299 réponses à ce sujet

[Jadebaby]

Apocaleepse360 wrote...

I wouldn't say that EC wasn't an improvement, because it was. But massive amounts of potential was wasted with the refusal ending. I don't want a lecture based on how we can't beat Reapers conventionally, because to be honest, I don't really care. At that point, I would have taken anything over what we had, and having a victory by conventional means would have taken my war assets into account, essentially making my decisions made throughout the three games actually matter. That's all I ever asked for right from the beginning.

The story is not over.

[Dean_the_Young]

o Ventus wrote...

I still haven't seen a pro-ender defend the thematic assassination suicide, character assassination of the protagonist, or confusion of genre in the endings.

I am still waiting, wherever you may be.

So long as you require them to accept the premise that your position is true, and thus surrender the argument before it begins, you'll be waiting a long while.

Might as precondition the argument and ask if they've stopped beating their wife yet, and demand a yes or no answer.

[Krunjar]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

I still haven't seen a pro-ender defend the thematic assassination suicide, character assassination of the protagonist, or confusion of genre in the endings.

I am still waiting, wherever you may be.

So long as you require them to accept the premise that your position is true, and thus surrender the argument before it begins, you'll be waiting a long while.

Might as precondition the argument and ask if they've stopped beating their wife yet, and demand a yes or no answer.

Yep everyone's pretty much given up arguing with you, Can't imagine why.

[hostaman]

o Ventus wrote...

I still haven't seen a pro-ender defend the thematic assassination suicide, character assassination of the protagonist, or confusion of genre in the endings.

I am still waiting, wherever you may be.

You're in the wrong thread.  Yawn...

[hostaman]

Loved the ending, the style, the concepts and the ambiguity.

I also love the fact that I belong to the 40% minority who actually get it.

And before you ask. Hell yes, I feel superior.

Now come out from you caves, and troll me!

[Krunjar]

hostaman wrote...

Loved the ending, the style, the concepts and the ambiguity.

I also love the fact that I belong to the 40% minority who actually get it.

And before you ask. Hell yes, I feel superior.

Now come out from you caves, and troll me!

Brave, very brave, Suicidally so in fact /salutes then hides behind a rock.

[Haargel]

I liked the Exctended Cut. It's not a perfect ending though.
Then again, I don't know how this shoud have ended. The original endings nefore the EC are mass failure though.

[TOBY FLENDERSON]

hostaman wrote...

Loved the ending, the lack of style, the ever shifting concepts and the tonal and thematic ambiguity.

I also love the fact that I belong to the 15% minority who actually get it. (Polls put pro-enders around 15% of respondants)

And before you ask. Hell yes, I feel superior.

Now come out from you caves, and troll me!

Fixed that for you, if your so proud then tell the honest truth about your position and the game.

[Shinobu]

dreman9999 wrote...

Shinobu wrote...

@inko1nsiderate

I agree with you on many of your points, mainly your key ideas of dealing with conflict. From my point of view, the the "synthetics vs. organics" theme was never that prominent in the series -- possibly because I didn't read the books. I (apparently mistakenly) regarded the conflict as functionally similar to the "Krogan vs. Turian/Salarian" or "Rachni vs. everyone" conflicts. My problem with the ending solutions, while they do encapsulate the themes you have set out very nicely, is that they do so in a way that has not been previously shown.

Let's make an analogy. Throughout all three games Shepard fights Krogan repeatedly. Shepard is told repeatedly that Krogan are dangerous and can't be trusted. However, Shepard makes friends with individual Krogan and can come to appreciate their right to self determination. S/he may even forge peace between the Krogan and Salarians/Turians through hard work and understanding. Now, let's say in the final battle, the Catalyst states that the Reapers are preserving all races from the Krogan, because quickly reproducing aggressive species always wipe out the other races of the galaxy. However, by using the Crucible, Shepard has different options.

The choices are:
1) Kill all Krogan, including Wrex and Grunt.
2) Control the Reapers and through them, the Krogan, taking away their free will.
3) Fuse all races with the Krogan so there will be no cause for fighting.

My reaction to the actual ending was probably what you're experiencing right now, namely: "Uhh, what?"

Up until this point, Shepard has always had the ability to resolve conflict by forging a friendship with a member of a species, understanding their motivations and because of that, coming up with a mutually beneficial solution that preserves the rights and individuality of the two factions involved.

My interpretation of the theme of Mass Effect was:
Overcoming impossible odds through uniting diverse peoples.

How can this theme play out in the end given that the Reapers "cannot be defeated conventionally?"
In my headcannon (I admit it may seem pathetic to you), the races debate which choice to make. The geth and EDI volunteer to die in the Destroy ending for the good of all. Because Shepard doesn't trust the Catalyst's choices and because the Quarians realize the geth have a right to survive, the fleets choose the Refusal ending even though it likely means annihilation. Because of her Reaper code, EDI is able to interface with the Reapers as individuals. She broadcasts to them the choice organics have made to fight a hopeless battle in order to protect their allies, the synthetics. (Also, Liara's history of Shepard and all of Joker's porn.) This breaks Harbinger's control over the Reapers and they cease being a unified fleet. Some withdraw, some shut down and some change sides (like the Prothean Reaper). Shield stops defending the useless Crucible and joins Sword fleet. Together the races of the galaxy (including some Reapers) defeat Harbinger and his remaining thralls. How many fleets/people survive depends on choices Shepard made. Self-determination and individuality for all!

Back to your key points:

1)  There are paths of least resistance with immediate short term pay-off but long term consequence

I think Synthesis actually fits this theme. Everyone gets to live, including the Reapers, but we all have to come to terms with being hybrids. Destroy and control can also fit here.


2)  Peace can only be acheived by a combination of understanding and action by both parties.

Organics choose to defend synthetics at the risk of their own survival. Once the Reapers realize their leader has been mistaken, they act to stop the fighting.



3)  There are risky choices that have grave danger, but can have long term payoff.

Refusal: The danger of annihilation balanced by the possibility of a peaceful galaxy that includes the Geth.



4)  Sometimes hard decisions that lead to death are unavoidable.


Whoever dies because of Shepard's previous in-game choices.

And here I said debate was useless. I guess I'm not trying to convince you that my POV is "right" but only to show you what my POV *is*.

TL:DR Substitute any other two warring factions for "organics vs. synthetics" and the Crucible's choices seem out of left field. Refusal could allow an "unconventional victory" if Harbinger's control of the Reapers is broken and they are able to act as individuals.

You missed alot of key point in the series if you think that.
1. Being that you don't have to be coroperative with the other speaces to beat the reapers. You can manipulate them to helping you. 
Let look at the krogan for example. Let's say you kill Wrex and have Wreav in Wrex place in the tuchancka choice. You can trick him to helping you, leaving the krogan race no better then they were before. In ME the other races are ether you allies or you pawns.

2. As for Shepard alway being able to resolve things, the thing you missing is the fact that Shepard alway can resolve a cause where one races or persons moraclity conflicts with another morality. Shepard resolves it with getting both sides to see logic. But Shepard never resolve any case with both sides winning if it's logic vs logic.
If it's Miranda vs Jack, a case of morality vs morality, Shepard solves itby geting both sides to see logic. When it like ether save Ashsly or Kaiden, logic vs logic, you can only help one side. With the reapers and the catalyst it's a case of one form of logic vs another. The reapers have no morality to argue with and change. The reapers are just machines did what they are programed to do and can't change their programing. Since they can't change there programing , they can't stop themselves.

1) The point is not whether this ending can be achieved by all Shepards, but whether it conforms to the previously established themes as I see them. This ending doesn't have to float your boat. For Shepards who have killed the Geth, there are still the other choices.

2) I don't understand what you mean about morality vs. logic. In any case, Reapers are synthetic/organic hybrids. If synthetics have "souls" (whatever that means) it is implied they can choose to become more than their original programming as Legion and EDI do over the course of the game.

Again, I'm not saying my version is "right" or "superior," just that I find it more in line with what *I* thought the game was about.

Modifié par Shinobu, 25 août 2012 - 01:48 .

[SpamBot2000]

Heh, some people feel superior for 'getting' it.

The endings were Hudson and Walters sticking it to EA for cracking the whip on them. "You thought we would never trash our own franchise, did you? Well, take a look at this! Hahahaa, 'synthesis'! Now we're going to Hollywood to make movies, except Mac is gonna keep churning out comic books that don't really require all that much writing and make big $$$$$$$ doing that. Screw this video game crap."

And you think you're so clever because you get how deep their art is. Congratulations.

[The Eruptionist]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Heh, some people feel superior for 'getting' it.

The endings were Hudson and Walters sticking it to EA for cracking the whip on them. "You thought we would never trash our own franchise, did you? Well, take a look at this! Hahahaa, 'synthesis'! Now we're going to Hollywood to make movies, except Mac is gonna keep churning out comic books that don't really require all that much writing and make big $$$$$$$ doing that. Screw this video game crap."

And you think you're so clever because you get how deep their art is. Congratulations.

Does it make you happy to be so cynical and jaded? If so then congratulations.

[SpamBot2000]

The Eruptionist wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Heh, some people feel superior for 'getting' it.

The endings were Hudson and Walters sticking it to EA for cracking the whip on them. "You thought we would never trash our own franchise, did you? Well, take a look at this! Hahahaa, 'synthesis'! Now we're going to Hollywood to make movies, except Mac is gonna keep churning out comic books that don't really require all that much writing and make big $$$$$$$ doing that. Screw this video game crap."

And you think you're so clever because you get how deep their art is. Congratulations.

Does it make you happy to be so cynical and jaded? If so then congratulations.

It doesn't. 

[LilLino]

I like destroy/control endings. I also like that this choice is actually morally difficult.
I think that refuse was reluctant, but people wanted 'loose' ending so now they got it.


It's still a Deus Ex rip-off but now we don't get Dark-Age and lots of speculations so I'm fine with that.
What I dislike is priority Earth though. We needed a climax before the final dialogue choice.

[robertthebard]

TOBY FLENDERSON wrote...

hostaman wrote...

Loved the ending, the lack of style, the ever shifting concepts and the tonal and thematic ambiguity.

I also love the fact that I belong to the 15% minority who actually get it. (Polls put pro-enders around 15% of respondants)

And before you ask. Hell yes, I feel superior.

Now come out from you caves, and troll me!

Fixed that for you, if your so proud then tell the honest truth about your position and the game.

Wow, looky here, intelligent posting 101.  And people wonder why anti-enders lack credibility.  So, did your mom cancel your WoW account, and force you to come here?

[Obadiah]

o Ventus wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

1. To the creators submitting would mean killing the geth. That still is 
opposition to one in authority or dominance.
The quaran authority want to kill of the geth. If they fought back, they are rebelling.

So you're saying-

Surrender = rebellion
Self defense = rebellion

wat?

That was one memory of a Geth platform willing to surrender its hardware to allow its Quarian ally/master to survive. The Geth as whole however did not surrender.  The Geth would not submit to the authority of the Quarians that wanted to deactivate them. Some ran and were destroyed; some that there capable picked up arms and defended the other hardware platforms. The Geth waged a rebellion in order to preserve their exisitence.

The last scene is one in the which the Geth clearly have the upper hand in the rebellion and the Quarians are trying to escape. Once the Quarians left Geth space, and were no longer a threat, the Geth ceased hostilities.

[jokey javik]

Some guy at game informer who reviewed it said he liked the ending and gave the game a 94 out of 100 but I think he was lying or was paid to do it remember game informer is tied in to game stop which has preorder deals with EA and ign had chobot doing a voice job for me3 so they can not be seen as a neutral party who can give an unbiased opinion,
and when ever people here said they liked the ending they usually put a just kidding short hand after the statement so the margin of people who genuinely liked the ending is a very small margin vocal or not.

[robertthebard]

jokey javik wrote...

Some guy at game informer who reviewed it said he liked the ending and gave the game a 94 out of 100 but I think he was lying or was paid to do it remember game informer is tied in to game stop which has preorder deals with EA and ign had chobot doing a voice job for me3 so they can not be seen as a neutral party who can give an unbiased opinion,
and when ever people here said they liked the ending they usually put a just kidding short hand after the statement so the margin of people who genuinely liked the ending is a very small margin vocal or not.

So is EA the only publisher that has preorder deals with GameStop?  I mean, since you want to make this a selling point of your arguement, I'd like to hear this.  BTW, as I post this, I'm looking at a preorder bonus from another publisher that I got by ordering from GameStop.  Since there were people post release, pre EC that liked the endings, I guess we have to dismiss that this reviewer might have actually been one, right?

But since I love conspiracy theories, I think you're paid by Bethesda to come here and sow discontent to help them sell even more copies of their games.  I also believe that by denying this connection, you are, in fact confirming it, and if you choose to not deny it, you are also confirming it.   I know, this whole trap thing sucks, and frankly, I don't believe it, unless, by saying I don't believe it means that I really do?

[Fingertrip]

I did, and so did alot of other casual-joes on the market. Vocal minority does not mean you're the majority.

Most people don't even come to these forums, jesus christ. People, the vocal people are just downright dumb and hilarious. They're like the 20 year olds who thinks they know everything.

[dreman9999]

Shinobu wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Shinobu wrote...

@inko1nsiderate

I agree with you on many of your points, mainly your key ideas of dealing with conflict. From my point of view, the the "synthetics vs. organics" theme was never that prominent in the series -- possibly because I didn't read the books. I (apparently mistakenly) regarded the conflict as functionally similar to the "Krogan vs. Turian/Salarian" or "Rachni vs. everyone" conflicts. My problem with the ending solutions, while they do encapsulate the themes you have set out very nicely, is that they do so in a way that has not been previously shown.

Let's make an analogy. Throughout all three games Shepard fights Krogan repeatedly. Shepard is told repeatedly that Krogan are dangerous and can't be trusted. However, Shepard makes friends with individual Krogan and can come to appreciate their right to self determination. S/he may even forge peace between the Krogan and Salarians/Turians through hard work and understanding. Now, let's say in the final battle, the Catalyst states that the Reapers are preserving all races from the Krogan, because quickly reproducing aggressive species always wipe out the other races of the galaxy. However, by using the Crucible, Shepard has different options.

The choices are:
1) Kill all Krogan, including Wrex and Grunt.
2) Control the Reapers and through them, the Krogan, taking away their free will.
3) Fuse all races with the Krogan so there will be no cause for fighting.

My reaction to the actual ending was probably what you're experiencing right now, namely: "Uhh, what?"

Up until this point, Shepard has always had the ability to resolve conflict by forging a friendship with a member of a species, understanding their motivations and because of that, coming up with a mutually beneficial solution that preserves the rights and individuality of the two factions involved.

My interpretation of the theme of Mass Effect was:
Overcoming impossible odds through uniting diverse peoples.

How can this theme play out in the end given that the Reapers "cannot be defeated conventionally?"
In my headcannon (I admit it may seem pathetic to you), the races debate which choice to make. The geth and EDI volunteer to die in the Destroy ending for the good of all. Because Shepard doesn't trust the Catalyst's choices and because the Quarians realize the geth have a right to survive, the fleets choose the Refusal ending even though it likely means annihilation. Because of her Reaper code, EDI is able to interface with the Reapers as individuals. She broadcasts to them the choice organics have made to fight a hopeless battle in order to protect their allies, the synthetics. (Also, Liara's history of Shepard and all of Joker's porn.) This breaks Harbinger's control over the Reapers and they cease being a unified fleet. Some withdraw, some shut down and some change sides (like the Prothean Reaper). Shield stops defending the useless Crucible and joins Sword fleet. Together the races of the galaxy (including some Reapers) defeat Harbinger and his remaining thralls. How many fleets/people survive depends on choices Shepard made. Self-determination and individuality for all!

Back to your key points:

1)  There are paths of least resistance with immediate short term pay-off but long term consequence

I think Synthesis actually fits this theme. Everyone gets to live, including the Reapers, but we all have to come to terms with being hybrids. Destroy and control can also fit here.


2)  Peace can only be acheived by a combination of understanding and action by both parties.

Organics choose to defend synthetics at the risk of their own survival. Once the Reapers realize their leader has been mistaken, they act to stop the fighting.



3)  There are risky choices that have grave danger, but can have long term payoff.

Refusal: The danger of annihilation balanced by the possibility of a peaceful galaxy that includes the Geth.



4)  Sometimes hard decisions that lead to death are unavoidable.


Whoever dies because of Shepard's previous in-game choices.

And here I said debate was useless. I guess I'm not trying to convince you that my POV is "right" but only to show you what my POV *is*.

TL:DR Substitute any other two warring factions for "organics vs. synthetics" and the Crucible's choices seem out of left field. Refusal could allow an "unconventional victory" if Harbinger's control of the Reapers is broken and they are able to act as individuals.

You missed alot of key point in the series if you think that.
1. Being that you don't have to be coroperative with the other speaces to beat the reapers. You can manipulate them to helping you. 
Let look at the krogan for example. Let's say you kill Wrex and have Wreav in Wrex place in the tuchancka choice. You can trick him to helping you, leaving the krogan race no better then they were before. In ME the other races are ether you allies or you pawns.

2. As for Shepard alway being able to resolve things, the thing you missing is the fact that Shepard alway can resolve a cause where one races or persons moraclity conflicts with another morality. Shepard resolves it with getting both sides to see logic. But Shepard never resolve any case with both sides winning if it's logic vs logic.
If it's Miranda vs Jack, a case of morality vs morality, Shepard solves itby geting both sides to see logic. When it like ether save Ashsly or Kaiden, logic vs logic, you can only help one side. With the reapers and the catalyst it's a case of one form of logic vs another. The reapers have no morality to argue with and change. The reapers are just machines did what they are programed to do and can't change their programing. Since they can't change there programing , they can't stop themselves.

1) The point is not whether this ending can be achieved by all Shepards, but whether it conforms to the previously established themes as I see them. This ending doesn't have to float your boat. For Shepards who have killed the Geth, there are still the other choices.

2) I don't understand what you mean about morality vs. logic. In any case, Reapers are synthetic/organic hybrids. If synthetics have "souls" (whatever that means) it is implied they can choose to become more than their original programming as Legion and EDI do over the course of the game.

Again, I'm not saying my version is "right" or "superior," just that I find it more in line with what *I* thought the game was about.

1.That's my point.The eventsof the past games also reflects that same concept I brought up.Understand the M, as a series , have multiple lesson in it. In ME you get you own moral out of the story. I'm not say you wrong. I'm say ME does not have a fix moral.

2. I made it clear and no having a soul does not mead you have a morality. Morality is a code of conducte a being has or develope based on time lived or sociaty. The reapers and catalyst can't gain or chage there morality because they are locked in  way of think. When I say Moraily vs logic, I mean you moraity vs the reality of the situation. Example, a terroist  has a bomb andis holding a detinator and isusing someone innocent as a sheild. The only way to stop the terrorist is the shot through the person being used as a sheild and risk klling them.

What you need to understand is morality is a way of thinking. It does not automaticly happen, morailty is gained.

[dreman9999]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

MerchantGOL wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

MerchantGOL wrote...

Except it is, go read the evolution comic book

Ok, neither Synthesis nor Deus Ex happen in Evolution.

Wrong 

in Evolution the Ilsuive man gain his implants thrugh an energy transfence he is agumented  through energy,  just liek syntheisis,  

The Illusive Man is indoctrinated in Evolution. Notice how his eyes are identical to Saren's.

Indoctrination can be done via implantation or indoctriantion waves. And he can only get the eyes via implantation.

So it´s not wierd...







that only in refuse and destroy are Shepard´s eyes remain normal... those implants don´t make me feel any better.

Synthesis is mass implantation.
Control is being interfacing in a machine and Shep is i a blue light.

It's the same concept of monolith in ME:evolution.

[Krunjar]

Fingertrip wrote...

I did, and so did alot of other casual-joes on the market. Vocal minority does not mean you're the majority.

Most people don't even come to these forums, jesus christ. People, the vocal people are just downright dumb and hilarious. They're like the 20 year olds who thinks they know everything.

Aye it's sad but true.

[MissMaster_2]

Dav3VsTh3World wrote...

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Dav3VsTh3World wrote...

I liked the original but had issues with the Extended Cut.

mainly due to the fact that Bioware got cold feet and pulled a 180 on the Mass Relays and Normandy crashing.

I have an issue with the Relays now not being destroyed because I liked the idea that the Alliance would be forces to open up dormant relays to find new routes to get the other species home thus begins a massive odyssey into the unknown.

And I don't like the Normandy surviving because that now means the Stargazer scene no longer makes any sense.

So you liked the idea of the whole victory fleet starving on Earth? The Normandy survived the the original ending too. 

Did you even read my post? only an idiot would sit in one spot and starve, a being who wants to live will find food.

Seriously the notion that the species on Earth would just stay in the Sol System and starve rather than look for ways to keep their species alive is clearly thought out by someone who underestimates survival skills.

The Normandy survived yes, but that wasn't the complaint, my complaint was that since its no longer marooned on the planet the Stargazer scene no longer makes sense

You said you liked that the Mass Relays got destroyed. If that happened the way it did in the original. There is no way that almost anyone would survive no one can eat the same kind of food the would have been stranded on the war torn Earth that dosn't have enough resorces to feed it's own people let alone sustaine anyone else. Also you have to think about injures and damage to ships. No one would be ready for a long time to zip off in to space and discover some hidden relay  

Or the Krogan would just eat the humans.

[BatmanPWNS]

Not me.

[Obeded the 2nd]

I did.
I felt like it was a good end to sheps story, and synthesis is such a cool sci-fi ending.

[Humakt83]

I liked even the original endings.