402 réponses à ce sujet

[Zombie Inc 91]

I can see how it could be taken as an insult. It's very empty compared to the other endings, so it doesn't seem hard for people to take Starkid's "SO BE IT!" as a "FINE THEN!" from the devs. All it needed was an equivalent to the victory scenes from the other endings, but showing all the planets falling to make it feel as valid as the others. If I'd gotten that (and maybe a high cost, bittersweet conventional victory with super high EMS), I'd maybe overlook the fact that I hate the reaper's motivation and the Starkid.

But unless a dev drops in and confirms "Bioware officially hates you guys!", we won't know if it was ment to be insulting, if they just thought people wouldn't think that way, they ran out of resources or just overlooked it.

[JPR1964]

withneelandi wrote...

I don't think its an insult.

I was very much in the "I reject these choices camp" and was as critical of the games original ending as anyone, when I loaded up the EC I went straight to reject and when I heard "so be it" I had a wry smile and realised that there was a bit of a meta gaming joke going on.

Its not insulting, its a bit cheeky and also quite witty, don't be so po faced,

I think if you want to look at the reject ending on a meta level its fair play for the writers to say "what you STILL don't like the end of the game we made and you won't play by the rules we set, so be it, you loose".

Thats how games work, and yes its a bit cheeky, but also a bit funny.

No, I kindly disagree with this opinion...

If I was playing a free game, no problem with this sort of reaction : but probably, in a pnp rgp, I will never play again with the GM that does this to me...

Here, this is simply an insult, not by the effect, but by the realisation of the end itself...

BW can forgot me for anything related to ME and I will never preorder anything to them...

Very disapointing,

JPR out!

[AngryFrozenWater]

UrdnotGrunty2 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

wryterra wrote...

I am arguing that if they're going to give us the reject choice they do it better than this, in a way that doesn't strike me personally as insultingly dismissive.

Just to be clear, would you have preferred there to be no refuse option at all, to what was provided?


It IS shorter, but is it really dismissive?  If it was just to be a shot at the fanbase, wouldn't it have been better to just say "oh well you lose" and wrap it up there?

Instead we get a video showing Liara talking about our past experiences and even get a unique sequence with a Stargazer where Shepard's legacy lives on based on what the future cycle learned from all of his hard work.

In fact, even with the refuse ending, the galaxy is still ultimately able to break free of the Reapers and largely holds Shepard responsible for being able to do so.

Stop the PR you were told to give and realize it's an insult because there is no way to get your 'happy ending' unless you take the choices bioware originally gave us which insulted us and are still badly written endings fille with plotholes just better than the ones we had before because they are the same endings.  And the one ending that makes sense and isn't thematically revolting at the very least there is no possible way for Shepard to win his happy ending so to speak, and the way it's written it makes it sound as if the writers are angry at the fans for criticizing their piece of crap work on the endings because thats what it is especially compared to the rest of the story.

I personally think rejection provides the most closure, and also feel it is the most thematically correct and keep Shepard in character, however I also believe it is the ending where Bioware holds up their middle finger at us telling us to screw off.

I don't like the option either and I too think it is a nonsensical idea. However, can you please tone it down a bit. Allan happens to work on Dragon Age. He also happens to be a fan of ME. You are not talking to a PR brainwashed pawn of EA. He's just as much human as you. Show some respect.

[Mr.House]

I didn't mind reject until a friend told me Bioware comfirmed that the next cycle did use the cruible, despitet he fact Liara said it did not work.

1:Give Shepard epic speech? check
2:Have Shepard act like Shepard? check
3:Show starbrats true colors? check
4:Don't do anything and pull bs? check

[Evelien]

gusdorf wrote...

Anyone else "reject your choice" by shooting the catalyst/kid?

Yeah, I intended to go for destroy but wanted one last shot just for ****s and giggles. I laughed my arse off at the SO BE IT.

That said, I am willing to put down the shorter ending due to reasons like lack of space (they did mention something of a limit for DLC) and take that to good faith, but I do dislike the fact that the next generation used the crucible anyway. Made the last struggle on earth feel very obsolete. Might as well have stopped fighting the reapers after Liara shows her project, since that's what is saving the next cycle.

[MindSweeper14]

My only problem with "reject" was the fact that it scared the bejesus out of me when I went to put a bullet in starbrat! It did seem pretty brief but it's not like we weren't told we "can't beat the Reapers conventionally". Turns out Hackett was right... I liked the twist with the stargazer scene at the end too.

[covertdrizzt]

I didn't take it as an insult. I thought it was funny and fitting because, Hacket tells you that victory without the crucible is impossible. I really thought it was funny that its the ending you get if you shoot the catalyst. I guess I could take it as a backhanded insult but, that makes it more funny.

[Essla]

It makes very little sense to argue that "if you could win without the crucible, everyone would choose that option." Of course they would. You're only pointing out how bad the other options were all along. In fact, that's all that this option does. It reveals the Reaper "star child" for what he really is and shows us that we don't have to play his little game. Except the writers decided to fade to black instead of actually letting us fight.

Shepard and the fans deserved better than some deus ex machina space magic that is in no way connected to everything else you've done over the course of three games. Why shouldn't the series have a good, satisfying final victory? Even if Shepard dies. Even if there are high casualties. Why shouldn't we be able to win the war without sacrificing our principles? Remember, we just told the Illusive Man that he "sacrificed too much." Now the Catalyst is asking us to do the same thing. All this ending does is shine a light on that fact. We either sacrifice our principles, or it's game over. Adding this option, but not letting us win this way, just feels like adding insult to injury. You come all this way with Shepard only to let the Reapers win, one way or another.

For myself, I'll choose Destroy and just pretend that EDI and the geth died heroic deaths in a big final battle against the Reapers. That will be close enough to the ending I wanted.

As for "conventionally," I got so tired of hearing that word. It was so obviously injected into the game as an excuse for the ridiculous ending choices. Nothing about Shepard or what she has achieved has been "conventional." She faced down a Reaper solo on Rannoch, that's pretty unconventional. She destroyed a human Reaper in the Collector Base, that's pretty unconventional. Don't give me "we can't win conventionally." Defying the odds is what Shepard does best.

MuKen wrote...

Furthermore, you don't count this one as game completion on the achievements. You can earn the insanity completion achievement for any other ending, but not this one. You are telling us by choosing this, we failed to complete the game. How much clearer can it get?

Ouch. Well, there we have it. You really did lose the game if you chose this option. That sounds like a pretty big insult to me.

[PoisonMushroom]

I've been thinking about this a bit more.

I don't think it's meant as an insult. I think Bioware wanted to retain their endings as the three big choices but offer an alternative to anyone that wants to stick to their morales regardless of the consequences.

They couldn't have made it a victory choice, because that would just make the original three endings (particularly destroy) redundant.

[Cyberfrog81]

I didn't see it as an insult. How could I? I've desired this option (even if it doesn't end well), and got it.


The good:
- Enjoyed Shepard's speech.
- Enjoyed the angry response to it.
- Enjoyed seeing Liara's idea put to use.
- New Stargazer scene! Somehow it becomes the message of hope that the original stargazer scene failed to be.

The bad:
- No confirmed IT (in the sense that Shepard can break free, fight back, and win). Wait... as it turns out I can actually live with that.
- Shepard turns from badass rebel to lost puppy in a heartbeat.
- Very short; we lost the war, fine, but would've liked to see more battle scenes (with the occasional success story, but mostly how bad it got, how people we know died, etc.,), and the (hopefully epic) death of Commander Shepard.

Modifié par Cyberfrog81, 27 juin 2012 - 10:43 .

[Mythosaeon]

I'm beginning to look at the 4th option as yet another sign that Bioware is simply out of touch with many of it's fans. In several games they've shown a trend toward the gameplay being more cinematic than player driven as in the early games - from Bioware's various comments in their minds they don't see it - many fans do.

The reject option presentation takes this to an even further level of not only not being gameplay the player does not actively experience much less determine the outcome of and not even a cinematic experience of seeing the Reapers defeat the combined forces of the entire galaxy - but just a canned AI exposition - story telling at it's most remote.

Yes I'd really rather that have had simply been left alone - whether it comes across as intentionally spiteful or just painfully out of touch, it solidifies the reality that the Bioware of the start of the millenium is gone.

Anakin has been replace by Darth Vader, the EAmperor and armies of whiteknighting troopers...

[Computim]

I don't see it as an insult either... throughout the game we've been given the opportunity to make OUR choice with OUR character. That's why the end forcing us to choose 3 that we didn't think made sense was so hated.

Even our good choices sometimes resulted in deaths... in this case if we don't want to sacrifice ourselves, or admit the bad guy actually was right, or commit genocide, or force change on people, we can still choose stubborn defiance. I love that. THAT is my Mass Effect. (though I think Control is actually my favourite choice at this point).

Even with this ending Society doesn't die instantly... It would have been like the Protheans dying over 900 years... maybe less. Life would still go on, there was no massive mass relay death to everyone worse than doing nothing ending.. they gave us exactly what we wanted.. we could tell the Citadel Kid where to put his solution, and live with the consequences... or die, we don't know, but it made sense and had closure not knowing. You know the end, you just don't know the path to get there.

Modifié par Computim, 27 juin 2012 - 10:45 .

[Evo_9]

Refusal ending makes no sense.

The catalyst admits the cycle no longer works...yet it continues? wah?

We still dont know why the catalyst takes the form of a child, we just have to assume the AI is reading shepards mind....how stupid.

[prem0nition]

I also see this ending as a bit of a middle finger to the fans. Not by Bioware itself, but by a certain writer and Executive Producer. Unfortunately for them, everything was played so sincerely by the voice actors, the animators etc that the reject ending actually works. Sure, they should have done more with it. Expanded it so we can see everyone go down fighting, give us the option to win with horrific losses to the galaxy, leaving it in ruins after the last Reaper falls. But regardless of them not doing so, I can't describe how happy I felt as my Shepard gave the "If we die, we die free" speech.

And personally, I choose to ignore twitter comments about the next cycle using the crucible and focus what's in game, that being Liara telling the next cycle that the crucible didn't work. I'm happy enough to use my own imagination here to say that they took everything we learned about the reapers and found another way to defeat them.

[Keelah117]

That choice seems.... Weird? It makes no sense..

[Computim]

prem0nition wrote...

And personally, I choose to ignore twitter comments about the next cycle using the crucible and focus what's in game, that being Liara telling the next cycle that the crucible didn't work. I'm happy enough to use my own imagination here to say that they took everything we learned about the reapers and found another way to defeat them.

Exactly.  The 'twin moon' end dialog that they replaced Buzz Aldrin's scene with basically says that.  The woman states that "They fought the war so we didn't have to"... it sounds like the end of the Shepard cycle was hard fought with the reapers so there was nothing left... probably the citadel was destroyed too wiping out the Citadel Kid.

Modifié par Computim, 27 juin 2012 - 10:57 .

[Helios969]

I thought it was awesome and clever and made me laugh. If it was an FU, then it's something I can respect a whole lot more than raising the ol' artistic integrity barriers. Also, it was great from the standpoint that it surprised the h*ll out of me, something that I rarely experience anymore.

[warlock22]

It was an insult, BW saying "you don't agree with us, well then you loose" f*ck off BW.

[NightHawkIL]

I actually loved the "SO BE IT" line, it just confirmed all the evil things that we knew star child was, and made me all the happier that I could reject him. What I did not at all care for was the pitiful amount of effort put into the results of that ending. That was where I saw the writers middle finger shine through.

Modifié par NightHawkIL, 27 juin 2012 - 11:04 .

[Computim]

NightHawkIL wrote...

I actually loved the "SO BE IT" line, it just confirmed all the evil things that we knew star child was, and made me all the happier that I could reject him. What I did not at all care for was the pitiful amount of effort put into the results of that ending. That was where I saw the writers middle finger shine through.

You gotta realize they actually had Liara do a LOT extra voice acting for that part.. they added an entirely new cutscene.. heck they added an entirely new ending.. that's not really a middle finger, that was an olive branch.

[Shepard Wins]

Essla wrote...

It makes very little sense to argue that "if you could win without the crucible, everyone would choose that option." Of course they would. You're only pointing out how bad the other options were all along. In fact, that's all that this option does. It reveals the Reaper "star child" for what he really is and shows us that we don't have to play his little game. Except the writers decided to fade to black instead of actually letting us fight.

Shepard and the fans deserved better than some deus ex machina space magic that is in no way connected to everything else you've done over the course of three games. Why shouldn't the series have a good, satisfying final victory? Even if Shepard dies. Even if there are high casualties. Why shouldn't we be able to win the war without sacrificing our principles? Remember, we just told the Illusive Man that he "sacrificed too much." Now the Catalyst is asking us to do the same thing. All this ending does is shine a light on that fact. We either sacrifice our principles, or it's game over. Adding this option, but not letting us win this way, just feels like adding insult to injury. You come all this way with Shepard only to let the Reapers win, one way or another.

For myself, I'll choose Destroy and just pretend that EDI and the geth died heroic deaths in a big final battle against the Reapers. That will be close enough to the ending I wanted.

As for "conventionally," I got so tired of hearing that word. It was so obviously injected into the game as an excuse for the ridiculous ending choices. Nothing about Shepard or what she has achieved has been "conventional." She faced down a Reaper solo on Rannoch, that's pretty unconventional. She destroyed a human Reaper in the Collector Base, that's pretty unconventional. Don't give me "we can't win conventionally." Defying the odds is what Shepard does best.

MuKen wrote...

Furthermore, you don't count this one as game completion on the achievements. You can earn the insanity completion achievement for any other ending, but not this one. You are telling us by choosing this, we failed to complete the game. How much clearer can it get?

Ouch. Well, there we have it. You really did lose the game if you chose this option. That sounds like a pretty big insult to me.

Now, THAT is well said!

[AngryFrozenWater]

Like I said in the other thread, the option doesn't make sense because it delays using the 3 options to be used in the next cycle. And in the meantime it kills everyone here. So it is not an option to those who cannot stand the circular logic of the brat (kill organics to prevent them from creating synthetics that destroy organics); or to those who noticed that synthetics cannot be a threat for the simple reason that they were never a threat, until the dark energy script leaked on the internet and BW plucked the threat from thin air to replace it; or to those who cannot stand the borderline war-crime-like methods required to finish the game.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 27 juin 2012 - 11:19 .

[DragonRageGT]

Like other players, I will always choose Destruction and, for me, EDI and the Geth are alive and kicking after that. After all, the starkid is a little lier. Just like its creators.

I would love to be able to reject him and still complete the game but since that is not possible and that I've been dying for the chance to destroy the Reapers since ME1, I will kill them all. Always!

[SirEuain]

Allan Schumacher wrote...


Just to be clear, would you have preferred there to be no refuse option at all, to what was provided?

I'm honestly uncertain. The ending is still abrupt and does not flow from the prior storylines -- the organics/synthetics dichotomy was barely referenced in ME2, and pointedly shown to be false both there and just hours previously in ME3. It still feels like a narrative cheat to say that the only valid choices are genoicde, slavery, or megalomania. Adding another type of genocide to the list doesn't exactly improve matters, and the primary problem I had was that Shepard couldn't point out the glaring flaw in the godchild's reasoning -- a flaw still present and still untouched.

This doesn't feel like a real option, so much as faint lip service. This ending, essentially, comes off like a token acknowledgement that refusal should have been there, while forgetting the reasons why it should have been a valid option in the first place. Let people die. Hell, let the reapers win, so long as it's a real fight and they take real losses. Just don't act like it's an appropriate outcome to force Shepard to unquestioningly embrace three objectively terrible options, then act like the fourth one is worse without justifying it.

Yes, it's better that Shepard no longer implicitly trusts the very entity responsible for all the galaxy's suffering. No, it's not something to celebrate that he's still not willing to draw upon personal and valid experience to show the godchild that the godchild may be objectively wrong. For three games, Shepard fought and sacrificed to save lives.

It is, frankly, ludicrous that the final message should be that it's not enough unless he commits warcrimes, too.

It IS shorter, but is it really dismissive?  If it was just to be a shot at the fanbase, wouldn't it have been better to just say "oh well you lose" and wrap it up there?

Frankly, that's not all that far off from what I just saw. Shepard stands by helplessly as everything he fought for dies, rather than lift a finger to stop the godchild or persuade the entity. "I kill my loyal friends and allies, I force my will upon everyone, or I enslave my enemy" are shown to be superior options to "no, those options are grossly wrong," but the only argument put forward is "because."

I don't think it was written to be intentionally insulting, but I do think it was written without much thought for why people had a problem with the other endings in the first place.

Instead we get a video showing Liara talking about our past experiences and even get a unique sequence with a Stargazer where Shepard's legacy lives on based on what the future cycle learned from all of his hard work.

In fact, even with the refuse ending, the galaxy is still ultimately able to break free of the Reapers and largely holds Shepard responsible for being able to do so.

It's a pity we have no idea why. The reapers are not infallible, and this was the first time the galaxy truly stood united against them, and are repeatedly shown to be vulnerable to Shepard's allies -- except the reapers win anyway, without further explanation or even notable casualty. The crucible doesn't work, because it doesn't work -- Shepard makes no effort to persuade the godchild whatsoever, when he's previously been shown willing to work with even his dire enemies, much less an entity that nominally wishes to help him. Liara's logs are somehow expected to be helpful, when even she's not certain what went wrong or why -- the only valid new data she'd add to the Protheans' would essentially be that the crucible was a waste of time and resources.

How is it logical that Shepard responsible for saving the galaxy in this ending? 

[wryterra]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

wryterra wrote...

I am arguing that if they're going to give us the reject choice they do it better than this, in a way that doesn't strike me personally as insultingly dismissive. 

Just to be clear, would you have preferred there to be no refuse option at all, to what was provided?


It IS shorter, but is it really dismissive?  If it was just to be a shot at the fanbase, wouldn't it have been better to just say "oh well you lose" and wrap it up there?

Instead we get a video showing Liara talking about our past experiences and even get a unique sequence with a Stargazer where Shepard's legacy lives on based on what the future cycle learned from all of his hard work.

In fact, even with the refuse ending, the galaxy is still ultimately able to break free of the Reapers and largely holds Shepard responsible for being able to do so.

Hey Allan, thanks for adding the BioWare tag on one of my threads, heh.

I've already answered this earlier in the thread but I'll answer again happily: Yes I would have preferred no refuse option at all compared to what was provided. 

My reason for saying that is because what was added, as I think I've made clear by now, I find insulting. Especially now I've learned that it doesn't actually count as a game completion for the purposes of achievement. That seems to be a deliberate comment that it is a way to end the game, not complete it. As it wasn't in the original ending that means this insult has been deliberately added. 

We actually did get an 'oh well you lose'. Liara's ideo, talking about our past experience, said nothing about our past experience. It reenforced the 'oh well you lose'. Correct me if I'm wrong but she covers the points: we built a crucible, it didn't work, we died. I'd have loved to hear how she described Shepard's history on the time capsule but all we got was 'Shepard failed'. Is that not dismissive? We know that 'archive' contains our entire history but the only bit BioWare chose to include in the ending was 'Shepard failed'. 

The Stargazer isn't dismissive, I'll give you that but then the Stargazer scene is a couple of lines and I'm sure it was included to maintain the structure of the ending, not because the fans demanded a better Stargazer scene. That said I was interested that the Stargazer looked a little Asari like, as described in the original leaked ending. 

Considering that comments from BioWare said no new options, no new endings during EC production I was expecting that to be true, considering that unwise pre-release comments caused a lot of the original complaints. When I saw a new option, despite what had been said, I thought it might be a wonderful surprise. 

It was a surprise but it wasn't wonderful.