Aller au contenu

Photo

Refusal is the most dumb choice in Mass Effect


362 réponses à ce sujet

#26
nitefyre410

nitefyre410
  • Members
  • 8 944 messages

Kawamura wrote...

I thought the "LET'S MAKE EVERYONE FRIENDS BY REMOVING THEIR DIFFERENCES AND NOW EDI HAS FEELINGS AND SYNTHETICS AND ORGANICS CAN GET ALONG" was the dumbest choice, to tell the truth.

Not only does it reek of privilege ("why wouldn't everyone like to be the same? We could be colorblind! 8D"), but EDI HAD FEELINGS AND THE GETH AND THE QUARIANS WERE GETTING ALONG TEN HOURS AGO IN MY GAME ARGH.

 

Image IPB    


Because according to Bioware as long as there are differences between people, spieces, etc... there will be no peace.  

And yeah people what trumpet this drivel  Bioware is spewing as "ART" and what games should be about...<_<  

#27
SinZinDetta

SinZinDetta
  • Members
  • 98 messages

Heeden wrote...

The whole game centred around the Crucible being our only shot of stopping the Reapers, if you decide not to use it we have no chance of stopping the Reapers.


What about them war assets?

#28
robertm2

robertm2
  • Members
  • 861 messages
they included it to give everyone the finger. just a big "heres your different ending so ha!". just further proof that bioware can not take criticism and that the company we knew and loved has been fully corrupted by ea.

#29
TheDonk95

TheDonk95
  • Members
  • 703 messages
I don't give a flying f**k about the IT.
I think it is very stupid to pick the Refusal ending, since you earn nothing by it. The entire trilogy was pointless if that's what you pick eventually.
But it was also pretty funny. Shepard's all like "Ok... now what?" after the space kiddo tells him says to him that he f**ked up.

#30
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 601 messages
Considering that it was inevitable that we would be stuck with the Crucible / Catalyst nonsense then I actually quite like the way that Reject was handled, even if a complete re-write would've been a million times better.

#31
Kawamura

Kawamura
  • Members
  • 1 960 messages

nitefyre410 wrote...

Kawamura wrote...

I thought the "LET'S MAKE EVERYONE FRIENDS BY REMOVING THEIR DIFFERENCES AND NOW EDI HAS FEELINGS AND SYNTHETICS AND ORGANICS CAN GET ALONG" was the dumbest choice, to tell the truth.

Not only does it reek of privilege ("why wouldn't everyone like to be the same? We could be colorblind! 8D"), but EDI HAD FEELINGS AND THE GETH AND THE QUARIANS WERE GETTING ALONG TEN HOURS AGO IN MY GAME ARGH.

 

Image IPB    


Because according to Bioware as long as there are differences between people, spieces, etc... there will be no peace.  

And yeah people what trumpet this drivel  Bioware is spewing as "ART" and what games should be about...<_<  




Right?

Try that logic IRL. "Hey, Kawamura, I know you're a black, queer transperson. I'm a straight, white man. You know what would help our relationship? What would make us get along? Why don't we just -- erase those differences. We can be the same! Won't that fix everything?

"Kawamura? Hey, Kawamura, where are you going? I offended you? BUT YOU SHOULD BE COLOUR BLIND. LET'S ALL BE THE SAME. NO ONE LIKES DIFFERENCES"

Which is why I hate the Synthesis ending the most and why I really hate that it's the 'good' one. Jesus. 

#32
jengelb1

jengelb1
  • Members
  • 78 messages
Something to consider:

The next cycle will find Liara's capsule, which gives them a lot more information than any other cycle ever had. They'll know about the Citadel, the relays, reaper IFFs, Thanix cannons, indoctrination, and reaper strengths and weaknesses.

With advanced notice, the races of the next cycle could reverse engineer the Citadel relay to figure out where in dark space the reapers sleep, then send a huge fleet through it and blow them up before they know what hit them. The reapers need to power down and recharge between cycle, so any that survive the initial strike will have to power themselves up, and even then likely won't be at full strength. To say nothing of the confusion and surprise they'd feel at being attacked in their "safe place".

Shepard lost the battle, but wins the war.

#33
Jarcander

Jarcander
  • Members
  • 823 messages
It's nice that it was there. You know, not too many game companies would go an extra mile just to bring you all this butt cletching.

#34
CautionLust

CautionLust
  • Members
  • 35 messages
Well, from what I read, i wouldn't mind have such an ending. People live in sugar-coated world for too long.

#35
jumpingkaede

jumpingkaede
  • Members
  • 1 411 messages

Obeded the 2nd wrote...

Uzzy wrote...

Obeded the 2nd wrote...
This means all you do is kill everyone you know for no reason, hence the title name.


Yeah, no. Refusal means you stay true to the very core principles that make Shepard who he is. Everything he's fought for. You choose your own ending to civilization, rather then compromising those core principles to survive. You choose your own fate, rather then accepting the Starchild's spurious reasoning.

And then you die, having done everything possible to defy the fate chosen for you by the Reapers.

It's the only ending that makes thematic sense, and had they added in some playable (or otherwise) scenes of your forces fighting to the very end, ala Halo Reach, it'd quite possibly have saved the entire game.


Yes but the next cycle picks a soultion.


If we assume the next cycle simply gets asked the same 3 choices and the "Shepard" of Cycle X+1 simply goes "Control sounds good, let's roll with that" then I agree, the Refusal choice is incredibly dumb.

I was hoping, at WORST, to get a Reach ending (back in March).  Something like Shepard and everyone fighting to the bitter end and making victory over the Reapers possible.  Of course, the pro-enders will say  that defeating the reapers conventionally is impossible ignoring that the only reason it's impossible is because ME3 says it's impossible.  

Silly reasoning, that.  And circular.  ME3 says winning conventionally is impossible to establish the Crucible as the only solution.  Just as easily Bioware could have rid itself of the Crucible solution and gone with the winning "conventionally" because Shepard and everyone he knows fights to the end and dies but with the surviving 5% of the fleet victory is won.   Again, something similar to Reach.

#36
Welsh Inferno

Welsh Inferno
  • Members
  • 3 295 messages
Not that I particularly like the endings or anything but refusal ended mostly how it should have. Kinda pleased that atleast there is a Reaper win scenario now(which should have existed from the start ffs)

Or do people still think the Reapers could be defeated conventionally? :whistle: 

Modifié par Welsh Inferno, 26 juin 2012 - 09:07 .


#37
KingZayd

KingZayd
  • Members
  • 5 344 messages
better than synthesis, better than control...

better than destroy? I haven't decided yet.

#38
Vilegrim

Vilegrim
  • Members
  • 2 403 messages

Obeded the 2nd wrote...

Uzzy wrote...

Obeded the 2nd wrote...
This means all you do is kill everyone you know for no reason, hence the title name.


Yeah, no. Refusal means you stay true to the very core principles that make Shepard who he is. Everything he's fought for. You choose your own ending to civilization, rather then compromising those core principles to survive. You choose your own fate, rather then accepting the Starchild's spurious reasoning.

And then you die, having done everything possible to defy the fate chosen for you by the Reapers.

It's the only ending that makes thematic sense, and had they added in some playable (or otherwise) scenes of your forces fighting to the very end, ala Halo Reach, it'd quite possibly have saved the entire game.


Yes but the next cycle picks a soultion.


or having heard that the crucible doesn't work..makes a ship out of shields and thanix cannons the size of the citadel, fills it with marines with pistol sized full auto cains, and proceeds to slaughter the reapers.  AKA pretty much what we should have done.

#39
jumpingkaede

jumpingkaede
  • Members
  • 1 411 messages

Welsh Inferno wrote...
Or do people still think the Reapers could be defeated conventionally? :whistle: 


/shrug

Citing events from ME3 to support that Reapers cannot be defeated conventionally is as convincing as citing proof from the Bible that Jesus is real.

Without trodding on religion, that is essentially what you would be doing, yes?  

In ME3 as written Reapers cannot be defeated conventionally.  Agreed and accepted.

But that is not the same as saying ME3 could not have been written otherwise had Bioware not decided to go with the Crucible/Catalyst-as-only-option ending.

Modifié par jumpingkaede, 26 juin 2012 - 09:14 .


#40
Guest_Cthulhu42_*

Guest_Cthulhu42_*
  • Guests

jumpingkaede wrote...

Welsh Inferno wrote...
Or do people still think the Reapers could be defeated conventionally? :whistle: 


/shrug

Citing events from ME3 to support that Reapers cannot be defeated conventionally is as convincing as citing proof from the Bible that Jesus is real.

Without trodding on religion, that is essentially what you would be doing, yes?  

In ME3 as written Reapers cannot be defeated conventionally.  Agreed and accepted.

But that is not the same as saying ME3 could not have been written otherwise had Bioware not decided to go with the Crucible/Catalyst-as-only-option ending.

This.

#41
Dragoonlordz

Dragoonlordz
  • Members
  • 9 920 messages
I like that choice, made me laugh. Plus it alows you to stick up for your idiologies if your Shepard does not concede to any arguement the AI comes up with or dislike every possible other choice. The outcome was good, there is consequence for taking such a stand and went down exactly as I thought it would and should. If you just try to argue with the AI instead of trying to save as many lives as you could picking a choice and instead rather bicker with a computer AI your not going to convince it is wrong, it is not a person it is a machine so unless you can reprogram as apposed to bicker your gong to get nowhere and everyone is going to die around you while you get stroppy with it. It should not end in victory, doing such would invalidate all other choices as opposed to providing an alternative choice.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 26 juin 2012 - 09:17 .


#42
SP2219

SP2219
  • Members
  • 159 messages
The concept of a refusal ending is very good, but it should have ended in victory.  It should have been the best ending from the get go.  If what you are saying is that the way they did it was dumb, then I agree with you.  The fact that it results in complete failure no matter what you do is unbelievably stupid.

In contrast, the concept of all the other choices is extremely dumb, but the way they were produced is somewhat acceptable and makes them seem slightly more intelligent than they actually are.  But not by much.

I laughed at the synthesis ending.  I really don't know what Bioware are about anymore.

#43
recentio

recentio
  • Members
  • 912 messages
Yeah...how convenient that the writers shyt all over the choice that doesn't march to the beat of their precious Starchild scenario.

#44
jengelb1

jengelb1
  • Members
  • 78 messages
I had another idea about how this cycle could win, sort of. Basically, they find out where in dark space the reapers sleep. Then they fire every single thing they have in that direction.

Remember what that guy on the Citadel said about Sir Isaac Newton being the "deadliest SOB in space"? Those shells won't stop until they hit something and if the calculations are correct, that something will be a bunch of powered down and unshielded reapers.

That, along with the data from Liara's capsule, will give the next cycle a pretty good chance of winning the old fashioned way.

#45
Comguard2

Comguard2
  • Members
  • 374 messages
Bioware really tries to intentionally annoy people.

Really, Priestly, are you listening? Why did you ask just a couple of weeks before if people believed in this Indoc-theory when at that time it was probably clear that there would be an extra-cutscene with the only purpose of giving the Indoc-people the finger?

Bioware = professional trolls.

#46
Ginkasa

Ginkasa
  • Members
  • 112 messages
I LOL'd. I didn't mean to pick it. I just thought it would fine funny if I shot the hologram (and knowing that it previously did nothing). Then he was all like, "SO BE IT!" and I was like, "NO! lol"

#47
jumpingkaede

jumpingkaede
  • Members
  • 1 411 messages

Ginkasa wrote...

I LOL'd. I didn't mean to pick it. I just thought it would fine funny if I shot the hologram (and knowing that it previously did nothing). Then he was all like, "SO BE IT!" and I was like, "NO! lol"


I think (and hope) that was the joke Bioware intended.

#48
Dragoonlordz

Dragoonlordz
  • Members
  • 9 920 messages

Comguard2 wrote...

Bioware really tries to intentionally annoy people.

Really, Priestly, are you listening? Why did you ask just a couple of weeks before if people believed in this Indoc-theory when at that time it was probably clear that there would be an extra-cutscene with the only purpose of giving the Indoc-people the finger?

Bioware = professional trolls.


He's on holiday shows much attention you pay to what goes on around you...

IDT should not and would never have been used. That is not their story they wished to create and never was, that is your story you wished to play only.

#49
Dragoonlordz

Dragoonlordz
  • Members
  • 9 920 messages

Ginkasa wrote...

I LOL'd. I didn't mean to pick it. I just thought it would fine funny if I shot the hologram (and knowing that it previously did nothing). Then he was all like, "SO BE IT!" and I was like, "NO! lol"


:lol:

#50
malakim2099

malakim2099
  • Members
  • 559 messages

Comguard2 wrote...

Bioware really tries to intentionally annoy people.

Really, Priestly, are you listening? Why did you ask just a couple of weeks before if people believed in this Indoc-theory when at that time it was probably clear that there would be an extra-cutscene with the only purpose of giving the Indoc-people the finger?

Bioware = professional trolls.


How often do you pay $100-300 and invest 100+ hours of game play to be trolled though? That IS Space Magic! :wizard: