285 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

chemiclord wrote...

Shepard was NEVER under your control. That's part of the problem.

You were effectively reading from a script. That illusion should have been shattered very quickly from the moment you were required to go a specific path in the story.  From the start to the finish, you were ALWAYS at the mercy of the story Bioware wanted to tell.

Yes, and in the closing moments of the final act, they changed scripts on me.  It was no longer a space fantasy about triumph over space-Cthulhu, but an angsty art film about the futility of struggling against fate.

Space fantasy I can handle.  It's fun, if not too serious.  Angsty art films not so much.

[chemiclord]

Well, now I think at least we're getting to the heart of the issue, and it actually doesn't have too much with Shepard's "death", I don't think.

The difference here is that while I don't like Mac Walters trying to get cute with an ending that he should have had NO delusions he could pull off, I am really unconcerned with getting Bioware to change it. If this is the noose they want to hang themselves with, so be it.

It's not my job to tell them how they should have done it better. It's my job to take it or leave it. As it stands, I plan to say "leave it" to future Bioware titles.

[Iakus]

chemiclord wrote...

Well, now I think at least we're getting to the heart of the issue, and it actually doesn't have too much with Shepard's "death", I don't think.

The difference here is that while I don't like Mac Walters trying to get cute with an ending that he should have had NO delusions he could pull off, I am really unconcerned with getting Bioware to change it. If this is the noose they want to hang themselves with, so be it.

It's not my job to tell them how they should have done it better. It's my job to take it or leave it. As it stands, I plan to say "leave it" to future Bioware titles.

In my case, I have followed Bioware games for over a decade.  Heck I've preordered a copy of the BG Enhanced Edition.  But now it's like I'm trying to talk down Darth Vader.  There's still good in them, I know it.  I'd hate for them to slip totally to teh Dark Side.

[chemiclord]

iakus wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

Well, now I think at least we're getting to the heart of the issue, and it actually doesn't have too much with Shepard's "death", I don't think.

The difference here is that while I don't like Mac Walters trying to get cute with an ending that he should have had NO delusions he could pull off, I am really unconcerned with getting Bioware to change it. If this is the noose they want to hang themselves with, so be it.

It's not my job to tell them how they should have done it better. It's my job to take it or leave it. As it stands, I plan to say "leave it" to future Bioware titles.

In my case, I have followed Bioware games for over a decade.  Heck I've preordered a copy of the BG Enhanced Edition.  But now it's like I'm trying to talk down Darth Vader.  There's still good in them, I know it.  I'd hate for them to slip totally to teh Dark Side.

I too, first experiences their games with Baldur's Gate.  Then, as is now, I find them entertaining, but never should be confused with spectacular storytelling.  Lately, they've been trying to get cute with their narratives, and they don't have the chops to pull it off.  They're not really telling stories I'm interested in any longer.  Oh well.  There's plenty of storytellers out there.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

chemiclord wrote...

Well, now I think at least we're getting to the heart of the issue, and it actually doesn't have too much with Shepard's "death", I don't think.

The difference here is that while I don't like Mac Walters trying to get cute with an ending that he should have had NO delusions he could pull off, I am really unconcerned with getting Bioware to change it. If this is the noose they want to hang themselves with, so be it.

It's not my job to tell them how they should have done it better. It's my job to take it or leave it. As it stands, I plan to say "leave it" to future Bioware titles.

Funny you should say that. I was listening to a podcast today that featured Chris Priestly and Jessica Meriztan (sp?). and they both said that Bioware takes fan feedback very seriously. However, it seems like Jessica doesn't read the forums and only uses twitter from what she said in the podcast because people here have been very articulate and concise.

Chris seems to police the Multiplayer forums more frequently. so this is like not happening. I'm doing what Jessica suggested and moving on. ME3 is beyond redemption. I will no longer whine about the ending, and that it didn't give me what I wanted. I will say it sucked, and place it as the worst ending to a video game I've ever played.

I figured out where the problem was and it wasn't in ME3. It was when they retconned the council in ME2 with their vacusuck that removed the cerebral cortex from each of the council members, and essentially made everyone complete idiots about the reaper threat. This destroyed the trilogy as a serious story.

So fanfiction time. I retconned their retcon and made other fixes and made an Arnold Schwarzenegger movie out of ME2 and 3 in the two links at the bottom of my signature. They're dumb and entertaining with lots of explosions. I'm still thinking about changing and having the Citadel break apart and fall through as well for the visual effect, and destroy the Citadel relay but have it implode instead of explode and get sucked through for double the fun on the other side. Blame the Quarians and their tinkering for that. I had fun with it and that's all that matters with fan fiction.

The goal now is to save the Mass Effect Franchise. It's got too much potential to see it go to waste. The franchise can be saved by doing a massive retcon in ME4 of the 20 minutes of ME3. The link is the first one in my signature. It doesn't satisfy BioWare writers, and it will not satisfy the fans, and is therefore full of win. It doesn't satisfy me. I would buy.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 22 août 2012 - 05:06 .

[chemiclord]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

The goal now is to save the Mass Effect Franchise. It's got too much potential to see it go to waste. The franchise can be saved by doing a massive retcon in ME4 of the 20 minutes of ME3. The link is the first one in my signature. It doesn't satisfy BioWare writers, and it will not satisfy the fans, and is therefore full of win. It doesn't satisfy me. I would buy.

You cannot save what its creator wants to die.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

EA owns them now. An EA executive could order that the series be continued, and they'd have to find a way of doing it. This is the way. I'd buy.

[Blueprotoss]

AresKeith wrote...

oh really, here's his originally comment

Yet you missed a thing called an edit.

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote... 

Shepard always dies, which is the point.

A high EMS Destroy says otherwise.

I corrected myself before you posted. 

 

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 22 août 2012 - 03:31 .

[Blueprotoss]

iakus wrote...

Destroy+ (Not the same thing as High EMS Destroy) hints otherwise.

How is that when Shepard doesn't die. 

iakus wrote...

Yes they do. It's the very definition of "tragic hero"  That's what makes them tragic.

Go ahead.  Look it up.  I'll wait.

http://dictionary.re...tragic hero?s=t 
http://tvtropes.org/...Main/TragicHero

iakus wrote...

Yeah, all the possible endings in ME3 are Ultimate Sacrifice, whether the player wills it or not.

However, the player has actual options in DAO

If you didn't think the "hero of the cycle" wasn't going to make the Ultimate Sacrafice then thats your fault.  Either way the decision is up to Bioware.  Hopefully you noticed the differences in DA and ME since DA has self-contained installment while ME was meant to be at least 3 intertwained games. 

iakus wrote... 

Elaborate.

You're expecting vastly different endings when you think about the word "multiple".  Neither Bioware nor Bethesda use "vastly different" with their endings.

[Blueprotoss]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

How are they flaws? 

Maximus a lot of pride along with loyalty and love.

The Night Mammoth wrote... 

I know Robin Hood well enough. It's not my fault you seem incapable of articulating any sort of supporting argument.

Its not that hard to explain Robin Hood because he also had 
a lot of pride along with loyalty and love.

The Night Mammoth wrote... 

Other than the fact that she dies as a host more than a mother, how is this character aspect a flaw?

If Ripley didn't have her "baby" then she would have killed it a long time ago. 

The Night Mammoth wrote... 

So you admit it's perfectly possible to forge a character that runs completely against a typically tragic storyline.

Nope because perfection isn't real and tragedy can't be avoided in ME.
 

The Night Mammoth wrote... 

It's not a f*cking strawman. You just have an opposing argument to a completely legitimate point. Creator choice can override player choice, but it shouldn't in this situation. BioWare aren't infallible. They can make, and have made, mistakes.

Bioware created and owns ME so its up to them, which menas you are using a straw-mann.

The Night Mammoth wrote...  

You're almost on the verge of saying I should just accept whatever BioWare do just because they created Mass Effect. 

Eh no.

So you must be against Bethesda, Obsidian, and other Developers that hey have the control over the story just like any other creator.

The Night Mammoth wrote... 

I corrected myself before you posted. 

No problem.

The Night Mammoth wrote...  

Yes, that's true, although I would make the point that you're stuck if Destroy is abhorrent to you. 

This is still opinion and its okay.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 22 août 2012 - 03:32 .

[Blueprotoss]

Reorte wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Are you guys trying to argue with blueprotoss? You know that he never listens to reason, right?

There's twisted entertainment in watching someone make a complete fool of themselves.

How is that when I'm not the fool.

[Blueprotoss]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Because he's no longer YOUR character in ME3. He's the plot's character. The plot demands that he dies. The end.

Yet Shepard was the plot's character since the beginning of ME1 while if he/she wasn't then there would have been no resurrection in ME2.

[garrusfan1]

I think he lives in high ems destroy ending but it is so f***ing vague that you aren't sure. Anyways there really was no reason for it because while it was sheps last game they could have left him alive.

[Blueprotoss]

iakus wrote...

Why was EC needed at all?

Clarity.  Closure.  

Seeing something so ambiguous after everything Shepard went through is throughly unsatisfying.  Especially since this is the closest we get to an ending where Shepard lives. If you do everything "right" this is the best it gets.

Everyone isn't going to be happy or mad about something based on how everyone has their own likes and dislikes.  If the "right" thing is done then its that Bioware isn't changing their mind.

iakus wrote... 

Could I just tell myself over and over "SHepard's alive.  Shepard's alive?  Maybe.  But what I'm seeing is burned and broken body, lying in a pile of rubble, not moving.  I'm hearing only a single breath.  I sacrificed EDI for this?  I genocided the geth, scoured the galaxy for every resource I could find, for this?

If thats the case then you haven't moved on.

iakus wrote... 

This ending doesn't give a sense of hope.  Like ME1.  Nor a sense of triumph, like ME2.  The closest emotion I can think of that it provides is...melancholy.

Most of the Developers like Bioware and Bethesda aren't Disney.

iakus wrote... 

 I shouldn't have to convince myself that this "best" ending is somehting I should be feeliong good about.

Do you play that many RPGs?

iakus wrote...

The protagonnist is not under my control in most of those stories.  

I played Shepard a certain way across Mass Effect 1, 2, and 3.  And for the last ten minutes, I was told it was all for nothing.

Yet Shepard was always controlled by Bioware since the beginning of ME1 to the end of ME3. 

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 22 août 2012 - 04:00 .

[Blueprotoss]

garrusfan1 wrote...

I think he lives in high ems destroy ending but it is so f***ing vague that you aren't sure. Anyways there really was no reason for it because while it was sheps last game they could have left him alive.

ME3 is ending Shepard's story arc while Shepard could still make an appearance in future installments.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 22 août 2012 - 03:54 .

[KENNY4753]

garrusfan1 wrote...

I think he lives in high ems destroy ending but it is so f***ing vague that you aren't sure. Anyways there really was no reason for it because while it was sheps last game they could have left him alive.

Even with a high EMS SHep should be dead according to the star child's logic. "All  synthetic life will be killed, even you are partly synthetic". No matter what shep should die when picking destroy no matter if you fetched the volus dreadnought or the elcor tanks.

[Iakus]

[quote]Blueprotoss wrote...

[quote]iakus wrote...

Destroy+ (Not the same thing as High EMS Destroy) hints otherwise.

[/quote]How is that when Shepard doesn't die. [/quote]
2650 is when High EMS Destroy kicks in.  Shepard still dies.  3100 EMS is when you get the breath scene.  Whcih still does not conclusively state Shepard survives

[quote]

http://dictionary.re...tragic hero?s=t [/quote]

"A literary character who makes an error of judgment or has a fatal flaw that, combined with fate and external forces, brings on a tragedy"

Yup, sounds about right.
[quote]
http://tvtropes.org/...Main/TragicHero
[/quote]

"The tragic hero is a longstanding literary concept, a character with a Fatal Flaw (like Pride, for example) who isdoomed to fail in search of their Tragic Dream despite their best efforts or good intentions."

Again, pretty good definition.

Interstingly, they cite Merrill and Anders in DA2 as such.  It actually kinda fits them.  Hadn't thought of that.
[quote]iakus wrote...

Yeah, all the possible endings in ME3 are Ultimate Sacrifice, whether the player wills it or not.

However, the player has actual options in DAO[/quote]If you didn't think the "hero of the cycle" wasn't going to make the Ultimate Sacrafice then thats your fault.  Either way the decision is up to Bioware.  Hopefully you noticed the differences in DA and ME since DA has self-contained installment while ME was meant to be at least 3 intertwained games. [/quote]

What expected was something along the lines of Conrad Verner's fate.  Yeah you can die, but with proper preparation things turn out all right.  You know, like in the other ME installmets?

The first two installments showed us that Shepard can overcome pretty much any challenge.  See the  endings I linked earlier.  ME3 and in particular its ending was a complete tonal shift.  In the last ten mminutes, Shepard went from commanding the Enterprise to commanding the Kobyashi Maru.

[quote]iakus wrote... 

Elaborate.[/quote]You're expecting vastly different endings when you think about the word "multiple".  Neither Bioware nor Bethesda use "vastly different" with their endings.[/quote]

Silly me for believing the devlopers' words 

Modifié par iakus, 22 août 2012 - 04:04 .

[iSousek]

KENNY4753 wrote...

garrusfan1 wrote...

I think he lives in high ems destroy ending but it is so f***ing vague that you aren't sure. Anyways there really was no reason for it because while it was sheps last game they could have left him alive.

Even with a high EMS SHep should be dead according to the star child's logic. "All  synthetic life will be killed, even you are partly synthetic". No matter what shep should die when picking destroy no matter if you fetched the volus dreadnought or the elcor tanks.

There is difference between a synthetic life form and someone who has synthetic implants. The same reason why biotics didn't drop dead

[Iakus]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Everyone isn't going to be happy or mad about something based on how everyone has their own likes and dislikes.  If the "right" thing is done then its that Bioware isn't changing their mind.

The fact that this is the latest iteration of a great number of threads made by fans unhappy with Shepard's nigh-inescapable fate is already evidence that Bioware did not do right by their fans in denying them a clearer ending.

iakus wrote... 
]If thats the case then you haven't moved on.

Ya think?  

Most of the Developers like Bioware and Bethesda aren't Disney.

And here I thought Synthesis was Bioware's preferred ending.  Guess I was wrong...

iakus wrote... 
Do you play that many RPGs?

Quite a few, actually.  You?

iakus wrote...
Yet Shepard was always controlled by Bioware since the beginning of ME1 to the end of ME3. 

Funny, I thought I was the one who chose to spare the rachni queen, talked Wrex down, saved Ash, did all those loyalty missions, told the Illusive man what he could do with his "big picture"...

Modifié par iakus, 22 août 2012 - 04:15 .

[KENNY4753]

iSousek wrote...

KENNY4753 wrote...

garrusfan1 wrote...

I think he lives in high ems destroy ending but it is so f***ing vague that you aren't sure. Anyways there really was no reason for it because while it was sheps last game they could have left him alive.

Even with a high EMS SHep should be dead according to the star child's logic. "All  synthetic life will be killed, even you are partly synthetic". No matter what shep should die when picking destroy no matter if you fetched the volus dreadnought or the elcor tanks.

There is difference between a synthetic life form and someone who has synthetic implants. The same reason why biotics didn't drop dead

I see your point

[CuseGirl]

Well, I always pick destroy because the other options are so off the rails, I can't consider them.

But it's not that Shepard "had to die", it's that "Casey and Mac MADE him die" and the only option where he "doesn't die" requires the player to head canon him living. So it just feels like "he had to die".

I do agree tho, Casey and Mac were trying to artificially make the end of ME3 high-brow and failed miserably. Mass Effect was a story-driven space shooter. But story-driven doesn't mean "philosophical and symbolic", it just means "the story is really important and has to make sense to keep the audience interested". If Shepard was supposed to die, it should have been with him firing his gun, omni-tool blazing orange, hands glowing purple, with hundreds of other soldiers fighting tooth and nail around him.

And to be honest, I think the best ending should have included Shepard walking or limping away like a bad-ass and going to find his friends/LI. But that's too video-gamey.

[Iakus]

CuseGirl wrote...

But it's not that Shepard "had to die", it's that "Casey and Mac MADE him die" and the only option where he "doesn't die" requires the player to head canon him living. So it just feels like "he had to die".

Like I've said, Shepard was beaten to dath with a Plot Hammer

And to be honest, I think the best ending should have included Shepard walking or limping away like a bad-ass and going to find his friends/LI. But that's too video-gamey.

Like...ME1?

[Blueprotoss]

iakus wrote...

2650 is when High EMS Destroy kicks in.  Shepard still dies.  3100 EMS is when you get the breath scene.  Whcih still does not conclusively state Shepard survives

Yet the HIgh EMS Destroy has the breath scene in it because you can't have one with the other.  If Shepard was dead then his/her nameplate would have been put up and Shepard woldn't have taken a breath in the 1st place.

iakus wrote... 

What expected was something along the lines of Conrad Verner's fate.  Yeah you can die, but with proper preparation things turn out all right.  You know, like in the other ME installmets?

Yet Conrad Verner isn't Shepard.

iakus wrote... 

The first two installments showed us that Shepard can overcome pretty much any challenge.  See the  endings I linked earlier.  ME3 and in particular its ending was a complete tonal shift.  In the last ten mminutes, Shepard went from commanding the Enterprise to commanding the Kobyashi Maru.

Yet it dodn't change because the goal of the stopping the Reapers didn't happen until the end of ME3.  If the Reapers were actually defeated in ME1 and/or ME2 then you might have a case.

iakus wrote... 

Silly me for believing the devlopers' words 

Yet Bioware never used "vastly different" with the ME3 endings while thats nothing new with Bioware quites being taken out of context on BSN.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 22 août 2012 - 05:08 .

[Blueprotoss]

iakus wrote...

The fact that this is the latest iteration of a great number of threads made by fans unhappy with Shepard's nigh-inescapable fate is already evidence that Bioware did not do right by their fans in denying them a clearer ending.

There are always a high amount of negative topics in forums because there are a lot of people that complain on the Internet in general.

iakus wrote... 

Ya think?  

Eventually you will have to move on.

iakus wrote...  

And here I thought Synthesis was Bioware's preferred ending.  Guess I was wrong...

isn't Synthesis doesn't prevent conflict and people will still die, which still a "Disney" ending.  Btw you assume that Bioware prefers Synthesis the most even if some did that doesn't make Bioware as a majority.

iakus wrote... 

Quite a few, actually.  You?

Then nothing in ME should really be new to you.

iakus wrote...

Funny, I thought I was the one who chose to spare the rachni queen, talked Wrex down, saved Ash, did all those loyalty missions, told the Illusive man what he could do with his "big picture"...

Yet Bioware gave us those options and consequences.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 22 août 2012 - 05:04 .

[Blueprotoss]

CuseGirl wrote...

Well, I always pick destroy because the other options are so off the rails, I can't consider them.

But it's not that Shepard "had to die", it's that "Casey and Mac MADE him die" and the only option where he "doesn't die" requires the player to head canon him living. So it just feels like "he had to die".

I do agree tho, Casey and Mac were trying to artificially make the end of ME3 high-brow and failed miserably. Mass Effect was a story-driven space shooter. But story-driven doesn't mean "philosophical and symbolic", it just means "the story is really important and has to make sense to keep the audience interested". If Shepard was supposed to die, it should have been with him firing his gun, omni-tool blazing orange, hands glowing purple, with hundreds of other soldiers fighting tooth and nail around him.

And to be honest, I think the best ending should have included Shepard walking or limping away like a bad-ass and going to find his friends/LI. But that's too video-gamey.

If Shepard was never meant to die then the Reapers would have been defeated in ME1.  Using Casey and Mac are a shield is useless because their position in the ME series really hasn't change since ME1 started on its developement and production.