1199 réponses à ce sujet

[Miekkas]

I wanted and still want an ending that does not involve committing one of three war crimes or dooming the current space-faring species to extinction as a middle finger to the fans and the key themes reinforced throughout the first two games. My mind is still boggled as to how these endings were written and put into development by the people that made the first two games. The endings, even with the EC, feel like they were made by a completely different team for a completely different game.

[Udalango]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

ph34r-X wrote...

I mean look at the refusal ending. Why can't we have that in the refusal ending, but if you're readiness is too low you get the current refusal ending.

I'm just asking this to facilitate discussion, so I'm not trying to pour salt on the wound or anything (my that sounds ominous...).


I see your opinion come up, and I often state my opinion and perspective.  I want to try something a bit different.  Many feel "why can't we have that in the refusal ending?"

Which is a fair enough point.  The writers/designers could have easily allowed that to be an option (what happens in the game is literally whatever they put in).


Just to be direct though:  Why should this be an option for the refusal ending.  Or even more generally, why should there be an ending that contains the following:

Shepard Lives, reapers defeated by conventional means, Geth/ EDI lives, Shepard walks off into the sunset with love interest.

I'm just asking to hear your thoughts on the subject.  Open question to others that feel the same way.

Ill preface this by saying the refusal ending as it is now is my favorite.  It lets me go out on my own terms and not give in to Star Brat who I absolutely abhor and delete from all head canon.

But IMO the reason that ending should be there is because I play games to get away from all the bad in reality.   Certain games do that differently.  God of War let me be the biggest BA of all time.  CoD lets me blow of steam mindlessly.  Up until the end Mass Effect let me feel like the biggest BA in the universe while having a personality of my own.  I was the biggest BA I mean I died.  I DIED and still kept going but I cant find a way to beat the Reapers?  Im the biggest BA and I fail in the end.  Which doesnt help me get away at all because Its just freaking sad and depressing.  I cant "Win"  I know some people feel like they won but to me I didnt win at all.  The Reapers ultimately win even in Destroy because they basically Made me kill myself.  

Then you have the personality part of ME which also left in the ending.  The only time where Shepard felt the same to me is when he is telling the Star Brat to go jump in a fire.  The other Shepards act like timid childern It breaks the immersion 

[zambot]

No.

[Deadpool9]

In a game of choice, if you *always* include choices that allow "paragon" and perfection, where a player has to work long and hard overcoming challenges for the reward of continuing to build a good, hopeful character, who beats the odds and beats death, who essentially represents the gamer and his/her hopes and attachments, you have to keep the final choices for ultimate happiness consistent. To nullify that in any way seems capricious or even cruel. Romantic idealism still exists.

[The dead fish]

Drudez wrote...

A conventional victory should be possible with enormous amounts of EMS.

No. That's just stupid against the reapers that CAN'T BE defeated like that, and is against the plot since M1.  It took almost all the fifth fleet to kill only Sovereign.

Modifié par Sylvianus, 29 juin 2012 - 03:59 .

[Mystiq6]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

ph34r-X wrote...

I mean look at the refusal ending. Why can't we have that in the refusal ending, but if you're readiness is too low you get the current refusal ending.

I'm just asking this to facilitate discussion, so I'm not trying to pour salt on the wound or anything (my that sounds ominous...).


I see your opinion come up, and I often state my opinion and perspective.  I want to try something a bit different.  Many feel "why can't we have that in the refusal ending?"

Which is a fair enough point.  The writers/designers could have easily allowed that to be an option (what happens in the game is literally whatever they put in).


Just to be direct though:  Why should this be an option for the refusal ending.  Or even more generally, why should there be an ending that contains the following:

Shepard Lives, reapers defeated by conventional means, Geth/ EDI lives, Shepard walks off into the sunset with love interest.

I'm just asking to hear your thoughts on the subject.  Open question to others that feel the same way.

It comes up a lot because many people feel Destroy is the best option (because Shepard can live and the reapers actually die) but also feel the price of Destroy is too high, killing the Geth and EDI, and stranding Shepard. I have serious issues killing EDI and the Geth but it's the only one I think I can accept from a story and morality standpoint.

[Udalango]

vivaladricas wrote...

Zero132132 wrote...

That just sounds dumb to me. If the Reapers can be defeated conventionally, the entire plot to ME3 is a big, pointless mislead.

To be fair they made them WAY too powerful, the Reapers belong in an Avengers or Marvel type storyline with the power they have.  Not in something like this, thats just too much and it honestly is a writers nightmare.  ME was better before the reapers showed up.  I know Soveriegn in ME1 was cool and all, but the sheer # and strength got obscene.  

Badly misplaced.  Seen this before but cant recall which film it was which the enemy was too overpowered and it had a weird way to get rid of it.  

It kind of reminded me of DBZ.  "Ungodly power come in and kicks the snot of all the super heros until the end when Goku reaches a new unheard of level of power through plot armor"  except SS4 is easier to swallow then Star Brat

[LaughingDragon]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

ph34r-X wrote...

I mean look at the refusal ending. Why can't we have that in the refusal ending, but if you're readiness is too low you get the current refusal ending.

I'm just asking this to facilitate discussion, so I'm not trying to pour salt on the wound or anything (my that sounds ominous...).


I see your opinion come up, and I often state my opinion and perspective.  I want to try something a bit different.  Many feel "why can't we have that in the refusal ending?"

Which is a fair enough point.  The writers/designers could have easily allowed that to be an option (what happens in the game is literally whatever they put in).


Just to be direct though:  Why should this be an option for the refusal ending.  Or even more generally, why should there be an ending that contains the following:

Shepard Lives, reapers defeated by conventional means, Geth/ EDI lives, Shepard walks off into the sunset with love interest.

I'm just asking to hear your thoughts on the subject.  Open question to others that feel the same way.

You want to know the REAL truth Allan?

Here it is.... Because that's what we are paying you for. To give us what we want. Do you think millions of fans want to spend $60 and get something they don't like? Every poll taken shows that 70-80% of more of fans thought the endings were terrible. The most die hard fans, had problems with the whole game for reasons like how prior choices RE the rachni, geth/quarian etc etc etc etc don't matter at all in ME3. Casual fans who just like to shoot guns with blue and red lights obviously don't care. 

Do you know why we all bought ME2 and ME3? Because in ME1 Shepard walks out from under that rubble against all odds and triumphs over saren and sovereign.

Why did we buy ME3? Because shepard survives the suicide mission and takes down the collectors and walks away a hero.

Why do 80% of fans hate ME3 ending? Because there's no way to WIN, there's no way for Shepard to walk away a hero. Every scenario is epic failure. Green eyed zombies...wtf dude? Controlling the reapers? Yeah no. Destroying the reapers with red lightning space magic and dying or gasping for air in the rubble fade to black? 

[wantedman dan]

Sylvianus wrote...

Drudez wrote...

A conventional victory should be possible with enormous amounts of EMS.

No. That's just stupid against the reapers that CAN'T BE defeated like that, and is against the plot since M1.  It took almost all the fifth fleet to kill only Sovereign.

Sovereign and a Geth-freaking-armada.

Oh, and the fact that Sovereign was obviously not your average Reaper.

[GreyLycanTrope]

OP this is pretty much what I've been asking for the whole time.

Allan I'll answer your question with a question "Why shouldn't it?"
Mass Effect is built largely on player choice and decision making and often preparation to achieve a set goal. We've been able to beat the odds before without having to make sacrifices if we played our cards right.

ME1 saving Zhu's hope without killing the colonists
ME1 Saving the drugged scientists from biotic extremists (the high paragon score mission)
ME2 We don't have to choose between exiling Tali gain her loyalty or not exiling her and gaining it we can achieve both
ME2 When Tali and Legion get into an argument we don't have to pick one side over another we can convince both to work together, same goes for Jack and Miranda
ME2 the suicide mission can be completed with no casualties
ME2 Zaeed mission can save the workers and still gain his loyalty
ME3 Zaeed's mission, we can have both the Volus fleet and save the Turian colony
ME3 Geth and Quarian peace without having to pick one side over the other.

I'd go on but this would get lengthy

These were the payoffs for making an effort and specific decisions within the game and we were rewarded for it. Yet no matter how I prepare for it every single one of my endings is bittersweet. I want something different. I want at least one of my Shepards' to have a happy ending were she could stand up for her beliefs and win without compromising her morals, freedom of choice, or betraying her friends and allies and yes living. Because she's made an effort, because she's been shouldering the burden of this war from the beginning and because she's earned it.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 29 juin 2012 - 04:11 .

[chuckles471]

If you get a "we win" victory, the other 3 options would just be you playing god with the galaxy.

I am contempt with losing and not giving in. I have already been called spacehitler for it, know it dooms the galaxy but I am not letting a bully get his way(for all I new at the time he could've been lying).

[KeraWildmane]

Sylvianus wrote...

Drudez wrote...

A conventional victory should be possible with enormous amounts of EMS.

No. That's just stupid against the reapers that CAN'T BE defeated like that, and is against the plot since M1.  It took almost all the fifth fleet to kill only Sovereign.

You just contradicted yourself. It took a single Alliance fleet and a small part of the Citadel fleet to destroy Sovereign. In ME3 we have the entire Alliance, turian, asari, krogan, quarian and/or geth, salarian, elcor, and volus militaries plus the rachni, a bunch of mercs, and what's left of the batarians. If it takes one fleet to kill one Sovereign-class Reaper, we should be able to at least scrape by.

[Kmead15]

The issue with an ending like that is that it would severely alter the context of the other endings. Instead of being legitimate choices with their own pros and cons, they'd just become three different wrong answers.

[LaughingDragon]

 I would just like to add,

You think people would have bought Halo 2, 3 and beyond if in Halo 1 master chief was driving his jeep in the final escape and he drives his jeep over the cliff and it explodes into epic fail and cortana turns into a green eyed zombie of wtf?

I wish more than anything I could sit with the ME3 team for just TWO minutes so I could explain to them what went wrong, so that they could do better next time. I think to many fans, it's super obvious.

Even if the psycho crazy whack artistic endings were in the game, fine, whatever, but we still should also have the epic win ultimate shepard hero bones liara blue babies krogan head smash wrex garrus and shep on the beach smoking cigars over flaming reapers owned epic win the emperor is dead darth vader the ring melts in the lava game over ****es.

[WhereEternityEnds]

LaughingDragon wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

ph34r-X wrote...

I mean look at the refusal ending. Why can't we have that in the refusal ending, but if you're readiness is too low you get the current refusal ending.

I'm just asking this to facilitate discussion, so I'm not trying to pour salt on the wound or anything (my that sounds ominous...).


I see your opinion come up, and I often state my opinion and perspective.  I want to try something a bit different.  Many feel "why can't we have that in the refusal ending?"

Which is a fair enough point.  The writers/designers could have easily allowed that to be an option (what happens in the game is literally whatever they put in).


Just to be direct though:  Why should this be an option for the refusal ending.  Or even more generally, why should there be an ending that contains the following:

Shepard Lives, reapers defeated by conventional means, Geth/ EDI lives, Shepard walks off into the sunset with love interest.

I'm just asking to hear your thoughts on the subject.  Open question to others that feel the same way.

You want to know the REAL truth Allan?

Here it is.... Because that's what we are paying you for. To give us what we want. Do you think millions of fans want to spend $60 and get something they don't like? Every poll taken shows that 70-80% of more of fans thought the endings were terrible. The most die hard fans, had problems with the whole game for reasons like how prior choices RE the rachni, geth/quarian etc etc etc etc don't matter at all in ME3. Casual fans who just like to shoot guns with blue and red lights obviously don't care. 

Do you know why we all bought ME2 and ME3? Because in ME1 Shepard walks out from under that rubble against all odds and triumphs over saren and sovereign.

Why did we buy ME3? Because shepard survives the suicide mission and takes down the collectors and walks away a hero.

Why do 80% of fans hate ME3 ending? Because there's no way to WIN, there's no way for Shepard to walk away a hero. Every scenario is epic failure. Green eyed zombies...wtf dude? Controlling the reapers? Yeah no. Destroying the reapers with red lightning space magic and dying or gasping for air in the rubble fade to black? 

This man knows what's up. 

[wantedman dan]

LaughingDragon wrote...

 I would just like to add,

You think people would have bought Halo 2, 3 and beyond if in Halo 1 master chief was driving his jeep in the final escape and he drives his jeep over the cliff and it explodes into epic fail and cortana turns into a green eyed zombie of wtf?

It would be more akin to introducing the Gravemind in the last ten minutes of Halo 3 with him giving you the option of Firing the Rings, Blowing up the Rings with a galactic dark age ensuing, or allowing the Flood to consume everyone.

[The dead fish]

wantedman dan wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

Drudez wrote...

A conventional victory should be possible with enormous amounts of EMS.

No. That's just stupid against the reapers that CAN'T BE defeated like that, and is against the plot since M1.  It took almost all the fifth fleet to kill only Sovereign.

Sovereign and a Geth-freaking-armada.

Oh, and the fact that Sovereign was obviously not your average Reaper.

If you decide not to help the destiny ascension, you don't fight against the Geth, the fleet was only focused on Sovereign , and the human fleet was able to destroy Sovereign only after shepard killed him while he was in Saren's body. In the aftermath the shield of the ship exploded. And that's where the ship was done.

Yep, but, the main fleet of the reapers is on Earth and protect also the citadel, they prepare something in London, obviously there are a few like Sovereign, while we have indeed other many average reapers. We can fight them, to gain time, to occupy them, to weaken them or anything else, but we can't win.

[WizenSlinky0]

Would like to agree. But I can't. I don't consider the ending moral. You're committing mass genocide against the reapers.

The "simple paragon ending" would be to cut the reapers off from control of the catalyst by destroying the citadel.

[circe]

Who wouldn't want more endings? You don't like that ending, pick a different one. Play your character one way, get one ending. Play it another way, get a different ending. The key here is options. The refusal option thrilled me simply because it was something different. I was disappointed when I discovered that EMS doesn't affect that one at all.

And I may have mentioned this in another post but I would have liked this sort of thing to be a reward for a completionist game spanning the whole trilogy. Require three insanity runs, whatever, but one of the things I didn't like about ME3 was that it felt like those that played the whole trilogy were a bit marginalized. A lot of us spent hours perfecting our games, our Shepards. Some sort of acknowledgement of that (possibly through a legitimately happy ending) might be nice.

[KeraWildmane]

Sylvianus wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Sylvianus wrote...

Drudez wrote...

A conventional victory should be possible with enormous amounts of EMS.

No. That's just stupid against the reapers that CAN'T BE defeated like that, and is against the plot since M1.  It took almost all the fifth fleet to kill only Sovereign.

Sovereign and a Geth-freaking-armada.

Oh, and the fact that Sovereign was obviously not your average Reaper.

If you decide not to help the destiny ascension, you don't fight against the Geth, the fleet was only focused on Sovereign , and the human fleet was able to destroy Sovereign only after shepard killed him while he was in Saren's body. In the aftermath the shield of the ship exploded. And that's where the ship was done.

Yep, but, the main fleet of the reapers is on Earth and protect also the citadel, they prepare something in London, obviously there are a few like Sovereign, while we have indeed other many average reapers. We can fight them, to gain time, to occupy them, to weaken them or anything else, but we can't win.

Again: If we were able to destroy Sovereign with a single Alliance fleet, why can't we destroy the others like him with the entire galaxy at our backs?

[wantedman dan]

Sylvianus wrote...

If you decide not to help the destiny ascension, you don't fight against the Geth, the fleet was only focused on Sovereign , and the human fleet was able to destroy Sovereign only after shepard killed him while he was in Saren's body. In the aftermath the shield of the ship exploded. And that's where the ship was done.

Snipped for repetetiveness and lack of questioning

The Geth still attacked the fleet coming in.