6432 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Dendio1 wrote...

We can always strive for better, but now that the ending is no longer a dumpster fire, I rather they focus on bringing out additional great single player dlc. The dlc production was already pushed back once. They need to get this stuff out before the player base furthers its natural dissipation.

The endings may no longer be a dumpster fire, but they're still a big flaming bag of dog poop on the front porch.

[Xamufam]

Dendio1 wrote...

xGamerx599 wrote...

with the retake moment back, we should hopefully gain some more awareness here. never stop fighting retakers! mass effect deserves a good ending.

Leviathan introduces star kid within the narrative rather than the last 5 mins.
Our endings now clearly show the results of each final option
Star kid fully explains the choices with next to zero ambiguity
We get an awesome love interest final scene
Our squadmates no longer teleport to the normandy


Its not perfect, but its superior to most game endings found in the industry:

It fully differentiates depending on choices made throughout the series, which is awesome.
The ending reflects on many of our accomplishments throughout the game, shows an epilogue of sorts for all of shepards squadmates, offers a ceremony for shepard and even gives us a peak into the distant future


Originally the ending was a mess, but its much improved at this point. Its good and if it were released originally as it is now and along with leviathan, there would have been no mass effect 3 ending fiasco

Information integral to understanding the story should be in the damn game, not be tacked on later, if they are sold as payed dlc they are not really valid content.

"Hey, we know it's frustrating and doesn't make any sense but not to worry. With another 30 dollars it'll all come together."

Side storys that has really no real meaning to the mainstory can be sold as dlc like Shadowbrooker & arrival, those two were not about the reapers & the collectors but leviathan is.

I hope that bioware will do as bethesda did with fallout.

Edit:
As for the fiasco  it's still there

The catalyst, He says he's the combined intelligent of the reapers but
he was first how can that be unless the reapers are just husks he
controls. (contredicing  sovereign)
&
If the crucible changed him when it docked with
the citadel doesn't that mean he can control it, so why not open the
backdoor, shut down the relays & let the reapers in. (it's a tactical advantage)
&
synthetics
and organics was resolved already on ranock it was a minor issue, edi
tells us that she is alive before the end & the geth also finds
themselves sentient beings.
&
how did protheans find get the crucible informatin to mars when both communications & the relays were turnrd of. (Liara found the plans in a databank)
In Me 1 it's stated that both the communication & relays was shut down during the war.
They should have planned the crucible back when they started developing ME 1 or 2.

Modifié par Troxa, 13 septembre 2012 - 08:55 .

[nibbo373]

I really envy the folks who have the idea that the journey makes the destination worthwhile. For me the ending of a story is absolutely critical. It decides whether I'm ultimately satisfied with the book/film/game or not. A while back I was really into a particular TV show. I loved it for several years, then in the final couple of episodes they went completely against what they had always done before and completely destroyed the show as a whole. During the last season I bought a DVD set of all that had come before with the intention of watching them all again as soon as it had finished. I haven't watched a single episode. The last couple of episodes ruined the whole thing for me. I can't enjoy all the good stuff knowing what it's building towards. The same is true here. I'm not going to spit the dummy and say the Mass Effect games are all going in the bin, but in all likelihood they'll stay on the shelf and never get played again. That's something that I never saw coming, and it's really sad.  I'll also be very wary of Bioware in the future.  That's sad too.

Modifié par nibbo373, 13 septembre 2012 - 07:38 .

[3DandBeyond]

Troxa wrote...


Information integral to understanding the story should be in the damn game, not be tacked on later, if they are sold as payed dlc they are not really valid content.

"Hey, we know it's frustrating and doesn't make any sense but not to worry. With another 30 dollars it'll all come together."

Side storys that has really no real meaning to the mainstory can be sold as dlc like Shadowbrooker & arrival, those two were not about the reapers & the collectors but leviathan is.

I hope that bioware will do as bethesda did with fallout.

Edit:
As for the fiasco  it's still there

The catalyst, He says he's the combined intelligent of the reapers but
he was first how can that be unless the reapers are just husks he
controls. (contredicing  sovereign)
&
If the crucible changed him when it docked with
the citadel doesn't that mean he can control it, so why not open the
backdoor, shut down the relays & let the reapers in. (it's a tactical advantage)
&
synthetics
and organics was resolved already on ranock it was a minor issue, edi
tells us that she is alive before the end & the geth also finds
themselves sentient beings.
&
how did protheans find get the crucible informatin to mars when both communications & the relays were turnrd of. (Liara found the plans in a databank)
In Me 1 it's stated that both the communication & relays was shut down during the war.
They should have planned the crucible back when they started developing ME 1 or 2.

Yes, if knowing about the reapers' origins was important, it should have been something they were chasing before getting to the ending.  It should have been important and stated somewhere in the game, like "if we knew what they wanted and where they came from, maybe we could defeat them", not "if only we could build some unknown device, then definitely we could destroy them."  We get some interesting, but non-essential information on where baby reapers come from.  Might have been fun if it really impacted the ending or if the ending was good, but it it really irrelevant.  It does not change the need to destroy the reapers, doesn't turn the kid into a genius, and doesn't make the choices any better.  It also adds to the feeling of futility.  You buy and play Leviathan (some just watched it) and then at the end, Leviathan is going to fight reapers (woot woot), but Leviathan doesn't.

The relays were a totally misused thing in ME3.  Reapers supposedly shut them down to strand the races-one of the first things they do when entering the galaxy.  How then could the crucible use them?  How is it Shepard is using them throughout the game?  Well, the reason they weren't shut down is so the big plot hole creator in the sky needed one huge plot hole to fly through-the relays had to be working so the crucible could be used.

The reason why the kid thinks what he does think is irrelevant.  He could be totally right, even.  And it's still irrelevant.  I don't care why a killer wants to kill people, I merely want it to stop.  And in this case, I want the reapers destroyed, because they are not something I'd ever want flying around in the galaxy. 

For all we know the reapers were independent beings just as Sovereign said until the crucible was created.  The crucible may have even acted like a switch to turn on the catalyst.  The reason the kid didn't exist up until the end could very well have been because the crucible was not interacting with the citadel.  Once it docked, it may have powered on the kid himself.  So the reapers without the kid may well still have killer tendencies. 

[Cecilia L]

You have my absolute support.

I love Mass Effect to an unhealthy degree and I just want a logical ending that fits thematically with the rest of this amazing, incredible series.

[Blueprotoss]

iakus wrote...

What Bioware has largely failed to realize is that the destination is as important as the journey.  If the story ends tragically, or ambiguous as to its happiness, what point is there is continuing the journey?  What should I shell out more money for a story that makes me unhappy?  But if I had the option to choose something happy or sad, depending on what I felt like, not only does that make me inclined to buy DLC and more games, that adds replayability. 

I'm hoping against hope that Bioware will notice the number of people begging, begging for these options, willing to spend more money to make a game "complete" for them.  I'm hopping that Bioware will ralize that, if they really want to boraden thier audience, they have to make endings that cater to a broader selection of fans.  Else they are simply trading one group for another.

The destination isn't always important just like how the Inception, Gladiator, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the Crow especially when its in the eye of the beholder.  You can't plaese everyone.

There is only so much that can be done and a few people trying to boycott the DLC because the endings won't be redone is hurrting more then helping.  Make the endings more broader isn't going to happen based on how there was enough difficulty to allow all of the different choices from ME1 and ME2 to have an effect in ME3.  To be fair its not cheap to develope DLC along with musical scores.

nibbo373 wrote...

I really envy the folks who have the idea that the journey makes the destination worthwhile. For me the ending of a story is absolutely critical. It decides whether I'm ultimately satisfied with the book/film/game or not. A while back I was really into a particular TV show. I loved it for several years, then in the final couple of episodes they went completely against what they had always done before and completely destroyed the show as a whole. During the last season I bought a DVD set of all that had come before with the intention of watching them all again as soon as it had finished. I haven't watched a single episode. The last couple of episodes ruined the whole thing for me. I can't enjoy all the good stuff knowing what it's building towards. The same is true here. I'm not going to spit the dummy and say the Mass Effect games are all going in the bin, but in all likelihood they'll stay on the shelf and never get played again. That's something that I never saw coming, and it's really sad.  I'll also be very wary of Bioware in the future.  That's sad too.

To be fair you can only do so much with games and tv shows have a lot more freedom compared to games.  

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 13 septembre 2012 - 02:10 .

[Blueprotoss]

Troxa wrote...

Information integral to understanding the story should be in the damn game, not be tacked on later, if they are sold as payed dlc they are not really valid content.

"Hey, we know it's frustrating and doesn't make any sense but not to worry. With another 30 dollars it'll all come together."

Side storys that has really no real meaning to the mainstory can be sold as dlc like Shadowbrooker & arrival, those two were not about the reapers & the collectors but leviathan is.

I hope that bioware will do as bethesda did with fallout.

Edit:
As for the fiasco  it's still there

The catalyst, He says he's the combined intelligent of the reapers but
he was first how can that be unless the reapers are just husks he
controls. (contredicing  sovereign)
&
If the crucible changed him when it docked with
the citadel doesn't that mean he can control it, so why not open the
backdoor, shut down the relays & let the reapers in. (it's a tactical advantage)
&
synthetics
and organics was resolved already on ranock it was a minor issue, edi
tells us that she is alive before the end & the geth also finds
themselves sentient beings.
&
how did protheans find get the crucible informatin to mars when both communications & the relays were turnrd of. (Liara found the plans in a databank)
In Me 1 it's stated that both the communication & relays was shut down during the war.
They should have planned the crucible back when they started developing ME 1 or 2.

Everybody doesn't get what they want and most of this is just semantics even when the DLC in all 3 ME games are optional.  Its easy to say that Bioware should have put Leviathan in from the beginning because hindsight is 20/20 and nobody here knows what the original idea would have been for it.  Maybe you should look for a fair compromise or just wait for ME4.  Plus ME3 doesn't need to be a Fallout 3 since ME3 isn't as customizable as a Bethesda game and ME3 is all about Shepard's last chapter in his/her story.  Its like making Tom Hank's character into Jesus at the end of Philedelphia.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 13 septembre 2012 - 01:52 .

[Ozida]

nibbo373 wrote...

I really envy the folks who have the idea that the journey makes the destination worthwhile. For me the ending of a story is absolutely critical. It decides whether I'm ultimately satisfied with the book/film/game or not. A while back I was really into a particular TV show. I loved it for several years, then in the final couple of episodes they went completely against what they had always done before and completely destroyed the show as a whole. During the last season I bought a DVD set of all that had come before with the intention of watching them all again as soon as it had finished. I haven't watched a single episode. The last couple of episodes ruined the whole thing for me. I can't enjoy all the good stuff knowing what it's building towards. The same is true here. I'm not going to spit the dummy and say the Mass Effect games are all going in the bin, but in all likelihood they'll stay on the shelf and never get played again. That's something that I never saw coming, and it's really sad.  I'll also be very wary of Bioware in the future.  That's sad too.

Great post nibbo373!
I was thinking the same way. I am more of "investor" type, meaning that I don't mind working extra hard, knowing that results are going to be great. Maybe I just don't have a time to stop, look around and enjoy the moment to make the jorney worth more than it is to me, but that's just the way I experience stuff - by results.
And I agree with others who say that they cannot replay the whole trilogy knowing how it will going to end. It just doesn't seem as a good time spent anymore, because no matter what choices you make during 3 games or how hard you try with your war assets, you will pretty much get the same 3 AB-C... oops, sorry, R-G-B endings. I mean, look at Leviathan DLC. Many people say that they liked it (and I fully believe them), but only few of them say that they would replay it again or that they think that it adds to the story greatly. For me, it seems that ME3 turned into nothing more but a shooter with some MP ability.

[Blueprotoss]

Troxa wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Troxa wrote...

Stargate had a similar issue but they didn't break suspension of disbelief, but it only destroyed.
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/12888478

Ha, all the more reason for me to watch Stargate since it sounds like they did it right.

forgot to ad more info
earth learned about it from the enemies servent his boss had ben searching for that weapon for hundreds of years but had not found it.
The creators of the wepon are well established: Ancients
stargate.wikia.com/wiki/Reckoning,_Part_1
stargate.wikia.com/wiki/Reckoning,_Part_2

To be fair SG1 had a life span of 10 years of worth of time finish off the series before the Atlantis and a handful of movies expanded upon it.  A hour long tv show usually has more potenail when compared to most games especially when its sci-fi related.

Zan51 wrote...

Stargate is fantastic, but didn't much like the last season when they fought religious maniacs with supernatural type powers. Some episodes were good, though. And Stargate Atlantis was also good - great bad guys, the Wraith, the life-vampires.
Only one that was real slow to take off was Stargate Universe and it had just beguin to get extremely interesting when they pulled the plug on it. It wasn't like the other 2 seies in that it was nearly all shades of gray, no real Hero figures. I think that was part of the slow start and lack of it getting the fan base. People like heroes!

That's why I loved the other 2 Stargates, apart from the obvious original Ancient Egyptian links (which are hokum, but GOOD hokum, with excellent research on all that stuff!) It had Heroes, flawed but real ones who tried to do their best, who didn't succumb to the easy options ever. M<orale building stuff, I ate it up and still visit the series eery now and then to enjoy it again.

Agreed other then I didn't like Universe at all. 

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 13 septembre 2012 - 02:07 .

[Blueprotoss]

iakus wrote...

kyban wrote...

I had a thought... Maybe Bioware's intent was for us all to create our own endings, it is "our" Shepard right!? So then... No that's just crazy.

Back to the OP. Bioware! Do the right thing! Please!

They should have included modding tools then

Bioware doesn't own the Unreal Engine.

[3DandBeyond]

Blueprotoss wrote...

iakus wrote...

What Bioware has largely failed to realize is that the destination is as important as the journey.  If the story ends tragically, or ambiguous as to its happiness, what point is there is continuing the journey?  What should I shell out more money for a story that makes me unhappy?  But if I had the option to choose something happy or sad, depending on what I felt like, not only does that make me inclined to buy DLC and more games, that adds replayability. 

I'm hoping against hope that Bioware will notice the number of people begging, begging for these options, willing to spend more money to make a game "complete" for them.  I'm hopping that Bioware will ralize that, if they really want to boraden thier audience, they have to make endings that cater to a broader selection of fans.  Else they are simply trading one group for another.

The destination isn't always important just like how the Inception, Gladiator, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the Crow especially when its in the eye of the beholder.  You can't plaese everyone.

There is only so much that can be done and a few people trying to boycott the DLC because the endings won't be redone is hurrting more then helping.  Make the endings more broader isn't going to happen based on how there was enough difficulty to allow all of the different choices from ME1 and ME2 to have an effect in ME3.  To be fair its not cheap to develope DLC along with musical scores.

Ok, again.  Who cares what other things show?  I'm sorry, but Inception sucked in my opinion.  I didn't give a good flying squirrel how it ended.  You may have liked the movie and so did others, but it has no bearing here.  I saw 2001 when it was first released-back when God was a boy.  Clarke was writing the book while they were making the movie.  Clarke wanted the book to explain the movie and Kubrick wanted the movie to stand on its own.  Sure, it was avant garde, it was new and it changed the face of Sci Fi as a consummable art form.  Before it SF was relegated to B movie status, even when some really great thought went into it (Forbidden Planet, for one).  However, 2001's ending left a lot of people wondering what they'd just seen, so they needed the book to help out.  The destination was unclear.  The starchild was either considered to be about rebirth, redemption, a never-ending cycle, or casting off some nanny that was trying to decide Earth's future-and there were many more interpretations.  But, outside or intellectual circles there was also this "what?" response, initially.

Yes, things are in the eye of the beholder.  Who said they weren't.  We've been constantly stating that here.  And you keep insisting that as you see it, everything's fine.  No one is disagreeing that it's all just ducky for you.  Fine, good, great.  However, I don't go to see a movie just to have fun along the way.  I've been in movie theaters where audiences actually booed the ending and where people asked for their money back because it sucked.  And movies that have unsatisfying endings often do not do well at the box office and head straight to DVD or Netflix.

I am just as much a beholder with eyes as are you.  What I behold, sucks.  So, you want me to say you're right.  Well, then that requires that you say that I'm right, too.  For you, it's the journey.  For me, the journey is capped off by the destination.  One person put it well with a cartoon.  The people on the Titanic were having a great journey, until they hit the iceberg.  My question to you is this:  What do you think mattered most to them-that great trip before hitting it, or everything that happened next after they hit it? 

Things that end are better when the destination is a great one or at least a good one.  The destination is the last thing you will remember of any journey.  And, as with most journeys you want to be brought home in the end.  ME3 does not bring the player or Shepard back home.

[saber00005]

I find it very hard to play any ME game now because of how to ruled the ending. Shepard went through hell and back and yet no matter what you do, you don't get to have the happy ending that most really want (if they went full paragon and choose the destroy option). That is to see Shepard get up, re-unite with the love interest in a short scene of like 30 seconds.

[3DandBeyond]

Blueprotoss wrote...

iakus wrote...

kyban wrote...

I had a thought... Maybe Bioware's intent was for us all to create our own endings, it is "our" Shepard right!? So then... No that's just crazy.

Back to the OP. Bioware! Do the right thing! Please!

They should have included modding tools then

Bioware doesn't own the Unreal Engine.

They got a license to use it and people do mod games with the Unreal Engine in use.

[Xamufam]

3DandBeyond wrote...

maybe, but it seems logical that the catalyst watches the organics from the citadel & when the time is right he strikes.
I want clousure, but i want it to make sense alot more.

Modifié par Troxa, 13 septembre 2012 - 02:46 .

[Iakus]

Blueprotoss wrote...

iakus wrote...

What Bioware has largely failed to realize is that the destination is as important as the journey.  If the story ends tragically, or ambiguous as to its happiness, what point is there is continuing the journey?  What should I shell out more money for a story that makes me unhappy?  But if I had the option to choose something happy or sad, depending on what I felt like, not only does that make me inclined to buy DLC and more games, that adds replayability. 

I'm hoping against hope that Bioware will notice the number of people begging, begging for these options, willing to spend more money to make a game "complete" for them.  I'm hopping that Bioware will realize that, if they really want to broaden thier audience, they have to make endings that cater to a broader selection of fans.  Else they are simply trading one group for another.

The destination isn't always important just like how the Inception, Gladiator, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the Crow especially when its in the eye of the beholder.  You can't plaese everyone.

There is only so much that can be done and a few people trying to boycott the DLC because the endings won't be redone is hurrting more then helping.  Make the endings more broader isn't going to happen based on how there was enough difficulty to allow all of the different choices from ME1 and ME2 to have an effect in ME3.  To be fair its not cheap to develope DLC along with musical scores.

But the destination is important to many people.  I liked how Inception ended.  It was "good" ambiguity.  As does The Crow.  Gladiator was all right, but sad (more bothered by how it folded, spindled, and mutilated actual history)
2001 was whacked, that's all I'll say about that.

Sure there's only so much that can be done without outright changing the endings.  But more could have been done.  More should be done.  I'm not advocating a boycott.  I'm asking a question about myself.  Why should I pay more oney for a game that will not make me happy?  Why should I trust Bioware to make such games aymore?  If enough people ask that question, boycotts won't be needed.  Bioware will have driven them off themselves. 

A game that boasts multiple endings should in fact boast multiple endings.  Including multiple fates for Shepard, beyond "How does Shepard die?"

As fro DLC, as I've said multiple times, it wouldn't take a whole lot to expand on the Shepard lives scene to make it much less ambiguous.  A few seconds of footage, and added lineor two of voiceover.  Even replacing the breath with a final ending slide.  I suspect it's purely pride that keeps that from happening.

[Xamufam]

Blueprotoss wrote...
To be fair SG1 had a life span of 10 years of worth of time finish off the series before the Atlantis and a handful of movies expanded upon it.  A hour long tv show usually has more potenail when compared to most games especially when its sci-fi related.

Thats why planning ahead is important on games if you are making a trilogy.
Im not saying write the scipt at the same time, but plan the plotpoints

Modifié par Troxa, 13 septembre 2012 - 02:40 .

[3DandBeyond]

Troxa wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

maybe, but it seems logical that the catalyst watches the organics from the citadel & when the time is right he strikes.

All I was saying or trying to say is that the existence of the catalyst and his non-interaction in ME up until the ending was far more important to me to know then some of the other things he talks about.  It was at least important to know why he is in hiding during all the events of ME1.  It was at least as important as anything else he says.  And if he is watching and controlling the reapers then what Sovereign says makes no sense.

And since he was unknown and hiding out, how someone could adapt the crucible to work with him is beyond me.  Whoever made or adapted the crucible must have known of the kid's existence and no one did, until Shepard got to the citadel.  No one but the Leviathans and the kid and reapers.  So, the question mark is really big right there.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 13 septembre 2012 - 02:47 .

[AresKeith]

Troxa wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
To be fair SG1 had a life span of 10 years of worth of time finish off the series before the Atlantis and a handful of movies expanded upon it.  A hour long tv show usually has more potenail when compared to most games especially when its sci-fi related.

Thats why planning ahead is important on games if you are making a trilogy.
Im not saying write the scipt at the same time, but plan the plotpoints

they really should have planned ahead since ME1, because they wasn't even gonna use the 50K years cycle thing

Modifié par AresKeith, 13 septembre 2012 - 02:49 .

[Fiannawolf]

Not all alt enders still post on these forums publicly anymore. Heck most times I stuck to the private group forums but the desire for more additions for the ending keeps bringing me back to this thread and a few others. Lots to catch up on every day here

Still if they were to add some more stuff to refusal and destroy, giving the other endings afew more things wouldnt hurt either. As I said afew pages back, give Priority Earth and the Endings more of a Suidice mission 2.0 feel. It can still happen.

[AresKeith]

Fiannawolf wrote...

Not all alt enders still post on these forums publicly anymore. Heck most times I stuck to the private group forums but the desire for more additions for the ending keeps bringing me back to this thread and a few others. Lots to catch up on every day here

Still if they were to add some more stuff to refusal and destroy, giving the other endings afew more things wouldnt hurt either. As I said afew pages back, give Priority Earth and the Endings more of a Suidice mission 2.0 feel. It can still happen.

someone made a thread about doing something similar to Earth http://social.biowar...ndex/13941929/1

[Fiannawolf]

Already subbed to it Ares XD it has alot of good ideas

[Blueprotoss]

Troxa wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
To be fair SG1 had a life span of 10 years of worth of time finish off the series before the Atlantis and a handful of movies expanded upon it.  A hour long tv show usually has more potenail when compared to most games especially when its sci-fi related.

Thats why planning ahead is important on games if you are making a trilogy.
Im not saying write the scipt at the same time, but plan the plotpoints

Again you can only do so much in a video game.  Each ME was between 20-40 hours over 3 games while SG1 had 214 episodes that spanned 10 seasons thathad 40 minutes devoted to each episode.  We can also add two movies to SG1 that both were at least 1 hour and 30 minutes long for each of them.  This is one of the reasons why games expand with DLC now and Expansion Packs in the past.

AresKeith wrote...

they really should have planned ahead since ME1, because they wasn't even gonna use the 50K years cycle thing

The series was mostly planned but choice is what caused most of the issues based on how you have to write the script for multiple paths. 

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 13 septembre 2012 - 03:06 .

[Blueprotoss]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

iakus wrote...

kyban wrote...

I had a thought... Maybe Bioware's intent was for us all to create our own endings, it is "our" Shepard right!? So then... No that's just crazy.

Back to the OP. Bioware! Do the right thing! Please!

They should have included modding tools then

Bioware doesn't own the Unreal Engine.

They got a license to use it and people do mod games with the Unreal Engine in use.

A license is far from having the developer rights to it.  Epic is the one who holds the rights and all of the tools to the Unreal Engine.

[3DandBeyond]

Troxa wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...
To be fair SG1 had a life span of 10 years of worth of time finish off the series before the Atlantis and a handful of movies expanded upon it.  A hour long tv show usually has more potenail when compared to most games especially when its sci-fi related.

Thats why planning ahead is important on games if you are making a trilogy.
Im not saying write the scipt at the same time, but plan the plotpoints

Correct.

Well, writers keep what they call Bibles-things that contain all the lore of a story, especially needed with huge numbers of characters and such things as in ME.

There are programs out there you can buy or people use Excel to keep track of their stories or even create their own databases. 

And ME had a Bible.  One of the writers or devs talked about it when discussing ME2.

It's actually series like Star Trek and movies like Star Wars that really bore out the need for such things.  In fact, you can go online and get guides as to each of these that tell you things you need to know to be able to write books set in each of their "worlds".  They have set lore that you have to follow, especially if say with Star Wars you want to get permission to get your book published.

And, ME is a lot shorter than SG1.  So, saying that a tv series has a better chance or more potential to finish things off because it's long just doesn't make sense to me.  It has way more chances and possibilities of getting everything wrong and of not satisfying people.  The longer a series goes, the more information contained in it and the more it gets replayed all over the place, so people are fairly familiar with the story by the time it ends.  That's what's also part of what's wrong at the end of ME3.  People had replayed ME1 and 2 several times over and then replayed them right before they got ME3.  They saw the faults right away because they were familiar with and had a lot of content to back up what they knew about the story.  The story and the ending conflicted with a lot that they'd just played and it still does for many of us.

All the EC did was add pictures, cool sounding narration, kid dialogue, and more flesh getting ripped from Shepard's face.  Shepard can't ask the tough questions, the kid doesn't fully answer questions asked-he answers the questions he wanted to be asked (anyone in PR would say he did an average job of deflection), and so on. 

Media training (as used in political and other debates) would inform you here.  Say I ask you if you will reduce crime if elected.  Well, maybe you don't know if you can reduce crime and don't want to promise to.  You don't answer that question.  You change the question.  Instead, you answer the question "are you against crime?"  So, you say, "I am 100% for a real effort to reduce crime and to save people from the heartache of the effects of crime.  I am appalled that my opponent would imply that we just have to live with crime that's out of control."  In no way did you answer the question.  This is actually taught in media relations.  You prepare answers for the questions you want to answer.  So the question could easily be, "Should we pay more taxes to fight crime?" or "Your opponent says you are soft on crime.  Are you?"  The answer you have prepared works no matter what question comes up on crime.

So, with the kid, Shepard asks questions, but he never answers the question really.  Some of the questions asked are really not the right ones to ask either.  But, what we still get to is that the EC didn't really change anything so much.  It made it all look and sound better and things that were changed were made somewhat sillier.  It just isn't such an immediate drop off as the original endings were.

[Xamufam]

3DandBeyond wrote...
All I was saying or trying to say is that the existence of the catalyst and his non-interaction in ME up until the ending was far more important to me to know then some of the other things he talks about.  It was at least important to know why he is in hiding during all the events of ME1.  It was at least as important as anything else he says.  And if he is watching and controlling the reapers then what Sovereign says makes no sense.

And since he was unknown and hiding out, how someone could adapt the crucible to work with him is beyond me.  Whoever made or adapted the crucible must have known of the kid's existence and no one did, until Shepard got to the citadel.  No one but the Leviathans and the kid and reapers.  So, the question mark is really big right there.

I would have wanted this instead there was a race of organics they wanted knowledge, power & immortality, so they made themselfs into the reapers, built the mass relays & began to harvest every 50 k year.
The catalyst could have been created by a race that wanted to find a way to destroy the reapers.

He's still flawed to me (tactic=logic).
but i get your point

Modifié par Troxa, 16 septembre 2012 - 08:55 .