6432 réponses à ce sujet

[Jadebaby]

Stop trolling Cronodragon, there a so many other ways they could have done it to give us a definitive live ending. They just didn't care enough. This is what happens when a director becomes a writer.

[3DandBeyond]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Firstly, "there is no canon" has been part of the battlecry for disgrunted fans who feel that ME3 did not give their choices ample weight. If you never believed that was true about Mass Effect, then okay.

Obviously it doesn't work for everyone else. The question is whether or not you have anything more than personal gratification as a reason for wanting Shepard lives in Destroy to be canon. I would like to see more, but only because I'd like some sap. But I'm not arrogant enought to believe it's anything more than that.

In any case, believe it or not there were people who wanted Shepard to be dead in Destroy, feeling that it was fitting for him to sacrifice himself. That you want Shepard lives to be established is selfish.

The point is that that "no canon" thing is so untrue it isn't funny.  You have only to look at how easy it is to get all the same choices at the end and thus the same basic endings no matter what you do.  What's canon is your choices never mattered, nor does how many games you play in the series.

And the canon thing is ridiculous in how LIs are presented-Liara practically throws herself at Shepard and she is the only LI you carry over in all 3 games. 

Your last point is really rather off point since I have said that what I believe most people wanted and thought would happen was a variety of endings that ran the gamut from a full loss and death to a full win and life.  In between would be the sacrificial type of death as well as the possibilities of others dying.

I don't want "Shepard lives" to be totally established for everyone since what I've always wanted was that it be possible even if difficult to get.  But I guess it's just so good that BW catered to those that want "Shepard dies" to be totally established for everyone along with a gasping ambiguous torso.

And it would only be selfish if it were not for the large numbers of people that feel the same way.  I have expressed a number of different things from the very destructive (to the story as in it would require a major rewrite which would never happen) to the bare minimum that would at least provide people that closure that you have, because I'm trying to be realistic here.

[ld1449]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Stop trolling Cronodragon, there a so many other ways they could have done it to give us a definitive live ending. They just didn't care enough. This is what happens when a director becomes a writer.

Jade???

I thought you said you were at peace with the endings?

[Iakus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

iakus wrote...

And here I thought we were past  "You just want a reunion with your waifu"

See the Romance DLC thread? Or the Blue Babies thread? I have good reason for believing this.

Sure some people want a reunion.  I've said myself it would be ideal.  But just making a definitive "SHepard Lives" ending would be all the foundation needed to headcannon that stuff.

No, that's not it.  What we want to to see Shepard get out of the rubble.  We want to see Shepard live.  Not just be "not dead yet"  And we want to see it, not just headcanon it.  

You don't get to choose to believe Shepard survived in control
We don't get to choose to believe Shepard survived in Synthesis
We don't get to choose to believe Shepard survived in refuse
We don't get to choose to believe Shepard survived in Low, Medium, or High EMS Destroy.

We get to see Shepard die all we want in any of these endings.  We just want it balanced with seeing Shepard live!  Destroy+ should not have to share with yet another dead Shepard ending.

You want to screw people who would prefer a sacrifice Destroy ending.

Sacrifce Destroy endings are possible from 0-3099 EMS.  Well, unambiguously sacrifice Destroy.  Anyone who wants Shepard to live are screwed out of every other ending, and have to "share" with sacrifice destroy too?

Who's selfish again?  

Modifié par iakus, 29 septembre 2012 - 04:26 .

[AresKeith]

CronoDragoon wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

how is it selfish that people wants an ending where there character can live, in a game thats built around choices. Its selfish to force the player to do self-sacrifice in every single ending, you don't do that in a RPG type game

And our choices from the past game should have ample weight, but most of them didn't for people

It's selfish because by seeing Shepard get out of the rubble, you've now eliminated a possible interpretation of that scene that *gasp* some people actually like. Now, if we had two separate Destroy scenarios that had led to two unique endings, that would obviously be preferable. Then both people could have the endings they want without having to share.

so its selfish for people who has over 5000 EMS and wants Shepard to live and see him/her get out of the rubble. And those who want him/her dead has less than that

Modifié par AresKeith, 29 septembre 2012 - 04:23 .

[CronoDragoon]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Stop trolling Cronodragon, there a so many other ways they could have done it to give us a definitive live ending. They just didn't care enough. This is what happens when a director becomes a writer.

Trolling? Excuse me? Because I happen to believe that the current endings have closure and that anything more is personal preference?

And yes, there are a lot of other ways. Let me be clear: The rubble scene is stupid. But that doesn't mean that:

1. The rubble scene should show Shepard definitively living.
2. That Shepard might as well be dead because we don't see anything more. (This one cracks me up)
3. The people who wanted a sacrifice Destroy ending should be handwaved because the majority want Shepard to live. That IS selfish, no matter how many people agree with you, because it only benefits people who want the same thing as you.

[3DandBeyond]

CronoDragoon wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

how is it selfish that people wants an ending where there character can live, in a game thats built around choices. Its selfish to force the player to do self-sacrifice in every single ending, you don't do that in a RPG type game

And our choices from the past game should have ample weight, but most of them didn't for people

It's selfish because by seeing Shepard get out of the rubble, you've now eliminated a possible interpretation of that scene that *gasp* some people actually like. Now, if we had two separate Destroy scenarios that had led to two unique endings, that would obviously be preferable. Then both people could have the endings they want without having to share.

Let's see for a few months people had to play MP if they didn't want to in order to get what they were told was the best ending with a torso gasp-some were depressed because they couldn't ever even get that.

Then we heard closure was coming (most often expressed as wanted for the torso) and closure didn't happen.  So since then we've had the torso.  Perhaps for a few months it might be nice to have an ending that a lot of other people would actually like.

Your statement about two separate Destroy scenarios is all I've been talking about repeatedly.  Don't get the EMS or whatever is needed for the Shepard lives ending and you'd never have to see it.  But when I say that, someone says it would ruin the balance and even if I never saw it I would know it was there, or it would be bad because too many people would want it. 

[Dragoonlordz]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Stop trolling Cronodragon, there a so many other ways they could have done it to give us a definitive live ending. They just didn't care enough. This is what happens when a director becomes a writer.

You do realise calling someone a troll does not invalidate what they say just because you decided to brand them with a derogatory term or word. Using such tactics in an attempt to discredit someone serves no purpose other than to have Stan come back and either give another warning about doing it or locking this thread for doing in once again after already given a warning half a dozen pages ago.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 29 septembre 2012 - 04:25 .

[CronoDragoon]

iakus wrote...

Sacrifce Destroy endings are possible from 0-3099 EMS.  Well, unambiguously sacrifice Destroy.  Anyone who wants Shepard to live are screwed out of every other ending, and have to "share" with sacrifice destroy too?

Who's selfish again?  

So you're expecting sacrifice Shepards to purposefully play the game poorly to get the ending they want.

You are being selfish again.

[N7 Lisbeth]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Personally as I have stated I have no issues with reunion DLC slides etc. Simple reason is would not take long and I think not cost much to produce half dozen slides. The alternative ending stuff though would take a lot longer and a lot more money despite what others proclaim in here. That time and money given the limited timeframe between each game and the DLC period between them is better spent (imho) and probably profit wise Bioware's too on other DLC.

We have offered, many times, to gladly pay for DLC that addresses altered or new endings. There is a profit to be made there, and the fact that it's paid makes it completely optional -- people that are happy with the endings don't have to buy it! Poof, everything solved. Everyone's happy as clams again, and Bioware makes money on top of that.

But that's not happening. Yet anyway. And it should, it really should -- and sooner than later, so they don't lose more of their customers, sick of Bioware's PR spin.

[Iakus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

iakus wrote...

Sacrifce Destroy endings are possible from 0-3099 EMS.  Well, unambiguously sacrifice Destroy.  Anyone who wants Shepard to live are screwed out of every other ending, and have to "share" with sacrifice destroy too?

Who's selfish again?  

So you're expecting sacrifice Shepards to purposefully play the game poorly to get the ending they want.

You are being selfish again.

I expect to be rewarded for playing a thorough, well prepared game.

I also expected both kinds of endings.  Unambiguously dead and unambiguously alive.  I did not expect a half dozen unambiguously dead and one "well maybe Shepard's alive" ending that has to be kept  ambiguous so we don't hurt the feelings of the dead Shepard crowd who already cornered the market of every other ending.

Modifié par iakus, 29 septembre 2012 - 04:30 .

[Lunch Box1912]

N7 Lisbeth wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Personally as I have stated I have no issues with reunion DLC slides etc. Simple reason is would not take long and I think not cost much to produce half dozen slides. The alternative ending stuff though would take a lot longer and a lot more money despite what others proclaim in here. That time and money given the limited timeframe between each game and the DLC period between them is better spent (imho) and probably profit wise Bioware's too on other DLC.

We have offered, many times, to gladly pay for DLC that addresses altered or new endings. There is a profit to be made there, and the fact that it's paid makes it completely optional -- people that are happy with the endings don't have to buy it! Poof, everything solved. Everyone's happy as clams again, and Bioware makes money on top of that.

But that's not happening. Yet anyway. And it should, it really should -- and sooner than later, so they don't lose more of their customers, sick of Bioware's PR spin.

Thank you voice of reason.

Modifié par Lunch Box1912, 29 septembre 2012 - 04:29 .

[CronoDragoon]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Your statement about two separate Destroy scenarios is all I've been talking about repeatedly.  Don't get the EMS or whatever is needed for the Shepard lives ending and you'd never have to see it.  But when I say that, someone says it would ruin the balance and even if I never saw it I would know it was there, or it would be bad because too many people would want it. 

That is a horrible way to think of it. "Hey guys if you want your ending just play less of the game than you want to."

What I'm talking about is different. I'm saying that in the discussion with the Catalyst, for example, some type of wheel comes up where you can either affirm that you are willing to sacrifice or counter that you expect everyone to make it out alive (a la the first dialogue wheel in ME2 after the Normandy crashes on the Collector Base) Then, you either get a scene with the crew finding Shepard in the rubble or you get a funeral scene at the end. This way, both sides get what they want and it's unambiguous.

As for the people who claim they want sacrifice but would pick the Shepard lives ending if available and thus have their story ruined, I'm inclined to disbelieve them when they say they really want sacrifice. 

[N7 Lisbeth]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Stop trolling Cronodragon, there a so many other ways they could have done it to give us a definitive live ending. They just didn't care enough. This is what happens when a director becomes a writer.

You do realise calling someone a troll does not invalidate what they say just because you decided to brand them with a derogatory term or word. Using such tactics in an attempt to discredit someone serves no purpose other than to have Stan come back and either give another warning about doing it or locking this thread for doing in once again after already given a warning half a dozen pages ago.

If you're insulted by the internet jargon/word troll, I suggest you stop being one then? What you're doing is trolling this thread at every opportunity.

Seen here, you pretty much fit the description to the letter:

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

We get it already, you like the endings. You loooove ambiguity and hate closure, you adore circular logic and have no need for common sense. We're not interested, nor are we buying it. There's the door, have a nice day.

[Lunch Box1912]

3DandBeyond wrote...



Your statement about two separate Destroy scenarios is all I've been talking about repeatedly.  Don't get the EMS or whatever is needed for the Shepard lives ending and you'd never have to see it.  But when I say that, someone says it would ruin the balance and even if I never saw it I would know it was there, or it would be bad because too many people would want it. 

That’s what makes the games good.

In ME2 you could have left Grunt in his tank the whole game, you could have chose to never re-activate Legion, these where choices in the game that effected your story. Someone who didn’t take the time to do these things and do their missions should get the same ending?

Screw them if they don't put the effort in.

Modifié par Lunch Box1912, 29 septembre 2012 - 04:39 .

[AresKeith]

CronoDragoon wrote...

iakus wrote...

Sacrifce Destroy endings are possible from 0-3099 EMS.  Well, unambiguously sacrifice Destroy.  Anyone who wants Shepard to live are screwed out of every other ending, and have to "share" with sacrifice destroy too?

Who's selfish again?  

So you're expecting sacrifice Shepards to purposefully play the game poorly to get the ending they want.

You are being selfish again.

sacrifice should always be a choice not forced, we're not being selfish for wanting the option to have Shepard live and for us to really. Its selfish to leave it ambiguous

[3DandBeyond]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Stop trolling Cronodragon, there a so many other ways they could have done it to give us a definitive live ending. They just didn't care enough. This is what happens when a director becomes a writer.

Trolling? Excuse me? Because I happen to believe that the current endings have closure and that anything more is personal preference?

And yes, there are a lot of other ways. Let me be clear: The rubble scene is stupid. But that doesn't mean that:

1. The rubble scene should show Shepard definitively living.
2. That Shepard might as well be dead because we don't see anything more. (This one cracks me up)
3. The people who wanted a sacrifice Destroy ending should be handwaved because the majority want Shepard to live. That IS selfish, no matter how many people agree with you, because it only benefits people who want the same thing as you.

You are ignoring the fact that it would be optional content, extra, unneeded, not required.  What's selfish is not the person asking for something else, it is the person who is happy and doesn't mind that others are not.  But let me be clear, since as of yet there's only been one person who ever posted in this thread that was really happy with the endings as they are and yet would be glad to see alternatives to the endings, I can safely say that there are few pro-enders who have ever cared one bit about the others of us that are unhappy with them.  They have called us names even when we were never part of all of the nastiness that came before.  Many, like myself made the big mistake of actually stating a dislike and a preference and for that some have shown just what type of people they are.  And frankly I'm glad not to know many of them because they have been extremely selfish, nasty, rude, and beyond anything that I've ever experienced before and I've dealt with cops and criminals and a lot more in my life.

I came here to start a kinder dialogue and I've seen others troll this thread and call people a lot of names and even had one send me hatemail that he denies doing.  And then he has the gall to report someone for calling him a name that was not as bad as anything he has posted here-but since he reported others he now comes here and tries to act like some big person who's above it all, kind and generous and helpful, when he has been anything but that.  This person was not you but he knows who he is and what he's done and some poor people may have to live with that.

So, your post saying that I should somehow bend over and care about what others think, when my OP and my constant posts have stated that I've been trying to do just that in what I've asked BW for, is I'm sorry, but rather hilarious.  I have consistently tried to remember them in every way even though they have shown their disdain and singular lack of concern for what I might want-even when it would not even have to be in their game.

So please never call me selfish.  I know what selfish is-it gets displayed here regularly in the posts of a person whose avatar shows him as he apparently really is-hateful, spiteful, and mean.  And yes, very selfish.

[CronoDragoon]

iakus wrote...
I expect to be rewarded for playing a thorough, well prepared game.

Sacrifice Shepards would say the same.

I also expected both kinds of endings.  Unambiguously dead and unambiguously alive.  I did not expect a half dozen unambiguously dead and one "well maybe Shepard's alive" ending that has to be kept  ambiguous so we don't hurt the feelings of the dead Shepard crowd who already cornered the market of every other ending.

Every other ending is pretty damn different though. Just because they want Shepard sacrificed doesn't mean they agree with Control or Synthesis.

But I agree that ideally we would have gotten more distinct scenes for Destroy.

[3DandBeyond]

CronoDragoon wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Your statement about two separate Destroy scenarios is all I've been talking about repeatedly.  Don't get the EMS or whatever is needed for the Shepard lives ending and you'd never have to see it.  But when I say that, someone says it would ruin the balance and even if I never saw it I would know it was there, or it would be bad because too many people would want it. 

That is a horrible way to think of it. "Hey guys if you want your ending just play less of the game than you want to."

What I'm talking about is different. I'm saying that in the discussion with the Catalyst, for example, some type of wheel comes up where you can either affirm that you are willing to sacrifice or counter that you expect everyone to make it out alive (a la the first dialogue wheel in ME2 after the Normandy crashes on the Collector Base) Then, you either get a scene with the crew finding Shepard in the rubble or you get a funeral scene at the end. This way, both sides get what they want and it's unambiguous.

As for the people who claim they want sacrifice but would pick the Shepard lives ending if available and thus have their story ruined, I'm inclined to disbelieve them when they say they really want sacrifice. 

Ok, honestly.  If I have to constantly describe exactly how things could be done down to every single iota I won't do it.  I really won't.  I was using what is commonly referred to as an example and not how it should or would be done specifically.  I was merely stating that you can make it so someone doesn't have to get it if they don't want it.  It could be done many different ways.

It would be like me saying you actually want there to be a dialogue option that says "yes I want to die" or "no, I'd like to live, thank you."

[CronoDragoon]

3DandBeyond wrote...
You are ignoring the fact that it would be optional content, extra, unneeded, not required.  What's selfish is not the person asking for something else, it is the person who is happy and doesn't mind that others are not.  But let me be clear, since as of yet there's only been one person who ever posted in this thread that was really happy with the endings as they are and yet would be glad to see alternatives to the endings, I can safely say that there are few pro-enders who have ever cared one bit about the others of us that are unhappy with them.  They have called us names even when we were never part of all of the nastiness that came before.  Many, like myself made the big mistake of actually stating a dislike and a preference and for that some have shown just what type of people they are.  And frankly I'm glad not to know many of them because they have been extremely selfish, nasty, rude, and beyond anything that I've ever experienced before and I've dealt with cops and criminals and a lot more in my life.

I came here to start a kinder dialogue and I've seen others troll this thread and call people a lot of names and even had one send me hatemail that he denies doing.  And then he has the gall to report someone for calling him a name that was not as bad as anything he has posted here-but since he reported others he now comes here and tries to act like some big person who's above it all, kind and generous and helpful, when he has been anything but that.  This person was not you but he knows who he is and what he's done and some poor people may have to live with that.

So, your post saying that I should somehow bend over and care about what others think, when my OP and my constant posts have stated that I've been trying to do just that in what I've asked BW for, is I'm sorry, but rather hilarious.  I have consistently tried to remember them in every way even though they have shown their disdain and singular lack of concern for what I might want-even when it would not even have to be in their game.

So please never call me selfish.  I know what selfish is-it gets displayed here regularly in the posts of a person whose avatar shows him as he apparently really is-hateful, spiteful, and mean.  And yes, very selfish.

I'm really sorry you've had these bad experiences. But pointing out the poor actions of others doesn't insulate you. I don't think you are intentionally trying to be selfish, but that is the result when you suggest that people with high EMS Destroy have Shepard live and low have him die. That is forcing a group of people to skip a significant portion of the content to get what they want.

A better answer, I think, is not tiered differences but rather dialogue wheel-tied differences or....alternate endings. 

I do my best to accomodate as many views as I can, and often I take sides on matters that sometimes appear contradictory. As a result, I tend to spend most of my time pointing and counterpointing instead of agreeing with people. But I do try and be specific about what I agree and disagree with, and I'm glad you acknowledge that. I also apologize if I sometimes come across too forceful, but I was trained in philosophy and that is how you are taught to speak/write.  

[CronoDragoon]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Ok, honestly.  If I have to constantly describe exactly how things could be done down to every single iota I won't do it.  I really won't.  I was using what is commonly referred to as an example and not how it should or would be done specifically.  I was merely stating that you can make it so someone doesn't have to get it if they don't want it.  It could be done many different ways.

It would be like me saying you actually want there to be a dialogue option that says "yes I want to die" or "no, I'd like to live, thank you."

I haven't seen any of your posts on how exactly you'd do it, so I thought you were suggesting that, sorry.

[AresKeith]

@CronoDragoon Bioware did this themselves having a certain level of EMS for Destory gives you the breathe scene, if you had lower than that you don't get the scene. What's wrong with getting more to that scene if people had higher EMS to see Shepard live?

[Lunch Box1912]

CronoDragoon wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Ok, honestly.  If I have to constantly describe exactly how things could be done down to every single iota I won't do it.  I really won't.  I was using what is commonly referred to as an example and not how it should or would be done specifically.  I was merely stating that you can make it so someone doesn't have to get it if they don't want it.  It could be done many different ways.

It would be like me saying you actually want there to be a dialogue option that says "yes I want to die" or "no, I'd like to live, thank you."

I haven't seen any of your posts on how exactly you'd do it, so I thought you were suggesting that, sorry.

Insert Dr Jack Kevorkian here

[3DandBeyond]

CronoDragoon wrote...


I'm really sorry you've had these bad experiences. But pointing out the poor actions of others doesn't insulate you. I don't think you are intentionally trying to be selfish, but that is the result when you suggest that people with high EMS Destroy have Shepard live and low have him die. That is forcing a group of people to skip a significant portion of the content to get what they want.

A better answer, I think, is not tiered differences but rather dialogue wheel-tied differences or....alternate endings. 

I do my best to accomodate as many views as I can, and often I take sides on matters that sometimes appear contradictory. As a result, I tend to spend most of my time pointing and counterpointing instead of agreeing with people. But I do try and be specific about what I agree and disagree with, and I'm glad you acknowledge that. I also apologize if I sometimes come across too forceful, but I was trained in philosophy and that is how you are taught to speak/write.  

I gave an example of how it could be done in keeping with the stupid way they do things now with EMS-since that's their preferred system for ME3 and dialogue doesn't mean jack, even including finding a specific item that would allow them to get that ending somehow.  I was not saying, "THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD BE DONE."  I was just saying that you could create two separate ones so that no one would be forced into anything.  And I have continuously stressed that I do not want anyone pigeonholed into something they don't want-that's very contrary to what they are willing to offer me and those like me.


EDIT: I see your post and thank you for the apology.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 29 septembre 2012 - 04:54 .

[Lunch Box1912]

CronoDragoon wrote...


I'm really sorry you've had these bad experiences. But pointing out the poor actions of others doesn't insulate you. I don't think you are intentionally trying to be selfish, but that is the result when you suggest that people with high EMS Destroy have Shepard live and low have him die. That is forcing a group of people to skip a significant portion of the content to get what they want.

Who plays a game to kill their character?  Honestly, really who?