6432 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

In ME3 its only compounded, not assisted by the fact that the death is held up by what is one of the most unequivocably hated characters in existence, the Catalyst, and framed by three equally abhorrent choices which equate, from left to right with Mass Slavery, Mass Molestation, and Mass Genocide.

Without the option of clear survivability, the endings will always be reduced to merely an elaborate method of killing off the protagonist of a 100 plus hour series in the eyes of a lot of people.

And not just the three choices. It was leaving the galaxy in the state of a total wasteland, even if one were to survive, never to see one's loved ones again, ever. desolate, hopeless.

And this is why I, and many people felt this way when they finished the game the first time. Like this picture which is titled "Desolation":



This has nothing to do with not making tough choices. This has to do with the outcomes of those choices. They were all bad outcomes. I'm going by the March endings. They do not change much with the EC. No time tables are given. Just a slide show and some cutscenes, but in the end they are pretty much the same. They are not going to change.

Point me to that total wasteland in any of the endings.

This is a pc form the ending.


Where's the wastland?

[MegaSovereign]

^Last time I was there I set off a bomb

[AresKeith]

@Dreman how does a picture that represents one area/Planet = the galaxy being a Wasteland?

plus they were talking about Mac's original intentions for the ending pre-EC

[cavs25]

Chris you guys are less trustworthy than the average politician...How many times have you guys denied something that came out? We are about on 7 to 8 things?

Hmm it seems you guys only go out of your way to deny things that are true...

[dreman9999]

AresKeith wrote...

@Dreman how does a picture that represents one area/Planet = the galaxy being a Wasteland?

plus they were talking about Mac's original intentions for the ending pre-EC

 I did not even post all the pics form ec. Every one of them in High ems shows no waste land and a galexy rebuild it self. EVERY LAST ONE

The only time you see a wastleland in in low to mid ems.
To add more to my point....

Modifié par dreman9999, 01 octobre 2012 - 05:00 .

[dreman9999]

MegaSovereign wrote...

^Last time I was there I set off a bomb

...
That's Thessia.

[dreman9999]

MassEffectFShep wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

MassEffectFShep wrote...

Bester76 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
So, for death to be meaningful it must be a clear choice and it must be an active one-going toward something and not merely to avoid something else.  The mistakes within these choices are like other stories in ME on steroids.  Advancement, that caused problems.  Inserting something artificial in people without their knowledge, that caused problems, asserting control (in some cases indoctrination) upon people or racing to achieve control, or controlling AIs, that caused trouble, attempting to destroy races of people, that caused trouble.  So, no reason to believe there'd be any problems this time.

Agree with this. 

Enforced suicide isn't a sacrifice. It's not a sacrifice when you have no other choice. 

I still believe that ultimately the range of choices should have covered Shepard both living and dying, each incentivised, and then the decision put in the hands of the player. 

^exactly. if you force a character (especially the main character that the player controls) to suicide/death, then to me the death doesn't feel as meaningful. maybe i wanted my shepard to sacrifice him/herself and maybe i didn't; maybe in one of my shepard's storylines it would have made sense and would have been coherent with her actions up until the end, and in another one of my shepard's storylines it wouldn't have made as much sense. why don't i get to choose? i previously chose everything, from the height of my eyebrow line to which of my squadmates dies, but i can't even willfully choose whether i sacrifice myself or not?

"but you do get to choose- in destroy you live!"

not really because (a) apparently it's up to me and millions of other players whether that breath is a last breath or breath of hope (side rant: REALLY? you can't even give me the satisfaction of definitely saying what type of breath that was? REALLY?), ( when i made that choice, i had no idea that i was going to live and in fact was told that i would probably die because i'm partially synthetic, and © even if i assume that the breath scene indicates life, there's nothing after that scene confirming that i live...except some old dude telling a little kid stories about "the shepard" in god knows how many years.

fail all around. just fail fail fail. 

What did I just read?
MassEffectFShep,Bester76,and 3d...You all wrong. A sacrific is not something a person or being inheritly wants to do. It something they do for for the greater good of th good.

It doesn't defer that sacrific if the person is put in a death no matter what choice. That means when the persom makes the choice, less death happens.

Look at Startrek 2's ending. We have the 2 main characters traped a near exploding warp core and the way to turn it off is in a super radiated room. If the warp core is not turned off, everyone n the ship dies. If it is turn of, it means one person dies.
That's the same thing as the endings of ME3.

well, a sacrifice isn't by definition "something they do for for the greater good of th good," it's simply "the destruction or surrender of something for the sake of something else; something given up or lost." if i wanted to sacrifice all my squadmates so that i can live, that might not be for the greater good but it's still a sacrifice. furthermore, in MY interpretation of a sacrifice, to make a choice (and thus to choose to destroy or surrender something for the sake of something else) i need to understand what choice i'm making. at the end of the game, i didn't understand the three choices or what their consequences would be. i didn't understand what destroy would mean for a variety of species (would quarians die? would EDI? would i?), so when i made that choice i did so blindly and so did not willingly and wholeheartedly sacrifice anything. in your star trek example, which i havent seen by the way, my guess is that when they made that choice they knew what the implcations would be (e.g., how many people would die depending on what choice is made).

for me it was honestly a "well i can't really do the other two so i guess i'll pick this one although i'm not entirely what it means or what i'm doing."

sure, i suppose you could say that because i was presented with three pathways and pressed a button that i technically made a choice and so technically made a sacrifice, but i did not understand the choices and thus did not deliberately sacrifice something with full knowledge of what the sacrifice was. even if all three choices would have been death, that would have been fine if i knew what my death would cause or mean. but because it was more of a shrug--> close eyes -->walk to red tube and pray something good happens, it felt more like i was being pushed to make a choice that i didn't want to make or necessarily think i should have had to make.

this probably goes without saying, but all of the above is just my interpretation of the ending and how it fits with my interpretation of "sacrifice" and "choice" and i don't think that any person's perspective is inherently "right" or "wrong." if you think differently of the meaning of the term "sacrifice," that's just as valid as my own view.

Then that means there is more then one type of sacrific then. That still means what's in the end of ME is a sacrific.

Modifié par dreman9999, 01 octobre 2012 - 05:02 .

[AresKeith]

dreman9999 wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

@Dreman how does a picture that represents one area/Planet = the galaxy being a Wasteland?

plus they were talking about Mac's original intentions for the ending pre-EC

 I did not even post all the pics form ec. Every one of them in High ems shows no waste land and a galexy rebuild it self. EVERY LAST ONE

The only time you see a wastleland in in low to mid ems

you really cannot read people's comments, I just said they were talking about Mac's original intentions for the ending pre-EC

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

AresKeith wrote...

@Dreman how does a picture that represents one area/Planet = the galaxy being a Wasteland?

plus they were talking about Mac's original intentions for the ending pre-EC

*Cough* Don't waste your time, dreman just likes to argue for the hell of it. *cough cough* It feeds him *cough hack cough*

[Iakus]

dreman9999 wrote...

MassEffectFShep wrote...

Bester76 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
So, for death to be meaningful it must be a clear choice and it must be an active one-going toward something and not merely to avoid something else.  The mistakes within these choices are like other stories in ME on steroids.  Advancement, that caused problems.  Inserting something artificial in people without their knowledge, that caused problems, asserting control (in some cases indoctrination) upon people or racing to achieve control, or controlling AIs, that caused trouble, attempting to destroy races of people, that caused trouble.  So, no reason to believe there'd be any problems this time.

Agree with this. 

Enforced suicide isn't a sacrifice. It's not a sacrifice when you have no other choice. 

I still believe that ultimately the range of choices should have covered Shepard both living and dying, each incentivised, and then the decision put in the hands of the player. 

^exactly. if you force a character (especially the main character that the player controls) to suicide/death, then to me the death doesn't feel as meaningful. maybe i wanted my shepard to sacrifice him/herself and maybe i didn't; maybe in one of my shepard's storylines it would have made sense and would have been coherent with her actions up until the end, and in another one of my shepard's storylines it wouldn't have made as much sense. why don't i get to choose? i previously chose everything, from the height of my eyebrow line to which of my squadmates dies, but i can't even willfully choose whether i sacrifice myself or not?

"but you do get to choose- in destroy you live!"

not really because (a) apparently it's up to me and millions of other players whether that breath is a last breath or breath of hope (side rant: REALLY? you can't even give me the satisfaction of definitely saying what type of breath that was? REALLY?), ( when i made that choice, i had no idea that i was going to live and in fact was told that i would probably die because i'm partially synthetic, and © even if i assume that the breath scene indicates life, there's nothing after that scene confirming that i live...except some old dude telling a little kid stories about "the shepard" in god knows how many years.

fail all around. just fail fail fail. 

What did I just read?
MassEffectFShep,Bester76,and 3d...You all wrong. A sacrific is not something a person or being inheritly wants to do. It something they do for for the greater good of th good.

It doesn't defer that sacrific if the person is put in a death no matter what choice. That means when the persom makes the choice, less death happens.

Look at Startrek 2's ending. We have the 2 main characters traped a near exploding warp core and the way to turn it off is in a super radiated room. If the warp core is not turned off, everyone n the ship dies. If it is turn of, it means one person dies.
That's the same thing as the endings of ME3.

Choose:

Control:  Shepard dies to create Catalyst 2.0

Synthesis:  Shepard dies to spread shiny green space magic throughout the galaxy

Refuse:  Shepard dies as the galaxy goes out in a blaze of glory

Destroy:  Shepard dies destroying all synthetic life (except with 3100+ EMS, wherin Shepard is trapped in Shrodinger's Box for all eternity)

Notice a comon theme here?  "Shepard dies"  There is no choice on the player's part.  There is no decision that can alter this outcome.  Shepard is doomed, the only "choice" is the one from Ghostbusters:  "Choose the form of the Destructor!"

This isn't choice, this is railroading.  This is why I say "Forced sacrifice isn't"  It isnt' really a sacrifice if you're going to die anyway.  It's a sacrifice if the hero can walk away, and maybe save himself, but chooses not to.  There was no option like "Shepard can die to ensure the galaxy's in better condition"  There was no option to let another squadmate take Shepard's place.  

[ElChipmunko]

iakus wrote...

 There was no option to let another squadmate take Shepard's place.  

"You or your love interest" would have been cool.  Much harder choice for some I'd imagine as well.  Or you(+geth, and/or squadmates/war assets) vs the remaining population of Earth.

The major issue I have with the endings in regard to "sacrifice" as the player is there is nothing I'm really giving up in choosing the ending.  For instance, synthesis (for sake of argument, limiting "synthesis" to mean, utopian society where everyone holds hands and enjoys rainbows) would have been much more powerful if it were an alternative to a more selfish outcome, where you could have Shepard walk away, at least semi-victorious, having given up very little personally.  From my perspective, having the ability to avoid a sacrifice, yet choosing to make that sacrifice anyway, is much more powerful.

I think the endings suffer due to a lack of sacrifice on the part of the "player" as opposed to "Shepard."  Shepard is sacrificing him/herself for the good of the galaxy in three outcomes, and arguably the fourth.  The player merely chooses how Shepard sacrifices him/herself, which affects superficial changes re: the ending cinematics.

P.S.
On an unrelated note: Can anyone explain how/why Shepard jumping into the beam in the synthesis option results in everything being synthesized?  Could anyone jump in the beam? Or just Shepard?  And if just Shepard, why?  I'm kinda perplexed by this and figured someone more knowledgeable could explain.

[Iakus]

ElChipmunko wrote...

iakus wrote...

 There was no option to let another squadmate take Shepard's place.  

"You or your love interest" would have been cool.  Much harder choice for some I'd imagine as well.  Or you(+geth, and/or squadmates/war assets) vs the remaining population of Earth.

The major issue I have with the endings in regard to "sacrifice" as the player is there is nothing I'm really giving up in choosing the ending.  For instance, synthesis (for sake of argument, limiting "synthesis" to mean, utopian society where everyone holds hands and enjoys rainbows) would have been much more powerful if it were an alternative to a more selfish outcome, where you could have Shepard walk away, at least semi-victorious, having given up very little personally.  From my perspective, having the ability to avoid a sacrifice, yet choosing to make that sacrifice anyway, is much more powerful.

I think the endings suffer due to a lack of sacrifice on the part of the "player" as opposed to "Shepard."  Shepard is sacrificing him/herself for the good of the galaxy in three outcomes, and arguably the fourth.  The player merely chooses how Shepard sacrifices him/herself, which affects superficial changes re: the ending cinematics.

P.S.
On an unrelated note: Can anyone explain how/why Shepard jumping into the beam in the synthesis option results in everything being synthesized?  Could anyone jump in the beam? Or just Shepard?  And if just Shepard, why?  I'm kinda perplexed by this and figured someone more knowledgeable could explain.

I agree with everything but "you or your LI"  That wouldn't work becase

A) not everyone has a LI and Such an ending would still be too bitter to a lot of people

However.  If you could save Anderson by sacrificing yourself?  Or if you could save EDI and the geth?  Or you could save yourself but doom the galaxy to a "mid-EMS ending" rather than a "high-EMS"?

And yes, the endings suffer because Biwoare takes our character away, burns it, and makes us watch.

And no, Synthesis is not a thing that can be understood.  I don't understand why SHepard couldn't just go downstairs and pick up TIIM's body to toss into the beam.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The slide show does not give a time line for reconstruction. Everything can be rebuilt, but how long? People are assuming it takes place quickly. Those are like artist's conception paintings in a propaganda film showing what things are going to be like.

Didn't you guys... no you're all too young. We were supposed to have flying cars and tall buildings with car ports that held those cars like in the Jetson's by now. We were supposed to have high speed trains linking futuristic looking cities all across America. Our cities are supposed to look like Nos Astra on Illium by 2020. Will they? Not likely. We saw stuff like that back in 1960. We expected that. What did we get. Look outside! It's been falling apart for decades.

So they are pictures using the same people we know already. It doesn't mean that stuff is going to happen in their lifetimes. It's going to take thousands of years in some cases. It doesn't mean Falare and Samara are going to be able to enjoy that vista which BTW is on Thessia, not the world with the monastery -- Ardat Yakshi are allowed supervised visits once a year. Those pictures are like propaganda pictures to get you to buy off on it.

Lack of sacrifice on the part of the player? :facepalm: I think the endings suffer because it is all death. There isn't sacrifice, only death. There is nothing to show that the geth die. There is nothing to show that the AI core is flashed. It is just that "be warned the beam will not discriminate. All synthetics will be targeted. Even you are partly synthetic." So all the starships should have blown up. Their FTL drives should have blown up, but somehow even though they are based on reaper tech they still work, yet the geth and EDI don't?

[hiraeth]

ElChipmunko wrote...

P.S.
On an unrelated note: Can anyone explain how/why Shepard jumping into the beam in the synthesis option results in everything being synthesized?  Could anyone jump in the beam? Or just Shepard?  And if just Shepard, why?  I'm kinda perplexed by this and figured someone more knowledgeable could explain.

Unfortunately, I don't think anyone definitively knows how the synthesis beam works or why it even exists; there's no codex entry or official description released from any official ME medium. We know that not all players are offered synthesis as a choice (according to IGN you have to have at least 2800 EMS to be offered it) and we know that the Catalyst says that others have tried synthesis before but failed, and that for some reason Shepard is ready and won't fail (so I would guess that other people are welcome to jump into the beam but nothing will happen or everything will go haywire). I couldn't even begin to speculate on the actual mechanics of how we go from Shepard jumping into a beam of light to the entire galaxy being synthesized (insert space magic), and I don't think our only source of information on synthesis-the Catalyst-is very helpful either (Extended Cut dialogue below):

Catalyst: There is another solution: Synthesis. 
Shepard: And that is?
Catalyst: Add your energy to the Crucible's. The chain reaction will combine all synthetic and organic life into a new framework, a new DNA.
Shepard. Explain how my energy can be added to the Crucible.
Catalyst: Your organic energy, the essence of who and what you are will be broken down and then dispersed.
Shepard: To do what exactly?
Catalyst: The energy of the Crucible, released in this way, will alter the matrix of all organic life in the galaxy. Organics seek perfection through technology, synthetics seek perfection through understanding. Organics will be perfected by integrating fully with synthetic technology, synthetics in turn will finally have full understanding of organics. It is the ideal solution. Now that we know it is possible, it is inevitable we will reach synthesis.
Shepard: Why couldn't you do it sooner?
Catalyst: We have tried a similar solution in the past, but it has always failed.
Shepard: Why?
Catalyst: Because the organics were not ready. It is not something that can be forced. You are ready, and you may choose it.
Shepard: I don't know.
Catalyst: Why not? Synthetics are already part of you. Can you imagine your life with them?
Shepard: But there will be peace?
Catalyst: The cycle will end. The reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilzations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us. Synthesis is the final evolution of all life.

I'm not sure why the Catalyst says "Now that we know it's possible..." because they actually still haven't had an instance in which they tried and succeeded. That's what sort of pulled me away from Synthesis (aside from me not liking the idea of forcing a genetic alteration on all life in the galaxy), was that the Catalyst just didn't sound convincing. He came across as a dodgy salesman-

Catalyst: Trust me, it will work with you this time.
Shepard: But how do you know? I mean, you just said it's never actually worked before...
Catalyst: Don't worry about how I know, I just do. Now please choose it.

If a doctor was talking to you about a medical procedure and used that logic, my guess is that you'd say "No thanks" and get a second opinion or do more research. But this is a video game and the description of synthesis is just one of many parts of the Catalyst's dialogue that left people scratching their head with raised eyebrows. 

I'm also not sure why Shepard can suddenly achieve synthesis (as opposed to anyone else). It's quite possible that he can't achieve synthesis and the Catalyst was just lying and that he, acting as a force on behalf of the reapers, is trying to convince Shepard to make a choice that benefits the reapers- this is an idea supported by ITers, I believe, and personally makes more sense to me than what the Catalyst is actually saying, particularly given Saren's very similar proposition in ME1 (see meme pic). 

These are just my thoughts- again I'm no synthesis expert and personally did not choose synthesis as my canon ending, though I can certainly understand why a lot of people did. 

[CaIIisto]

Synthesis - If you look very, very carefully, when you're running into the beam, if you look in the background you should just about be able to make out Casper waving his magic wand.

[Ozida]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Lack of sacrifice on the part of the player? :facepalm: I think the endings suffer because it is all death. There isn't sacrifice, only death.

Underlined part should be slogan of ME3. Next to: " We fight, or we die. That's our plan".

[ld1449]

Ozida wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Lack of sacrifice on the part of the player? :facepalm: I think the endings suffer because it is all death. There isn't sacrifice, only death.

Underlined part should be slogan of ME3. Next to: " We fight, and we die. That's our plan".

Fixed that for you.

[GarvakD]

ElChipmunko wrote...

iakus wrote...

 There was no option to let another squadmate take Shepard's place.  

"You or your love interest" would have been cool.  Much harder choice for some I'd imagine as well.  Or you(+geth, and/or squadmates/war assets) vs the remaining population of Earth.

An LI or squadmate take the place of Shepard throwing himself into beam or taking Control.  Is this what you reference or am I missing a previous quote (could you go into futher detail)?  If true, I wouldn't let a squadmate, and certainly not Tali, "sacrifice" themselves.  I would "sacrifice" myself in their place so that they may live.  I never choose Synthesis or Control anyways.  

Check that.  Actually, if Javik was with me and willing to sacrifice himself to get rid of Reapers I would let him accomplish what he set out to do.  

Check that.  I won't let Javik synthesize and brainwash everyone.  Nor become the next Catalyst and eventually come to the same conclusion as the original.  Maybe if he wanted to walk into the explosion for Destroy, and I could evacuate in time, I would.  

Modifié par GarvakD, 01 octobre 2012 - 11:28 .

[Ozida]

ld1449 wrote...

Ozida wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Lack of sacrifice on the part of the player? :facepalm: I think the endings suffer because it is all death. There isn't sacrifice, only death.

Underlined part should be slogan of ME3. Next to: " We fight, and we die. That's our plan".

Fixed that for you.

True, true indeed.

[Iakus]

Ozida wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Lack of sacrifice on the part of the player? :facepalm: I think the endings suffer because it is all death. There isn't sacrifice, only death.

Underlined part should be slogan of ME3. Next to: " We fight, or we die. That's our plan".

"You exist because we allow it.  And you will end because we demand it"

[inversevideo]

I do wonder about the repercussions of this...

"Catalyst: The cycle will end. The reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilizations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us. Synthesis is the final evolution of all life."

I almost feel like one needs a lawyer to parse through all of this. Connected? Connected to what extent?

[Lunch Box1912]

inversevideo wrote...

I do wonder about the repercussions of this...

"Catalyst: The cycle will end. The reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilizations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us. Synthesis is the final evolution of all life."

I almost feel like one needs a lawyer to parse through all of this. Connected? Connected to what extent?

Objection over-ruled .... Judge Bioware says take or leave it.

[3DandBeyond]

inversevideo wrote...

I do wonder about the repercussions of this...

"Catalyst: The cycle will end. The reapers will cease their harvest, and the civilizations preserved in their forms will be connected to all of us. Synthesis is the final evolution of all life."

I almost feel like one needs a lawyer to parse through all of this. Connected? Connected to what extent?

99% of the crap the kid says is like someone twisting themselves into a pretzel to not say what they mean or know.

It's actually called media training and politicians go through it.  You never answer the questions asked.  You seize on the hot button words used and turn it to frame the question into something you want to answer.

[Condack]

3DandBeyond wrote...

99% of the crap the kid says is like someone twisting themselves into a pretzel to not say what they mean or know.

It's actually called media training and politicians go through it.  You never answer the questions asked.  You seize on the hot button words used and turn it to frame the question into something you want to answer.

...WE ARE ASSUMING CONTROL!

3DandBeyond wrote...

I take that back. Politicians and PR people that work for gaming companies are wholesome and honest all the time. What was I thinking when I thought that the child's logic was flawed?!

Modifié par Condack, 02 octobre 2012 - 01:18 .

[3DandBeyond]

Condack wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

99% of the crap the kid says is like someone twisting themselves into a pretzel to not say what they mean or know.

It's actually called media training and politicians go through it.  You never answer the questions asked.  You seize on the hot button words used and turn it to frame the question into something you want to answer.

...WE ARE ASSUMING CONTROL!

3DandBeyond did not wrote...

I take that back. Politicians and PR people that work for gaming companies are wholesome and honest all the time. What was I thinking when I thought that the child's logic was flawed?!

Watch it buddy or there be green eyes in your future.  In order for the child's logic to be flawed I think one has to assume logic exists there in the first place.