361 réponses à ce sujet

[Conniving_Eagle]

daaaav wrote...

To be honest, they probably made a mistake by making the game about the Reaper war in the first place.

Think about it, the Prothean Reaper war supposedly lasted 300 years. They were trying to make a game about starting fighting and ending a potential 300 year conflict....

I reckon they should have kept the focus to STOPPING the Reapers. That way they don't even have to fully explain them. The plot of ME3 should have been finding a way to use the relays to fling the buggers further out into dark space or something.

Not as Grand but doable in ONE game.

There's a difference though. The war with the Prothean Empire lasted so long because the Protheans fought a war of attrition and subjegated most of the galaxy. In the current cycle, galactic power is shared among various races and each has their own priorities, "Divide and Conquer," I guess. That is why the Reaper War in this cycle wasn't estimated to last more than a year.

[sammysoso]

....or...you know, maybe they like what they created? That tends to happen.

And with the EC, I'm starting to think like they do.

[Conniving_Eagle]

Silasqtx wrote...

I fail to see the point of this thread.

It's their product and they can do whatever they want with it. People will like it? Good. People won't? idontgiveaf*ck.jpg

Lots of people didn't like it? They lack the hindsight we have to continue the franchise, so it's understandable. We'll do the EC to both please them and keep our vision intact for the sake of the next products related to this series.


Guys, it's over. The Catalyst takes form of a kid, Shepard has nightmares and TIM can control people. GET OVER IT.

That sir/ma'am, is defeatist talk.

[Geth_Gestalt25]

DGMockingJay wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Geth_Gestalt25 wrote...

I neither like or hate how the ending was implemented, but even with the EC it still ruined the mysterious Lovecraftian feel of the Reapers.

I agree, though I know alot of people did ask for an explanation of the Reapers origins.

I discussed it frequently with my friends about it. They wanted an explanation I thought it was better left un explained.

THAT'S something that can be left up to speculation.

I even had my own theories about why the Reapers do what they do and why Harbinger kept saying "We are your salvation through destruction."

I won't go into it here but I think my explanation was MUCH more logical than

"Yo dog, I heard you didn't wanna get wiped out by synthetics. So I made synthetics with organics to wipe you out to save you from being killed by synthetics."

For me, I did not even wanted Reapers to have a complex reason to destroy Synthetics, other than Self interest. I always thought they destroy sentients since we are a genetic mutation, and before we become Ma threat large enough to wipe Reapers out, they wipe us.&nbspwriters thought it would b fine to make the Reapers the real Heroes of the story and Commander Shepard, just a ruckus in the world!!! Even if they wanted to show the Reapers as a character, doing good, in their own twisted ways, the execution was really poor!!

I actually thought that the Reapers were remnants of a dying race from another reality that survived off harvesting advanced civilisations create new Reapers, well that idea was formed when EDI explained that they were harvesting humans as it was part of their reproductive cycle.

Modifié par Geth_Gestalt25, 05 juillet 2012 - 08:16 .

[Bfler]

sammysoso wrote...

....or...you know, maybe they like what they created? That tends to happen.

And with the EC, I'm starting to think like they do.

Then they would come to the forum/media and defend their idea. But since release they seem to be absent.

[Peregrin25]

My personal feeling is, Mr. Hudson and Walters are at fault and are in denial. After all, what ever the truth may be. It is speculated that Hudson and Walters wrote the endings, prior to Extended Cut without any peer review. That if true, in my opinion is the part that irks me in more ways than one.

Fact of the matter is. At this stage of the whole controversy, there is really nothing that can be done about it. Trying to make something happen, or trying to change their minds is not going to happen.

Whether Hudson and Walters grow a pair and man up to their mistake, or just sit back and take everything and deny any mistake was made. That is on them and them alone. I doubt the rest of the BioWare Mass Effect Team is at fault because they just didn't have a choice in the matter.

If someone did say something they probably got fired or they themselves left the company.

I firmly believe Hudson and Walters are in the wrong. I do believe they screwed the pooch when it came to Mass Effect 3. They were so concerned with how epic and massive the story was, that they lost sight of the things that made Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 great games. I honestly do not know what Walters was thinking when he decided to take the direction the ending had pre-Extended Cut.

BioWare should have created something that was their own. Not something that has been done many times in many different science fiction franchises. I am referring to the Deus Ex style ending which we have. Although the endings now are much much better than they were before, we still have the Deus Ex ending. BioWare is capable of better writing and Walters should have seen that. Why they took that direction is beyond me.

At least I can enjoy the game more now than I did pre-Extended Cut. I don't necessarily love the endings even now, but I don't have to hate BioWare for it. I blame Hudson and Walters. I do firmly believe they are only ones fingers should be pointed at. However, they do get some points for keeping on a promise to release the Extended Cut. Even if the content was supposed to be there in the beginning. At least we got it.

Who knows, it could have all been some sort of huge publicity stunt that ended up backfiring in their faces.

I also hate how the press release handled the situation. It was horrible and those that handled it should have been fired.

I try to veer off the course when it comes to threads like this because I am trying to move on, but there are just some things that need to be said, and I am sure there are many who agree with what I am saying. I just wish the people that need to see it and read it or hear it could. On this forum chances are very unlikely. I wish I had the means to call 'em out.

If it is infact a matter of pride, then they are in the wrong. There is nothing wrong with being proud of your work, but being so pridefull you cannot man up to your mistakes. That is just messed up, and there is no place for it.

Anyway, that's all I have to say on the matter lol.

Modifié par Peregrin25, 05 juillet 2012 - 07:17 .

[Yuqi]

Obadiah wrote...

Grogimus wrote...

I liked Mass Effect 3. Even the original endings. Perhaps I am indeed in the minority. So be it. Doesn't bother me at all.

I too was satisfied with the original ending... once I got over the price of victory. It made sense to me that the cost of stopping the Reapers was as high as the current civilization (drstroyed relays).

I liked the EC as well, a bit too happy - but I dont have any real problems with it. I welcomed the added exposition and 4th option as well.

^This

[Silasqtx]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Silasqtx wrote...

I fail to see the point of this thread.

It's their product and they can do whatever they want with it. People will like it? Good. People won't? idontgiveaf*ck.jpg

Lots of people didn't like it? They lack the hindsight we have to continue the franchise, so it's understandable. We'll do the EC to both please them and keep our vision intact for the sake of the next products related to this series.


Guys, it's over. The Catalyst takes form of a kid, Shepard has nightmares and TIM can control people. GET OVER IT.

That sir/ma'am, is defeatist talk.

No, it's "not being a blockhead" talk.

WE (because I hated the original endings too, some plotholes were undeniable others could be easily bypassed) did what we could. They delivered as best as they could (at least i'm headcanoning that). Why can't we just sit down for a moment and think "hey, maybe they delivered that product because they really liked it and released the EC to "fix" some major concerns the fanbase had with the endings, keeping their vision intact!" and get off their back?

Again, it's over. They won't change nothing.  [haters] Stop crying around making terrible threads such as this and grow a quad. [/haters]

They're not in denial because they love the way they made this series end, period. Now they're probably on vacation somewhere sunny running tests on seashells.

Modifié par Silasqtx, 05 juillet 2012 - 07:38 .

[satunnainen]

I am not sure what the devs really are, since they havent said much about it. But I am sure that some of the "fans" are certainly stuck in their way of thinking about the ending. Repeating the memes like RGB, spacekid, plothole, lying, etc.has replaced any need to provide a valid argument for their claims about the possible problems in the game.

It has been 4 months since the game got out, time to quit whining and move on if you really dont like the game even after the new ending DLC.

I certainly dont like all the games I have played but I also dont spend 3 months in the games forum complaining about it. If I have something to say, I say it and then move on. Therefore I have a really trouble believing that people who still complain here about the endings, do it because they really have a problem with the ending. More likely it has become a hobby for them to whine in the Bioware forums.

[Binary_Helix 1]

ld1449 wrote...

DGMockingJay wrote...

For me, I did not even wanted Reapers to have a complex reason to destroy Synthetics, other than Self interest. I always thought they destroy sentients since we are a genetic mutation, and before we become a threat large enough to wipe Reapers out, they wipe us. 

Why in the hell, the writers thought it would b fine to make the Reapers the real Heroes of the story and Commander Shepard, just a ruckus in the world!!! Even if they wanted to show the Reapers as a character, doing good, in their own twisted ways, the execution was really poor!!

Well I didn't want to get into it but my personal reason for the reapers wiping out organics was the following.

We can assume that the very first civilization, the one that didn't have to worry about Reapers eventually populated the entire galaxy.

And populated

and populated

and populated

eventually its as Thane said back in ME2 "When all the world is overcharged with inhabitants, the last remedy is war, which provideth for every man through victory or death"

The whole galaxy was overpopulated and fighting for the resources left.

Their AI's eventually came to a solution. And wiped the galaxy clean of life, harvesting the organics. They determined to never allow this to hapen again, knowing that eventually, when new organic life evolved and surfaced it would, if allowed to fully flourish.

This is why Harbinger and Sovereign state "You are Chaos. We Are Order." And "We are your salvation through destruction."

This, I thought, fit perfectly for their motivations and their justification in those statements. Because it is coldly logical to a degree and they can't simply let organics advance more than every 50k years because then it'll just be too much of a pain to wipe us out.

It could even have been called a "Mercy" to let us live 50k years in relative peace, not just harvesting us as our species achieves Space travel.

This is where I thought it was going. Not space magic and circular logic. But by sheer innevitability that was so far away none of the organics could fully fathom it.

That was my expectation as well.

[SpamBot2000]

It's embarrassing, but it took me a long time to get what they were going for. It was no less than the destruction of the electronic entertainment business. These are brave people who give no good goddamn for the profit motive.

[Daverid]

People claim the Reaper IFF ... And whilst I'm not entirely sure whether the IFF is still on board the Normandy even after the Alliance stripped it apart and remade many parts of it , which I reckon they probably would have gotten rid of the IFF.

All I can say is this ...

BioWare wanted a Bittersweet Ending? That scene would have made far more sense and created that Sacrifice for Victory atmosphere that they apparently wanted. Also it could have been easily preventable to not have your LI get obliterated by the beam by taking a different character on the mission prior to the Beam Charge.

And to fix the whole "People get on the Normandy" ... Simple ... Just have it so before the Beam Charge Shep rounds up his crew and says that he doesn't want them on the Charge, Call the Normandy in, tells them he might need them and the Normandy's support if he makes it to the Citadel and something goes haywire.

Of course however THAT would have 'Somehow' ruined Artistic Integrity, or didn't have enough Space Magic involved in it.

[Peregrin25]

Daverid wrote...

And to fix the whole "People get on the Normandy" ... Simple ... Just have it so before the Beam Charge Shep rounds up his crew and says that he doesn't want them on the Charge, Call the Normandy in, tells them he might need them and the Normandy's support if he makes it to the Citadel and something goes haywire.

Of course however THAT would have 'Somehow' ruined Artistic Integrity, or didn't have enough Space Magic involved in it.

Actually, they did add somthing along those lines prior to charging the beam. You tell your crew and party members to get on the Normandy and leave.

[ld1449]

Peregrin25 wrote...

Daverid wrote...

And to fix the whole "People get on the Normandy" ... Simple ... Just have it so before the Beam Charge Shep rounds up his crew and says that he doesn't want them on the Charge, Call the Normandy in, tells them he might need them and the Normandy's support if he makes it to the Citadel and something goes haywire.

Of course however THAT would have 'Somehow' ruined Artistic Integrity, or didn't have enough Space Magic involved in it.

Actually, they did add somthing along those lines prior to charging the beam. You tell your crew and party members to get on the Normandy and leave.

Which was one of the few parts of the EC I liked. I can headcannon that Harby was too busy shooting everyone trying to get to the beam to shoot the normandy.

Everything else...meh

[Mazebook]

I think people are in denial that the ending was actually pretty good... it just went over their heads...or they did not liked what it represents...which is arguable.

[Geth_Gestalt25]

[quote]Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

[quote]ld1449 wrote...

[quote]DGMockingJay wrote...

For me, I did not even wanted Reapers to have a complex reason to destroy Synthetics, other than Self interest. I always thought they destroy sentients since we are a genetic mutation, and before we become a threat large enough to wipe Reapers out, they wipe us. 

Why in the hell, the writers thought it would b fine to make the Reapers the real Heroes of the story and Commander Shepard, just a ruckus in the world!!! Even if they wanted to show the Reapers as a character, doing good, in their own twisted ways, the execution was really poor!!

[/quote]

Well I didn't want to get into it but my personal reason for the reapers wiping out organics was the following.

We can assume that the very first civilization, the one that didn't have to worry about Reapers eventually populated the entire galaxy.

And populated

and populated

and populated

eventually its as Thane said back in ME2 "When all the world is overcharged with inhabitants, the last remedy is war, which provideth for every man through victory or death"

The whole galaxy was overpopulated and fighting for the resources left.

Their AI's eventually came to a solution. And wiped the galaxy clean of life, harvesting the organics. They determined to never allow this to hapen again, knowing that eventually, when new organic life evolved and surfaced it would, if allowed to fully flourish.

This is why Harbinger and Sovereign state "You are Chaos. We Are Order." And "We are your salvation through destruction."

This, I thought, fit perfectly for their motivations and their justification in those statements. Because it is coldly logical to a degree and they can't simply let organics advance more than every 50k years because then it'll just be too much of a pain to wipe us out.

It could even have been called a "Mercy" to let us live 50k years in relative peace, not just harvesting us as our species achieves Space travel.

This is where I thought it was going. Not space magic and circular logic. But by sheer innevitability that was so far away none of the organics could fully fathom it.

[/quote]

That was my expectation as well

Modifié par Geth_Gestalt25, 05 juillet 2012 - 11:53 .

[MoZedK]

Some of the writers or maby higher up says it is that way.

I my opinion this ending is against all good writing technicks, and it simply dosent belong.
I guess I understand what they where aiming for and in that forgot all good sence, while trying to create a grand ending.
Thats just my opinion. In there eager they forgot.

And yes some is to pridefull to see the faliur the ending is. So might be told to say nothing. Proberly

[hangmans tree]

only question now is how will they proceed from now on?
PR is trying to sculp a masterpiece out of crap, althought you can polish crap (proven), its still crap. BW can aknowledge that 'some RELATIVELY big group of fans THINK the ending is BAD'. They crippled their 'artistic integrity' really bad imo, it will drag behind 'em for some time like unpleasant smell travels after you when you spoil the atmosphere.

They need to work hard not to repeat that kind of decisions/concepts in the future.

Look at BSN after EC: slight traffic, nowhere near the volume after the game was out and people realised that there is a problem. Cause? People stopped caring and moved on, just as I thought it will be. And BW was left only with the hardcore fans, which most likely had a problem with the ending and treatment they got with PR spin...

[Drake-Shepard]

A different Perspective

All the hate seems to be on Mac and Casey whilst Drew and Weeke's are thought to be infallible

Tuchunka and Rannoch are amazing yeah and weeke's nailed it when he said he wanted to see the assets in action in the hammer team etc.

However, both Weeke's and Drew are completely fine with the order-chaos technological singularity ending. Yeah the starchild is annoying but a big part of what makes him so awkward is that his order-chaos speech comes from nowhere;

- It is against the themes of the game when you find out over 20+ hours of geth story related missions and EDI's evolution that we can live together with synthetics. And then all of a sudden they say you can't? and the actually over arching theme contradicts it?
- The crucible is a deus ex machina never mentioned before in any lore or anything.
- No actually forshadowing...just some cut and paste dialogue , an out of place rannoch reaper convo and vendetta going on about trophs and peaks
- No dev or anyone has criticised the above points yet!
- Drew said dark energy  was one of many endings/reaper motivations being considered? WHAT? being considered...how can you change the entire motivation of an enemy half way through a series. Changing the ending is one thing..how things play out, who dies, but the overall point of the story. thats like darth vader not being lukes dad, adding another side to the force, the point of the matrix being to solve global warming instead of controlling humans. It changes everything. It changes the whole point of the story.

Looks like they just wrote themselves in a corner and then for some reason wanted the game to be easy to follow for new players, further writing themselves in a corner.

Weeke's went on a scathing long rant in that post but didn't mention the other problems...the much much bigger problems. I don;t know what to make of that.
And is Drew serious about changing the reaper motivations mid script (remember so much dark energy forshadowing in ME2). Is he still being paid by EA?

Modifié par Drake-Shepard, 05 juillet 2012 - 10:09 .

[crimzontearz]

Bungie still thinks the ending to halo 2 was awesome

Silicon Knights still thinks and proclaims Too Human was awesome

and so on

[Carlthestrange]

Sometimes its just difficult to find fault with your own work. Understandable really. But what looks right in your head, won't look right in the head of someone else.

[KevShep]

garrusfan1 wrote...

Billyg3453 wrote...

I personally think Casey and Mac are in denial, and that %70+ don't like it and can't do anything about it.

It's pretty clear those two are in some serious denial however.

Was it ever confirmed that only those two wrote the ending if so wow that is sad that they didn't bother to get feedback from their team of amazing writers but those two are in denial or have too much pride to admit they were wrong

Drew K. was the one that did ME1 and 2 and then moved to Star Wars MMO.

Thats when Casey H. CHANGED what Drew had in store with the plot by creating his own plot. Thats why the crucible came out of nowhere and why ME2 adds nothing to the overall plot now!

Drew K. had some big plans in store with ME3 but thanks to Casey H. that didnt happen!

[DMWW]

maaaze wrote...

I think people are in denial that the ending was actually pretty good.

+1

[Grubas]

KevShep wrote...



Drew K. was the one that did ME1 and 2 and then moved to Star Wars MMO.

Thats when Casey H. CHANGED what Drew had in store with the plot by creating his own plot. Thats why the crucible came out of nowhere and why ME2 adds nothing to the overall plot now!

Drew K. had some big plans in store with ME3 but thanks to Casey H. that didnt happen!

How do you know? Source?

Also i think everyone at bioware knew that the ending sucks. But they couldnt do anything about it. Hence the official denial.

Modifié par Grubas, 05 juillet 2012 - 12:10 .

[Caenis]

DMWW wrote...

maaaze wrote...

I think people are in denial that the ending was actually pretty good.

+1

Semantics. 

If you ask people, do you think the ending had a lot of plotholes, and if it needed work and improvement, people would say yes.

If you ask them if they liked the emotional impact of the ending, and the clarification and the closure, people might say yes.

If you ask them if it is a crappy ending. Well what does crappy mean, could have had more improvement, but had a lot of emotional impact and closure, with good graphics, and good additions can mean great or great enough, good voice acting etc.

The definitions people place on what is 'terrible' is not necessarily universal. For intance the original ending gets an 8/10 for me, the EC gets a 13/10 for me. But that doesn't mean I don't 'think' that it could have been better, should have been better, but wasn't as good as it could have been. This ending could have been 'monumental' it could have been historical, it could have been a phenomenal 98/10  ! Like so many stars above 10 that it's crazy.

I don't think the ending was 'terrible' I just use semantics, and understand that the word terrible equates to poor writing choices towards the end, but poor writing choices doesn't MAKE it bad, as it was executed in a way that was visually pleasing, like eye and ear candy. 

Modifié par Caenis, 05 juillet 2012 - 12:15 .