the endings, who can say?

I still have an incredibly difficult time making a decision in the end. I 'critical mission failure'd my first time because I was too heartbroken to decide. I can't ever know what's going on with some people's minds if they chalk the Destroy ending up as an unambiguously 'happy' one...I just assume their characters are wild renegades or that they didn't immerse themselves as much in the game, but I know that's just my ego talking.

When I was exposed to the endings the first time in the game, the only thoughts that went through my head initially were "I didn't want this. I don't want this, I didn't ask ofor this, isn't there another way?" Those thoughts cycled and cycled. Everything I fought for in the game...everything I hopped for...was bottled up in my Shep and the results she got. It all culminated in a plot to beat the reapers unconventionally. I didn't expect my Shep to live. I made peace with that, and I accepted it as inevitable. Saren and the Collectors wre incredibly minor compared to the Reapers, and my Shep died once already to them. There would be no returning from this battle.

I didn't expect to have to sacrifice a part of myself, my ideologies, what I fought for, what I was proud of. In the end, that made the ending stronger for me, because an unconventional means of victory should have unconventional forms of sacrifice. That's just how it is, otherwise it wouldn't be unconventional.

I don't get how some people can look at any of the endings and say one is the happy one unless they loathed EDI and the Geth the entire time. I just can't fathom it. I personally chose destroy in my first playthrough, because I didn't trust the other two options, and I stuck to my initial goal. It hurt. Every shot I fired hurt tremendously. I loved EDI's growth as a character through ME3, and I came to adore the Geth just as much as any other species in the game. I knew I was betraying them, and I knew that I was actively admitting to the idea that organics and synthetics will never coexist peacefully. Among the major victory of beatigng the reapers, the Starkid AI got a moral victory from me. Every ending has Shepard admitting, basically, that the Starkid is correct in some form or another, justifying their efforts in order to accomplish what needs to be done.  I hated that AI< and I think it was still a terrible move introducing it so late in the game, but it was a villain I could admire a little. They won as much as I did. My Shepard would take that knowledge to her grave.

I don't know how anyone could confuse that for a happy ending. I gasped in horror at the idea of my Shep being alive, and potentially having to live the rest of her life knowing that she committed genocide. I wouldn't wish that grief, that burden on her. I initially chalked it up as part of that ruthless calculus of war, in order to partially justify my decision, but that all changes if my Shep lives through it. She wouldn't be able to handle that kind of survivor's guilt. That, IMO, made the destroy ending an incredibly depressing one for me. Not that it wasn't before, but it would tear my Shepard apart.

Destroy is a happy ending? I can't wrap my head around that. I just can't. I know some feel that way, but it's incomprehensible to me.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

avenging_teabag wrote...

pants witch wrote...

avenging_teabag wrote...

I've not even played the EC, but Jesus H. Christ. Stop freaking whining, you big freaking baby.

Uncalled for.

Nope. If that person's Shepard is so principled that he couldn't sacrifice the geth no matter what, he would pick destroy or synthesis. Yes, that Shepard won't live, but them's the breaks: sometimes you pick your principles, and sometimes you pick your well-being. That persons entire spiel is: I WANNA BE A SHINING PARAGON OF VIRTUE AND I WANNA KEEP MY HIDE TOO! GIMME MY CAKE NAO!

It's people like that who, among other things, stop the games from becoming something more than puerile wish fulfillment.

No no, you misunderstand. I think it'd be better if Shepard died in all three endings. I'm actually appalled at how many people in this thread and other threads consider an ending where you commit genocide unambiguously happy.

I actually think that Shepard and Earth should be destroyed in Destroy, rather than the Geth. that would ensure that everyone feels they are making some kind of sacrifice. As it is now, people who couldn't save the Geth or who just hate synthetics get an ending they consider compltely happy and sacrifice free.

If Bioware does actually feel that the theme of Sacrifice is more important than the theme of galactic unity and hope, then Shepard should die every single time and earth should be destroyed in the destroy ending. That would be more appropriate, balanced, and interesting.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 26 juin 2012 - 03:31 .

[Tommytsunami]

While there might still be some questions, I do like the extended cut endings WAY more than the originals. They are no longer something that would deter me from playing through the game more... and for that I thank you Bioware!

[avenging_teabag]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

avenging_teabag wrote...

pants witch wrote...

avenging_teabag wrote...

I've not even played the EC, but Jesus H. Christ. Stop freaking whining, you big freaking baby.

Uncalled for.

Nope. If that person's Shepard is so principled that he couldn't sacrifice the geth no matter what, he would pick destroy or synthesis. Yes, that Shepard won't live, but them's the breaks: sometimes you pick your principles, and sometimes you pick your well-being. That persons entire spiel is: I WANNA BE A SHINING PARAGON OF VIRTUE AND I WANNA KEEP MY HIDE TOO! GIMME MY CAKE NAO!

It's people like that who, among other things, stop the games from becoming something more than puerile wish fulfillment.

No no, you misunderstand. I think it'd be better if Shepard died in all three endings. I'm actually appalled at how many people in this thread and other threads consider an ending where you commit genocide unambiguously happy.

I actually think that Shepard and Earth should be destroyed in Destroy, rather than the Geth. that would ensure that everyone feels they are making some kind of sacrifice. As it is now, people who couldn't save the Geth or who just hate synthetics get an ending they consider compltely happy and sacrifice free.

If Bioware does actually feel that the theme of Sacrifice is more important than the theme of galactic unity and hope, then Shepard should die every single time and earth should be destroyed in the destroy ending. That would be more appropriate, balanced, and interesting.

In that case i apologize for going off like that.

Still can't say that i agree, but it's better to put my opinion off intil the time i actuall played the EC.

[Nizzzy]

EDIT: deleted.

Modifié par Nizzzy, 26 juin 2012 - 05:37 .

[MHBILLS_Endurell]

For me, it was always about the nonsensical plot/theme/tone change at the very end.

The only good that came out of this whole mess was the Marauder Shields fan-ending, which is (so far) 50x better than anything in the EC, or the original ending.

Good luck in your future endeavors Bioware, you'll be doing it without my money and with negative advertising from me.

[Fox In The Box]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...


If Bioware does actually feel that the theme of Sacrifice is more important than the theme of galactic unity and hope, then Shepard should die every single time and earth should be destroyed in the destroy ending. That would be more appropriate, balanced, and interesting.

So what exactly would be the downsides in the endings where Shepard gains near limitless power with the entire Reaper army and forcibly rewrites the genetic code of every being in the galaxy, which can potentially lead to unimaginably horrible results? You do realize that not all who chooses Destroy does so for survival's sake?

Modifié par Fox In The Box, 26 juin 2012 - 04:00 .