1199 réponses à ce sujet

[KLGChaos]

Sire Styx wrote...

Novate wrote...

I am all for the War = Sacrifice aspect of the endings, but what I don't get is the ONE BUTTON TO RULE THEM ALL solution they came up with.

After several Months and reading through forums and playing the game, I have finally found the reasons why I hated the ending.
This whole Reaper can't be beaten by conventionally means is whats wrong with the whole game.
It was proven in ME1 that we can beat the Reapers, then in ME2 we proved that we can out gun and out wit the Collectors whom by the way is 50k years in advanced technology ahead of this current generation.

The moral of the stories from ME1 and ME2 is that the Odds are stacked against Shepard, with only a chance smaller than 0.01 % Shepard can still come up from defeat even in death Shepard can come back and kick your ass.

In ME3 all that is wiped clean, the odds are still stacked against us, but this time we have an Secret Weapon, the one weapon that we don't know the uses of, yes we know for sure it will destroy the Reapers. The I WIN button.

IF they had set it up where the Reapers has an massive Mass Effect Shield, an technology that we can't bypass, then sure, conventional weapons can't by pass the technology unless we have an ancient tech that can distrupt the shield so that we have a chance.
And to do that we have to go to the Citadel and access it from within, then have an battle with the catalyst where he uses the child's form to persuade us from doing it where the Cycle must continue. And then in the end, we have to sacrifice ourself, or one of the team, maybe a LI , based on War Assets that you have gathered, that made the effectiveness of the machine different. Then it would make sense to me.

I just think this whole can't beat by Conventional means a whole lots of *****

I would have preffered this to the ending. I had thought originally the catalyst would have been something to even the odds, not just win outright.

This was exactly what I wanted.... The Crucible should have been a weapon that could disrupt the Reaper's shields. As we saw with Sovereign, they become pretty vulnerable when their shields are down and can be destroyed. It would have allowed for a more conventional victory without making the Crucible storyline useless. The outcome of that victory could have been based on our choices throughout the series. and in the end, would could have been given the option to finish off the Reapers or take control of them if the player wanted power. Could you picture the different endings people would get? Rachni coming in to save the day for those who chose to save them, or the Collector Base raining hell down on Reaper forces for those who didn't destroy it? It would have been epic.

[FatalX7.0]

Malditor wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Malditor wrote...

Ozida wrote...

Malditor wrote...
I was against them doing new endings. I did enjoy the EC though. I do say that doing the EC set a bad example. I understand that you and some others aren't actually requesting/demanding that they change the endings, however you are in the minority of those posting. The basic premise of this thread was that everyone could agree on wanting the ending the OP posted. The problem is that not everyone DID want it. I would never propose to say that everyone wanted/should have wanted any type of ending. I'm not saying that the OP was looking to offend anyone but assuming that everyone would agree to what they proposed is not intelligent.

Once again, I disagree. Making EC was not a bad example, but rather a wise business decision. Company was loosing money because most of people were not satisfied with the product, and so BW decided to get it better. (Who in their mind would think that EA/BW did it for their "care for players", not for money?).

BW knew that practically nobody would buy future DLCs and games if they leave the ending as it was. It was other to loose the huge amount of income (remember, they have to pay those "writer" salaries?) or to make something customers demand for. Pretty fits business model, if you ask me, and I was surprised they hesitated of doing EC for so long.

It's only set a bad example because it was never going to satisfy everyone. Now people can use it as a precident and call for more and more changes. They hesitated because they needed to evaluate how much the potential cost would be to do it or not. They had to be sure that the potential recovery on the back end *dlc profits* would cover what it cost to do the EC.

No.

Just stop.

It's the truth. It didn't satisfy everyone and it's being used as a precident to call for more and more changes..... Don't see it?

I don't think I can facepalm any harder.

People have been demanding, discussing and begging for changes and upates in video games for years.

[FatalX7.0]

Oldbones2 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 the fact is the refusal ending is imcomplete as is.  Don't the other endings adjust the outcome based on EMS?
Because we play games to win?
Because it would maintain the consistency of the game, wherein if we work hard, we can reap a better reward.
Because it wouldn't necessarily mean the other endings would have 0 picks.  Many synthesis fans, would still pick that one just to prevent a TS in the future.
Because it would fit the game and fill in the niche of the other endings (It wouldn't HAVE to be 'perfect' either, maybe the brutality of the fight ruins the Earth and kills most of humanity in the process).
Because its basically what we asked for, and you threw in refuse because we asked (I assume).
Because at this point many of us would PAY (real money EA, real, spendable money) for such an addition.
Because it 'might' win back more fan support (to be truthful, this is incredibly unlikely.  I myself, hate BW not for the endings, but for the companies' response to fans legitament complaints in the months following the release).
Because it is one way to 'fix' the refuse ending, which is unquestionably a slap in the face of the ending's critics.  (Come on, you could at least have added in some scenes of the fleets getting hammered and given us so hope spots of the sqaddies almost escaping before their deaths.  Not an 'ending' that is a THIRD as long as the others).
Because this ONE ending if included originally would have prevented this entire outrage.  (though the EC DLC being in the game from the start would have done the same)
Because no on, and I mean no one, expects this of you.
Because the EC DLC makes the ending of the Mass Effect trilogy good enough.  But when has your company ever settled for good enough?
Because ME3 is a masterpiece and it deserves the many varied endings that it was supposed to contain.  This could be one of the first new ones.  If released for free, others could be released for money. 
Because I would buy every single SP DLC BW releases if you gave us that ending.
Because as it stands I and possibly a few others, will not buy DLC because we still don't feel there is any point to the game and the series as a whole.
Because before ME3 and especially during ME3, I was raring to see the ME film.  Now I'm hoping it gets stuck in dev. hell, just to prevent any chance of 'the ending.'  (Please note, that while I would prefer the film series didn't end with the Catalyst and synthesis, as long as in my game I could defy him and win, I'd be ok with it)
Because I want to respect Bioware again.  I don't and likely won't respect your 'integrity' for many years.  But your creativity and imagination, your talent at writing coherant logical plots, your intuition for the audience emotions are still up for grabs.
Because frankly, you want fans like me, fans who are WAAAAAY to invested in the series.  Because we buy all the DLC, we go see the film adaptation, we spend MONTHS lurking on the forums, we pre-order, we buy day 1, we talk the series up to our friends, we buy the merchandising, we keep the franchise going after the casual crowd moves on (you know they will) we buy brand, we make fan work, we give feedback, we defend your work, we bring in publicity, .........we are your base.  And you need us.

Allan is with Dragon Age, if you didn't know.

[Oldbones2]

[quote]gmboy902 wrote...

@gmboy902

If you can't see the flaw in that logic, then I pity what the public school system has done to your 'education'.

Right now, there are people on these forums who think Synthesis is the ****g bomb.  There are people who ONLY choose destroy.  

There are even a few controllers (myself included).


Each of us has our own reasons for picking the ending we like.  And Caenis makes a great point.  What we value in the game and for our own morals vary.  Some people will prioritize Shepard living above anything.  Others want to save everyone without tech raping them.  Still others fear the inevitable tech singularity.


The refuse ending probably wouldn't have a 'perfect' resolution, and even if it did, why would synthesis fans choose it?  They fear the TS.  Controllers might want to have the power of the Reapers.


How would it lessen the game to have more choices?

At this point the endings are well known and everyone has played them.  You don't have to download new ones if you don't want to.  So why would you 'have to' pick a perfect ending?  And how would it harm your playthrough now, months after you experienced the original ending, to have another option?



[/quote]

Taking cheap shots at someone's intelligence to advance an artistic debate just doesn't flow with me.

Why would I kill all of the Geth and EDI when I could pick Refuse and only lose some faceless soldiers? And to be quite honest, I doubt that many people choose control just so they can be the Reaper Overlord.

The "if you don't like it, don't download it" argument is just bad. By this point in the series, players have become attached to Shepard and his squad. They've become fictional friends. Seeing Shepard die is never by itself preferable to seeing Shepard live and getting to see him reunite with everyone we've come to like. If I have that option, I'm going to go for it.

Which is why I don't want that choice. Getting that choice means losing all the others. It turns "Here's three thought-provoking choices that each Shepard will consider differently" into "Here's a happy ending, and if you really want to kill yourself have some others". The only people I can think that would choose that ending are those who genuinely believe the Catalyst's logic (look at BSN - those are few and far between) and people who just want to be the Reaper boss. There's no reason to pick Destroy.

[/quote]

You arrogant tone offends me.  If my insults return the slight, so be it.


In DA:O I'm told most people choose to have Morrigan's monster child to save themselves. 

I don't.  Even on my first (and thus canon) playthrough I refused.  I went to the AD and when Alistair offered to go in my place I refused again.  My warden died.

And I thought it was great. 

To this day, I don't have a single playthrough where I have the freakbaby.

Whereas most people think nothing of it.  To them its the key to a 'perfect' ending.  And that's my point.  There are no perfect endings.

Bioware isn't going to craft an ending that is literally puppies and rainbows.  No one and I mean NO ONE would like it or take it seriously.

They're going to build an ending with depth and drama, sacrifice and victory.


It will have flaws, perhaps like Morrigan's baby that some like myself will consider unacceptable, where others barely stop to think about it.

When DA:O came out, I don't remember anyone saying, 'yeah, the game's great. but having all these options on how to end my game really made it unrealistic for me.'
 
Did anyone say that?

If DA:O can make a balanced set of endings, why can't ME?

[Oldbones2]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Oldbones2 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 the fact is the refusal ending is imcomplete as is.  Don't the other endings adjust the outcome based on EMS?
Because we play games to win?
Because it would maintain the consistency of the game, wherein if we work hard, we can reap a better reward.
Because it wouldn't necessarily mean the other endings would have 0 picks.  Many synthesis fans, would still pick that one just to prevent a TS in the future.
Because it would fit the game and fill in the niche of the other endings (It wouldn't HAVE to be 'perfect' either, maybe the brutality of the fight ruins the Earth and kills most of humanity in the process).
Because its basically what we asked for, and you threw in refuse because we asked (I assume).
Because at this point many of us would PAY (real money EA, real, spendable money) for such an addition.
Because it 'might' win back more fan support (to be truthful, this is incredibly unlikely.  I myself, hate BW not for the endings, but for the companies' response to fans legitament complaints in the months following the release).
Because it is one way to 'fix' the refuse ending, which is unquestionably a slap in the face of the ending's critics.  (Come on, you could at least have added in some scenes of the fleets getting hammered and given us so hope spots of the sqaddies almost escaping before their deaths.  Not an 'ending' that is a THIRD as long as the others).
Because this ONE ending if included originally would have prevented this entire outrage.  (though the EC DLC being in the game from the start would have done the same)
Because no on, and I mean no one, expects this of you.
Because the EC DLC makes the ending of the Mass Effect trilogy good enough.  But when has your company ever settled for good enough?
Because ME3 is a masterpiece and it deserves the many varied endings that it was supposed to contain.  This could be one of the first new ones.  If released for free, others could be released for money. 
Because I would buy every single SP DLC BW releases if you gave us that ending.
Because as it stands I and possibly a few others, will not buy DLC because we still don't feel there is any point to the game and the series as a whole.
Because before ME3 and especially during ME3, I was raring to see the ME film.  Now I'm hoping it gets stuck in dev. hell, just to prevent any chance of 'the ending.'  (Please note, that while I would prefer the film series didn't end with the Catalyst and synthesis, as long as in my game I could defy him and win, I'd be ok with it)
Because I want to respect Bioware again.  I don't and likely won't respect your 'integrity' for many years.  But your creativity and imagination, your talent at writing coherant logical plots, your intuition for the audience emotions are still up for grabs.
Because frankly, you want fans like me, fans who are WAAAAAY to invested in the series.  Because we buy all the DLC, we go see the film adaptation, we spend MONTHS lurking on the forums, we pre-order, we buy day 1, we talk the series up to our friends, we buy the merchandising, we keep the franchise going after the casual crowd moves on (you know they will) we buy brand, we make fan work, we give feedback, we defend your work, we bring in publicity, .........we are your base.  And you need us.

Allan is with Dragon Age, if you didn't know.

He asked a question.  He gets an answer.

That's all I care about.

[saber00005]

Guys Relax...... Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.... Only mine is actually worth something.. XD Kidding. Lets all remember, WE as a community, love ME3 and we can have a HEALTHY debates on disagreements. Insulting one another goes to show that you that you didn't think things through.

I personally, would like to see a small re-union. Why? In my opinion, I felt the last scene you saw with your love interest was very depressing. It was a sad part. Just assuming what will happen next doesn't always cut it. Especially if you have people who has been romancing the same LI in all 3 games. Only in ME3 does the relationship evolve into something more.. It's a damn soup opra and I've fallen for it! I want to see my HAPPY ENDING WITH THEM! 

Modifié par saber00005, 03 juillet 2012 - 10:55 .

[warlock22]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

No, I wouldn't want an ending like that because:

A) It's completely at odds with the tone of the game.

It creates an optimal play experience, which goes against the whole idea of role playing. YouYou wouldn't be making choices based on how you or your character feels, you'd be basing them purely on numbers.

C) Come on, most people thought the Crucible was too much! Given the nature of the Reapers and what they're capable of, you'd need a Deus Ex Machina pulled out of the deepst and holiest reaches of the Arse of God for an ending completely devoid of any meaningful loss to be possible.

All the ME games had a dark tone, but they also had one of hope. Even in ME3 it's there, other wise there wouldn't be tons of people hating it and pretty much wanting the same thing. Character consistencey for your Shepard and story , what has Shepard always be able to do depsite all odds? Come out on top, do the impossible, Shepard has always had that option, and has always been able to save everyone for the most part.

And you never really use the fleet you gathered, this ending would have to actually use your EMS and thats what you would be sacrificing. In the other endings the war stops right when the catalyst goes off, this would not be the case in this ending. If you have high enough EMS, you survive, LI survive as well as crew, but you will loose a great deal of the fleet. In the fleet Hackett would die, maybe have the council die on the Destiny Asention. And if you have lower EMS, then your chances for surviving, your LI and crew go down and so on and so forth.

Modifié par warlock22, 04 juillet 2012 - 02:11 .

[warlock22]

saber00005 wrote...

Guys Relax...... Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.... Only mine is actually worth something.. XD Kidding. Lets all remember, WE as a community, love ME3 and we can have a HEALTHY debates on disagreements. Insulting one another goes to show that you that you didn't think things through.

I personally, would like to see a small re-union. Why? In my opinion, I felt the last scene you saw with your love interest was very depressing. It was a sad part. Just assuming what will happen next doesn't always cut it. Especially if you have people who has been romancing the same LI in all 3 games. Only in ME3 does the relationship evolve into something more.. It's a damn soup opra and I've fallen for it! I want to see my HAPPY ENDING WITH THEM! 

Agreed:D

[Malditor]

FatalX7.0 wrote...

Malditor wrote...

FatalX7.0 wrote...


No.

Just stop.

It's the truth. It didn't satisfy everyone and it's being used as a precident to call for more and more changes..... Don't see it?

I don't think I can facepalm any harder.

People have been demanding, discussing and begging for changes and upates in video games for years.

How many game developers then redid those games? Serious question.

I've from an older generation where you bought a game and that was that. No dlc, no patches. You played the game and if you liked it you played it again, if you didn't you traded it in on a new game. Perhaps that is why I'm not sympathetic to people buying a game then demanding a change in it. I stand by what I said, that the reason the EC was a bad idea is because it was known it wouldn't satisfy everyone and now is being used as precident to make more changes. This is a well and true statement that can't be argued against or denied.

[jedsithor]

All I want...all I've ever wanted...is for Bioware to admit they screwed up.

While I would have loved for them to have fixed the endings (as in have them make sense), ultimately I wanted them to come out and say "sorry guys, we screwed up, we'll try to do better in the future" or something along those lines. If they had done that and not done anything with the endings, I'd be upset about the game but at least I'd know I could trust Bioware to be honest with the consumer and I'd be able to remain a consumer of Bioware products in the future.

But to this day they refuse to acknowledge the logic flaw. To this day they maintain that the ending of the game makes perfect sense. To this day refuse to admit their mistakes both with the game and in how they handled the aftermath (seriously, claiming artistic integrity and pointing to review scores was a massive insult).

An apology. That's all I ask. I don't think they're ever going to give one. It's a shame. I used to respect Bioware. Now I just pity them.

[Priss Blackburne]

jedsithor wrote...

All I want...all I've ever wanted...is for Bioware to admit they screwed up.

While I would have loved for them to have fixed the endings (as in have them make sense), ultimately I wanted them to come out and say "sorry guys, we screwed up, we'll try to do better in the future" or something along those lines. If they had done that and not done anything with the endings, I'd be upset about the game but at least I'd know I could trust Bioware to be honest with the consumer and I'd be able to remain a consumer of Bioware products in the future.

But to this day they refuse to acknowledge the logic flaw. To this day they maintain that the ending of the game makes perfect sense. To this day refuse to admit their mistakes both with the game and in how they handled the aftermath (seriously, claiming artistic integrity and pointing to review scores was a massive insult).

An apology. That's all I ask. I don't think they're ever going to give one. It's a shame. I used to respect Bioware. Now I just pity them.

Closest we got is Lance Henrikson saying it was an oversight a mistake that the endings didn't live up to the quality they are used to producing in a interview. I couldn't help but think, why Can't Bioware just say that?

[giljs2198]

Back to the original question: Yes, I'd love to see a happy ending option. Or at least a more hopeful ending option that Destroy gives.

[thefallen2far]

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?;

Not everyone "wants" it. However, it would decrease the negative reaction towards the ending. I know, some people may think "if you go away, the negative reaction will stop." Yeah, and if people stopped complaining about Phantom Menace, themovie would be well regarded. I? Perfectly comfortable with it going down as one of the "bad part 3" of a trilogy... like Austin Powers and Spideran....and Superman.... remember that one? And then they tried doing it again with Superman Returns. That one ended up being worse than the the first #3.

Modifié par thefallen2far, 04 juillet 2012 - 03:56 .

[warlock22]

thefallen2far wrote...

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?;

Not everyone "wants" it. However, it would decrease the negative reaction towards the ending. I know, some people may think "if you go away, the negative reaction will stop." Yeah, and if people stopped complaining about Phantom Menace, themovie would be well regarded. I? Perfectly comfortable with it going down as one of the "bad part 3" of a trilogy... like Austin Powers and Spideran....and Superman.... remember that one? And then they tried doing it again with Superman Returns. That one ended up being worse than the the first #3.

This may be for nothing, I hope not but it may be. But i will keep fighting for it. And I do agree with you about those movies, but thats the thing I was being told a story not shaping/makeing my own. Thats why so many people are still fighting for this.

[nara14]

Even though the chances of there ever being any more additional content to the endings are slim to none, but for the sake of argument and in defense of happy endings, I wanted to point out a few things
I think the first one below  is the most important,  showing that although synthesis and control endings might be enjoyable, they don't necessarily count as the real or optimum endings from a gameplay standpoint

Mass Effect is an RPG. Role playing games and all the Mass Effect games in particular  reward you in different ways and better outcomes the more you accomplish and explore when playing.
When reaching the end when you make your final choice, if your various scores are too low only Synthesis and Control are the only two available. When your scores are higher, the destroy option becomes available, and the overall score needs to be even higher to get the ending where Sheppard wakes up in the rubble and takes a breath.  This is the most successful ending. Since he was successful in destroying the Reapers and surviving,  it's also safe to assume he'll be reunited with his LI and squad mates, and crew. Destroying the Geth and EDI seemed unnecessarily added just for the sake of making a "bittersweet ending but it's still the most positive ending true to what Commander Sheppard was trying to do.

the others below are more or less critiques of the different endings, and why there are logical reasons the choices and dark/sad endings don't fit the way some people played considering the choices available within Mass Effect
Synthesis is probably the biggest lose ending, it's something neither renegade nor paragon would choose, one would never unselfishly give up their own life, and the other might give up their life, but never the freedom or free will of those he/she was fighting for. It's basically a form of aiding the reapers to accomplish their goals. Instead of harvesting everyone and making more giant Reapers they just created billions of individual mini-reapers. This is also pretty much what Saren wanted to do from ME 1, which you prevented, and you were even able to convince him to see the error of his ways to the point that he killed himself. Suddenly what you were fighting isn't such a bad idea, and it's OK to cooperate with an insane artificial intelligence and it's creations.

Control is the second worst ending, this was the Illusive Man and Cerberus's 's goal, the main enemy for most of ME 1 AND ME 3, and an uneasy ally at best in ME 2 . Just 10 minutes before you make the final decision you show him how wrong he is, and then you can get him to kill himself if you use the right dialog too. Only someone who played their character as an evil/renegade couldn't turn down a chance to control such power and possibly gain immortality. They probably wouldn't turn out to be a very benevolent robotic overlord so this isn't a good ending for someone who played as a "good" character.

Destroy is sadly the best available outcome available, but it isn't very satisfying, when you end up wiping out an entire race (Geth) that depending on what you've done earlier, you could have brokered peace between them and the Quarians or sided with in an earlier mission allowing the Quarians to be wiped out since they were the ones who were really responsible for the Geth turning on their masters. Plus you destroy EDI, who you were in the process of helping to understand her new state of being.
There were already tremendous sacrifices made throughout the game that led up to this point from your allies, their homeworlds, and squad mates. If there was a need for personal sacrifice in this a possible way around destroying the Geth and EDI could have Sheppard being killed and not taking a breath at the end, or doing surviving if your total readiness. war assets, etc. were high enough and rewards completing everything or say at least 95%
This would be reasonable as these games always rewarded you more, the more you did, (loyalty missions, side quests, ship upgrades, etc.)


Refuse could have been  the most flexible as far as possible outcomes,  I bet it would have been one that the largest amount of people would have originally chosen after all the options were lain out compared to the other 3  It could have been another "win" ending, with your Sheppard living or dying, where the galaxy survives but with horrible losses, or a you lose "So Be It!"  ending, all depending on your various scores, decisions , readiness, reputation and so.
I know Refusal was just a little unexpected bonus Easter egg they added which was kind of funny, but if it was available slong with the other 3 it could have been the one with the most variety and easiest to implement. as you'd just be adding a cinema of varying length with who lived or died.

Modifié par nara14, 04 juillet 2012 - 06:27 .

[SpamBot2000]

Except the destroy ending was always available with the lowest EMS, with Synthesis becoming a possibility with a higher score. Thus heavily implying that this was the optimal ending in the minds of the devs. It is not entirely unreasonable to draw the conclusion that this was to be the "canon" ending should one be required.

The implications for the ME franchise of this decision seem pretty huge. Imagine selling a game such as Mass Effect, only set in a universe where everything is a violent collision of organic and synthetic, to any audience. It is a magic universe where machines have DNA. Everybody has creepy glowing green eyes. Some folks are husks and other assorted abominations. The key to immortality is discovered. Trees sway in the autumn breeze, their leaves rustling and crackling with circuitry. You snack on an apple that tastes like an iPod. Sound like something you'd like to be invested emotionally in? Or does it in fact sound like someone's gone and done torched the franchise?

Competent people do not make mistakes like this, so the reasonable assumption again is that this was a deliberate decision. What the future holds for ME will be all prequels, set in a world where everything discovered in the Mass Effect games outside of the Codex does not exist yet and the fate of the universe has been prewritten. Certainly not a good design choice if you're planning to create Story-Based Gaming Experiences. ME in the future: Shooters with 5 different types of Turian to blast with a wide variety gunz you can purchase individually at Origin Store for 2.99 each (prices may vary). And which one you get will be random.

Forgive me if I'm less than enthused. I loved what you already had BW. A sound business plan is not one that is based on calculations of retaining "the existing fans" no matter what you do while adding every new demographic you decide to pander to... and then keeping them as if in a vault at EA HQ no matter what you do next. No matter how great you've been in the past, you're not feudal lords and we're not your peasants.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 04 juillet 2012 - 09:42 .

[string3r]

I would love to have a happy ending.

Sadly it's not "artistic" or deep enough for Bioware.

[Fuzzfro]

Who doesn't like a happy ending??

and I wish our choices from previous games provided more of an impact in me3 and it's ending too.

[Sleekshinobi]

mechalynx wrote...

I wouldn't. Not one big fat happy ending at least. I wouldn't be able to buy it at all. The fact that I had to choose between saving Shepard and saving the synthetics made the destroy option that much harder and more meaningful. There has to be a downside that has not already occurred, like the deaths of Mordin and Thane.

Shepard reuninting with his/her main squeeze? **** yeah! But I should be able to feel that that happiness came at a price.

I agree with this, each option had to have its pros and cons, if one was obviously better than the others then no one would ever choose the other options

[Sire Styx]

It's pretty annoying that the main argument against a "happy" ending boils down to everyone wants it, so we can't have it because everyone will choose it.

(image to illustrate how stupid this is)


Obviously you could say "well I don't want it" but if you then go and choose it then that's your own daft fault.

Modifié par Sire Styx, 04 juillet 2012 - 10:20 .

[elitehunter34]

I think a happy ending is what we all want, but I don't think it needs to be done without the Crucible. Just an ending where you use the Crucible and everyone lives if you have a high enough EMS. Why is that so wrong?

[Sire Styx]

I would argue that we don't even want a "happy" ending, just one where entire races of people aren't killed, but Shepard survives. But then other people counter this with "well I never knew those millions of people who died so it doesn't count" because, as we all know, in real life it doesn't matter if millions of people die, just as long as we don't know them personally.

Modifié par Sire Styx, 04 juillet 2012 - 10:38 .

[Daverid]

I didn't really want a happy ending... I was legitimately hoping for a beautiful bittersweet ending ... But I still assumed it would have been possible. Now since I've realised the Crucible options is what BioWare intended a happy ending is all I want. Since every other option is complete BS it was the only thing I wanted from the EC (minus the impossible hopes for the IT). EVEN if it required multiplayer to achieve I would have been happy.

Here's how it should have been (disregarding multilayer for now)

Anything under 2500 EMS = Refuse and everyone dies. Current cinematic plays.

2500-2700 EMS = Shep dies, Hackett dies, vast majority of your Squadmates die from 2 and 3. However, you Defeat the reapers.

2700-2900 EMS = Shep dies, Hackett dies, And a good amount of old Squadmates die. Only LI survives and You defeat the Reapers.

2900-3100 EMS = Shep Lives, LI lives, Hackett dies and a few of your Squamates die. Reapers defeated.

3100+ = All Squadmates alive(inc Shep and LI), Few "Minor Major" characters still die like Hackett, Primearch Victus, Couple of Quarian Admirals etc.

And naturally Heavy fleet losses in every Win, but just the higher the EMS the more of the fleet survives.

This would still have sacrifice in every ending no matter if you win or lose. It's just the impact of the sacrifice is lessened (or increased) via whether lots of Major characters die or more Minor Major ones. Also would be the perfect chance to actually see EMS in action and properly give people some different Endings all based off the one decision. You want a happy ending? Fine but you're going to have to work hard throughout the game to get it. Makes sense IMO.

Space Magic and Artistic Integrity trumped the possibility of such a brilliant ending.

[ph34r-X]

A friend actually told me a cool idea for perfect renegade ending.

Shepard controls reapers, but LIVES. Rules the galaxy. Cool concept. If only

[ph34r-X]

Daverid wrote...

I didn't really want a happy ending... I was legitimately hoping for a beautiful bittersweet ending ... But I still assumed it would have been possible. Now since I've realised the Crucible options is what BioWare intended a happy ending is all I want. Since every other option is complete BS it was the only thing I wanted from the EC (minus the impossible hopes for the IT). EVEN if it required multiplayer to achieve I would have been happy.

Here's how it should have been (disregarding multilayer for now)

Anything under 2500 EMS = Refuse and everyone dies. Current cinematic plays.

2500-2700 EMS = Shep dies, Hackett dies, vast majority of your Squadmates die from 2 and 3. However, you Defeat the reapers.

2700-2900 EMS = Shep dies, Hackett dies, And a good amount of old Squadmates die. Only LI survives and You defeat the Reapers.

2900-3100 EMS = Shep Lives, LI lives, Hackett dies and a few of your Squamates die. Reapers defeated.

3100+ = All Squadmates alive(inc Shep and LI), Few "Minor Major" characters still die like Hackett, Primearch Victus, Couple of Quarian Admirals etc.

And naturally Heavy fleet losses in every Win, but just the higher the EMS the more of the fleet survives.

This would still have sacrifice in every ending no matter if you win or lose. It's just the impact of the sacrifice is lessened (or increased) via whether lots of Major characters die or more Minor Major ones. Also would be the perfect chance to actually see EMS in action and properly give people some different Endings all based off the one decision. You want a happy ending? Fine but you're going to have to work hard throughout the game to get it. Makes sense IMO.

Space Magic and Artistic Integrity trumped the possibility of such a brilliant ending.

That I could have lived with and what I was saying the whole time. Victory, a lot of the galaxy sacreficed (still sad) but more personalized victory because the characters you are close to live. 

Modifié par ph34r-X, 05 juillet 2012 - 02:09 .