1199 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoonlordz]

Sire Styx wrote...

The EC did actually change the games ending though.
Like, I'm not even trying to be obtuse or stupid by pointing out that obviously the EC has changed it.
But, to pick on point, the normandy scene on the run to the citadel. That never happened pre-EC. EC made it so the normandy flew down. That's a change.

The part where the normandy engines exploded, I don't think happened.

You couldn't refuse the catalyst choice pre-EC (or at least, not directly).

I'm not saying that this is a bad thing, but it just shows they are somewhat unreliable when they tell you stuff.

They kept to their word, clarified existing endings and expanded on them with additional scenes and dialogue. The ability to reject was the only major change but they kept the consequence of choosing that as high as to keep the balance of choices equal as possible. Therefore not invalidating the others as worthy choices for others.

[warlock22]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

warlock22 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

And you forget I gave you a quote that literally puts an end to the topic of this thread right at start regarding EC and future topic of any new endings. Caseys quote was pure PR, my quote listed was not. PR is mean't to please customers and say what want to hear, the one I quoted said what is, what will be and not what you wanted to hear.

Ah yes like when they said they had no plans on doing anything to the ending. Then comes out the EC, and now they say they have no plans to add anything to that (dispite part of the Leviathan DLC in the EC DLC files). And since alot of people here are still posting here, I guess your quote didn't put an end to it as you claim. And I still like that you haven't backed up your "this is bioware's story". Yes the chances my be low that this wont happen, but that doesn't mean we wont fight for it.

I said back then that they were never going to delete and remove their current endings. That they never have and never will. They did not, I was correct. They stuck to their word too. The chances are not low, they are non existant. The quote I gave you told you this. There have been quotes since EC was annouced too which back this up and they kept their word on EC and will do so here too. Nothing in EC data regarding Levi dialogue proves any new endings. Like I also said earlier your setting yourself up for massive disappointment.

Like I said the chances are low, so this whole setting my self up for massive disappointment... yeah not sure were your gettting that from, maybe you just need something to say. True about Leviathan though, it doesn't say anything like that, but this is a reaper, a reaper who could be on your side (and it sounds like it is atleast for a bit from the dialogue I read), I cant really see BW just making it a EMS score. They also said they were not going to add any new ending's just give more insight to the current ones, which they did and they added the Refusal ending.

[greggm2000]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Let me ask you this, why did you bother buying DA2 when Warden was not the lead in it?

The DA series was never marketed as a trilogy, with the protagonist being the same throughout. We knew, going in, that there would be a new protagonist going into DA2, and DA3. Not so with the ME series.

[Dragoonlordz]

Kamfrenchie wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kamfrenchie wrote...

yeah considering all the things bioware said before he release (it's your story , we'll have plenty (16) of diferent endings) pople hae the right to ask for a brighter ending. It was their money they spent

The game is not made to order meaning you gave them list of what want and they have to make all on that list like a tick sheet. It does not have to meet your specifications, especially regarding story. In the end this is what you gave you, they even gave a free ending DLC which gave you the option of sticking to your guns and persona of your character in not picking any options listed. This does not mean should win, the consequence of your choice must be on par with the choices of the others to not make the others worthless. Like I said earlier a good game does not just give you choices, it gives you hard choices that you as a player find hard to choose. Currently that exists with current endings.

They are supposed to please their customer, and give them what they promised. As it is, even with EC, they didn't at all, I couldprobaly sue them if i wanted to.
Smaller devs like Eugen system mae free DLC without any ****storm forcing them,so saying bioware s great for giving us EC i wron, they  needed that to notlose ahugechunk of their fans.

The game plot is meh with arguably 2 deus ex machina, writing ranging from great to terrible, 1 button for everything beause thy couln't be bothered, random repetitive MP.

ME1 (save the council instead of focusing on sovereign) and ME2 gave you the option to win it all, but now in ME3 it's immature to want a pyrhic victory without the deus ex machina? please. Sad isn't deep.

Try it. Money where mouth is since I have little patience for people who use such threats. Bioware have always listened to feedback but this does not mean your entitled to get everything you want. Unless you alone funded the entire development then what they do regarding your feedback is theirs to chose from what agree with. EC pleased a large amount of people and Bioware said they know it won't please everyone, just because you remain not pleased does not mean they will make another ending DLC for you.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 30 juin 2012 - 11:58 .

[Dragoonlordz]

warlock22 wrote...

Like I said the chances are low, so this whole setting my self up for massive disappointment... yeah not sure were your gettting that from, maybe you just need something to say. True about Leviathan though, it doesn't say anything like that, but this is a reaper, a reaper who could be on your side (and it sounds like it is atleast for a bit from the dialogue I read), I cant really see BW just making it a EMS score. They also said they were not going to add any new ending's just give more insight to the current ones, which they did and they added the Refusal ending.

What Cvic is pretty much is akin to another ID style theory. Call it CVT if want but just because you think something is possible, does not mean will happen (I provided you with quotes from Bioware saying it is not going to happen). People argued about IDT far better than people are doing here regarding CVT yet they did not impose IDT on the endings Bioware created. Which is why I relegated this to fanfiction as it is the same sort of topic given I provided you evidence that says the current EC endings is what they are happy to go with and are final endings.

If they are telling you it is not going to happen then how is it not setting yourself up to be disappointed? Your doing exactly the same as the IDT group only you do not have the luxury of Bioware saying no comment unlike did with that one, this one they said pretty much not going to happen... I am not being overly mean I am telling you what they said and talking about my preference separate from that regarding game balance between endings.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 juillet 2012 - 12:16 .

[Sire Styx]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Sire Styx wrote...

The EC did actually change the games ending though.
Like, I'm not even trying to be obtuse or stupid by pointing out that obviously the EC has changed it.
But, to pick on point, the normandy scene on the run to the citadel. That never happened pre-EC. EC made it so the normandy flew down. That's a change.

The part where the normandy engines exploded, I don't think happened.

You couldn't refuse the catalyst choice pre-EC (or at least, not directly).

I'm not saying that this is a bad thing, but it just shows they are somewhat unreliable when they tell you stuff.

They kept to their word, clarified existing endings and expanded on them with additional scenes and dialogue. The ability to reject was the only major change but they kept the consequence of choosing that as high as to keep the balance of choices equal as possible. Therefore not invalidating the others as worthy choices for others.

My problem with it is that this "ending clarification" changed a lot of stuff, not clarifying it. I'm not going to point out everything, but there are scenes inserted that didn't occue and that you couldn't have possibly imagined. Originally, you rant down the road and got hit be a laser. To clarify this, bioware have essentially turned around and said "ah well, when you got hit by a laser, this showed that the laser actually hit a car, almost killing your squad, and Normandy flew down, somehow avoided being lasered, you lead your teamates onto the normandy, had a nice conversation, watched as it flew off, again avoiding lasers, than ran down a road and got hit by a laser."

That's not clarifying anything, that's adding some strange scene because you made an awful mess of it originally.

[Dragoonlordz]

greggm2000 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Let me ask you this, why did you bother buying DA2 when Warden was not the lead in it?

The DA series was never marketed as a trilogy, with the protagonist being the same throughout. We knew, going in, that there would be a new protagonist going into DA2, and DA3. Not so with the ME series.

They never promised you Shepard for ME4 so whats you point? You had Shepard for the trilogy which they gave you. They said ME3 was the end of his or her story. It is no different than examples of DA:O and DA2 you just provided... Do you not see that? Your point would only hold water if they promised you Shepard in ME4 and did not give you him or her... Maybe I missed your point in which case I ask you to expand on it to clarify what you mean.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 juillet 2012 - 12:07 .

[Kamfrenchie]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kamfrenchie wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kamfrenchie wrote...

yeah considering all the things bioware said before he release (it's your story , we'll have plenty (16) of diferent endings) pople hae the right to ask for a brighter ending. It was their money they spent

The game is not made to order meaning you gave them list of what want and they have to make all on that list like a tick sheet. It does not have to meet your specifications, especially regarding story. In the end this is what you gave you, they even gave a free ending DLC which gave you the option of sticking to your guns and persona of your character in not picking any options listed. This does not mean should win, the consequence of your choice must be on par with the choices of the others to not make the others worthless. Like I said earlier a good game does not just give you choices, it gives you hard choices that you as a player find hard to choose. Currently that exists with current endings.

They are supposed to please their customer, and give them what they promised. As it is, even with EC, they didn't at all, I couldprobaly sue them if i wanted to.
Smaller devs like Eugen system mae free DLC without any ****storm forcing them,so saying bioware s great for giving us EC i wron, they  needed that to notlose ahugechunk of their fans.

The game plot is meh with arguably 2 deus ex machina, writing ranging from great to terrible, 1 button for everything beause thy couln't be bothered, random repetitive MP.

ME1 (save the council instead of focusing on sovereign) and ME2 gave you the option to win it all, but now in ME3 it's immature to want a pyrhic victory without the deus ex machina? please. Sad isn't deep.

Try it. Money where mouth is since I have little patience for people who use such threats. Bioware have always listened to feedback but this does not mean your entitled to get everything you want. Unless you alone funded the entire development then what they do regarding your feedback is theirs to chose from what agree with. EC pleased a large amount of people and Bioware said they know it won't please everyone, just because you remain not pleased does not mean they will make another ending DLC for you.

This isn't a threat, but you fail to acknowledge that Bioware din't delive what they promised ( like16 widely diffeent endins). You can play th devil's attorney all you want. I paid for a product, which didn't live up to the promises tht were made. Bioware didn't live up to the customer-seller contract and that is objective, whether or not EC pleases part f the community.

Modifié par Kamfrenchie, 01 juillet 2012 - 12:12 .

[vallore]

Stornskar wrote...

A related question to ask - would anyone invest time in a new trilogy with the understanding that your main character will get killed off for the sake of art?

Personally, I believe that, for sacrifice to be meaningful in a RPG, it must result from the player’s decisions; either directly, (e.g. the player deciding to take a risky action, knowing she had the option not to), or indirectly, as a long term, possibly unforeseen, consequence of previous (avoidable) actions decided by her. When this isn’t the case, sacrifice becomes merely fate; an inescapable doom; and I frankly don’t enjoy playing doomed characters.

So, I guess I would avoid a game that I know the character is doomed.

[sugarpouring]

my problem with the ending was not that there was no happy ending, because in fact happiness is open to interpretation, my problem with the ending was that it did not deliver what is promised, by that i mean that they had me running around like an idiot collecting every possible galactic readiness for no apparent reason, in matter of fact that was the main plot of mass effect 3, but they completely destroyed it at the end when it didn't even matter.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

The reapers living isnt losing, thats just people looking at things in black and white. Defeating an enemy and taking them over is still a victory. Control is an Imperialist choice. You're defeating the reapers and making them your own. They are now your ****.

Synthesis is about seeing all life as equals and evolving past the reapers into a society of hyper intelligent immortals. thats a pretty sweet victory if you ask me.

Destroy is a ruthless victory, if you read the backstory of ruthless on the character creation screen it matches perfectly. victory at all cost. "you hold one rule above all others, get the job done." It doesnt matter if the geth die, if the universe is in shambles, if edi dies, or if you die, as long as the reapers are wiped from existence. thats a pretty renegade ending, duders.

refusal is the ultimate renegade act though, the ultimate act of defiance. its the scene where luke drops off a cliff at the end of empire strikes back. he wont comprimise who he is in the face of overwhelming odds, even if it means losing everything. it doesnt matter that in the next film he comes back and wins the day, that scene was powerful and meant alot on its own. luke was giving up his life to make sure the empire didnt take it. the fact that he lived was good fortune. the fact that the crucible survives and saves the next cycle (ruled by yahgs, kickass) is good fortune and still the result of everything shepard, liara, and the armies of the univeres, did and accomplished. without shepard that hope for the next cycle wouldnt have existed, you made it possible and became a legend. it would have been cool to have had some flashes of your journey in that ending but you kind of got the other half of that speech when liara came to visit your cabin in the middle of the game. its not a big deal. we dont need a slide reel of things we've already seen. we all know that stuff, vindicating it is meaningless in the big picture.

[Dragoonlordz]

sugarpouring wrote...

my problem with the ending was not that there was no happy ending, because in fact happiness is open to interpretation, my problem with the ending was that it did not deliver what is promised, by that i mean that they had me running around like an idiot collecting every possible galactic readiness for no apparent reason, in matter of fact that was the main plot of mass effect 3, but they completely destroyed it at the end when it didn't even matter.

What if high EMS means making it to the crucible and catalyst. Medium EMS was made it through into Sol and landed but died when car exploded outside beam and low EMS the entire fleet gets wiped out moment enter Sol? In that scenario high EMS paid off but you still get what what saw and is major impact on game dependant on EMS.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

I think the best way to explain the clamoring for a happy ending is that
the previous two games were not tragedies and neither was Mass Effect 3

ME3 was FULL of tragedy.  did you forget when the asari homeworld fell to the reapers?  Or the myriad of deaths and hopeless situations you have to overcome across all the games?  The end of arrival was tragic, the end of bring down the sky was tragic, and so was the ending to mass effect 3.

[sugarpouring]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

sugarpouring wrote...

my problem with the ending was not that there was no happy ending, because in fact happiness is open to interpretation, my problem with the ending was that it did not deliver what is promised, by that i mean that they had me running around like an idiot collecting every possible galactic readiness for no apparent reason, in matter of fact that was the main plot of mass effect 3, but they completely destroyed it at the end when it didn't even matter.

What if high EMS means making it to the crucible and catalyst. Medium EMS was made it through into Sol and landed but died when car exploded outside beam and low EMS the entire fleet gets wiped out moment enter Sol? In that scenario high EMS paid off but you still get what what saw and is major impact on game dependant on EMS.

that's fine, as long as it would have meant something

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

sugarpouring wrote...

my problem with the ending was not that there was no happy ending, because in fact happiness is open to interpretation, my problem with the ending was that it did not deliver what is promised, by that i mean that they had me running around like an idiot collecting every possible galactic readiness for no apparent reason, in matter of fact that was the main plot of mass effect 3, but they completely destroyed it at the end when it didn't even matter.

What if high EMS means making it to the crucible and catalyst. Medium EMS was made it through into Sol and landed but died when car exploded outside beam and low EMS the entire fleet gets wiped out moment enter Sol? In that scenario high EMS paid off but you still get what what saw and is major impact on game dependant on EMS.

Theres actually a laundry list of things that change based on your EMS score throughout the entire london sequence

Low EMS sees fleets being wiped out and watching lots of turians get killed in the initial approach on earth.  theres also a change to the crucible docking scene where reapers assault the crucible as hackett desperately attempts to dock (as opposed to the regular scene where its successfully docked without issue.  the catalyst also remarks on the state of your crucible)  Theres also the scene where your two squadmates will get killed by harbinger (because low EMS means that that mako that they got to hide behind isnt in your armada.  heh) 
It also leaves the normandy more damaged at the end, the engines exploding is still in it, and in some cases the relays still explode.  the final shot of low ems control is of the normandy being unfunctional and the crew setting up beacons on the planet and unloading all survival materials.  High ems actually prevents the normandy from being stranded (I think the second lowest destroy ending has this scene as well)  You also get changes to many of the ending slides (Tombs' slide, i think miranda's slide changes too with her being part of the rebuilding effort)  if your EMS is SUPER low and you get destroy then you get an entirely unique ending where hackett laments the losses in the war and his worry that the species of the galaxy will not recover from this battle, implying that everyone might die out.


So yeah EMS does have a pretty significant effect on the endings this time arround.  its not just seeing guys get melted and earth getting glassed while big ben falls, theres substancial differences to the normandy and the galaxy at large depending on your score.  Beyond that your paragon and renegade score actually come back to effect how your control ending plays out (speech completely changes tone and meaning)

also theres the ems unlocking additional endings and the ability for shepard to be spared by the crucible's destructive blast

Modifié par Doctor_Jackstraw, 01 juillet 2012 - 12:53 .

[vallore]

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

The reapers living isnt losing, thats just people looking at things in black and white. Defeating an enemy and taking them over is still a victory. Control is an Imperialist choice. You're defeating the reapers and making them your own. They are now your ****..

A question: Can there be victory over the Reapers if they are not defeated?

In the end scenario everything Shepard can accomplish only happens at the whim of the Starchild. The entity is not forced to allow it, (he can, if he so chooses simply ignore Shepard and continue with his plan), and neither have Shepard convinced him of the validity of her arguments. It is the Starchild that decides to change the rules and everything that allows it is on his terms.

Now, there is something disturbing about this, considering the twisted logic and monstrous morals he previously demonstrated ….

Synthesis is about seeing all life as equals and evolving past the reapers into a society of hyper intelligent immortals. thats a pretty sweet victory if you ask me.
.

Hmmm, I was under the impression that it was the other way around: that the differences were insurmountable obstacles and only by destroying what makes them different, (and unique), is peace attainable between the two.

A declaration of perpetual mental minority of all sentient species of the galaxy that so is needed such drastic steps to avoid extinction.

[Cyran127]

I don't want a forced happy ending.  I just want an ending that makes sense without pointless ambiguity.  "I'm going to tell you the story about Commander Shepard but leave the part out about whether he survived or not."

[warlock22]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

warlock22 wrote...

Like I said the chances are low, so this whole setting my self up for massive disappointment... yeah not sure were your gettting that from, maybe you just need something to say. True about Leviathan though, it doesn't say anything like that, but this is a reaper, a reaper who could be on your side (and it sounds like it is atleast for a bit from the dialogue I read), I cant really see BW just making it a EMS score. They also said they were not going to add any new ending's just give more insight to the current ones, which they did and they added the Refusal ending.

What Cvic is pretty much is akin to another ID style theory. Call it CVT if want but just because you think something is possible, does not mean will happen (I provided you with quotes from Bioware saying it is not going to happen). People argued about IDT far better than people are doing here regarding CVT yet they did not impose IDT on the endings Bioware created. Which is why I relegated this to fanfiction as it is the same sort of topic given I provided you evidence that says the current EC endings is what they are happy to go with and are final endings.

If they are telling you it is not going to happen then how is it not setting yourself up to be disappointed? Your doing exactly the same as the IDT group only you do not have the luxury of Bioware saying no comment unlike did with that one, this one they said pretty much not going to happen... I am not being overly mean I am telling you what they said and talking about my preference separate from that regarding game balance between endings.

I like how you keep saying this is what they said, and it not going ot happen. I tell you that they gave us a new ending when they said that they would not, and you side step it. You still havent backed up your argument about how this was always BW story, almost like your trying to aviod it. And you keep talking like I know this will happen, not onces have I or anyone else on this thread said that, we have just stated very good reeasons why this ending should have been an option. From what I've seen you have argued with people just for the sake of arguing. You have made it very clear that you dont want this becasue you dont like happy endings so no can have one, if you cant have it make sence in your head than theres no way it can happen. Because I cant see you staying here and arguing to save us all from be "dissapointed".

Now saying that this is just your preference, fine than dont choose an ending like this. Like I told you before I didn't like synthesis ending for many reasons, so I wont choose it, done deal. But whatever your reason, this has gone on long enough and I need to stick with what I said to you before, all you have done is said it wont happen because BW said it wont and that you dont like it. Once again they gave us a new ending when they said that they wouldn't. If you want to get the last word in go for it, other wise I'm done.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

vallore wrote...

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

The reapers living isnt losing, thats just people looking at things in black and white. Defeating an enemy and taking them over is still a victory. Control is an Imperialist choice. You're defeating the reapers and making them your own. They are now your ****..

A question: Can there be victory over the Reapers if they are not defeated?

In the end scenario everything Shepard can accomplish only happens at the whim of the Starchild. The entity is not forced to allow it, (he can, if he so chooses simply ignore Shepard and continue with his plan), and neither have Shepard convinced him of the validity of her arguments. It is the Starchild that decides to change the rules and everything that allows it is on his terms.

Now, there is something disturbing about this, considering the twisted logic and monstrous morals he previously demonstrated ….

Alot of the new dialogue in extended cut supports the idea that he's just working off of his programming.  He has no perogative.  If he wanted to **** over shepard he'd turn off the oxygen in the control center and kill him.  My favorite like in the extended cut is if you select the renegade response after he explains the control ending shepard says
"I didn't come all this way just to give up everything I had!"  "I dont look forward to being replaced by you, but I'd be forced to accept it."
its not only REALLY sweet writing but it reinforces what he said when you questioned the reaper war itself.  Its his programming, his purpose.  he's an advanced program but he cant make decisions.  the crucible is docked to the citadel and it has opened up new possibilities.  He needs a living being to make a decision because shepard understands what it means to be alive.  (oh hey tying it back into the synthesis ending and basically everything Edi said in the game)

vallore wrote...

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...
Synthesis is about seeing all life as equals and evolving past the reapers into a society of hyper intelligent immortals. thats a pretty sweet victory if you ask me.
.

Hmmm, I was under the impression that it was the other way around: that the differences were insurmountable obstacles and only by destroying what makes them different, (and unique), is peace attainable between the two.

A declaration of perpetual mental minority of all sentient species of the galaxy that so is needed such drastic steps to avoid extinction.

Its not applying a flat effect to both organic and synthetic, they're being changed in different ways to unlock the potential for evolution of artificial life and organic life.

One thing that stood out to me: Starchild saying "SO BE IT" was an ANGRY response.  It was not programmed to make that decision, shepard's refusal dooms the catalyst to the cycle that he just acknowledged as no longer being the answer to his purpose.  You broke the cycle, thanks to the protheans' efforts, but reject your destiny to establish something to replace it, which is what the Catalyst was pleading with you to do.  He didnt have an agenda, only a purpose.

The way I see it is that Liara was able to provide enough information on the crucible that the next cycle was able to activate the crucible in a way that didnt leave it up to shepard to make that decision in place of a galactic concensus.  (I would have loved to see a galactic debate of the following species' council discussing what to do with the crucible.  I bet they picked synthesis but thats just me)

[zambot]

Cyran127 wrote...

I don't want a forced happy ending.  I just want an ending that makes sense without pointless ambiguity.  "I'm going to tell you the story about Commander Shepard but leave the part out about whether he survived or not."

There is a lot of ambiguity in the EC endings, but the question of whether Shep survives is resolved.

[nara14]

Allan Schumacher wrote...


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.

 Besides the point that a game where you actually have a chance of winning is one of the points of playing a game:

A possibility for a "good" ending should exist because it would actually fit the story arc from all 3 games, as well as reflecting how it was played.  Sheppard's not written as a tragic hero or doomed figure. he's not Achilles or Hector,  wether played as good or bad, and is closer to a character like Odysseus,   who eventually overcomes all obstacles and losses to reach his goal, no matter what's placed in front of him. (or good-Kirk  evil-Kirk for paragon and renegade examples)   
Sad endings are fine but not when it's seemingly done just for the sake of being sadi, and doesn't fit the rest of the game, and Seppards not written as dumbly shrugging his shoulders and making a choice from options given by what's essentially his ultimate enemy.

As it stands the Crucible seems more like a trap as they pretty  much win in all the endings but destroy, and your side pretty much loses in that one  too.

Control is what the Illusive man wanted, who was shown to be evil and you could even show him how wrong he was and he shoots himself in the head and kills himself

Synthesis is similar to what Saren was hoping for, you could show him the error of his ways so he kills himself too.

Technically the Destroy option doesn't even seem to be a function of the Crucible, you end up having to blow up the weapon that was built to blow up the Reapers with a pistol. In the process you destroy an entire race that you just helped broker peace with, and out of all your allies were probably the ones with the least  deserving of being wiped out, due to them originally  just protecting themselves from extinction.

Control and Synthesis aren't even that bad from the standpoint that it would portray the danger of repeating others mistakes,
Destroy should have been the choice that could have been affected by the decisionss made. alliances , side quests finished and resources gathered,;  ranging from the Geth and EDI being destroyed or surviving, and Sheppard living or dying and all the other damage to earth and the various fleets of ships.


Refuse could-have should-have been another option with success again depending on how your choices/resources gathered, etc. It was mentioned in the Codex that most ships had their weaponry upgraded with new missiles and some kind of cannons to aid in the ship to ship fighting in space.
Plus if they really wanted to go dark and gloomy they could have used some of the dreadnoughts as fire-ships, ramming the reapers at near lightspeed  and blowing their power cores to destroy  some of them showing more sacrifices made
What's funny it could probably have all been accomplished with another 10-15 minutes of cut scenes
pre-extended cut and there would have actually been more happy campers...........

Modifié par nara14, 01 juillet 2012 - 02:34 .

[Dragoonlordz]

warlock22 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

warlock22 wrote...

Like I said the chances are low, so this whole setting my self up for massive disappointment... yeah not sure were your gettting that from, maybe you just need something to say. True about Leviathan though, it doesn't say anything like that, but this is a reaper, a reaper who could be on your side (and it sounds like it is atleast for a bit from the dialogue I read), I cant really see BW just making it a EMS score. They also said they were not going to add any new ending's just give more insight to the current ones, which they did and they added the Refusal ending.

What Cvic is pretty much is akin to another ID style theory. Call it CVT if want but just because you think something is possible, does not mean will happen (I provided you with quotes from Bioware saying it is not going to happen). People argued about IDT far better than people are doing here regarding CVT yet they did not impose IDT on the endings Bioware created. Which is why I relegated this to fanfiction as it is the same sort of topic given I provided you evidence that says the current EC endings is what they are happy to go with and are final endings.

If they are telling you it is not going to happen then how is it not setting yourself up to be disappointed? Your doing exactly the same as the IDT group only you do not have the luxury of Bioware saying no comment unlike did with that one, this one they said pretty much not going to happen... I am not being overly mean I am telling you what they said and talking about my preference separate from that regarding game balance between endings.

I like how you keep saying this is what they said, and it not going ot happen. I tell you that they gave us a new ending when they said that they would not, and you side step it. You still havent backed up your argument about how this was always BW story, almost like your trying to aviod it. And you keep talking like I know this will happen, not onces have I or anyone else on this thread said that, we have just stated very good reeasons why this ending should have been an option. From what I've seen you have argued with people just for the sake of arguing. You have made it very clear that you dont want this becasue you dont like happy endings so no can have one, if you cant have it make sence in your head than theres no way it can happen. Because I cant see you staying here and arguing to save us all from be "dissapointed".

Now saying that this is just your preference, fine than dont choose an ending like this. Like I told you before I didn't like synthesis ending for many reasons, so I wont choose it, done deal. But whatever your reason, this has gone on long enough and I need to stick with what I said to you before, all you have done is said it wont happen because BW said it wont and that you dont like it. Once again they gave us a new ending when they said that they wouldn't. If you want to get the last word in go for it, other wise I'm done.

Firstly don't put words in my mouth about what I have said implying 'I don't want anyone to have a happy ending because I don't apparently like happy endings'. That is pure hyperbole and fallacy. I said there has to be a balance with the current endings otherwise one without consequence removes all reason for prior ones to exist and Bioware will never go for that so please stop accusing me of things I have not said and making false hyperbolic accusations.

What part of if you make choice A have a large consequence, make choice B have a large consequence and choice C have a large consequence then to go offering one (choice D) with literally hardly any consequences at all... Use some common sense that all the time, resources, effort and money that went into both the original and the EC becomes wasted and thrown away. You think Bioware would do that then it is time to have a reality check. My advice to even have you be taken seriously is to up the level of consequence to match that of the others (balance of choices) to even be considered by them logically instead of making all others null and void.

As far as I recall they never said would not give you EC, they said they was listening to feedback all through that period and then announced EC, this does not equal your claim of them saying 'no to EC or the current ending DLC'. This time around they have said no very clearly many times including while EC was being developed and after that would be only one ending DLC and that was EC.

The whole element of Bioware crafted the story they wished to tell and therefore being their story is common sense, I do not care what fantasy your head is filled with about the PR relating to combination of fan and developer story Casey spoke about. PR serves one purpose which is damage control and promotion telling people what they wish to hear. Bioware created the story, they set the parameters, they choose the dialogue to put in the game and the choices they wish to give you. It is their story and you merely played a role in it within their boundaries set.

You claim I am arguing for sake of it, you also call me a troll too all because I am discussing the topic from a different perspective/opinion and your being melodramatic in order to discredit anything I say.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 01 juillet 2012 - 03:43 .

[Father_Jerusalem]

To anyone using the "It's MY story not BioWare's story!" claim:

Make a Raloi Shepard.

Turn down becoming a Specter.

Agree with Saren and don't stop him from opening the Conduit.

Stop working with The Illusive Man.

Choose to take Kal'Reegar with you after Haestrom.

Shoot Vega in the face.

Keep Anderson as the human councilor.

Can't do any of those things? Yeah. That's because it's BioWare's game. They just give you some choices in how you play it.

Their game. Their rules. No conventional victory. No Disney ending.

End. Of. Argument.

[alienatedflea]

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.

Allan...its the fact that we have been playing shepard since 2007 (well some of us)...and through all that time...why isnt there an ending where all of our work pays off (winning the war) and we see old man shepard and his LI children with his LI by his/her side?...Call me crazy but that seems nothing short of a reasonable demand from your Mass Effect fanbase...

Modifié par alienatedflea, 01 juillet 2012 - 03:24 .

[masster blaster]

So i like that the korgen can rise again with Wrex running the Show along with Grunt on his side.