517 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr.House]

Reject is my canon ending. There's no point picking destroy when they try to make it so negitive and Shepard will bleed or starve to death. In end, while Control the better out of the three, you are still a hypocrite because you argued with TIM, now your like ok I'll control! Merge just disgusted me. So ya, as Shepard said in her speech. I rather end the war on our terms and die, giving the next cycle the tools to defeat the Reapers, which did work accoding to the woman and the girl, so the sacerfice of the current cycle was worth it, was bittersweet and was a true victory.

Modifié par Mr.House, 26 juin 2012 - 08:26 .

[frostajulie]

Now I want a youtub video where someone takes a dump on their ME3 disc and then in big letters tells Bioware NOW THATS ART FUC K YOU!

[Yuoaman]

I think with a few alterations I would have loved it, but the fact that Bioware seems to hold those of us wanting Shepard to make consistent decisions and not acquiesce to the demands of a Reaper in contempt and wants to punish us for it ruins the ending for me. I think with a high enough EMS it would have been possible to fight the Reapers to a standstill. Plus, didn't the Star Child want the cycle to end since they weren't working? Why was he so eager to let the cycle continue?

[Hakuthehedgehog]

cgvhjb wrote...

The Not So Illusive Man wrote...

cgvhjb wrote...

I know I've posted this before but... I am annoyed that Bioware still insists on shoe-horning you into spinning the wheel and choosing a color. Personally this is my take on the refuse ending

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 and that just because something or someone has power doesn't mean they're always right. Something to show that the "process" doesn't always have to be followed and that the Starchild was himself flawed because he allowed his way of thinking to become stagnant in the assumption that he was always correct.

Would have loved this, how satisfying would it have been to stick it to "the man" and show that he isn't as great as he thought he was.

Despite the fact that we are consistently told throughout the series that we do not have the manpower or the technology to beat the reapers, throughout Mass Effect 3 we are told that we can't beat them conventionally by Admiral Hackett. To suddenly be able to defeat them would be an even bigger cop-out than using a super weapon like the Crucible, the way the reject ending is now is perfect.

That's the point, through out the whole series we're told time and time again that we can't win by individuals who assume they can quantify our chances and tell us what can and can't be done and Shepard always finds a way to show that there's another option. Admiral Hackett is not all knowing and *god forbid* he like so many others may have underestimated what a coalition of the races can acomplish.

Also you're okay with the reject ending essentially being the writers way of saying "Yea you screwed up choosing freedom instead of a nonsensical deus ex machina ending so now you lose, go back and try again"? Really? 

I don't know that sort of ending isn't okay with me and frankly this is part of the reason why the 3 colored choices are so out of key with the rest of the series.

Look at what Sovereign did, that monster can oneshot cruisers and dreadnoughts, and there are 20000 of them, plus much more destroyers and even more occuli to counter our fighters.

They also don't need to care for food, sleep, economy, planets, supply lines, etc.

Seriously, how the hell do you expect us to win against them?

Sure, the turians and asari manage to inflict some losses on the reapers, but as Victus tells us (the god damned primarch), Palaven is lost, the Krogan HALTED the reapers, sure they killed a dozen of capital ships, plus ofther dozen the turian fleet managed to destroy with their DN, but those numbers are too few agains THOUSANDS of those things.

I personaly liked that ending. Dying on our terms and give hope to the next cycle, which ends up ending the reaper threath.

[Sepharih]

RiouHotaru wrote...
1) Difference between Reaper (singular) and Reapers (plural)

NO, no different.  Only different in your mind.  You must unlearn, what you have learned.  

[Claym0re]

Its almost exactly the same ending I came up on my own months ago for a "bad" ending...so when I saw it I was laughing hard.

[MC_Loki]

Love the reject ending. Should have been an option on launch day.

...and is that an asari in the stargazer scene?

[Fidget6]

MC_Loki wrote...

...and is that an asari in the stargazer scene?

Yeah, what was with that? 

[Stance Punk]

MC_Loki wrote...

Love the reject ending. Should have been an option on launch day.

...and is that an asari in the stargazer scene?

I think it's a race in the next cycle.

Modifié par Stance Punk, 26 juin 2012 - 08:37 .

[xistfirat]

I didn't have any hope for the extended cut, I thought it would just extend the ****ty endings, and it did exactly that but the addition of the "reject" ending to the extentions changed everything for me. I love sad endings (yeah, I know) and I just fell in love with this, after all the struggle, you fail to save your civilization, and give hope to another one. It could definately be improved (a foggy ending would definately be better, they didn't need to show the next cycle succeeded to destroy the reapers, knowing the information passed would be enough) and I still think this should've been an alternative ending (as it is right now) with better main ending choices, but personally, this was a great surprise and relieved me, I can finally take Mass Effect as a great trilogy with a sad but powerful ending.

[MACharlie1]

The one thing I liked about the reject ending was that Starchild's voice turns into a Reapers.

[cgvhjb]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Uh...your points are only midly accurate:

1) Difference between Reaper (singular) and Reapers (plural)
2) No-one bothers going through the Omega 4 Relay for that reason (no-one comes back), TIM just thinks you'll beat the odds.
3) I never see that point made in ME2
4) It's a momentary standstill, it won't last. In-game and in the Codex they drill that into you. Those tactics won't work all the time.
5) When does anyone say that?

Also, the game constantly throws out about how races are getting rolled over and how millions are dying every day. It's silly to say that an ending where choosing to do nothing gets you wiped out is somehow a "Take That!"

I think we should just leave this we just have different thought processes, you think Shepard would just believe what he's told  and think that A, B or C choices are all there is. I think Shepards defining characteristic is finding another solution that doesn't compromise his moral compass (which clearly all 3 choices do) and make the impossible possible. To me Shepard represents free will and all that it can acomplish, so if you want to talk about something that doesn't make any sense at all it would be him obediently following the instructions of a deluded mass murderer to do something that negates much of what he claims to stand for.

So while I didn't get the same vibe that "reapers are unstoppable without some plot device" that you did get the impression that shepard inspires people to become part of the impossible and leads them become far more than they thought they could be. That's the issue, that's the crux of the problem, and that's why there could have been a way for Shepard achieve victory even when everything else says it's impossible.

[dublin omega 223]

I can describe the reject ending in two simple words. It sucked.

[lillitheris]

Reject vindicates Destroy. Synthesis and Control were traps…

[thisisme8]

I have to admit, if I made a game and a bunch of kids on a forum demanded that I changed it or else they would never preorder games from whatever company published it, I would answer:

No.

[Daniel_N7]

thisisme8 wrote...

I have to admit, if I made a game and a bunch of kids on a forum demanded that I changed it or else they would never preorder games from whatever company published it, I would answer:

No.

Fortunately, BioWare is better than that.

A bunch of kids...

[Sherbet Lemon]

Norwood06 wrote...


I'd say BW wrote themselves invincible villains, and the problem is that the victories in ME3 underminded this fact. I would have been more willing to view the reapers as unstoppable if I hadn't beaten them (small reapers, I know, but still, I won) in Tuchanka & Rannoch.  But a game where the player spends 40 hours losing isn't going to have many fans. 

I think this is the crux of the issue for  me and I'd venture to say that it goes back even to ME2.  The fact that we were able to save everyone relatively easily in the suicide mission was a nice touch, but it seriously took away some of the Reaper's mysticism.  One could argue that the ending cutscene of ME2 (the giant cut to the impending Reaper invasion) was an attempt to bring it back full circle, but it was already too late.  The PC/Shepard had not only triumphed once (without much collateral damage), but now TWICE against the villains (by killing two repears) therefore leading the PC to believe that a unilateral win was possible despite warnings to the contrary.   In essence, the thematic elements were contradictory. D:

TBF, it really was a rough conundrum to be in and I'm not convinced that it was easily solvable.  Hmm...

Modifié par Village Idiot, 26 juin 2012 - 08:49 .

[Sireniankyle1]

OMG I SHOT THE STAR CHILD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Binary_Helix 1]

thisisme8 wrote...

I have to admit, if I made a game and a bunch of kids on a forum demanded that I changed it or else they would never preorder games from whatever company published it, I would answer:

No.

As soon as you drift away from " the customer is always right" mentality you fail at whatever business you do. Since today's work force was brought up on "everybody's a winner" leftist nonsense we have people who can't even recognize they're failing.

Modifié par Binary_Helix 1, 26 juin 2012 - 08:59 .

[Goodwood]

Saw the Reject then the Destroy endings on YouTube.

No need to download the EC.
No need to play any of the games.
No need to buy any future BioWare products unless a collection of unbiased sources give high amounts of praise.

IMHO BioWare, your "rocks fall, everyone dies" ending also dropped a few boulders on Edmonton.

[Gunjan]

I personally feel the "rejection" ending is the best ending and the ending that fits with the theme with Mass Effect.

They could have did so much with this ending, for example if your EMS was high enough, Shepard could escape and be picked up by the Military. If it's not high enough we get the current ending. He would then tell them about the Star kid, if your EMS is high enough the combined forces could take out the Catalyst, explosion could destroy the Citadel thus all the Reapers would lose a link or some sort of hive mind control for coordination.

This loss lets the Military start beating back the Reaper forces, while Shepard preps his crew for another suicide mission by boarding Harbinger to take him out. ME2 style decisions with squad mates being selected for roles letting Shepard get farther into Harbinger...etc...etc.

[Seishoujyo]

Setsuna F Seiei 
etc...

Nope these guys are not Hero's according to the Bioware... all heroes must sumbit or die.    Because the Hero winning  is too mainstream now. 

Watched Gundam 00 Awakening of the Trailblazers ? Because Setsuna died at the final.

[cgvhjb]

I have to admit, if I made a game and a bunch of kids on a forum
demanded that I changed it or else they would never preorder games from
whatever company published it, I would answer:

No.

I'm not a kid and this is probably a reason you would probably be terrible at making games. Sorry but if you're not willing to listen to what you're fans are saying then you're doing something wrong and will be out of business soon.

Look at what Sovereign did, that monster can oneshot cruisers and dreadnoughts, and there are 20000 of them, plus much more destroyers and even more occuli to counter our fighters.

They also don't need to care for food, sleep, economy, planets, supply lines, etc.

Seriously, how the hell do you expect us to win against them?

Sure, the turians and asari manage to inflict some losses on the reapers, but as Victus tells us (the god damned primarch), Palaven is lost, the Krogan HALTED the reapers, sure they killed a dozen of capital ships, plus ofther dozen the turian fleet managed to destroy with their DN, but those numbers are too few agains THOUSANDS of those things.

I personaly liked that ending. Dying on our terms and give hope to the next cycle, which ends up ending the reaper threath.

We don't really know how many Reapers are out there so using a number like 20,000 is pointless, lets just say there are alot. However I also seem to recall being told that Sovereign was involatile and unstoppable which was later proven to be anything but true. Hell just Reapers themselves were seen as damn near unstoppable but the races united started taking them down and more importantly showing that they are not the unkillable space gods then so many assumed they were. So given the fact that there were a few races and factions that weren't even represented in the final conflict I'd say there is a chance that the door to victory on our own isn't completely closed just yet.

[Sepharih]

Norwood06 wrote...
I'd say BW wrote themselves invincible villains, and the problem is that the victories in ME3 underminded this fact. I would have been more willing to view the reapers as unstoppable if I hadn't beaten them (small reapers, I know, but still, I won) in Tuchanka & Rannoch.  But a game where the player spends 40 hours losing isn't going to have many fans. 

Pretty much this.  In storytelling showing is more important than telling, so telling us that reapers are "invincible" or "unbeatable" really falls flat when the protagnist is shown defeating them at nearly every story beat.  Now some might scream "THOSE WERE SMALL REAPERS, NOT BIG ONES!!!  THERE'S A DIFFERENCE"!!!  But that's the problem....you're telling us there's a difference and what we were shown in the story was meaningless.

[Mr Waffles]

RiouHotaru wrote...

It's hilarious that people think Rejection is revenge writing. It's telling us what we already knew, and what the game drilled into you from the start:

You CANNOT beat the Reapers conventionally. It will. Not. Work.

How hard is that to understand?

This.