362 réponses à ce sujet

[Pottumuusi]

Refusal: kicking the Reapers' ass from the moral high ground.

Modifié par Pottumuusi, 27 juin 2012 - 03:27 .

[Zaalbar]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

D24O wrote...

SomeKindaEnigma wrote...

This ending made me lawlz. As much as people on this forum wanted such an option, and they finally got it. Then you get pooped on by Bioware losing everything. Ultimate Lawlz.

Not having seen the refusal ending, and reading things like this, it seems like they did just to insult and spite us. One of the most common, non-happy ending requests was to win the game on out own terms, not on the catalysts, or at least to be able to argue with him. So what do we get? To lose. I really hope I'm wrong, because it seems they did this just to kick us in the balls one more time. 

To be fair, a common thing brought up was simply people saying "I'd still choose to refuse the Catalyst even if it meant losing."

I find it an interesting choice because Shepard CAN actually refuse the Catalyst.


I know it's not popular with some, but in my posts earlier I actually agreed with many posters that said the option to refuse the Catalyst should have been there, though I did state that if I did something like that I'd have it be a situation where the Reapers win.

Not to say "F U  fans" or anything of the like, but because I actually find it a more interesting choice and very complementary to the other choices.  If it was "fight conventionally and win" then it just becomes "the choice" and it's less interesting in my opinion.

I'm downloading the DLC now (but am about to meet a friend so I won't play it for a couple of hours), but I think the options at the ending are better served by having this than not, simply because Shepard SHOULD be able to refuse the reapers.

JMO be gentle!

I enjoyed the refusel ending and the best of it is, I totally found it by accident. After the dialogue with the Catalyst I decided to shoot him in the head and what happened next completely surprised me. Overall, I liked it.

[D24O]

zaalbar76 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

To be fair, a common thing brought up was simply people saying "I'd still choose to refuse the Catalyst even if it meant losing."

I find it an interesting choice because Shepard CAN actually refuse the Catalyst.


I know it's not popular with some, but in my posts earlier I actually agreed with many posters that said the option to refuse the Catalyst should have been there, though I did state that if I did something like that I'd have it be a situation where the Reapers win.

Not to say "F U  fans" or anything of the like, but because I actually find it a more interesting choice and very complementary to the other choices.  If it was "fight conventionally and win" then it just becomes "the choice" and it's less interesting in my opinion.

I'm downloading the DLC now (but am about to meet a friend so I won't play it for a couple of hours), but I think the options at the ending are better served by having this than not, simply because Shepard SHOULD be able to refuse the reapers.

JMO be gentle!

I enjoyed the refusel ending and the best of it is, I totally found it by accident. After the dialogue with the Catalyst I decided to shoot him in the head and what happened next completely surprised me. Overall, I liked it.

Like I've said earlier, my interpertation of it really depends on how the next cycle wins. While I was hoping that maybe there would be a chance to win conventionally, at great cost to those living in the galaxy right now, it doesn;t make sense in the context of 3. But having actually seen it, and going with the interpertatoin  they won on their own, it does come across as very hopeful. It's not the "You don't like my endings? Then F off" that some people make it out to be.

[tamperous]

It is a pure paragon choice I asked for when Jessica solicited opinions. I'm a bit was disappointed it didn't result in any hope of the survivaln of the current species. Coming after the past 4 months it can also be seen as the creative team taunting those who reject the ending choices. I accept now, mass effect was never about cooperation and unity overcoming the odds. Solutions can only come from a godlike intervention that causes genocide, using the reapers to create a fascist regime of control, or involuntary genetic intervention.

Just don't advertise choice for your next trilogy.

Modifié par tamperous, 27 juin 2012 - 03:37 .

[Yakko77]

I have a deep love/hate for Refusal ending. I loved the fact that Shep could call out Star Brat and not buy his circular logic and basically tell him to go to he!!. It was Shepard at her finest. Her calling the shots and not being lead into something she doesn't believe in. Then the game writers kill you and everyone else for it. I found that to be very spiteful. As if the writers were annoyed that fans didn't like their original endings. It's like they said, "Oh, you don't like or get our brilliant endings? Well here's a new one, everyone dies. Now go away. *middle finger to fans* " I mean, if that wasn't their intent then that's sure how it came across to this fan and I've seen many other comments that feel the similarly.

[blacqout]

I think that it could have been written so that the Reapers were actually beatable conventionally. Shepard's cycle had several advantages that previous ones didn't, such as having prevented the Reapers element of surprise and ability to access galactic records through the citadel, and the ability to study actual Reaper technology which provided a big jump in weapon technology.

However, it is made clear that it's not possible in Mass Effect 3. We see the fleet we spent the whole game collecting not fare especially well against just the Reapers near Earth, so i didn't have much hope the refusal option would end in anything other than destruction for the cycle.

So for me, the refuse option appeared foolish and stubborn. The Destroy option is a much more appealing one, simply because you get to actually win that freedom Shepard speaks about. The Reapers no longer loom over the galaxy and it is free to grow as it sees fit.

I read that one of the BioWare eomployees stated that that in the refuse option, the next cycle uses the crucible anyway. So even in retrospect, Shepard is just passing the buck. My Shepard doesn't shy away from making tough decisions.

[thefallen2far]

John Epler wrote...

I would have, as well.

Given the restrictions on DLC, and the absolutely insane amount of work that would have gone into such a scene (IE, expect the EC sometime in December), I'm happy with what we got. I imagine that the ME team would have loved to do that too, but yeah. Resource/time restrictions are a very real thing.

How much do you need? Honestly. We can probably find the funds. We raised tens of thousands of dollars in a few days, I'm sure we can get something hammered out.

If your development team wants to do it, and we want it and give you whatever time and resources you need.... make it happen.

[Afrolash]

I chose refusal as my canon decision. Our cycle went down fighting submitting heavy losses to the Reapers. We left a beacon of hope to the next cycle telling them the crucible doesn't work. They can use this knowledge and the archives we left them to develop weapons with the sole purpose of killing Reapers.

I will pick this option everytime. The scene at the end showed it worked, maybe not the next cycle maybe not for 10 cycles but eventually organics win on their own terms.

The ending doesn't show how our cycles battle ends you could even propose Shepard gets off the citadel and joins the alliance to continue fighting, spending his last time alive with his love interest battling until the end

"No Compromise No Surrender"

[Lord Goose]

Based on ME1 and ME2 alone, Bioware could have written a
so-called conventional victory i.e. unite the entire galaxy,
create technology based on Sovereign, study Sovereign's
weaknesses, ramp up weapon and defense production, lay
ambush for the Reapers at the Alpha/Batarian Relay, etc.
Heck, something like detonating the Batarian Relay at the same time the Reapers were coming through would have
wiped out many of the Reaper fleet, yes? Not to mention
that you had found out the Geth were actually allies
(possibly the first time synthetics have ever allied with
organics?) Add in the rachni, something to do with dark
energy, and there you go. An ending that doesn't require a Crucible and Space Magic.

Well, in ME1 Sovereign challenged Alliance fleets alone and it was almost one-sided battle. And he promised, that where is enough Reapers to cloud every sky of every inhabited world in the Galaxy. Since when I always knew, what it require some ancient super-powerful device to defeat them.

Galaxy still highly improved from studying remains of Sovereign. Now 3-4 drednaughts can defeat Reaper. We actually see some Sovereign-class Reapers being blown up in final combat.

But Reapers still have to be unmanageable threat to preserve narrative. If it was possible to defeat them conventionally, where was no need for Shepard, nor for his mission.

[M Hedonist]

tamperous wrote...

It is a pure paragon choice I asked for when Jessica solicited opinions. I'm a bit was disappointed it didn't result in any hope of the survivaln of the current species. Coming after the past 4 months it can also be seen as the creative team taunting those who reject the ending choices. I accept now, mass effect was never about cooperation and unity overcoming the odds. Solutions can only come from a godlike intervention that causes genocide, using the reapers to create a fascist regime of control, or involuntary genetic intervention.

Just don't advertise choice for your next trilogy.

Actually, the new Stargazer looks suspiciously like an Asari. It could be very well possible some species managed to survive into the next cycle - just like Javik did.

Modifié par Sauruz, 27 juin 2012 - 03:44 .

[Baronesa]

Sauruz wrote...

tamperous wrote...

It is a pure paragon choice I asked for when Jessica solicited opinions. I'm a bit was disappointed it didn't result in any hope of the survivaln of the current species. Coming after the past 4 months it can also be seen as the creative team taunting those who reject the ending choices. I accept now, mass effect was never about cooperation and unity overcoming the odds. Solutions can only come from a godlike intervention that causes genocide, using the reapers to create a fascist regime of control, or involuntary genetic intervention.

Just don't advertise choice for your next trilogy.

Actually, the new Stargazer looks suspiciously like an Asari. It could be very well possible some species managed to survive into the next cycle - just like Javik did.

Not only that...

Refusal has Shepard acting like Shepard (no reason to trust the Reaper's headhoncho). Fine, our cycle is toast (I wish EMS would factor in this, but that didn't happen... anyways).

Liara's message is clear: THE CRUCIBLE DIDN'T WORK. "Hope that you can avoid the same mistakes we made. We fought the Reapers, but we failed to stop them. We did everything we could. We built the Crucible, but it didn't work. We fought as united galaxy, but it wasn't enough."

Let that sink in for a minute.

There is no reason for the next cycle to build a new crucible if they know in advance that it does not work (And No... no way the Reapers woul d leave the crucible attached to the Citadel for the lulz, when they desroyed it if you waited too long... remember that?)

So, if Liara warns them that the Crucible does not work and the new Stargazer (very Asari looking, sounds like a young Aethytha too.. ) said tht the info from previous cycle led to peace and for them to not be threatened...

We could infere that the next cycle won in their own terms... no crucible means no RGB... so Refuse is not pointless... you just paved the way for epic victory to the next cycle.. and there is a slim chance that at least 1 race survived to see the new cycle (Asari).

Modifié par Baronesa, 27 juin 2012 - 04:05 .

[Moofy76]

Obeded the 2nd wrote...
Ok, when you pick refusal everyone in our cycle dies, Reapers continue.
Now I see why you may pick this (you hate all the other options) so your told  the cycle after ours stops the Reapers.
They did this through Liara's capsule, this showed them how to build the crucible which would lead them to one of the three options you refused, and chose one.
This means all you do is kill everyone you know for no reason, hence the title name.

Refusal is basically Shephard being indecisive or not haviing the balls to make a choice.. he can't make a decision, thus the Catalysts balance of life in the galaxy heading towards chaos is restored.

Are you sure the capsule told them they have to chose one of the 3 options?? I don't think it did, Liara would not have known that either.. how could she.

[Zix13]

As Allan said earlier, refuse makes a lot more sense if you don't base your choice on the actual outcomes, since your character is unaware of these outcomes when making that decision.

In fact, you should keep in mind that your mortal enemy is telling you to kill yourself because it will help the galaxy because it says so. Think about it from a first person standpoint. You have no reason to trust it and no reason to believe that the options will actually work. All the options are detrimental to the reapers goal, with the possible exception of synthesis.

So there is most certainly a reason to pick refuse, even without moral considerations.

[thefallen2far]

MaleQuariansFTW wrote...

People said they wanted to refuse starkids options. They let you do that. How is that them saying eff you?

Are you serious? If you don't understand the concept, I'll give you a few examples.

Returning a dinner to the kitchen at a restaurant because it was undercooked and they heat it up and then spit in it, is an "eff you".

Saying you want a raise to your boss and he tells you fine, just go to the 8th floor, they'll help you there, and you find out there's an unemployment line. That's and "eff you"

Asking an artist that you comissioned to add a bit of red to a painting they're making and he changes all the light bulbs to red in the entire room, is an "eff you".

Saying you want your garden sheers back from your neighbor and him leaving it in the carcass of your dog and leaving it at your doorstep, is and "eff you".

Are you kinda following what and "eff you" is now. Did we clarify it?

[Lalalandia]

Moofy76 wrote...

Refusal is basically Shephard being indecisive or not haviing the balls to make a choice.. he can't make a decision, thus the Catalysts balance of life in the galaxy heading towards chaos is restored.

Accepting a false dichotomy (or trichotomy in this case...) is not 'having balls' it's being foolish. I see no reason to believe the Star Child at all so why would I accept that any of these choices has any positive outcome for the galaxy?

[Erixxxx]

thefallen2far wrote...

John Epler wrote...

I would have, as well.

Given the restrictions on DLC, and the absolutely insane amount of work that would have gone into such a scene (IE, expect the EC sometime in December), I'm happy with what we got. I imagine that the ME team would have loved to do that too, but yeah. Resource/time restrictions are a very real thing.

How much do you need? Honestly. We can probably find the funds. We raised tens of thousands of dollars in a few days, I'm sure we can get something hammered out.

If your development team wants to do it, and we want it and give you whatever time and resources you need.... make it happen.

It's not just a case of finances, it's also a matter of time. They've had several SP DLCs planned for a long time for ME3, and the EC completely halted production on those. There's only so much they can do at one time. If they went forward with the idea proposed here, no other DLC would be made in that time. They don't have unlimited manpower.

[upsettingshorts]

I liked it and didn't mind that it meant the current cycle fell, as it is made clear the next cycle is ultimately victorious.

[Erixxxx]

Zix13 wrote...

As Allan said earlier, refuse makes a lot more sense if you don't base your choice on the actual outcomes, since your character is unaware of these outcomes when making that decision.

In fact, you should keep in mind that your mortal enemy is telling you to kill yourself because it will help the galaxy because it says so. Think about it from a first person standpoint. You have no reason to trust it and no reason to believe that the options will actually work. All the options are detrimental to the reapers goal, with the possible exception of synthesis.

So there is most certainly a reason to pick refuse, even without moral considerations.

This is important to remember. Everyone playing the EC has the benefit of hindsight. The characters in the actual game don't have that.

[tamperous]

blacqout wrote...



So for me, the refuse option appeared foolish and stubborn. The Destroy option is a much more appealing one, simply because you get to actually win that freedom Shepard speaks about. The Reapers no longer loom over the galaxy and it is free to grow as it sees fit.

At the cost of a geth genocide that my Shepard fought to stop. My character wouldn't accept that.

She'd prefer Control because paragons often delude themselves into thinking they are incorruptable. However they always are corrupted, but the character doesn't know that.

[cavs25]

The rejection ending is best when you refuse the catalyst not when you shoot him.
When you shoot him you don't get to hear one of the best speeches in the mass effect series.

[Ryzaki]

Baronesa wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

tamperous wrote...

It is a pure paragon choice I asked for when Jessica solicited opinions. I'm a bit was disappointed it didn't result in any hope of the survivaln of the current species. Coming after the past 4 months it can also be seen as the creative team taunting those who reject the ending choices. I accept now, mass effect was never about cooperation and unity overcoming the odds. Solutions can only come from a godlike intervention that causes genocide, using the reapers to create a fascist regime of control, or involuntary genetic intervention.

Just don't advertise choice for your next trilogy.

Actually, the new Stargazer looks suspiciously like an Asari. It could be very well possible some species managed to survive into the next cycle - just like Javik did.

Not only that...

Refusal has Shepard acting like Shepard (no reason to trust the Reaper's headhoncho). Fine, our cycle is toast (I wish EMS would factor in this, but that didn't happen... anyways).

Liara's message is clear: THE CRUCIBLE DIDN'T WORK. "We did everything we could. We built the Crucible, but it didn't work. We fought as united galaxy, but it wasn't enough"

Let that sink in for a minute.

There is no reason for the enxt cycle to build a new crucible if they know in advance that it does not work (And No... no way the Reapers woul d leave the crucible attached to the Citadel for the lulz, when they desroyed it if you waited too long... remember that?)

So, if Liara warns them that the Crucible does not work and the new Stargazer (very Asari looking, sounds like a young Aethytha too.. ) said tht the info from previous cycle led to peace and for them to not be threatened...

We could infere that the next cycle won in their own terms... no crucible means no RGB... so Refuse is not pointless... you just paved the way for epic victory to the next cycle.. and there is a slim chance that at least 1 race survived to see the new cycle (Asari).

See I would've been fine with this. Hell that's what I was expecting. I would've preferred a kamikaze run that severely damages Reaper forces as well. Not enough to win but enough for the next cycle to have an easier time of it. And for *that* cycle to defeat the Reapers conventially.

But Gamble tweeted that they use the Crucible anyway.

So yeah the ending is just BW being petty and going "WELL THE CRUCIBLE IS NEEDED!1111!!!" even with a 40K year headstart.

Ridculous.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 27 juin 2012 - 04:05 .

[Dorje Sylas]

What disappoints me the most now is Casey Hudson. It's fairly clear his ego has damaged this franchise and this "comical" ending that was added as playful "middle finger" to the fan base is both in poor taste and seems typical of Casey Hudson's thought process throughout ME3.

Casey, go suck a lemon and join Michael Bay as a hack director. Your services are no longer appreciated.

Modifié par Dorje Sylas, 27 juin 2012 - 04:05 .

[Persephone]

cavs25 wrote...

The rejection ending is best when you refuse the catalyst not when you shoot him.
When you shoot him you don't get to hear one of the best speeches in the mass effect series.

Agreed.

Don't SHOOT Starkid, REFUSE him. Way more fulfilling.

[MadRabbit999]

thefallen2far wrote...

MaleQuariansFTW wrote...

People said they wanted to refuse starkids options. They let you do that. How is that them saying eff you?

Are you serious? If you don't understand the concept, I'll give you a few examples.

Returning a dinner to the kitchen at a restaurant because it was undercooked and they heat it up and then spit in it, is an "eff you".

Saying you want a raise to your boss and he tells you fine, just go to the 8th floor, they'll help you there, and you find out there's an unemployment line. That's and "eff you"

Asking an artist that you comissioned to add a bit of red to a painting they're making and he changes all the light bulbs to red in the entire room, is an "eff you".

Saying you want your garden sheers back from your neighbor and him leaving it in the carcass of your dog and leaving it at your doorstep, is and "eff you".

Are you kinda following what and "eff you" is now. Did we clarify it?

Sorry not to defend anyone here, but your example makes no sense at all in relation with what refusal is in ME.. if you really want to make an example is more like:

Annoying Kid: Whaaa... whaaa,  I did not like the ME endings because it did not allow me to tell the kid to get lost, whaa!

Story teller: Well there is no point, the reapers are too strong anyways

Annoying Kid: Whaaa, whaa I want to tell the reapers to get lost

Story Teller: Fine, you tell them to get lost, then they swarm around the crucible and kill everyone, happier now?

Annoying Kid: Whaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!

But personally, I do not believe that's what they did, and this makes the most sense to me, the reapers cannot be stopped with how many numbers of ships you have, that would be just lazy writing... "Yes, 10 billion ships should do, as opposed to 10 millions"

Modifié par MadRabbit999, 27 juin 2012 - 04:09 .

[Persephone]

Dorje Sylas wrote...

What disappoints me the most now is Casey Hudson. It's fairly clear his ego has damaged this franchise and this "comical" ending that was added as playful "middle finger" to the fan base is both in poor taste and seems typical of Casey Hudson's thought process throughout ME3.

Casey, go suck a lemon and join Michael Bay as a hack director. Your services are no longer appreciated.

Comical? COMICAL?

Did we see the same scene?