1199 réponses à ce sujet

[Caenis]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Seriously not going to happen.

It's happened before in games...people enjoyed those endings and the many different outcomes, it can and will happen again. Nobody is telling Bioware to change it, they're not rioting saying give us a happy ending. They're merely stating what they wished they had or would have liked to see, while accepting that they didn't.

I ENJOY the EC, and I also ENJOYED the original ending. But does that mean I wouldn't have liked to see more? It's no different than people who still want to have plot holes filled, etc. etc. It's NICE to be able to talk about these things. It's sad to see people rejecting the very idea that people even felt anything but the opposite of them...that...omg how dare people wish they had seen hard sacrifice pay off for the hero....

Modifié par Caenis, 02 juillet 2012 - 12:56 .

[pseudonymic]

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.

because we all invested 100+ in the game and would like for all of that time to pay off somehow. happy endings make that possible, and like all of it was worth the effort.

[Dragoonlordz]

Psythorn wrote...

Stix's nonsense about "don't make that choice then" is silly from the offset. Four choices and you make three with large consequences and one with almost none, it does not take a genius to work out people will all pick the one with almost none making the other three redundant. Both waste of time, money and other resources. On top of the fact they would have to redesign the game almost from front to back to change how all the assets tie in to the ending and choices and then have to replace the ending all over again with vast expense of large new cinematics.

Seriously not going to happen.

With all respect - it's you who is talking non-sense. Because you are contradicting your own point with one thing:
-snip-
Because with this you are admitting that this is exactly what a majority of people wanted to have. And as many people including me have said many times: It is not a good idea to do something most of your customers do not want - that's if you ever want to to business with them...
So it's not HIM who want's to force something on you... Seems like you are the one forcing something on us and why - just because you do not want to be part of a minority of players who will stay true to the original ending - or because you are affraid of also choosing the "easy way" - that's completetly your problem...

It is their story this is how they wanted it to end, you merely played a role within the allowed parameters of their story. You can end your own story in your own imagination or within the confines of the choices they allowed. Write your own fan fic and you can end it how you want in your own words but this does not mean should be cut and pasted into the current game. Your argument is pointless, it is no different than "I do not like how Phantasy Star 4 where Alys dies and neither do most people" does not mean so retcon and remove her dying scene. It is their story and if they want it to end with major consequences for the galaxy due to it being based on a galactic war then that is what should be regardless of whether you wanted happy ever after hills alive with sound of music.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:10 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Caenis wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Seriously not going to happen.

It's happened before in games...people enjoyed those endings and the many different outcomes, it can and will happen again. Nobody is telling Bioware to change it, they're not rioting saying give us a happy ending. They're merely stating what they wished they had or would have liked to see, while accepting that they didn't.

I ENJOY the EC, and I also ENJOYED the original ending. But does that mean I wouldn't have liked to see more? It's no different than people who still want to have plot holes filled, etc. etc. It's NICE to be able to talk about these things. It's sad to see people rejecting the very idea that people even felt anything but the opposite of them...that...omg how dare people wish they had seen hard sacrifice pay off for the hero....

Allen was not asking for DLC ideas, he was just discussing the topic as fan of the series. People are getting their hopes up and setting themselves up for disappointment based on fact he merely asked a question. He even said so himself was just curious as a fellow fan. We also have direct quotes saying won't actually happen so it is worth keeping expectations in check.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:09 .

[EnforcerWRX7]

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.

Because up until ME3, the contextual narrative was a classic hero story and people wanted classic hero endings, even if some of the endings ended in Shepard's death.  The whole point of the ENTIRE SERIES was that Shepard would fine a way and would never sacrafice people when they could be saved. 

In the last 5 minutes we got fantasy land and space magic.  It felt like an entirely different game.  It broke the entire narrative of the hero's journey with nonsensical space beams and a new character that didn't exist in ME1 & ME2.

There are so many gaping plot holes left from star child even with the EC.  The EC does nothing but allow us to put the controller down.  It doesn't give any sense to the star kid nor make sense of the technology of contrl, synth, destroy.

It was a confusing ending to a great story.  While the EC is a "better" ending, it doesn't fix the logic gaps and ridiculous assumptions that the player had to make.

So why did we want a classic ending?  Because it was a classic story and it feels like Bioware didn't even know what they were doing in the last 5 minutes.

Modifié par EnforcerWRX7, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:10 .

[Dragoonlordz]

EnforcerWRX7 wrote...

Because up until ME3, the contextual narrative was a classic hero story and people wanted classic hero endings, even if some of the endings ended in Shepard's death.  The whole point of the ENTIRE SERIES was that Shepard would fine a way and would never sacrafice people when they could be saved. 

In the last 5 minutes we got fantasy land and space magic.  It felt like an entirely different game.  It broke the entire narrative of the hero's journey with nonsensical space beams and a new character that didn't exist in ME1 & ME2.

There are so many gaping plot holes left from star child even with the EC.  The EC does nothing but allow us to put the controller down.  It doesn't give any sense to the star kid nor make sense of the technology of contrl, synth, destroy.

It was a confusing ending to a great story.  While the EC is a "better" ending, it doesn't fix the logic gaps and ridiculous assumptions that the player had to make.

So why did we want a classic ending?  Because it was a classic story and it feels like Bioware didn't even know what they were doing in the last 5 minutes.

Where did you get that wrong idea, the entire series was dark. ME1 your companions died, you were actually forced to choose which dies. ME2 all your companions could die, even Shepard could die and if was not designed to be a trilogy he would remain dead in first place. ME3 has companions die too and Shepard just like ME2 he/shecan die. It was never a happy ever after theme to the game. The entire plot and dialogue of ME3 is about loss and tired of everyone dying, coming to the end of the road and losing of will to continue fighting. Being tired of war and death and wanting it to all end. This was all expressed through the game itself prior to the ending. It was also expressed through the entire trilogy that there cannot be a conventional victory to change this now would destroy the theme of the series and of ME3.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:16 .

[EnforcerWRX7]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

EnforcerWRX7 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.

Because up until ME3, the contextual narrative was a classic hero story and people wanted classic hero endings, even if some of the endings ended in Shepard's death.  The whole point of the ENTIRE SERIES was that Shepard would fine a way and would never sacrafice people when they could be saved. 

In the last 5 minutes we got fantasy land and space magic.  It felt like an entirely different game.  It broke the entire narrative of the hero's journey with nonsensical space beams and a new character that didn't exist in ME1 & ME2.

There are so many gaping plot holes left from star child even with the EC.  The EC does nothing but allow us to put the controller down.  It doesn't give any sense to the star kid nor make sense of the technology of contrl, synth, destroy.

It was a confusing ending to a great story.  While the EC is a "better" ending, it doesn't fix the logic gaps and ridiculous assumptions that the player had to make.

So why did we want a classic ending?  Because it was a classic story and it feels like Bioware didn't even know what they were doing in the last 5 minutes.

Where did you get that wrong idea, the entire series was dark. ME1 your companions died, you were actually forced to choose which dies. ME2 all your companions could die, even Shepard could die and ifwas not designed to be a trilogy he would remain dead in first place. ME3 has companions die too and Sheaprd just like ME2 can die. It was never a happy ever after theme to the game. The entire plot and dialogue of ME3 is about loss and tired of everyone dying, coming to the end of the road and loss of will to continue fighting. Being tired of war and death and wanting it to all end. This was all expressed through the game itself prior to the ending.

There is nothing in my post that says the game was generally happy.  I never said that.  Point out where I said that.

MY point is that the game is bascially a hero's journey.  Shepard finds ways that other people can't.  What are you rambling about honestly?  I didn't say anything about happy environments in the other games. ?????

I said "where they can be saved".  As in, IF THEY CAN.  or...HE WOULD TRY TO at the very minimum.  And no, I was not a "happy ending proponent".  I was just explaining what people were asking for.  I see you're a current ending "lover" anyway so reasoning with you will be like talking to a wall. Its been pointed out MANY times how the current ending is simply bad writing style.  Its generally weak in a lot of areas.

Modifié par EnforcerWRX7, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:17 .

[Drake-Shepard]

ph34r-X wrote...

 Simple paragon ending. 

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

Is this basicly what we all want? 

The Shepard lives and walks into the sunset part

This is playing into the hands of the condescending &*%^%'s across the industry that are accusing the unhappy fanbase of all just wanting a happy ending which is not consistent with the 'artistic vision' of BW.

...Which is true if this was the case..but the case really is the story, themes, lore,  forshadowing is poor/inconsistent + plot holes.
Simply, we are fans/consumers who are unhappy with the quality of a product.

BW then addresses these concerns to keep a proportion of their customers. What proportion depends on each individual.

we should keep a distinction between 'fan requests' and ' this is some poor quality etc etc'

However i also have a problem with shep's 'death/ sacrifice/(even survival)...the fact that it made little sense. Nor did the revelations and events that lead up to it

[Dragoonlordz]

EnforcerWRX7 wrote...

EnforcerWRX7 wrote...
-snip-

The whole point of the ENTIRE SERIES was that Shepard would fine a way and would never sacrafice people when they could be saved. 

-snip-

There is nothing in my post that says the game was generally happy.  I never said that.  Point out where I said that.

MY point is that the game is bascially a hero's journey.  Shepard finds ways that other people can't.  What are you rambling about honestly?  I didn't say anything about happy environments in the other games. ?????

That is where. He still saved as many as he could in ME3 whether you think he saved enough or not.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:18 .

[EnforcerWRX7]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

EnforcerWRX7 wrote...

EnforcerWRX7 wrote...
-snip-

The whole point of the ENTIRE SERIES was that Shepard would fine a way and would never sacrafice people when they could be saved. 

-snip-

There is nothing in my post that says the game was generally happy.  I never said that.  Point out where I said that.

MY point is that the game is bascially a hero's journey.  Shepard finds ways that other people can't.  What are you rambling about honestly?  I didn't say anything about happy environments in the other games. ?????

That is where.

Read above...I see you fail at reading too.  I'm talking about story telling.  I'm not even talking about Shepard directly.  Shepard was focal point.  He was an extension of hero that everyone wants to be even if they have to make tough choices.  

Modifié par EnforcerWRX7, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:21 .

[Dragoonlordz]

EnforcerWRX7 wrote...

Read above...I see you fail at reading too.

Read above.

In the very choices he makes he saves as many as could based on current choices, "could" does not mean should. Not as many as you wish or like to save but as many as could save. This already exists. So your whole stance is redundant. I repeat...

"Where did you get that wrong idea. The entire series was dark. ME1 your companions died, you were actually forced to choose which dies. ME2 all your companions could die, even Shepard could die and if was not designed to be a trilogy he would remain dead in first place. ME3 has companions die too and Shepard just like ME2 can die. It was never a happy ever after theme to the game. The entire plot and dialogue of ME3 is about loss and tired of everyone dying, coming to the end of the road and losing of will to continue fighting. Being tired of war and death and wanting it to all end. This was all expressed through the game itself prior to the ending. It was also expressed through the entire trilogy that there cannot be a conventional victory to change this now would destroy the theme of the series and of ME3."

It does not matter how heroic you think he is or she. Keeping inline with theme of the game he is not required to survive or everyone else. Which was point I made and you ignored.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 02 juillet 2012 - 01:38 .

[EnforcerWRX7]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

EnforcerWRX7 wrote...

Read above...I see you fail at reading too.

Read above.

In the very choices he makes he saves as many as could based on current choices, "could". Not as many as you wish or like to save but as many as could save. This already exists.

WTHam I reading?  You're just typing words and rambling on about things that no one is saying.  I'm done with this because you obviously don't understand anything I wrote.  My brain hurts.

[Cannonarm758]

I think the issue isn't the fact that shepard sacrificed himself, it is more along the lines of why and how he did it in the endings we were presented.

I think there are people who look at the endings more as concepts and less literally. Some see the storyline as a very classic good versus evil with a dark tone. Other's see the more broad brushstrokes of concepts as they progress through the narrative. Some do not want a bad ending at all and I won't be going into that.

Both groups understand self sacrifice. Since the more literal interpretation of the narrative is important to some, the flaws in the storytelling take away from sacrifice. We expected a large fight with harbinger where the only way to save humanity was Shepard to sacrifice himself to stop him. This last epic battle.

The other group enjoyed the conceptualization the starchild presented. Since the conceptualization was the more important aspect to the narrative, the overall theme of self sacrifice isn't diminished. The goals and the storyline were wrapped up as expected in their broad strokes.

Neither group is right or wrong for feeling the way they do or expecting something else. I think the problem is that the argument devolves into those who want a happy ending and those who understand and like the ending. I believe most people in the groups would understand a truly epic self sacrifice moment, but to the first group, that never happens. The ability to save the galaxy as they were expecting was suddenly taken away. It is a very jarring transition.

So again, I don't necessarily think the argument should be about a perfect happy ending vs current, but instead if you felt the only way to save the galaxy was, how did you want to go about it.

Personally I would have loved a storyline along the lines of after the meeting with TIM, and the crucible docks, it sends out a beam (of space magic) and all of the reapers are currently disabled but Harbinger.

Than it is a race to stop harbinger in an epic battle before he is able to stop the crucible. Than at the last moment, shepard can choose to sacrifice himself to save others or instead of others sacrificing themselves, such as if your EMS was really high, Anderson is able to sacrifice himself instead of you. Now the choice is not whether you die anyway, but do you let someone die for you or not.

There could be other choices too, but that is basic example.

[BCMakoto]

Is this what I want? No, certainly not. I stay true to what I said prior to the EC. I do not want a happy ending where everyone starts drinking tea in a garden. That was never what I wanted.

Do I accept this as the wish of others? Yes, I do. However, pre- EC we all said that it is not a happy ending rainbows and stuff thing we want, yet now people seem to want this a lot.

Do I think it will happen? Not in the slightest. Bioware won't change anything, and that is good for me. I accept that some people want something as this, but ending a threat of old machines that killed far more people then we can actually put in numbers by conventional systems is not going to end with happy shiny rainbows.

[Pekkan]

There was fair amount of "war takes its toll" though, so wasn't really excepting perfect happy ending.

ME1: Starts with a squad member, Corporal Jenkins, dying. Losing people under your command is not fun. Eden Prime civilian casulties. Kaidan or Ashley will die in Virmire. Heavy fleet casulties on the fight with Sovereign and geth fleet.

ME2: Game starts with Collector ship destroying Normandy, killing at least 21 crew members. Losing your ship and half of it's crew members, that is pretty depressing. Hundreds of thousands of colonists will die, the people who were taken into the collector ship in the Horizon before you forced the collector ship to leave, will die.

ME3: Game starts with attack on Earth, all around the galaxy billions will die.

Modifié par Pekkan, 02 juillet 2012 - 02:01 .

[leapingmonkeys]

Obviously that should be one of the possible conclusions.

That is really the failing of ME3 - it has only one conclusion, irrespective of how one played the prior games. It is really a rather fatal flaw for a game which promotes itself as having a "player driven" plot mechanic.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

leapingmonkeys wrote...

Obviously that should be one of the possible conclusions.

That is really the failing of ME3 - it has only one conclusion, irrespective of how one played the prior games. It is really a rather fatal flaw for a game which promotes itself as having a "player driven" plot mechanic.

That's not true. The state you leave the galaxy in is very different depending on your choices in all 3 games. 

[v3paR]

pseudonymic wrote...
because we all invested 100+ in the game and would like for all of that time to pay off somehow. happy endings make that possible, and like all of it was worth the effort.

i didn't play 100+ to once again watch moronic hollywood like happy ending crap with the damn flag in background.
this is war. millions of people are already dead at the end of the game. and you want happy ending?
ask any veteran soldier if he wanted happy ending or just to win and end the damn war and go back to home.

we already have happy ending. you need to have high EMS and its called Destroy.

[Aurvant]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

leapingmonkeys wrote...

Obviously that should be one of the possible conclusions.

That is really the failing of ME3 - it has only one conclusion, irrespective of how one played the prior games. It is really a rather fatal flaw for a game which promotes itself as having a "player driven" plot mechanic.

That's not true. The state you leave the galaxy in is very different depending on your choices in all 3 games. 

Perhaps, but no matter which choice you make that state is always going to be "garbage". Yay, I chose from three different ways to kinda/sorta save the galaxy and THEY'RE ALL BAD.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 ME1 Sovereign: "We have numbers that will darken the skies of every world"

*Sovereign brings down entire Citadel fleets before its death*

"Better" ME3 Ending: Battle of the Citadel times 100,000? Eh, we can handle it if We All Work Together!™




Silly Sovereign.

[pseudonymic]

v3paR wrote...

pseudonymic wrote...
because we all invested 100+ in the game and would like for all of that time to pay off somehow. happy endings make that possible, and like all of it was worth the effort.

i didn't play 100+ to once again watch moronic hollywood like happy ending crap with the damn flag in background.
this is war. millions of people are already dead at the end of the game. and you want happy ending?
ask any veteran soldier if he wanted happy ending or just to win and end the damn war and go back to home.

we already have happy ending. you need to have high EMS and its called Destroy.

it's called fiction for a reason.

[Alushadow]

ph34r-X wrote...

 Simple paragon ending. 

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

Is this basicly what we all want? 

we can agree buy by doin so
bioware will hurt the "artistic integrity " of the ho so bad story they have created
not to mention the end is probably stolen from another game
but god forbid you cannot hurt artistic integrity since a stolen end could be called "Art"

[bjdbwea]

I certainly hoped for the possibility of an ending to the game like the OP describes, and of course it should have been implemented. From a story perspective, there's no reason not to provide it. Anyone who doesn't agree with that sort of ending, is of course free to choose a different one. Unfortunately, some people seem to think that they have the right to decide which sort of ending has a right to be in the game and which doesn't. The truth is that happy endings have been popular throughout the history of story telling, and for good reasons. Therefore, such an ending would have just the same right to be in the game as any other, and of course BioWare should have provided it.

After the EC, they can't even claim that happy and optimistic endings don't fit with their artistic vision for ME 3, because the epilogues delivered just that. I for one do like that, the only thing that's inexcusably missing is a proper reunion with Shepard's LI.

And I suspect that the main reason for that has nothing to do with art or storytelling, but the fact that creating the different cutscenes would have cost too many resources. The game was obviously released a few months too early anyway, and since they didn't even have the time to create a proper finale in the first place, it's fitting that they also couldn't provide proper epilogues.

Why they wasted that chance with the EC is less clear. Perhaps because they anticipated that a large majority would suddenly only choose the single ending where Shepard could be reunited with the LI. But so what? That only tells them that such an ending to the game would be popular, that's even more reason to provide it. And it also tells them that the other endings of the game lack something that many people expect. The solution would have been to provide even more diversity in the endings to the game, just as they promised before release anyway.

I for one would, even though it should have been in the game from the beginning, pay for a DLC that offers a nice conclusion to the romances in the Mass Effect series.

Modifié par bjdbwea, 02 juillet 2012 - 05:45 .

[Pekkan]

leapingmonkeys wrote...

Obviously that should be one of the possible conclusions.

That is really the failing of ME3 - it has only one conclusion, irrespective of how one played the prior games. It is really a rather fatal flaw for a game which promotes itself as having a "player driven" plot mechanic.

Reapers have destroyed countless number of civilizations, some of them much more advanced than the "current"  advanced civilizations in the galaxy, but no  worries, as long as Commander Shepard does enough side quests, he can stop the reapers exactly in the way he wishes to. 

Modifié par Pekkan, 02 juillet 2012 - 02:48 .

[Ozida]

I just don't get some people, to be honest, when talking about happy end option (NOT a single end choice). Some people state that they don't feel it would be "right" to end ME story with a happy end, and sometimes it's their only argument. Well, some of other fans, including myself, feel that it would be "right" to have a true "sickening-sweet" ending. So how come our feelings are worse than yours? Heck, why do I even need to prove and explain my desire for a happy end as it is a crime against "artistic integrity"? 

And for those who rudely tell us to go and watch some Disney... Well, go and watch some Titanic or something if you seek for a depressing, real-life end. 

Modifié par Ozida, 02 juillet 2012 - 02:49 .