362 réponses à ce sujet

[soulprovider]

 actually refusal is a politcal statement as much sa the other endings are a political  statement, its statement is this if you choose to fight for freedom and unity through diversity(you know one of the overall themes of the series) then you will be snuffed out, only those who conform to Socialism, ****sm, or genocide will be victorious against overwhelming odds.

I should have known better than to expect a possible victory through our EMS in that endings, because the hidde message in those endings would be lost on the general populace and instead it would push that freedom and democracy and diversity could succeed if people were willing to fight hard enough and sacrifice enough for it.

As i've said in the past EA is not above putting political messages in advertising and gaming if you want proof look up on youtube the your mom will hate dead space 2 commercial and making of it and then research Mature video games supreme court decision(I think those key wods would bring it up, but basically it was the supreme court case about whether or not california could enforce a mature games ban.) 

Listen to the words of that commercial carefully.

Ofcourse i'm starting to get into tin foil hat territory but I would not be surprised if this was on purpose for political reasons. 

[Alienboy411676]

Zero132132 wrote...

It was their response to people wanting to be able to reject the Catalyst's options. They didn't make it so that the Crucible suddenly was no longer needed, which would invalidate a substantial portion of the plot, they just allowed you to reject these endings, and then showed the realistic consequences.

Not really a '**** you,' since it fits completely with the plot. They were trying to appease people that essentially didn't want to use the Crucible, but they weren't going to chance it so that the Reapers were suddenly defeatable conventionally. I think people only see it as a "**** you" if they thought that the Reapers were substantially weaker than the entire rest of the series implies.

This.  I don't see it as a middle finger.  I think it was a nice addition.  Sucks that it results in Shep's cycle being wiped out, but what else could BioWare have done? If the cycle wasn't wiped out because of the Reject ending then that would have meant the war had to go on and had to be won at some point, which would have meant BioWare would have had to add a LOT of post - DLC or created a post - ME4, which they aren't planning on doing.  People asked for a Reject choice, BioWare gave it to them.  The cycle being wiped out was the only way it could work without making BioWare scrub all their current DLC and (potentially) ME Prequal ideas just so they could make a post ME4 for people who want to have their cake and eat it too.

[Clayless]

cavs25 wrote...

Doesn't Vigil say something about not even the Reaper's standing a chance against the galaxy united?

No.

[Allan Schumacher]

Yumi50 wrote...

...WOW.............just WOW.....

And I've always thought BW was all about making-decision-choose-you-option-make-a-choice RPG all along.

EMS for nothing, such a wasted opportunity.

Can't-*******-believe-it.

Do you feel that providing this as a choice is no longer about "making-decision-choose-you-option-make-a-choice" RPG?

I admit I'm not entirely sure what you're saying when you use that phrase.

I don't feel that the ending would be more interesting without this choice.


I guess it depends on what you want with "choice."  Is choice equivalent to "direct the narrative in the way that I want to direct it" or is choice more about "providing alternatives that have different consequences."

I'm about to load the DLC up again myself (finally).

[Rodia Driftwood]

I don't care if I lost because I told Starchild to go F$%^ itself. I flipped it off and I don't regret it.

[dreman9999]

Han Shot First wrote...

I think it was put in the game specifically to debunk Indoctrination Theory. And it suceeds.

How does it debunk IT?

[Obadiah]

Refusal is the Rorschach option.

"Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise."

[soulprovider]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

cavs25 wrote...

Doesn't Vigil say something about not even the Reaper's standing a chance against the galaxy united?

No.

 

He states that a united galaxy could result in the reapers having a harder time fighting..

[John Epler]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Yumi50 wrote...

...WOW.............just WOW.....

And I've always thought BW was all about making-decision-choose-you-option-make-a-choice RPG all along.

EMS for nothing, such a wasted opportunity.

Can't-*******-believe-it.

Do you feel that providing this as a choice is no longer about "making-decision-choose-you-option-make-a-choice" RPG?

I admit I'm not entirely sure what you're saying when you use that phrase.

I don't feel that the ending would be more interesting without this choice.


I guess it depends on what you want with "choice."  Is choice equivalent to "direct the narrative in the way that I want to direct it" or is choice more about "providing alternatives that have different consequences."

I'm about to load the DLC up again myself (finally).

At the end of the day, I never expected my forces to take out the Reapers. I was undergunned, undermanned and outclassed by a race of sentient machines that had access to technology which one can assume is the sum total of countless 50 000 year cycles of technological evolution.

Refuse was my principled stand. My rejection of the gilded shackles, and my Shepard's statement that dying in battle was preferable to living under the thumb of a mad AI god, or pulling a Red Son and putting the world in a bottle that I had full control of.

It wasn't necessarily appropriate for my canon Paragon shep (who was all about Control because he was, essentially, Superman in Red Son), but I still liked the option. Yeah, this cycle lost out, but we took the Reapers to the mat and set up the next cycle to deliver the finishing blow.

[staindgrey]

I love the refusal option. Absolutely love it. An ending doesn't have to be "happy" to be good. My Shepard didn't compromise her ideals, didn't sell out one race for the sake of another, and didn't destroy all she'd fought for in order to achieve some sort of fake utopia. Her cycle may not have succeeded, but it put the biggest dent in the Reapers to date, and it saved the next one.

The ending is still riddled with basic storytelling problems and yet unexplained plotholes, but I'm letting those go. This was enough, and I thank Bioware for giving us this extended cut. It was a lot of work in a short period of time with no price tag. I can't complain anymore.

[Nefla]

I was shocked when the traditional shooting of the catalyst ended up being a choice lol. It was a depressing ending yes, but I like it a lot better than control and not much less than Synthesis. At least the reapers were destroyed eventually in that ending and people have hope. (even if it's not you or anyone you love or care about)

[Necrotron]

So, I tried it.  The moral of the story, don't try and reject the storywriter's logic, it will only end in saddness.  Still, might end up best the least worst ending for me.

Guess I'll try Control or Synthesis next time, since Destroy is so downright cruel and evil, I can't even consider it.

Modifié par Bathaius, 27 juin 2012 - 05:38 .

[cavs25]

I would have liked it if after you rejected the catalyst, you would have seen your war assets go down fighting...

[FabricatedWookie]

When the eff are people going to realize the whole thing is absurd because it is just one drop in a much greater universe? Or also known as your contention that it matters NOW is invalid.

[2papercuts]

staindgrey wrote...

I love the refusal option. Absolutely love it. An ending doesn't have to be "happy" to be good. My Shepard didn't compromise her ideals, didn't sell out one race for the sake of another, and didn't destroy all she'd fought for in order to achieve some sort of fake utopia. Her cycle may not have succeeded, but it put the biggest dent in the Reapers to date, and it saved the next one.

The ending is still riddled with basic storytelling problems and yet unexplained plotholes, but I'm letting those go. This was enough, and I thank Bioware for giving us this extended cut. It was a lot of work in a short period of time with no price tag. I can't complain anymore.

The refusal ending actually had less plot holes than the others

[jds1bio]

John Epler wrote...

At the end of the day, I never expected my forces to take out the Reapers. I was undergunned, undermanned and outclassed by a race of sentient machines that had access to technology which one can assume is the sum total of countless 50 000 year cycles of technological evolution.

Refuse was my principled stand. My rejection of the gilded shackles, and my Shepard's statement that dying in battle was preferable to living under the thumb of a mad AI god, or pulling a Red Son and putting the world in a bottle that I had full control of.

It wasn't necessarily appropriate for my canon Paragon shep (who was all about Control because he was, essentially, Superman in Red Son), but I still liked the option. Yeah, this cycle lost out, but we took the Reapers to the mat and set up the next cycle to deliver the finishing blow.

Very well said.

This ending gave more meaning to every ME trilogy decision that seemed to have a convenient replacement waiting in the wings (Rachni, council save/destroy, Wrex, etc.).  When you know your actions either spared people from - or forced them to face - the Reaper threat, your final moments of reflection on the Citadel are loaded ones indeed.

[Tracido]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Tell me you didn't just equate socialism and synthesis.

Yes, yes he did.  Much like, genocide fits the current insano xian conservatism, eh?

Overall I didn't like the execution of any of this ****.

What I did like, was the fact that it was at least done at all, point is all of the EC should have been in the goddamn game to begin with, end of story...

I enjoyed it, sorta, and hated it sorta, have to say 50/50 on this one add on ending...

Modifié par Tracido, 27 juin 2012 - 05:50 .

[darthnick427]

You are clearly confusing refusal with synthesis. that is the worst ending. Refusal is cool. I always wanted a reapers win ending and it happened.

[jds1bio]

2papercuts wrote...

The refusal ending actually had less plot holes than the others

Yep!

[DiebytheSword]

I don't mind the Refusal option at all, I do however see the shoot the GUARDIAN/Catalyst to start it version as a very unsubtle troll.

[FlyingCow371]

All the original choices sucked and had pretty major downsides. Refusal should've been there from the start, and it's nice that it's there, but I guess it also needs to suck and have major downsides else it wouldn't fit in as well with the other options. It would've been nice if with stupid high EMS you were able to actually win. But having a real victory would make the other sucky choices, well, more obviously sucky. Perhaps having to select among bad options is the artistic integrity, shepard isn't allowed a clean victory.

[The_Crazy_Hand]

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!

See, I get what you're saying, I really do, but if we factor in "Reaper Vulnerabilities", "The Miracle at Palaven", and have really high War Assets, it should logically be possible to win conventionally.  Especially with Thanix cannons.

[John Epler]

cavs25 wrote...

I would have liked it if after you rejected the catalyst, you would have seen your war assets go down fighting...

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.

Of all the endings, Control is still the most appropriate to my canon Shepard.

But to me? Refuse is the human option. It's making your own destiny and forging your own path. It's refusing the handouts of 'superior beings' (I don't trust Destroy - every other 'gift' the Reapers have offered, Mass Relays and helping the Geth has little hooks all over it) and choosing to go down fighting.

Plus, Refuse lets me believe that Zaeed is the next cycle's version of Javik. And that's a thought to keep me warm at night.

[RainbowDazed]

Refuse ending was awesome. It'll definately be the canonical ending for my reckless renegade Shepard who has the all or nothing attitude.