531 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

Spartan212 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Spartan212 wrote...

So Bioware listened to its fans and gave you what you wanted for free and you're still crying about it? No matter how you try and spin it, 30 minutes into the game they told you that the crucible was the only way to win. They said numerous times that conventional war couldn't defeat the reapers. If you ignore that for 20 hours and try to do it anyway, you should lose. You should get the exact ending that they gave you. This is their game. It's their rules. Honestly, some of you would cry even if Bioware gave you a four-hour personalized ending. Get over it

Presentation matters, and in a medium like this it matters a lot.  The complaint was not that the 'reject' option is available.  Almost everyone approves....even if you ultimately might have to lose in this cycle, most people approve.  It's HOW it's done that makes it a big "F.U." to the fans. [Including the fact you aren't even allowed to shoot at holo-boy in frustration again...don't tell me that wasn't a response to 'understated nerd rage', I dare ya]

I don't understand "how it's done"=insulting.  You basically ignore what the game has told you for the past 20 hours and and try to shoot a hologram in the face.  I thought the ending was appropriate, even unnecessary.  The entire game tells you that you will lose if you don't use the catalyst.  So, in the end, you choose to....not use the catalyst.  The reapers win.  You lose.  Everyone is dead so there is no "what are they doing now" ending.  How anyone could possibly be insulted is beyond me.  

Many posters have patiently explained why, "how it was done", was insulting at best.  In short, even if this cycle most lose if we reject the solutions of the enemy (and if you talk to the Calalyst you find he is most DEFINATELY the enemy), then how we lose should be expanded on, because how we lose could have a huge impact on how )(or if) the next cycle can win.  In short, refer to your EMS.

Not only that, but the tweets by highly placed Bioware people saying, "Oh well the next cycle played ball" seems further evidence that this was in fact a "F.U." to the fans.

-Polaris

[AtreiyaN7]

Wow, really? Now they're insulted by having the option to say no? I do believe that I saw a fair number of people requesting a shot at rejecting all the choices. If you want to take that road, then honestly, you should have expected the universe to burn. We're not even as advanced as the Protheans, and they couldn't win a victory through conventional warfare. It's not an "FU" just because you people who believe that is was an insult had completely unrealistic expectations that you could somehow pull off a miraculous victory. I mean, excuse me, but Admiral Hackett flat-out says that we can't win conventionally. No matter how many shiny war assets you have, it's not happening. So revel in your freedom of choice to throw away our future! You got what you wanted, a chance to defy the Catalyst.

[thefallen2far]

Spartan212 wrote...

I don't understand "how it's done"=insulting.  You basically ignore what the game has told you for the past 20 hours and and try to shoot a hologram in the face. I thought the ending was appropriate, even unnecessary.  The entire game tells you that you will lose if you don't use the catalyst. So, in the end, you choose to....not use the catalyst.  The reapers win.  You lose. Everyone is dead so there is no "what are they doing now" ending. How anyone could possibly be insulted is beyond me.

If you really can't understand "how it was done" was insulting, then I suggest you stay out of the entertainment industry. Most industry professionals know 1. Find out why they're insulted. 2. Don't do that ever again.

So, having an ambiguous ending for those that don't like the catalyst's inclusion in the first ending, don't do it again in the extended cut.  And yes, having an ending that basically says "eff you, it's the Catalyst or nothing you whiners" is an insult. and I don't have to in any way be thankful for insults.

Modifié par thefallen2far, 27 juin 2012 - 07:18 .

[IanPolaris]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Wow, really? Now they're insulted by having the option to say no? I do believe that I saw a fair number of people requesting a shot at rejecting all the choices. If you want to take that road, then honestly, you should have expected the universe to burn. We're not even as advanced as the Protheans, and they couldn't win a victory through conventional warfare. It's not an "FU" just because you people who believe that is was an insult had completely unrealistic expectations that you could somehow pull off a miraculous victory. I mean, excuse me, but Admiral Hackett flat-out says that we can't win conventionally. No matter how many shiny war assets you have, it's not happening. So revel in your freedom of choice to throw away our future! You got what you wanted, a chance to defy the Catalyst.

See above.  It's the "you lose-->fade to black" (which is really not much different than the old critical failure screen) along with how it's presented that has people upset.  There are losses and then there are losses.  With a high EMS (and that SHOULD have been checked!), at least you should have been able to get a pyrric victory, i.e. this cycle loses but the next one doesn't have to play the Reaper's game....but per some tweets by Bioware, you don't even get that.  Petty is exactly what it is.

-Polaris

[Blacklash93]

IanPolaris wrote...
No.  I am basing my arguments on what Bioware has said both in their authorial device, Catlyist Boy (and it's reactions) as well as what they have said since (the infamous tweets that say...yeah the next cycle defeated the reapers out way, so nyah)

Also in entertainment such as this, what seems to be true and what is taken to be true is vastly more important that what may have been intended.  So even if the authors didn't mean this to be a big F.U. (and I still think they did) the fact it's being taken that way is just as bad.

Authroital Catalyst? Also a big presumption. As far as I'm concerned it's an info dump you draw your own conclusions on. The Catalyst is not a perfect being akin to a god. It's origin reeks of hypocrisy and its methods and reasoning are still incredibly questionable and inconclusive to the players perception. To the point it's undeniably intentional.

How can an authorital device be portrayed to have flaws? Riddle me that.

And the title of this thred: "not meant as FU" - If you're arguing that you're bashing an entirely different part of Bioware than its ability to craft stories. It's not the same.

[savionen]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Wow, really? Now they're insulted by having the option to say no? I do believe that I saw a fair number of people requesting a shot at rejecting all the choices. If you want to take that road, then honestly, you should have expected the universe to burn. We're not even as advanced as the Protheans, and they couldn't win a victory through conventional warfare. It's not an "FU" just because you people who believe that is was an insult had completely unrealistic expectations that you could somehow pull off a miraculous victory. I mean, excuse me, but Admiral Hackett flat-out says that we can't win conventionally. No matter how many shiny war assets you have, it's not happening. So revel in your freedom of choice to throw away our future! You got what you wanted, a chance to defy the Catalyst.

I find it funny that your signature basically says to draw your own conclusions but hey, Hackett's word is the word of god on the subject of fighting the Reapers, even though everyone said defeating Sovereign and the Collectors was impossible too.

[IanPolaris]

Blacklash93 wrote...
How can an authorital device be portrayed to have flaws? Riddle me that.

The Greeks did it all the time.  The god in question (or gods often) were openly written with many serious human-like flaws but were still authorial devices.

And the title of this thred: "not meant as FU" - If you're arguing that you're bashing an entirely different part of Bioware than its ability to craft stories. It's not the same.

Sure it is.  I disagree with the O.P.  Simple as that.

-Polaris

[redBadger14]

Baronesa wrote...

Tritium315 wrote...

It's definitely a **** you since every fan that ever wrote a refusal ending stipulated that with a ****load of EMS you would be able to beat the reapers; that's the whole point of those fan refusal endings. What we got was Casey and Mac basically telling us "You don't like our endings? **** you then, die."

THIS

All the post asking for a refuse option also asked for EMS to be factored on the result of such refusal.. but it is convenient to forget that part... right?

It is NOT possible to beat the Reapers through CONVENTIONAL MEANS. EMS means absolutely NOTHING if the Crucible is not used.

Convenient you guys forgot that part, right?

Great post Ieldra I agree 100%

[Spartan212]

IanPolaris wrote...

Spartan212 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Spartan212 wrote...

So Bioware listened to its fans and gave you what you wanted for free and you're still crying about it? No matter how you try and spin it, 30 minutes into the game they told you that the crucible was the only way to win. They said numerous times that conventional war couldn't defeat the reapers. If you ignore that for 20 hours and try to do it anyway, you should lose. You should get the exact ending that they gave you. This is their game. It's their rules. Honestly, some of you would cry even if Bioware gave you a four-hour personalized ending. Get over it

Presentation matters, and in a medium like this it matters a lot.  The complaint was not that the 'reject' option is available.  Almost everyone approves....even if you ultimately might have to lose in this cycle, most people approve.  It's HOW it's done that makes it a big "F.U." to the fans. [Including the fact you aren't even allowed to shoot at holo-boy in frustration again...don't tell me that wasn't a response to 'understated nerd rage', I dare ya]

I don't understand "how it's done"=insulting.  You basically ignore what the game has told you for the past 20 hours and and try to shoot a hologram in the face.  I thought the ending was appropriate, even unnecessary.  The entire game tells you that you will lose if you don't use the catalyst.  So, in the end, you choose to....not use the catalyst.  The reapers win.  You lose.  Everyone is dead so there is no "what are they doing now" ending.  How anyone could possibly be insulted is beyond me.  

Many posters have patiently explained why, "how it was done", was insulting at best.  In short, even if this cycle most lose if we reject the solutions of the enemy (and if you talk to the Calalyst you find he is most DEFINATELY the enemy), then how we lose should be expanded on, because how we lose could have a huge impact on how )(or if) the next cycle can win.  In short, refer to your EMS.

Not only that, but the tweets by highly placed Bioware people saying, "Oh well the next cycle played ball" seems further evidence that this was in fact a "F.U." to the fans.

-Polaris

The game isn't about the next cycle.  It's about the current one.  The catalyst wasn't used, the reapers overpowered our forces like the have every time before for millions of years, game over.  Wasn't that pretty much implied?  I didn't need it to be spelled out for me

[Baronesa]

savionen wrote...

I find it funny that your signature basically says to draw your own conclusions but hey, Hackett's word is the word of god on the subject of fighting the Reapers, even though everyone said defeating Sovereign and the Collectors was impossible too.

New rule! everytime a game character tells you something is impossible, you must give up because that is the word of god!

[Nightwriter]

AtreiyaN7 wrote...

Wow, really? Now they're insulted by having the option to say no? I do believe that I saw a fair number of people requesting a shot at rejecting all the choices. If you want to take that road, then honestly, you should have expected the universe to burn. We're not even as advanced as the Protheans, and they couldn't win a victory through conventional warfare. It's not an "FU" just because you people who believe that is was an insult had completely unrealistic expectations that you could somehow pull off a miraculous victory. I mean, excuse me, but Admiral Hackett flat-out says that we can't win conventionally. No matter how many shiny war assets you have, it's not happening. So revel in your freedom of choice to throw away our future! You got what you wanted, a chance to defy the Catalyst.

I'm not sure what a conventional warfare victory has to do with the desire to not drink the Catalyst's Kool-Aid.

[Temprathe]

I didn't take it as an "FU". I saw plenty of people lamenting the fact that they couldn't reject the Catalyst's choices and make their own choice as they had many times throughout the series, so they added it in. If you like one of the choices and don't have enough EMS, then, like any other point in the series, you cannot make the decision you want to.

And I think having the ability to shoot the Catalyst is a nod towards what a lot of people did comics on/posted videos of them doing. Shooting the Catalyst. Like you probably wanted to do anyway. I think that's more of an Easter Egg, really.

[MothrascoolerthenGodzilla]

I thought FU immediately, glad to see I wasn't alone.

[Lord Goose]

Maybe that already was brough up, but I also noticed, that final message says: "You have ended the Reapers threat", instead of "Commander Shepard ended Reapers threat". So, technically, even refuse is a victory, although in a sad way.

Probably, because Liara used less... complicated device to transfer data than Protheans, new races knew about Reapers threat, and spend large amounts of time, preaparing to fight them. So, when Reapers entered, they really fought against them on equal foothold and were victorious. Ultimately, your Shepard was right. It is possible to defeat the Reapers without the Crucible. Just not in that cycle.

I actually kind of like it. Do not think that it was meant to be trolling.

Modifié par Lord Goose, 27 juin 2012 - 07:22 .

[Cecilia L]

I didn't feel trolled by Reject. I was going to pick DESTROY, but first shot starkid and was thrilled when that led to an unexpected extra ending.

I liked that Bioware put that in there. Especially with the IT-supporting reaper voice. So interesting! More speculation for everyone! (sincere excitement)

[CrutchCricket]

grey_wind wrote...

There were a hundred different ways they could have had the Reject ending lead to a victory if they weren't so eager to tell everybody who hated their options to go f*ck off.

Catalyst: I am the Collective Consciousness of every Reaper.
Shepard: Really? Change of plans, Hackett. Have the entire fleet blow the Citadel to hell.
Catalyst: Wait, what are you doing?
Shepard: See, I remember what happened the last time a Reaper poured his consciousness into something and I destroyed that something. So if you claim to be the Collective Consciousness of every single Reaper.... see where I`m going with this?

Once the Catalyst has been blown into whatever balck hole of sh!t writing he came out of, and the shields of every single Reaper fail, your victory is determined by whether or not your EMS is high enough.

You know, you might just have something there...

[AxholeRose]

Cecilia L wrote...

I didn't feel trolled by Reject. I was going to pick DESTROY, but first shot starkid and was thrilled when that led to an unexpected extra ending.

I liked that Bioware put that in there. Especially with the IT-supporting reaper voice. So interesting! More speculation for everyone! (sincere excitement)

You definitely got trolled.  Shooting Star Child doesn't give you the awesome speech Shepard gives, moments before he dies.

Either way....  SO BE IT.

[mrcanada]

Posted this in response to a Bioware employee who responded to the exact style of this thread and asked "Would you rather have had nothing at all then?

Yes, I would have prefered it not to be there in its current state. EMS does not influence it at all and the abruptness is all the more telling in its intent. That intent is a direct reflection of how you chose to deal with the fans who questioned the colored choice endings. It also reinforces your intention of only allowing the Starchilds choices to be the only ones in the end as that is how the cycle is eventually concluded.

It is a direct response to the IT crowd and it is dismissive as to the questions it asked. Questions I add, that only were asked through obvious shortcomings in the endings and coincidences in the game. Thing that I still can't understand were missed in testing prior to release. Almost anyone playing the game for the first time notices the main points of what supported the IT theory.

[Spartan212]

thefallen2far wrote...

Spartan212 wrote...

I don't understand "how it's done"=insulting.  You basically ignore what the game has told you for the past 20 hours and and try to shoot a hologram in the face. I thought the ending was appropriate, even unnecessary.  The entire game tells you that you will lose if you don't use the catalyst. So, in the end, you choose to....not use the catalyst.  The reapers win.  You lose. Everyone is dead so there is no "what are they doing now" ending. How anyone could possibly be insulted is beyond me.

If you really can't understand "how it was done" was insulting, then I suggest you stay out of the entertainment industry. Most industry professionals know 1. Find out why they're insulted. 2. Don't do that ever again.

So, having an ambiguous ending for those that don't like the catalyst's inclusion in the first ending, don't do it again in the extended cut.  And yes, having an ending that basically says "eff you, it's the Catalyst or nothing you whiners" is an insult. and I don't have to in any way be thankful for insults.

I think most of these industry professionals also know that some people just can't be pleased, so they just write them off rather then spending time and resources trying to appease everyone
I'd say about 50% of the people who didn't like the first endings are fine with it now.  I'd say that's as good as BW could have hoped for

[Calibrations Expert]

AxholeRose wrote...

Cecilia L wrote...

I didn't feel trolled by Reject. I was going to pick DESTROY, but first shot starkid and was thrilled when that led to an unexpected extra ending.

I liked that Bioware put that in there. Especially with the IT-supporting reaper voice. So interesting! More speculation for everyone! (sincere excitement)

You definitely got trolled.  Shooting Star Child doesn't give you the awesome speech Shepard gives, moments before he dies.

Either way....  SO BE IT.

You get to decide between a speech and a bullet. You have choice, more than you think.

Modifié par Calibrations Expert, 27 juin 2012 - 07:25 .

[Lord Goose]

Especially with the IT-supporting reaper voice

I really do not understand that part. As far as I remember, IT was based on premise, that correct ending is to reject Catalyst's logic. Reject is just about that because Shepard clearly refuses to do as Catalyst proses, and wants to fight the Reapers on his own.

But it seems like, that he doom the cycle by doing that.

If I were IT supporter, it would everything for me, because idea is ruined completely. And voice wouldn't change anything, because Catalyst is a AI who created the Reapers and embodiment of their consiciousness. It's only natural to have such a voice. It cannot help the fact, that Shepard's resistance (true, show resistance) leads to futile end.

Well, maybe it's just me.

[LoboFH]

Reject ending is in no way a FU, it's a very needed option and while short and abrupt is handled with a poetic, bitter and emotionant election of scenes.

I prefer other endings but this one works as intended.

[sAxMoNkI]

Agreed OP, was good to have more options. In a way I almost prefer it because the reapers are defeated without shepard compromising his/her ideals.

Sadly it's when you think of the implications of this that you realise every turian, asari, salarian, quarian, geth, krogan etc etc were either harvested or killed because of this choice. While you have given freedom for organic life to self determinate you can't escape the fact that your inaction doomed everyone you know to almost certain death.

I will still say however that I like the fact it was included as an option and it does lead to what I would call a true "bittersweet" ending i.e. reapers defeated so future life is safe but at the cost of everything we were fighting to save. Maybe I just have doubts because the decision was by one person, not a collective choice by this cycle to fight til the end and give the next cycle the best possible chance.

[RiouHotaru]

IanPolaris wrote...

He does more than that.  Without him, you don't get access to the three platforms.  He and only he choses which platforms you get to interact with.  He can even turn the crucible OFF (and does so in "reject").  DEM is exactly what he is.

-Polaris

Did you pay attention to any of the Catalyst's new dialog?


Shepard: Why are you doing this?  Why help me?
Catalyst: You have changed the variables.


That right there proves he's not a DEM.  Nothing that's happened is the result of the Catalyst.  Shepard made it possible for you even HAVE options besides "The cycle continues", and the Catalyst is just the mouthpiece that tells you how those choices work.  Him turning off the Crucible doesn't count because he doesn't do that UNTIL you say "I'm not going to do it your way."

[RiouHotaru]

mrcanada wrote...

Posted this in response to a Bioware employee who responded to the exact style of this thread and asked "Would you rather have had nothing at all then?

Yes, I would have prefered it not to be there in its current state. EMS does not influence it at all and the abruptness is all the more telling in its intent. That intent is a direct reflection of how you chose to deal with the fans who questioned the colored choice endings. It also reinforces your intention of only allowing the Starchilds choices to be the only ones in the end as that is how the cycle is eventually concluded.

It is a direct response to the IT crowd and it is dismissive as to the questions it asked. Questions I add, that only were asked through obvious shortcomings in the endings and coincidences in the game. Thing that I still can't understand were missed in testing prior to release. Almost anyone playing the game for the first time notices the main points of what supported the IT theory.

Overanalysis HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!