1199 réponses à ce sujet

[warlock22]

Miekkas 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.

Hi Allan,

I hope these words find you well, and if they reach you, please pass them on to the team. EDIT: These are just thoughts for you and them to think about. What is done with them is up to anyone.

I want to answer you question with this: Why not? People seemed to have loved the fact that games like Chrono Trigger have various endings that are all very different in nature, so why not Mass Effect? The more endings and variables the better I say.

In many discussions involving the Refusal Ending, players cite that the reason for it resulting in the ultimate defeat of the united forces is that many times it is stated that you cannot win by conventional means. But how many times in the series has Shepard turned around and done exactly what NPCs said was impossible depending on how much effort the player puts into the game? As a developer, you know better than any of us ever could that the trilogy has spent a very sizeable portion of the game centered around Shepard and his/her team achieving what others deemed impossible based upon how much effort the player puts into the game. Remember the words of the Illusive Man during the Suicide Mission: "Shepard, you have done the impossible." Those are strong words coming from a man not easily impressed like the Illusive Man and strongly suggests that even the Illusive Man had his doubts about Shepard's odds of success, but Shepard not only was successful, he exceeded all expectations. Or remember the words of Javik, who noted that Shepard and his allies were far more united as against the Reapers than the Protheans, and that they just might stand a chance. Again these are strong words from as cynical a character as Javik. The character of Shepard has achieved in his or her lifetime what others had deemed as impossible based upon the efforts of the player: he cured the genophage, brought peace between the quarians and geth, led a suicide mission with no casualties, etc. And these are just some of the major examples the from games. There are many others in the games that vary based upon the player's decisions and how much effort they put into the game. It is this feeling of accomplishment and upliftment that the player has come to know and cherish from the Mass Effect series. The current endings, especially the Refusal Ending, does not deliver this same kind of feeling to the player. Instead, the players find themselves confronted with now four choices that involve committing acts of highly questionable morality via deus ex machina with no means of achieving an ending that shares the same uplifting and overcoming impossible odds message.

Another issue I have noticed among some players and the stance suddenly taken at the end in stark contrast to the rest of the game is that there seems to be the belief that the hero must die in order to be hero worthy of legend and depth. You do not need the hero to die in order for a game, movie, or novel to have a deep message. Rather, a hero who lives, albeit with the scars caused by his, the team's, and the Galaxy's sacrifices, can bring an even deeper meaning to the story. A story that shows how much a hero has suffered to achieve a "happy" ending can bring even greater inspiration to people than if a hero simply sacrifices him/herself to save the world. Please see the Lord of the Rings for a stellar example of sacrifice and suffering by the hero to achieve peace and happiness at the end of a long and arduous journey. Could the hero have been hailed as a martyr and a savior if he had died? Yes, but when a story is executed in a particular way, there can be even deeper meaning in that hero having to live with the suffering and sacrifice. Sometimes true strength and sacrifice comes from having to live with your choices and suffering at the end of the day instead of it being washed away with death. Regardless if Shepard and his team dies, they and the Galaxy have already suffered enough for it to be a bittersweet ending. Ask any soldier how they felt fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, and their stories will be bitter sweet at best even if they came home to their families. Because a lot of times, they lost buddies, parts of their soul, and maybe even parts of their physical selves, but their sacrifice and suffering still matters.  In the game the potential and possibly gameplay forced death of Shepard and the team does not positively add to the message of sacrifice like I think you intended it would. Shepard does not need to die for it to be the end of his story. I'm sure he'll be plenty busy having to take care of little blue children, building a house on Rannoch, etc.

This ending completely goes against the established message of hope and overcoming impossible odds if you are willing to put enough into the game. Throughout the trilogy, the majority of the third included, Shepard is portrayed as this larger than life character who builds a career on doing the impossible and living to tell the tale. He embodies a symbol of hope and perseverance for the player that shows if you are willing the put enough time and effort into the game, you can achieve a “happy ending”. The ending of the third game completely breaks this set rule for seemingly no reason seemingly other than shock factor.

I may be selfish, but I want to see an end to Shepard where the Reapers are defeated, and the choices, suffering, and sacrifices of the him, his team, and the Galaxy matter. I want to see the "happy" ending and message of hope I have seen in the past two game's endings. Where the quarians and geth are able to live together now as brothers and sisters. Where the turians and Krogan now respect each other not as enemies on the battlefield, but as comrades. Where the sacrifices and suffering of the krogans ushers in a cultural renaissance to prove the salarians wrong, and make Mordin's faith in Bakara and Wrex mean something. Where the pain and loss of Shepard and Liara is finally laid to rest where it is at least implied they can live in peace together with lots of blue children. Where the newfound affection of Garrus and Tali can be explored instead of being just a fun easter egg, and show that when one down closes, another one opens. But we must also remember the suffering and pain as well that they all must now live with. Show the graves of those we have lost. Show the devastation on each of the major worlds attacked by the Reapers. The games as they are now currently do not offer closure to us for what is supposed to be the end of Commander Shepard's story with the message of hope we have come to expect from Mass Effect despite the suffering and sacrifices along the way. The Extended Cut helps offer a slightly better message of hope, but it is not the same as the past two games in my opinion.

You have given us a message of hope in the past where even when life seems darkness, light can still shine through. There is nothing wrong with an ending of bittersweet happiness because the world needs those stories. They give us strength to continue holding on even when there seems to be no hope left. Sometimes we need heroes to walk among us, and not simply be remembered as martyrs. I want to see an ending like I described above, and I am sure there are others who would like to see one as well. We don’t want to backed into a corner where we are given three depressing ending that make us feel like it was all an empty victory. Every day we hear stories of death, war, and sadness, and we don't hear enough of those with hope. Because without those stories, it empties our lives of meaning where we are taught that matter how hard we fight, we cannot outcome obstacles. People need to be inspired, Bioware.  They need to be shown through games and art that sometimes you can come out a fight with your head held high.

I liked the majority of Mass Effect 3. It has some of the best writing I have seen in a video game or any form of entertainment…but the ending just fails to live up the  stellar standard set by the previous two titles and the majority of the third. I am still in dismay and confusion to try and understand how this ending came to be accepted by your writing team and Casey Hudson. There are times when I feel so deep in doubt, I desperately want to believe that you have something up your sleeve like the infamous indoctrination theory, but I cannot bring myself to believe in such things. I will try to remember Mass Effect for what it was and not how the ending made it turn out.

Again, if you do happen to read this, please pass it onto your fellow team members and think on it if you find it worth your time. I think a fair number of people would greatly appreciate seeing an ending of that kind. EDIT: I'm not asking or worse yet demanding you change anything because as you said, it is out of your hands. It's just something to think about I suppose.

Thanks.

Very well said. I hope BioWare reads this, because its all true. Honestly the hero that lives is the one we remeber the most imo.

[EnvyTB075]

Mezantine wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

Master Chief lived at the end of Halo 3., except it was only known to those who put in the effort (or looked it up on youtube).

Why can't the same apply here?

You can still live at the end of ME3 if you're willing to commit genocide against the Geth and EDI.

You see, i still don't believe that. Because logic.

[KeraWildmane]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
Do NOT respond to me if you're attaching any sort of expectation that it will change anything.  I do not want people feeling hopeful for more endings because of this thread.  I have no control over anything like that.

My only expectation is that you respond without condescension. Your reply to my comment failed to deliver on that.

Modifié par Kerasth, 29 juin 2012 - 04:55 .

[Allan Schumacher]

vivaladricas wrote...

The back of the box says 16 endings or in an ad.  Wasn;t it advertised as a choice game?  You're bolding "should"  so I am guessing you are getting at the player should not have choice in the manner you are implying the word should there?  

I'm bolding the word "should" because many people are just saying "why not?"  In a completely fictional world, we could have had pink flamingos materialize doing the macarena while shooting laser beams out of their eyes as the way the game wraps up.  So yeah, they could have done it.  I'm asking why should it?

For instance, some people have simply just stated "I play games for escapism and I loved being the hero."  That's a valid reason.  And if that's the way that person really feels, kudos to them for just telling me like it is.

Some people feel that there shouldn't be.  Some people feel that the game's definition of choice is more along the lines of "drive the narrative the way I want it to go" instead of "give me choices that have consequences, be and I'll deal with those consequences."

I'm stressing the idea: "Because something CAN be done, does that mean it SHOULD be done?"  If you think it should be done, then why?  Some have written up some very interesting responses and I enjoy reading them.

A large part of this stems from the other common threads (also mentioned here) about how BioWare could have totally made the refuse ending a happier one.  

[wantedman dan]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Some people feel that there shouldn't be.  Some people feel that the game's definition of choice is more along the lines of "drive the narrative the way I want it to go" instead of "give me choices that have consequences, be and I'll deal with those consequences."

Why is this an either/or situation?

[VonVerrikan]

Yep, it's what I wanted. It should have been an option, plain or simple. Not everything needs to end in some stupid attempt at being 'edgy' with bleak bleak bleak garbage.

[LT123]

Scolai wrote...

Because in the best stories, the timeless ones that are cherished for generations, the ones that matter to people and keep them warm when the real world goes cold and give a glimmer of light when the darkness closes in, end in such a way, realistic or not.

We live in a time plagued by a horrible, horrible fad that says to be "important" or "deep" you need to kill off the main character and wreck the world.  The theme always has to be sacrifice, and yet many authors seem to entirely forget that sacrifice isn't the only way to end a story. Why this is I don't know.  It flies in the face of the stories that people actually enjoy.  Real life has far too much doom and gloom as it is.  There is neither anything wrong with having a happier ending, nor are "sacrifice" endings somehow more poinent.  They're simply a sign of our times and a sad commentary on how little hope we collectively have.  If you can no longer believe in miracles, in overcoming the impossible, well...you don't really need heroes any more, just martyrs.

Look at the stories people consider to be classics of the fantasy and sci-fi genre.  Look at Star Wars or Lord of the Rings.  Do they end in darkness?  No.  They end with the hero conquering all, and receiving their just reward.  Want a more recent example?  Look at the Avengers.  Ants standing up to the boot, so to speak, and winning against impossible odds.  Why?  Because that's what heroes do.  It's what we need them to do, so that we can have that glimmer of hope in our own lives.  It's also, in the Star Wars case and somewhat in Mass Effect, the monomyth.  It's what we want as a people because it's our most basic of stories.

Ending on a sad note because it's trendy to do so means Mass Effect likely won't go on to have the sort of appeal that Star Wars does.  Sure, lots of people will like it...but consider this - which ending do you think people will remember most in 10 years...Mass Effect or Return of the Jedi?  Or Avengers?  Or Lord of the Rings?

This.

[Salfin]

Before the very end, the game discusses hard choices, and Shepard knows he's/she's going to have to make several more once she returns to earth for the final confrontation.

How would everything works out for everyone be a hard choice? Wouldn't it have been the obvious choice, while making the other options silly to even consider? The other choices would simply be invalidated. Why sacrifice anything, if you don't have to sacrifice at all?

By having drawbacks, and sacrifices to each of the choices Bioware creates tension for the player at the end as he has to weigh exactly what he's willing to sacrifice to stop the reapers.

Modifié par Salfin, 29 juin 2012 - 05:01 .

[inusannonn]

If its possible in one of the DLCs for MassEffect 3, I would like to follow thru with Shepards promise.

And that is to find and reunite with Miranda.

War is over, if it were me as Shepard I would now be searching every single square inch of the galaxy for Miranda.

[Mystiq6]

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. The ending clearly wanted to be a tragedy and it felt very out of place. It doesn't get much simpler to me than that. Having the main character or friends die on you when you don't understand the narrative reason behind it is just so very jarring. Had there been more preparation (had the game actually been a tragedy), I think I could accept the endings as they are.

I've seen so many movies with sad or bittersweet endings and not one of them have left me as conflicted as Mass Effect 3.

Modifié par Mystiq6, 29 juin 2012 - 05:04 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

I would like the geth and EDI to survive the destroy option.

Not sure if I would be sane enough after that to even talk to anyone. I do think I can manage a tropical island with a great beach, an omni-tool with an extranet connection and a well filled bar.

[im commander shep]

Miekkas 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.

Hi Allan,

I hope these words find you well, and if they reach you, please pass them on to the team. EDIT: These are just thoughts for you and them to think about. What is done with them is up to anyone.

I want to answer you question with this: Why not? People seemed to have loved the fact that games like Chrono Trigger have various endings that are all very different in nature, so why not Mass Effect? The more endings and variables the better I say.

In many discussions involving the Refusal Ending, players cite that the reason for it resulting in the ultimate defeat of the united forces is that many times it is stated that you cannot win by conventional means. But how many times in the series has Shepard turned around and done exactly what NPCs said was impossible depending on how much effort the player puts into the game? As a developer, you know better than any of us ever could that the trilogy has spent a very sizeable portion of the game centered around Shepard and his/her team achieving what others deemed impossible based upon how much effort the player puts into the game. Remember the words of the Illusive Man during the Suicide Mission: "Shepard, you have done the impossible." Those are strong words coming from a man not easily impressed like the Illusive Man and strongly suggests that even the Illusive Man had his doubts about Shepard's odds of success, but Shepard not only was successful, he exceeded all expectations. Or remember the words of Javik, who noted that Shepard and his allies were far more united as against the Reapers than the Protheans, and that they just might stand a chance. Again these are strong words from as cynical a character as Javik. The character of Shepard has achieved in his or her lifetime what others had deemed as impossible based upon the efforts of the player: he cured the genophage, brought peace between the quarians and geth, led a suicide mission with no casualties, etc. And these are just some of the major examples the from games. There are many others in the games that vary based upon the player's decisions and how much effort they put into the game. It is this feeling of accomplishment and upliftment that the player has come to know and cherish from the Mass Effect series. The current endings, especially the Refusal Ending, does not deliver this same kind of feeling to the player. Instead, the players find themselves confronted with now four choices that involve committing acts of highly questionable morality via deus ex machina with no means of achieving an ending that shares the same uplifting and overcoming impossible odds message.

Another issue I have noticed among some players and the stance suddenly taken at the end in stark contrast to the rest of the game is that there seems to be the belief that the hero must die in order to be hero worthy of legend and depth. You do not need the hero to die in order for a game, movie, or novel to have a deep message. Rather, a hero who lives, albeit with the scars caused by his, the team's, and the Galaxy's sacrifices, can bring an even deeper meaning to the story. A story that shows how much a hero has suffered to achieve a "happy" ending can bring even greater inspiration to people than if a hero simply sacrifices him/herself to save the world. Please see the Lord of the Rings for a stellar example of sacrifice and suffering by the hero to achieve peace and happiness at the end of a long and arduous journey. Could the hero have been hailed as a martyr and a savior if he had died? Yes, but when a story is executed in a particular way, there can be even deeper meaning in that hero having to live with the suffering and sacrifice. Sometimes true strength and sacrifice comes from having to live with your choices and suffering at the end of the day instead of it being washed away with death. Regardless if Shepard and his team dies, they and the Galaxy have already suffered enough for it to be a bittersweet ending. Ask any soldier how they felt fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, and their stories will be bitter sweet at best even if they came home to their families. Because a lot of times, they lost buddies, parts of their soul, and maybe even parts of their physical selves, but their sacrifice and suffering still matters.  In the game the potential and possibly gameplay forced death of Shepard and the team does not positively add to the message of sacrifice like I think you intended it would. Shepard does not need to die for it to be the end of his story. I'm sure he'll be plenty busy having to take care of little blue children, building a house on Rannoch, etc.

This ending completely goes against the established message of hope and overcoming impossible odds if you are willing to put enough into the game. Throughout the trilogy, the majority of the third included, Shepard is portrayed as this larger than life character who builds a career on doing the impossible and living to tell the tale. He embodies a symbol of hope and perseverance for the player that shows if you are willing the put enough time and effort into the game, you can achieve a “happy ending”. The ending of the third game completely breaks this set rule for seemingly no reason seemingly other than shock factor.

I may be selfish, but I want to see an end to Shepard where the Reapers are defeated, and the choices, suffering, and sacrifices of the him, his team, and the Galaxy matter. I want to see the "happy" ending and message of hope I have seen in the past two game's endings. Where the quarians and geth are able to live together now as brothers and sisters. Where the turians and Krogan now respect each other not as enemies on the battlefield, but as comrades. Where the sacrifices and suffering of the krogans ushers in a cultural renaissance to prove the salarians wrong, and make Mordin's faith in Bakara and Wrex mean something. Where the pain and loss of Shepard and Liara is finally laid to rest where it is at least implied they can live in peace together with lots of blue children. Where the newfound affection of Garrus and Tali can be explored instead of being just a fun easter egg, and show that when one down closes, another one opens. But we must also remember the suffering and pain as well that they all must now live with. Show the graves of those we have lost. Show the devastation on each of the major worlds attacked by the Reapers. The games as they are now currently do not offer closure to us for what is supposed to be the end of Commander Shepard's story with the message of hope we have come to expect from Mass Effect despite the suffering and sacrifices along the way. The Extended Cut helps offer a slightly better message of hope, but it is not the same as the past two games in my opinion.

You have given us a message of hope in the past where even when life seems darkness, light can still shine through. There is nothing wrong with an ending of bittersweet happiness because the world needs those stories. They give us strength to continue holding on even when there seems to be no hope left. Sometimes we need heroes to walk among us, and not simply be remembered as martyrs. I want to see an ending like I described above, and I am sure there are others who would like to see one as well. We don’t want to backed into a corner where we are given three depressing ending that make us feel like it was all an empty victory. Every day we hear stories of death, war, and sadness, and we don't hear enough of those with hope. Because without those stories, it empties our lives of meaning where we are taught that matter how hard we fight, we cannot outcome obstacles. People need to be inspired, Bioware.  They need to be shown through games and art that sometimes you can come out a fight with your head held high.

I liked the majority of Mass Effect 3. It has some of the best writing I have seen in a video game or any form of entertainment…but the ending just fails to live up the  stellar standard set by the previous two titles and the majority of the third. I am still in dismay and confusion to try and understand how this ending came to be accepted by your writing team and Casey Hudson. There are times when I feel so deep in doubt, I desperately want to believe that you have something up your sleeve like the infamous indoctrination theory, but I cannot bring myself to believe in such things. I will try to remember Mass Effect for what it was and not how the ending made it turn out.

Again, if you do happen to read this, please pass it onto your fellow team members and think on it if you find it worth your time. I think a fair number of people would greatly appreciate seeing an ending of that kind. EDIT: I'm not asking or worse yet demanding you change anything because as you said, it is out of your hands. It's just something to think about I suppose.

Thanks.

Good Post

Would like to add for me, the options we get while very different and force a tough choice they all step away from some of the key themes that we have worked with and understood. To pick 1 of the main 3 to have any real hope of viewing the ending as a win. All have significant aspects which people disagree with and so people go with option 4 of reject all 3 to maintain the ideas that we have learned throughout the trilogy but of option 4 is also comes across as the ultimate fail. To get the balance better an at least small win not without sacrifice while
still sticking to the principles and ideas of the whole trilogy.

Also for me personally the ideas behind why this is happening ie: synthetics saving organics by killing them every 50000 years we are introduced to still seem illogical to me and to base my final choices with only a 100% fail as the option to go aginst it on logic introduced in the final 15 min of 100hours of game time without any real basis for it and some evidence against it is tough to take and confusing at the very least.

[VibrantYacht]

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? 

I no longer want this. I think that's for a different story set in the ME universe.

[KeraWildmane]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

vivaladricas wrote...

The back of the box says 16 endings or in an ad.  Wasn;t it advertised as a choice game?  You're bolding "should"  so I am guessing you are getting at the player should not have choice in the manner you are implying the word should there?  

I'm bolding the word "should" because many people are just saying "why not?"  In a completely fictional world, we could have had pink flamingos materialize doing the macarena while shooting laser beams out of their eyes as the way the game wraps up.  So yeah, they could have done it.  I'm asking why should it?

For instance, some people have simply just stated "I play games for escapism and I loved being the hero."  That's a valid reason.  And if that's the way that person really feels, kudos to them for just telling me like it is.

Some people feel that there shouldn't be.  Some people feel that the game's definition of choice is more along the lines of "drive the narrative the way I want it to go" instead of "give me choices that have consequences, be and I'll deal with those consequences."

I'm stressing the idea: "Because something CAN be done, does that mean it SHOULD be done?"  If you think it should be done, then why?  Some have written up some very interesting responses and I enjoy reading them.

A large part of this stems from the other common threads (also mentioned here) about how BioWare could have totally made the refuse ending a happier one.  

Did you not notice all the people in this thread who've been telling why it should have been done? Did you not see all the huge walls of text containing solid arguments for why it should have been done? Is this what we're to expect from Bioware in the future? Ignoring everything we say and responding to all grievances with what amounts to "F*ck you, we know what we're doing"?

[d4rk fallen]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

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

Allan I'll answer your question with a question "Why shouldn't it?"

Since I was already asking my question in response to the OPs question, we could really go in circles all day with this if we play it this way.

He's gathering our responses.

To be clear, I'm not "gathering" anything.  I'm simply curious, because it's a perspective that is different than mine and hence intrinsically is more difficult for me to understand.

Do NOT respond to me if you're attaching any sort of expectation that it will change anything.  I do not want people feeling hopeful for more endings because of this thread.  I have no control over anything like that.

Why not allow an ending like that. I understand you feel if your shepard refused it could only end in total destruction, but a lot of people have followed their shepards story from the begging. Way I feel after everything my shepard has done with one impossible victory after another, why the hell would he just say nay I don't feel like it and watch as everything he/she has fought for gets destroyed. Noway in hell should shepard be the type of character that just gives up, isn't that how you guys wrote him, why shouldn't we feel he/she could pull off yet another impossible victory. Plus the EMS does it even really mean anything in this game, could have easliy made it so a high EMS atleast gave the chance.

[Allan Schumacher]

crimsontotem wrote...

Put us in your perspective... you put about god knows how many hours into the game... and you yourself has become Commander Shepard. Now you want to see how this story of YOU come to an end and you only get a speculative ending... what do you think? YOUR story ends abruptly witout any direct end. How woudl you feel?

I first played ME1 in 2008, before I even started at BioWare, and I have kept my saved games and played through the whole series with two different characters.  At no point have I ever worked on a Mass Effect game, so I've only ever played them as a fan, and have suck well over 100+ hours into the games myself.


Now, I had already heard crazy rumors about the awfulness of the ending, so that likely made me go into it with a much more open mind.  But I did NOT mind the open endedness of the original endings.  An advantage of the, I found, is that it places more emphasis on the choice and what I feel about the choice, rather than seeing the validation of said choice with a detailed description of the consequence of my choice.

When you provide a more detailed epilogue, you validate, or worse invalidate, whether or not the thought process they used to make the decision was correct.  I think part of this is why many people feel the current refusal ending is an insult, because they really wanted it to go down in another way.  Even though it's not actually illogical that the Reapers ultimately win, there are more than one several page threads that basically say "This is stupid, we should be able to win conventionally" because really, it's what they want.

So I didn't mind the original endings (I didn't think they were great, but I didn't think they were bad.  I was still able to enjoy them), but I could certainly understand (in part by asking) why many did want more details and whatnot.

[GamerrangerX]

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? 

boring ending,the best ending is control,Shepard become immortal

Modifié par GamerrangerX, 29 juin 2012 - 05:07 .

[Ticonderoga117]

It should've been part of the refusal ending if certain -strict- criteria were met.
Like: Did you peacefully solve the Geth/Quarian war, did you get X amount of WA's, do you have high enough reputation to tell GlowBoyhis logic is flawed because he is flawed and his creators were flawed.

Something!

[LadyMarisa]

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.

Personally, becaue I look for entertainment from the games I buy and play. I'm most entertained by an escape from reality that eventually leads to a happy ending. I don't mind my entertainment having doom and gloom, I don't mind having to fight to get that happy ending before I come back to reality. But I want it to be there.

I don't want to have to "speculate" or "imagine" things in my games. I could (and do) write my own entertainment and fiction and not have to spend a dime to do so. So when I purchase a game, I want to experience the story but I want to have a "happy" ending to my experience. (Sure, not all games have this but I tend to enjoy those games less)

Shepard Lives: Why should it be there? Because I've already seen my Shepard overcome death once so Shepard surviving against all odds has become a potential light at the end of the tunnel. Of course I want to live, I wanted to come out of this alive. Not unscathed, but alive.

Geth/EDI lives: I think it should be there because what I took away (as my personal experience) from playing the whole series is that I (we) overcame our differences, beat the odds and showed just how much good/potential we all have. I feel that I spent as much time healing and developing all these different peoples as I did trying to destroy the reapers. It made me sick that the only option I could see my Shepard ever taking flies in the face of everything I've worked for. So yeah, I think this amazing race and character should live too.

Shepard walks off into the sunset with LI: It should be there figuratively (as an option so it's not forced on people who don't want this) because no one has made me to want to pursue romance in a game like Bioware has. The teams have done such a good job investing me in my character and the npcs that tearing that apart in the end is depressing. and again, I don't enjoy depressing games. I want my games to entertain me and make me happy. Going off into the sunset with my LI would make me happy. If Bioware didn't do such a superb job with character development and interaction, I wouldn't have pursued romance.


Reapers defeated by conventional means: This is probably the least important to me but I do feel it should have been an option. I don't want to get into the whole Catalyst rant again but playing the earlier games felt like we were working towards that kind of solution.  To wind up with what we got was... well it was wierd to me. It didn't feel right at all. Like everything else, this type of situation should never be easy to achieve but when you combine all of the other things we've been building on and working towards, I just can't understand why all of it didn't have this situation as a potential end result.

[Mcfly616]

EC=BEST DLC EVER....I havent even downloaded Dawnguard yet, because EC makes my favorite game series meaningful again....


Well played Bioware

[Allan Schumacher]

Kerasth wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Because it would be a satisfying, happy ending. We would still have had to pay a high price for our victory, but the cost would not have been our soul and we'd actually win. In all the current endings we lose and in three of the four the Reapers win. Players should be rewarded for rejecting the logic of the monsters known as Reapers, not punished.

Just to be clear, you seem to be equating losing simply with whether or not Shepard survives? Am I correct in understanding this. What does it take to "win" this conflict then? Is the only "winning" condition one that has Shepard living, reapers defeated conventionally, Geth/EDI living, and Shepard walking off with love interest?

Wrong. I equate losing with the Reapers surviving. I would have been okay with Shepard dying to destroy the Reapers. Instead EDI and the geth die in the destroy ending and Shepard lives (if only for a few seconds). I went into ME3 accepting the fact that my Shep might not get to see the future she saved. I did not go into it accepting that the Reapers would survive in any of the alleged "win" scenarios.

If this was the case, you wouldn't have said that in all the current endings we lose.  Was that misspoken on your part?  The Reapers are definitively destroyed in the Destroy ending.  Yet you refer to the other endings as being the "win" scenarios.

[Hajilestone]

This is all iv'e wanted since the beginning.

[comrade gando]

LaughingDragon wrote...

You want to know the REAL truth Allan?

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

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

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

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

so much THIS. you just described perfectly how I feel. There's no way to WIN.

[Y2Kevin]

This isn't a Disney movie; I'm glad all of the endings require some level of sacrifice. In all honesty, the only ending that doesn't disappoint me is the "Refusal," as I don't believe the Reapers should have been defeated by any means, and certainly not conventional ones.

There are a few choices made throughout the series that I wish carried a little more weight, the fate of the Rachni just to name one, but overall I was pleased with the ability to allow the cycle to continue at the expense of high-level galactic civilization.

Modifié par Y2Kevin, 29 juin 2012 - 05:16 .