881 réponses à ce sujet

[shepdog77]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

No it won't. Gamble tweeted it won't change the endings in any way. It will at best add a line of dialogue with the catalyst.

That changes the endings in some way. They're being very contradictory about this.

They say EC wouldn't add new endings, only change the existing ones, yet EC included the Refuse option

Well Refusal is a just a glorified game over screen, and in the original endings you can just stand there until the fleets are destroyed.  So they basically just expanded on that.

[RavenEyry]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Um didn't you people want an refuse option?  So they gave you want you want and you still whine about it

It's not whining it's pointing out they've not been entirely true about the endings before.

People who whine about refuse is because it's NOT what they asked for.

[mauro2222]

BrookerT wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

I can also easily defend a horrible painting too.

But how can you define what is a horrible painting? I know people are going to hate me for saying this, but art is subjective, every view point is valid. This isn't me going on about "can't critiscize art", but for evey person who loves the Mona Lisa, there will always be people with well thought out arguments on why it sucks balls. It's who Art Critique works.

Art is art, that doesn't change the fact that a paiting wich consist of a green vomit is a good paiting, is lazy and horrible, but is art.

Modifié par mauro2222, 04 août 2012 - 08:59 .

[Conniving_Eagle]

BrookerT wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Defending the ending, though. Why? If you were offered one significantly better, would you refuse?

I was, the EC. There is always something better than what we have. If I was asked if I could have an hour's worth of ending content dedicated to EDI, more dialouge, extra content, 1000 different endgame scenarios for her then yes of course I would accept, but We have the endingg we have, I like it, and I will defend it, but there is always something better, but it is not always feasible to have

Creating a better ending isn't that difficult in this case. Just look at all the fan fiction endings. Most people consider the majority of them better endings. Bioware can make a better ending by removing (atleast some of) its fundamental problems.

[Baronesa]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Um didn't you people want an refuse option?  So they gave you want you want and you still whine about it

Selective memory?

The idea of a refusal ending was then to have the amount of war assets determine if you win or lose the war... but ignorign the second part simply furthers your rethoric... They simply took half of what was asked.

[Conniving_Eagle]

shepdog77 wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

RavenEyry wrote...

Chaotic-Fusion wrote...

No it won't. Gamble tweeted it won't change the endings in any way. It will at best add a line of dialogue with the catalyst.

That changes the endings in some way. They're being very contradictory about this.

They say EC wouldn't add new endings, only change the existing ones, yet EC included the Refuse option

Well Refusal is a just a glorified game over screen, and in the original endings you can just stand there until the fleets are destroyed.  So they basically just expanded on that.

A glorified game over screen with its own "clarity and closure" ? The credits still roll, there is still a scene explaining what happens, I'd consider that an ending. There is no restarting point if you pick Refuse.

[BatmanPWNS]

Do people still take Bioware at face value?

I mean they did say there was no MP in ME3.... there was MP.
They said there was no Prothean in ME3..... there was a prothean.
They said there was no new ending with ME3..... refuse got added.

And this isn't including what they said about ME1/2 leaks.

[KotorEffect3]

The Angry One wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Um didn't you people want an refuse option?  So they gave you want you want and you still whine about it

You have to be incredibly obtuse to not realise what's wrong with the refuse option.
That Shepard just stands there and doesn't even attempt to do anything while the resident psychopath has just declared it's intention to murder everybody because you refuse to buy into it's nonsense is an insult.

Now go back to upholding American justice without fail. That was more fun.

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

And for all you know I am a trash talking Mexican.  Or I could be French.

Modifié par KotorEffect3, 04 août 2012 - 09:01 .

[BrookerT]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

I can also easily defend a horrible painting too.

But how can you define what is a horrible painting? I know people are going to hate me for saying this, but art is subjective, every view point is valid. This isn't me going on about "can't critiscize art", but for evey person who loves the Mona Lisa, there will always be people with well thought out arguments on why it sucks balls. It's who Art Critique works.

A painting and a story are two different things. As are art and literature.

No, they're really not. I say that the Last Supper is crowded and directionless, you say its brimming with life and full of dulcet tones. I say the Catalyst is an interesting plot point and that the closure I recieved was adequate and well written, you say the opposite I presume. Art Critque is subjective. All art is off subjective quality.

[The Angry One]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

You have a device designed to promote Reaper interests and no way to know what it will do without meta-gaming.
Yeah, why wouldn't anyone activate that?

[Conniving_Eagle]

BatmanPWNS wrote...

Do people still take Bioware at face value?

I mean they did say there was no MP in ME3.... there was MP.
They said there was no Prothean in ME3..... there was a prothean.
They said there was no new ending with ME3..... refuse got added.

And this isn't including what they said about ME1/2 leaks.

I'm assuming you're only listing those because you're not in the mood to write a dissertation, correct?

[shepdog77]

The Angry One wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

You have a device designed to promote Reaper interests and no way to know what it will do without meta-gaming.
Yeah, why wouldn't anyone activate that?

Destroy promotes Reaper interests?  Fail.

[KotorEffect3]

The Angry One wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

You have a device designed to promote Reaper interests and no way to know what it will do without meta-gaming.
Yeah, why wouldn't anyone activate that?

You know you will lose to the reapers if you don't activate that and you know that without metagaming.  Hackett and several others note that the reapers can't be defeated conventionaly.  Also dead reapers doesn't exactly promote reapers interest.

Modifié par KotorEffect3, 04 août 2012 - 09:04 .

[ZackG312]

shepdog77 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

You have a device designed to promote Reaper interests and no way to know what it will do without meta-gaming.
Yeah, why wouldn't anyone activate that?

Destroy promotes Reaper interests?  Fail.

I think he was talking about the crucible as a weapon.

[The Angry One]

shepdog77 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

You have a device designed to promote Reaper interests and no way to know what it will do without meta-gaming.
Yeah, why wouldn't anyone activate that?

Destroy promotes Reaper interests?  Fail.

The destruction of all synthetic life because synthetics will inevitably destroy organics.

[Taboo]

shepdog77 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

You have a device designed to promote Reaper interests and no way to know what it will do without meta-gaming.
Yeah, why wouldn't anyone activate that?

Destroy promotes Reaper interests?  Fail.

Killing them solves all their troubles in their home lives.

I hear Harbinger's wife is a real ****.

[shepdog77]

The Angry One wrote...

shepdog77 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

You have a device designed to promote Reaper interests and no way to know what it will do without meta-gaming.
Yeah, why wouldn't anyone activate that?

Destroy promotes Reaper interests?  Fail.

The destruction of all synthetic life because synthetics will inevitably destroy organics.

Only destroys Reaper based technology.  Fail #2.

[The Angry One]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You know you will lose to the reapers if you don't activate that and you know that without metagaming.  Hackett and several others note that the reapers can't be defeated conventionaly.  Also dead reapers doesn't exactly promote reapers interest.

No. I don't know that. The fact that Hackett is a defeatist and a coward has no bearing on what I or Shepard thinks.

I can think of at least one way to win conventionally (by destroying the Catalyst). Shepard would try anything. Anything but standing there like an idiot.

[Wrathra]

Seifer006 wrote...

The only Good Ending would be if Wrex came with Shepard and ate Casper the Ghost

I'd buy levithan for this. i'd even force myself to replay the game for this.

[AresKeith]

shepdog77 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

You have a device designed to promote Reaper interests and no way to know what it will do without meta-gaming.
Yeah, why wouldn't anyone activate that?

Destroy promotes Reaper interests?  Fail.

in a way it does because you prove that Synthetics really are the problem, even though you kill the Reapers you sacrificed too much with EDI and the Geth

[BrookerT]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Defending the ending, though. Why? If you were offered one significantly better, would you refuse?

I was, the EC. There is always something better than what we have. If I was asked if I could have an hour's worth of ending content dedicated to EDI, more dialouge, extra content, 1000 different endgame scenarios for her then yes of course I would accept, but We have the endingg we have, I like it, and I will defend it, but there is always something better, but it is not always feasible to have

Creating a better ending isn't that difficult in this case. Just look at all the fan fiction endings. Most people consider the majority of them better endings. Bioware can make a better ending by removing (atleast some of) its fundamental problems.

Removing game content is hard, no seriously it is. You would need to sever all programming, and re-route all plot points. It's a bit of a clusterf*ck of programming. And it would need a really big download.

[Conniving_Eagle]

BrookerT wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

I can also easily defend a horrible painting too.

But how can you define what is a horrible painting? I know people are going to hate me for saying this, but art is subjective, every view point is valid. This isn't me going on about "can't critiscize art", but for evey person who loves the Mona Lisa, there will always be people with well thought out arguments on why it sucks balls. It's who Art Critique works.

A painting and a story are two different things. As are art and literature.

No, they're really not. I say that the Last Supper is crowded and directionless, you say its brimming with life and full of dulcet tones. I say the Catalyst is an interesting plot point and that the closure I recieved was adequate and well written, you say the opposite I presume. Art Critque is subjective. All art is off subjective quality.

They're not that different? Okay, try getting a job as an artist with a degree in literature and vice versa, let me know how it works out for you. They are completely different fields. An artist doesn't have to abide by a set of rules to make his work better. A writer does.

[KotorEffect3]

AresKeith wrote...

shepdog77 wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You have the one device that can end the cycle and even destroy the reapers.  Yet you won't activate it, yeah you refusers kind of get what you deserve.

You have a device designed to promote Reaper interests and no way to know what it will do without meta-gaming.
Yeah, why wouldn't anyone activate that?

Destroy promotes Reaper interests?  Fail.

in a way it does because you prove that Synthetics really are the problem, even though you kill the Reapers you sacrificed too much with EDI and the Geth

I am sure on Palevan, Tuchanka, Thessia etc... they aren't going to mind if a bunch of robots are deactivated as long as the reapers that were destroying those worlds are destroyed

[Conniving_Eagle]

BrookerT wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Defending the ending, though. Why? If you were offered one significantly better, would you refuse?

I was, the EC. There is always something better than what we have. If I was asked if I could have an hour's worth of ending content dedicated to EDI, more dialouge, extra content, 1000 different endgame scenarios for her then yes of course I would accept, but We have the endingg we have, I like it, and I will defend it, but there is always something better, but it is not always feasible to have

Creating a better ending isn't that difficult in this case. Just look at all the fan fiction endings. Most people consider the majority of them better endings. Bioware can make a better ending by removing (atleast some of) its fundamental problems.

Removing game content is hard, no seriously it is. You would need to sever all programming, and re-route all plot points. It's a bit of a clusterf*ck of programming. And it would need a really big download.

Oh, okay. I didn't know that. Thank you, mister bioware game developer.

[mauro2222]

BrookerT wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

mauro2222 wrote...

I can also easily defend a horrible painting too.

But how can you define what is a horrible painting? I know people are going to hate me for saying this, but art is subjective, every view point is valid. This isn't me going on about "can't critiscize art", but for evey person who loves the Mona Lisa, there will always be people with well thought out arguments on why it sucks balls. It's who Art Critique works.

A painting and a story are two different things. As are art and literature.

No, they're really not. I say that the Last Supper is crowded and directionless, you say its brimming with life and full of dulcet tones. I say the Catalyst is an interesting plot point and that the closure I recieved was adequate and well written, you say the opposite I presume. Art Critque is subjective. All art is off subjective quality.

In the Last Supper, you can see the artist direction, what he painted. That's good art, it has quality paiting. You can guess why he painted that, but you can't say that there's a Terminator hidden behind Jesus (you can say it, but is nosense).That's exactly the level of speculation of the horrible ending. The catalyst is by all means a cheap plot solution, more cheaper than the crucible being an off button.

"The creator will always rebel against its creator" is so obvious and stupid that the catalyst could say "The sun comes out everyday, that's why we reap" and it would make more sense.

You can explaing whatever feelings of emotions or "colors" you see, but we both see people, chating and eating.