402 réponses à ce sujet

[mrcanada]

Sauruz wrote...

spacefiddle wrote...

They did not include Harbinger's voice with the Starchild by accident. 

You are right, they did not include Harbinger's voice.
Seriously. Why does everybody say that? Did nobody ever hear Harbinger's voice? I always thought he was kind of obnoxious but now people pretend they can't tell his voice from any other.

Are you insinuating that Harbringer's voice does not come out of the Starchilds mouth in the Refusal ending?  Or that he doesnt' talk to you right before blasting you during the rush to the beam?  If so, you need to just stop.

[mrcanada]

Kastrenzo wrote...

Haters gonna Hate

Defnders gonna defend.  Stay blind and accept.

[squee365]

So, you're saying they shouldn't have included the reject ending at all?

[I_Jedi]

Refusal made sense.

Hackett and others said time and time again that there is no way to win without the Crucible.

Presumably, the Yahg are helped a lot.

It also gives the "Reapers win" ending. Game felt incomplete without one.

Modifié par I_Jedi, 27 juin 2012 - 07:30 .

[Allan Schumacher]

spacefiddle 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?

False choice.

You cannot be unaware of every issue brought up with the ending by now.  It is very telling that your first question is "well if it was that or nothing, would you really want nothing?" instead of addressing why a large number of people could interpret such a thing as a cheap shot.  Would you prefer I ignore you, or kick you in the nuts?  That's no kind of choice at all, and I'm pretty sure you know that.

It's not a false choice.  It's a direct question to help me understand the poster's position.  I am specifically asking him if he'd prefer the choice not be presented rather than what was given.

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?

False logic.  "If we were going to insult you, wouldn't we have done a more efficient job of it?"  Again, sidestepping the issue of the content of the 4th ending and deflecting it to "huh? what? why would we do such a thing?"  But let me answer your question: yes, it is dismissive.  You sucker us in to thinking, holy crap, they've really pulled off something amazing here.... Harby is Godboi like the Indoc folks said he was!  Shep's rejecting the IM and Saren choices, and refusing to commit genocide on the Geth!  And then, you just pull the rug out.

Are you really proud of this?  Will you look back on this moment in your career, and think, you know, we really did something worthwhile there?

Your attempt to deflect this, and the entirety of the 4th choice ending, does not stand up to the slightest amount of logical scrutiny.  Just like the original endings.  So no; nothing has been achieved other than a very expensive slap delivered to people who actually cared about your company and your story.  Well done.

Well then.  At the same time I think people just see what they want to see.  Frankly your post was rude and pretentious, magnified by the fact that you demonstrated you actually didn't actually understand what I was asking and tried to be witty about it with "False <point>" to open your statements.  If you wish to be dismissive of me trying to talk with the fans (as a fan myself, since most posters here are quite understanding of the fact that I don't work on the Mass Effect team), you're free to not respond to my posts.

If you feel that this was an attempt by the Mass Effect team to flip you the bird, I do not feel there is anything I can say to you to convince you otherwise.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 27 juin 2012 - 07:30 .

[antares_sublight]

If the Catalyst had not changed his voice, spoken with such disdain and stormed out, the Refusal ending would not have seemed at all like a Freudian swipe from BioWare toward dissatisfied players. The concept of the Refusal ending and the way it plays out is an interesting option, and I appreciated that they added it.

The "execution" (to borrow BioWare's terminology) led to it seeming like it was written late at night by a steaming Hudson furiously typing away after reading the BSN.

There's no logical reason for the Catalyst to be upset, if the cycle continues, he's fine with it. Shepard rejects the options and the cycle continues, why should the Catalyst care? The Catalyst's unnecessary attitude led it to seem like something it probably wasn't meant to seem like. (Yes, I'm giving BW the benefit of the doubt on this one).

[Temprathe]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

You still win the war while not making the choices that a lot of people thought were "morally detestable". That's why I liked the Reject ending, although I didn't choose it personally. 

[mrcanada]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

spacefiddle 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?

False choice.

You cannot be unaware of every issue brought up with the ending by now.  It is very telling that your first question is "well if it was that or nothing, would you really want nothing?" instead of addressing why a large number of people could interpret such a thing as a cheap shot.  Would you prefer I ignore you, or kick you in the nuts?  That's no kind of choice at all, and I'm pretty sure you know that.

It's not a false choice.  It's a direct question to help me understand the poster's position.  I am specifically asking him if he'd prefer the choice not be presented rather than what was given.

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?

False logic.  "If we were going to insult you, wouldn't we have done a more efficient job of it?"  Again, sidestepping the issue of the content of the 4th ending and deflecting it to "huh? what? why would we do such a thing?"  But let me answer your question: yes, it is dismissive.  You sucker us in to thinking, holy crap, they've really pulled off something amazing here.... Harby is Godboi like the Indoc folks said he was!  Shep's rejecting the IM and Saren choices, and refusing to commit genocide on the Geth!  And then, you just pull the rug out.

Are you really proud of this?  Will you look back on this moment in your career, and think, you know, we really did something worthwhile there?

Your attempt to deflect this, and the entirety of the 4th choice ending, does not stand up to the slightest amount of logical scrutiny.  Just like the original endings.  So no; nothing has been achieved other than a very expensive slap delivered to people who actually cared about your company and your story.  Well done.

Well then.  At the same time I think people just see what they want to see.  Frankly your post was rude and pretentious, magnified by the fact that you demonstrated you actually didn't actually understand what I was asking and tried to be witty about it with "False <point>" to open your statements.  If you wish to be dismissive of me trying to talk with the fans (as a fan myself, since most posters here are quite understanding of the fact that I don't work on the Mass Effect team), you're free to not respond to my posts.

If you feel that this was an attempt by the Mass Effect team to flip you the bird, I do not feel there is anything I can say to you to convince you otherwise.

Honestly, the Refusal choice is seen as a middle finger for a few reasons, but none more thanchoosing to use Harbringers voice.  That single moment directly addresses the IT theory and the Starchild only speaks in that voice in that one scene.  The IT itself insinuated that Harbringer was in control of the entire ending sequence and you chose to address, then further dismiss it.

[M Hedonist]

mrcanada wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

spacefiddle wrote...

They did not include Harbinger's voice with the Starchild by accident. 

You are right, they did not include Harbinger's voice.
Seriously. Why does everybody say that? Did nobody ever hear Harbinger's voice? I always thought he was kind of obnoxious but now people pretend they can't tell his voice from any other.

Are you insinuating that Harbringer's voice does not come out of the Starchilds mouth in the Refusal ending?  Or that he doesnt' talk to you right before blasting you during the rush to the beam?  If so, you need to just stop.

I'm insinuating that it's a completely different voice. It simply isn't the voice Harbinger has in ME2.
For comparison:
SO BE IT
Harbinger's voice

[UWxMaserati]

I_Jedi wrote...

Refusal made sense.

Hackett and others said time and time again that there is no way to win without the Crucible.

The catalyst goes on about how he needs a new solution because the old one will no longer work and offers an option in destroy that also kills him.

When you refuse he suddenly goes back to his stradegy that he just said would no longer work and gives an angry reaction that goes against the laws an AI should be bond by. His priority was to protect organics from being completely whipped out by synthetics and prioritized it so highly that he would accept death in the destroy option.

Refusal is just another big contradiction that defies the new set AI logic and is a pretty blantant middle finger to those who rejected the ending. It doesn't make sense.

[mrcanada]

Temprathe wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

You still win the war while not making the choices that a lot of people thought were "morally detestable". That's why I liked the Reject ending, although I didn't choose it personally. 

You don't win, that is the point.  You are wiped out and the choices you refused to make are made by the next cycle.  Only then do they win. 

[Turran]

How can people see this as a middle finger?
It kind of seems like you are now just finding a reason to be insulted or find a flaw with the new EC. Ofcourse the DLC is not flaw free mind you, as Bioware have admitted it does not answer every question.

But it is most certainly not a middle finger from them. If anything it was something the fans wanted. People screamed "I want to be able to say 'No!' I want the choice to not accept his proposal!" so they added it.
Without it, you would be railroaded into 3 choices, this opens a very unique and interesting fourth.

Shepard would of died on the Citadel after rejecting it, or maybe he was saved. Maybe we fought for years to come? Maybe we were wiped out within a year. Either way the scene with Liara's box could of taken place 40,000 years into the future.
It was your choice to push away your options and that is the ending to it. You stood no chance without the device.

Was not a middle finger, was a fan request, gives you proper ending summing up your choice.

Modifié par Turran, 27 juin 2012 - 07:37 .

[mrcanada]

Sauruz wrote...

mrcanada wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

spacefiddle wrote...

They did not include Harbinger's voice with the Starchild by accident. 

You are right, they did not include Harbinger's voice.
Seriously. Why does everybody say that? Did nobody ever hear Harbinger's voice? I always thought he was kind of obnoxious but now people pretend they can't tell his voice from any other.

Are you insinuating that Harbringer's voice does not come out of the Starchilds mouth in the Refusal ending?  Or that he doesnt' talk to you right before blasting you during the rush to the beam?  If so, you need to just stop.

I'm insinuating that it's a completely different voice. It simply isn't the voice Harbinger has in ME2.
For comparison:
SO BE IT
Harbinger's voice

Harbringer is looking right at you when the voice comes across and it was added specifically in that scene.  It was intended to show Harbringer speaking, as is the So Be It as it is mixed with the Starchilds voice.

[mrcanada]

UWxMaserati wrote...

I_Jedi wrote...

Refusal made sense.

Hackett and others said time and time again that there is no way to win without the Crucible.

The catalyst goes on about how he needs a new solution because the old one will no longer work and offers an option in destroy that also kills him.

When you refuse he suddenly goes back to his stradegy that he just said would no longer work and gives an angry reaction that goes against the laws an AI should be bond by. His priority was to protect organics from being completely whipped out by synthetics and prioritized it so highly that he would accept death in the destroy option.

Refusal is just another big contradiction that defies the new set AI logic and is a pretty blantant middle finger to those who rejected the ending. It doesn't make sense.

I just said this.  Well spoken.

[Neothanos]

Sorry Alan but the refuse the option can be reasonably seen as you either use our endings or everyone dies.

[Shallyah]

I find the reject choice as a valid outcome.

Basically, you find all the options presented as morally wrong, and because you value your morales above the survival of the Galaxy as it is, you reject making a choice at all. Doing the morally correct thing does not equal winning. I really don't know how to express this without sounding passive-agressive, but really, Mass Effect is not a Disney movie where love triumphs and the shiny hero wins the day by standing in the moral highground. It's all I can say about it.

The creators of the setting are BioWare, and if they decided that the Reapers can not be defeated conventionally, then nobody has a right to say otherwise.

You lose, the cycle continues, but you stood up for what you believed, and that is passed on to the next cycle, while being hinted that thanks to Shepard's actions they did manage to remove the Reaper threat. It's still a victory, just not an immediate one that will save your own friends and words. In the bigger picture, the Reapers just get to harvest another half dozen of races, which is nothing compared to the thousands that they already harvested.


PS: The child changes his voice when Shepard rejects his solutions probably because at that point he has nothing to hide or sugar-coat anymore. He doesn't need to sweet-talk Shepard in that child's shape because he has failed to convince him. He's not necessarely upset, but simply uncaring about the repercussions that any further interactions with Shepard could have, since he has become insignificant to him at the point in which he chooses to not be part of his new solution.

Modifié par Shallyah, 27 juin 2012 - 07:48 .

[Tocquevillain]

antares_sublight wrote...

If the Catalyst had not changed his voice, spoken with such disdain and stormed out, the Refusal ending would not have seemed at all like a Freudian swipe from BioWare toward dissatisfied players. The concept of the Refusal ending and the way it plays out is an interesting option, and I appreciated that they added it.

The "execution" (to borrow BioWare's terminology) led to it seeming like it was written late at night by a steaming Hudson furiously typing away after reading the BSN.

There's no logical reason for the Catalyst to be upset, if the cycle continues, he's fine with it. Shepard rejects the options and the cycle continues, why should the Catalyst care? The Catalyst's unnecessary attitude led it to seem like something it probably wasn't meant to seem like. (Yes, I'm giving BW the benefit of the doubt on this one).

There is a logical reason and it is stated by the Catalyst straight up in the EC. Synethetics and organics each want a piece of the other, which is why synthesis is the final evolution of life.

[LKx]

I can accept that a conventional battle would lead to reaper win.
The problem with it is that Shepard just sit down and wait.

If that was Shepard's plan, it should have at least tried control, even under the convinction that  it was a trap, because (s)he wouldn't have anything to loss, and anything would be better thant stay there watching allies die.

My point is that, with a rejection option, Shepard should have tried something... trying to destroy the catalys himself (and i don't mean by shooting an hologram...),or calling a nuke toward the citadel core!

I would have been still totally ok for a reaper win even after this, but it would still have had some meaning.
What the reject option is now really looks like a middle finger

Modifié par LKx, 27 juin 2012 - 07:42 .

[M Hedonist]

mrcanada wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

mrcanada wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

spacefiddle wrote...

They did not include Harbinger's voice with the Starchild by accident. 

You are right, they did not include Harbinger's voice.
Seriously. Why does everybody say that? Did nobody ever hear Harbinger's voice? I always thought he was kind of obnoxious but now people pretend they can't tell his voice from any other.

Are you insinuating that Harbringer's voice does not come out of the Starchilds mouth in the Refusal ending?  Or that he doesnt' talk to you right before blasting you during the rush to the beam?  If so, you need to just stop.

I'm insinuating that it's a completely different voice. It simply isn't the voice Harbinger has in ME2.
For comparison:
SO BE IT
Harbinger's voice

Harbringer is looking right at you when the voice comes across and it was added specifically in that scene.  It was intended to show Harbringer speaking, as is the So Be It as it is mixed with the Starchilds voice.

Do you mean this?
It just sounds like a generic Reaper noise. Doesn't really sound like Harbinger, either. If you think they got Harbinger's voice actor and paid him to make that noise, and did all that just to troll people... well, I really don't even know what to say to that.

[Vaktathi]

What was wrong with the Crucible just being some doohickey that disabled the reapers (or just enough of them, or like their shields or something) and allowed a conventional victory?

I mean, was the awkward hamfisted kubrik-esque ending that was cut straight from DeusEx really that much better?

[Asch Lavigne]

I would've liked it fleshed out a little more. Did the Crucible just sit there and the Reapers destroyed all the fleets? What happened to Shep? Did she/he just fall over and die? And yeah, I agree with those saying that the starkid saying we need a new outcome and then oh nevermind, was kinda weird. But I guess he/it/whatever could just write it off as "those darn organics are still not ready."

It looked like a new capsule that Liara buried and not the one shown in game with gylph because she says things like "we failed."

Regardless, I liked that they included "The Cycle Continues" ending.

[mrcanada]

Sauruz wrote...

mrcanada wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

mrcanada wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

spacefiddle wrote...

They did not include Harbinger's voice with the Starchild by accident. 

You are right, they did not include Harbinger's voice.
Seriously. Why does everybody say that? Did nobody ever hear Harbinger's voice? I always thought he was kind of obnoxious but now people pretend they can't tell his voice from any other.

Are you insinuating that Harbringer's voice does not come out of the Starchilds mouth in the Refusal ending?  Or that he doesnt' talk to you right before blasting you during the rush to the beam?  If so, you need to just stop.

I'm insinuating that it's a completely different voice. It simply isn't the voice Harbinger has in ME2.
For comparison:
SO BE IT
Harbinger's voice

Harbringer is looking right at you when the voice comes across and it was added specifically in that scene.  It was intended to show Harbringer speaking, as is the So Be It as it is mixed with the Starchilds voice.

Do you mean this?
It just sounds like a generic Reaper noise. Doesn't really sound like Harbinger, either. If you think they got Harbinger's voice actor and paid him to make that noise, and did all that just to troll people... well, I really don't even know what to say to that.

If you are insinuating that he isn't saying anything or that it isn't Harbringer speaking when the only two things in that shot are Harbringer and Shepard, I'm done with this conversation.  

[kobayashi-maru]

For what its worth I liked it and it is shame wasn't in original where it could have been more cinematic. I always wanted the refusal, Normandy rescues Shepard and Crucible blows up as ships fight it out. Followed by empire strikes back scene of crew flying in different directions with timecapsules as shep and LI watch out Normandy windows. Cut to helmeted humanoids 45000 years later unearthing capsule flying in shuttle to huge destroyer, before it revealed it Yahg and robot under helmets. Dialogue about were as ready as we ever be to win, cut to outside as ships leave using warp or something not reaper based and hinting that they will win. Thats my head cannon anyways.

[Steel Dancer]

As others do, I like the option of the Refuse ending. The problem is the implementation of it.

I'm completely OK with it resulting in defeat, but it should have been fleshed out in the same way as the other options. Fight scenes/pictures with a devastated aftermath (similar to the 'Bad Destroy" endings) allies dying, etc.

That said: shooting a hologram resulting in galactic destruction seemed... kind of petty and trollish

[M Hedonist]

mrcanada wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

mrcanada wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

mrcanada wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

spacefiddle wrote...

They did not include Harbinger's voice with the Starchild by accident. 

You are right, they did not include Harbinger's voice.
Seriously. Why does everybody say that? Did nobody ever hear Harbinger's voice? I always thought he was kind of obnoxious but now people pretend they can't tell his voice from any other.

Are you insinuating that Harbringer's voice does not come out of the Starchilds mouth in the Refusal ending?  Or that he doesnt' talk to you right before blasting you during the rush to the beam?  If so, you need to just stop.

I'm insinuating that it's a completely different voice. It simply isn't the voice Harbinger has in ME2.
For comparison:
SO BE IT
Harbinger's voice

Harbringer is looking right at you when the voice comes across and it was added specifically in that scene.  It was intended to show Harbringer speaking, as is the So Be It as it is mixed with the Starchilds voice.

Do you mean this?
It just sounds like a generic Reaper noise. Doesn't really sound like Harbinger, either. If you think they got Harbinger's voice actor and paid him to make that noise, and did all that just to troll people... well, I really don't even know what to say to that.

If you are insinuating that he isn't saying anything or that it isn't Harbringer speaking when the only two things in that shot are Harbringer and Shepard, I'm done with this conversation. 

And I'm done with this conversation if you honestly believe they got Harbinger's voice actor to do that noise. I don't doubt that noise is supposed to be coming from Harbinger. But if they really wanted the Catalyst to sound like Harbinger they would have gotten Harbinger's voice actor for that line.
Good day.