6432 réponses à ce sujet

[GarvakD]

AresKeith wrote...

Xellith wrote...

I dont see the appeal of ME3 MP. Without more modes (hell throw in some "N7 missions" where its actually STORY CONTENT done from the aspect of a 4 man squad) in MP which would allow for SP weapon unlocks then I really dont see ME3 MP going anywhere cept down in popularity.

I mean sure adding the collectors is good and all but its not exactly game changing stuff thats going to retain a significant number of people.

The maps are more or less elaborate circles too which is hardly enthralling.

That's what I put in my MP DLC idea, I made new game modes that are story-based

Interesting.  Anything in particular?  

[AresKeith]

GarvakD wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Xellith wrote...

I dont see the appeal of ME3 MP. Without more modes (hell throw in some "N7 missions" where its actually STORY CONTENT done from the aspect of a 4 man squad) in MP which would allow for SP weapon unlocks then I really dont see ME3 MP going anywhere cept down in popularity.

I mean sure adding the collectors is good and all but its not exactly game changing stuff thats going to retain a significant number of people.

The maps are more or less elaborate circles too which is hardly enthralling.

That's what I put in my MP DLC idea, I made new game modes that are story-based

Interesting.  Anything in particular?  

I made a game mode idea called Guardian, which is similar to the Jacob side-mission but on Steroids lol

Another new game mode idea takes place during the Cerberus Coup. Its in the Spectre DLC banner below

[3DandBeyond]

Xellith wrote...

I dont see the appeal of ME3 MP. Without more modes (hell throw in some "N7 missions" where its actually STORY CONTENT done from the aspect of a 4 man squad) in MP which would allow for SP weapon unlocks then I really dont see ME3 MP going anywhere cept down in popularity.

I mean sure adding the collectors is good and all but its not exactly game changing stuff thats going to retain a significant number of people.

The maps are more or less elaborate circles too which is hardly enthralling.

Actually you are quite correct-they are circles and what's really funny is watching people try to get strategic positions when the mission first starts.  What's funny about that is they'll run to a place where they think the hordes will start and all that does is force them to start somewhere else.  I can't tell you how many times I've watched people run to the other side of the map and then had the hordes spawn right near where we spawned in the game.  I then throw a bunch of arc grenades and watch everyone run back to where I am.  It's part of what entertains me with MP.

As soon as CoD comes out there will be a drop off.  I've seen it before with other online games and I've already noticed a big drop in players on the xbox.  The only reason I think there are still a lot on the PS3 is because online is free.

[3DandBeyond]

Here's some food for thought. On reasons why the catalyst should have been something different (or just not there at all).

There's a thread about the choices and whether they are unfair to paragons. I actually think that both paragon and renegade would have trouble with them for similar, but somewhat different reasons. A paragon would want to know what they would do to other people in the galaxy, what all they would really mean. A renegade would want to know what they really would mean and do to him/her. This is simplistic but a part of it.

Then I got to thinking about the catalyst and I've said before that his creators really were poor at making tech. First of all they only seem capable of creating homicidal or harmful tech and secondly, with the kid as an example, they use the worst logic in programming of any supposedly advanced species. But then I though about it some more and it's worse than that. The Leviathans were not and are not nice beings. They were worse than the Protheans and the Protheans were pretty bad. They wanted to enthrall and control all other races or just kill them. So, with this mind set they created the catalyst to find peace and balance. Uh, ok. And this thing they created, Shepard is supposed to believe might actually sort of help him/her. Uh, ok. And this thing created the reapers, that are people goo factories, and in all this Shepard is supposed to rely on what the Catalyst says will happen?

I'm not even suggesting here that the kid made the choices and the crucible plans though it doesn't make sense that anyone else did. But this points to the probability that the kid would have reasons for being deceptive even if that means he was programmed to deceive or to not give out the whole truth.

[inversevideo]

Starkid, being a machine, has a whole different concept of life and death.
Loss of information is death. If the information is recorded, it is not lost, therefore no death.

The harvest is Starkid turning organics into preserves. We preserve fruit, like strawberries, by turning the strawberries into red goo, and adding it to mason jars. Starkid turns organics into gray goo, and adds the goo to Reaper shells. The organic species is harvested and preserved, the DNA is written into a Reaper shell, so no information is lost. In Starkid's logic, life has been preserved.

While I can appreciate that Starkid has a unique perspective on life, death, and the preservation of a species, I do not understand how anyone can feel pity or empathy for the thing.

From my human perspective, understanding Starkid's logic means it is not possible to trust it.
It is convinced that the death, misery, and destruction it has been sowing, is in our best interest.
I think that alone is good reason not to want to go along with any schemes it concocts to fix the galaxy.

And Leviathan are evil. They turned the Starkid loose on the galaxy, and in all this time, they have done nothing to shut it down.

[N7 Lisbeth]

BearlyHere wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Looking back at the previous games. ME1 was done right. ME2 in all was done very well, but in retrospect I think should have had a more vanilla ending. What I'm saying is no suicide mission. I remember thinking when I thought about it in context with a trilogy "there's no way this isn't going to come back and bite them in the ass."

Too many variables in that game. And the narrative director left afterward and wasn't replaced. If they did a vanilla ending in ME2, and did the suicide mission at the end of ME3, they could have had their 16 different endings.

The thing about the suicide mission in ME2 was that if Shep didn't make it, or if you lost squadmates like I did the first time, it was possible to reload and replay for the win. The biggest problem with ME3 is there's no reload, no win. It's Shepard's dead, game over, buy DLC! All because we have a couple of "artists' who didn't realize they were making a video game. They still can't understand that people play games to WIN! Or at least to be left feeling like the death was worth it, and not just because it fit the narrative.

No, they understand just fine. Perhaps they underestimated the negative impact, but they made the endings intentionally incite-worthy, so they wouldn't be forgotten; so people would talk about them. (Talk about "them" being bad, and I don't mean just the the endings. <Mr Bean eyebrows>)

The sad thing is, the first thing people do after completing the endings (and seeking help/confirmation that there's no way around them) is that they completely forget them. They throw those endings out the window and read fanfiction instead. Some people refuse to even "finish" the game, a lot of people by the numbers. They shut it off at Marauder Shields and read MScanon instead. Or they shut it down at the black screen immediately following your exhausted sit-down with Admiral Anderson.

That's right. A black screen is a better ending. Hah.

It's gotten bad enough that when Mac&Co try to force Synthesis as canon, everyone screams no way, not interested in your ME4 anymore.

Modifié par N7 Lisbeth, 05 octobre 2012 - 06:17 .

[CaIIisto]

Dash+Quit FTW.

That's the 'best possible' ending, and the kicker is that you can have whatever EMS you want, it won't make the slightest bit of difference!

If you watch many of the 'reaction' videos to the EC on YT, the number of people who shoot Starjar, and get the refuse ending is ridiculous. BW were probably well aware of the popular opinion of Casper and knew full well that this was the easiest way of giving fans the middle finger.

[CaIIisto]

The next game will almost certainly be a sequal of sorts. They're not going to be able to run away from canonizing one of the endings at some point.

[N7 Lisbeth]

magnetite wrote...

N7 Lisbeth wrote...
It's gotten bad enough that when Mac&Co try to force Synthesis as canon, everyone screams no way, not interested in your ME4 anymore.

Why do people have to rely on Bioware for a "canon" ending? Why not decide for yourself? Issue with canon endings for me is that everyone just picks what the developers think is the right choice. If that were the case, every single playthrough would end up the same more or less.

You misread what I was writing, I was not advocating a canonised ending. In ME1 and ME2, most of the decisions you made were at least given lip service to or the results made fuzzy so that you could at least believe your choices are in effect (even if course of events did change minor things later).

The problem is ME3's endings are too divergent, too horribly wrong, to make a game that accomodates all four endings. How can you create a Mass Effect universe that has or doesn't have the any synthetics? We're talking about trivialising most technology in the game to the point that it's not mentioned in any narrative so that it doesn't impact the other ending alternatives too much. In another of the endings every known species is completely wiped out. How do you make a game that takes that into account? There's just no way. Even if you did, it wouldn't be Mass Effect anymore. FUBAR. So they canonise an ending. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying they torched the Mass Effect franchise with those endings in a desperate attempt at fame -- which has instead manifested itself as infamy and notoriety.

The problem is the endings are awful. There is no cohesive narrative, no logic, and no closure. Worst of all, they painted themselves into a corner; any game afterwards has no chance without them canonising an ending, choosing an ending for us, which makes the choice in ME3 completely irrelevant and insulting. To rub salt on the wound, they have this really frelled up affectation with the worst of the endings.

I can see why people get banned on these forums. It's easy to get caught up in the moment and tell Bioware exactly what you think of them. You know what? Bioware deserves it. Their willful stupidity on this subject earns any disrespect they get. The entire thing just makes me so angry.

Heh. Clearly this subject isn't a healthy one for me. Recognising that I think I'll bow out rather than damage this thread. I respect what you're doing, 3DandBeyond and you have my wholehearted support in your endeavours. I just can't divorce myself from my emotions on the matter no matter how much I try. This isn't to say that I forgive Bioware or that "I'll go away and not posting my dislike of the endings." No. I hate Bioware more than ever now with their refusal at changing the endings, what's changed is that I no longer see the point in trying to be constructive. Being vocal and nasty seems like the only thing they'll respond to and that's not the purpose of this thread so I'll continue it elsewhere.

The rift Bioware has created is between themselves and their customers simply too great, especially since they make no effort to bridge it.

The irony is how mild mannered I am. To see this vitriol spew out of me in this way is, well, shocking. It's testament to how badly Bioware has treated everyone with these fully intentional, terrible, agenda-serving endings.

Chris, Mac, Casey, here's my speculation for you. It's from the heart.

Modifié par N7 Lisbeth, 05 octobre 2012 - 08:37 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

magnetite wrote...

N7 Lisbeth wrote...
It's gotten bad enough that when Mac&Co try to force Synthesis as canon, everyone screams no way, not interested in your ME4 anymore.

Why do people have to rely on Bioware for a "canon" ending? Why not decide for yourself? Issue with canon endings for me is that everyone just picks what the developers think is the right choice. If that were the case, every single playthrough would end up the same more or less.

Mass Effect is about picking different choices and ultimately every story plays out differently. Kind of like that "fork in the road" thing. Unlike these "canon" storylines which more or less follow a singular path more or less.

People are talking about setting a canon for a sequel because Bioware is working on the next game.

Because if there is going to be a sequel it is the responsibility of the writer of the story to have a canon of some sort from which to work. It's that simple. Otherwise you can't have a sequel. You can have different ways of how Shepard's story ends, but not the way the state of the galaxy ends up in general.

If you have a canon you can write a new story from a single point. If you don't have a canon you have to write a story from a multiverse point. How many multiverses are we talking about? And as a whole you're still setting about six to eight canons. Some people want to narrow it down to three which means one for each ending, so that means you're throwing out the medium EMS and low EMS endings. In the end you are setting canons for a sequel.

This gets cost prohibitive and cumbersome and unwieldy from a writing standpoint. So I say let's just go and pick one as a canon. And it would have been a lot easier to have had the Suicide Mission in ME3 instead of ME2 as the end of Shepard's story arc and basically the end of the Normandy's story arc. That would have iced the canon.

However, IMO they're going to have to do a passing of the torch mission in the next game. Even Star Trek TNG got a passing of the torch from Kirk to Picard at some point in the movies. Just don't make it a dark passing. Shepard has been through enough.

[DarthSleepy]

Just gonna add my voice to this. What's a man gotta do to defeat the Reapers and ride off into the sunset with Liara? I need to believe a new ending is coming - even if it isn't.

[3DandBeyond]

magnetite wrote...

N7 Lisbeth wrote...
It's gotten bad enough that when Mac&Co try to force Synthesis as canon, everyone screams no way, not interested in your ME4 anymore.

Why do people have to rely on Bioware for a "canon" ending? Why not decide for yourself? Issue with canon endings for me is that everyone just picks what the developers think is the right choice. If that were the case, every single playthrough would end up the same more or less.

Mass Effect is about picking different choices and ultimately every story plays out differently. Kind of like that "fork in the road" thing. Unlike these "canon" storylines which more or less follow a singular path more or less.

The problem here is that BW set the standard and a promise if you will (stories create worlds and settings and internal promises) as to how the hero would be treated and what possibilities might exist at the end.  The main internal promises were that the endings were based on how hard you tried, doing the things you needed to do (this determined who would survive) and the fate of the hero being possible and visualized within the game.

I can imagine anything.  I may buy a story and even a game to spur on that imagination, but not to require me to make up whole parts of the story.  ME3 failed as an ending because it did not aptly conclude the story it was supposed to conclude (the main thing always talked about by BW was this was the end of Shepard's story), it did not answer all of the most relevant questions of the 3 games (what was ME2 all about), it failed in showing that the protagonist met the main goal of 3 stories unequivocally, it was not uplifting, and it did not bring the hero home so it did not conclude Shepard's story.

A new ME is being developed.  If it's a prequel, it's pointless as it is because of this mainly: it will be a cycle that ends with the reapers.  It is also pointless because there is no final, uplifting reason for playing or seeing any of it - a prequel leads to the reaper and the end of that cycle and then leads to the current ME series.  A big sidequest in another galaxy will reduce those interested in ME since one of the big draws was not just Shepard but being able to play as someone that you can envision being like you or who you'd like to be (if you were a hero).  The most natural type of game to create would be a sequel (with or without Shepard).  They've said it would be without Shepard so that makes it a little bit easier, but...ME3 ends with 4 different created worlds.  One is under the authority of reapers and the Shepard AI.  One is a totally assimilated, green eyed reality with reaper variants running around with green eyes and reaper flying around with green whatevers.  This is also a supposedly more intelligent (given knowledge) group and synthetics understand organics (that no longer exist).  Another is a reality where all synthetics are destroyed, reapers are destroyed, and all tech is damaged.  And the final one exists sometime in the future after humanity and every race you know has been wiped out.

It would be truly difficult to make one story world that incorporates all of these realities.  Some have suggested they create separate games for each and this is even a bigger undertaking.  They would be creating and even more divided fan base in doing so.  They'd either have to release 4 separate games or release 1 game that is not so big.  If they made 4 separate games, a lot of people would only ever buy one version.  If they made 1 game with 4 stories, that would mean people would be paying for a story they never wanted and each story would be significantly shorter than ME3.  They could do it but given these more difficult and divisive ideas with built in rage inducers (no one would be happy paying for synthesis if that was not how they felt ME3 should have ended).

The logical thing would be to find a way to set canon.  At some point they have to get off of this fence full of lies-well intentioned but lies nonetheless.  What I mean is it's totally untrue that nothing is canon.  Of course it is.  Any mission that you did not complete that ends in a mission failure was a mission with a canon ending.  There are canon stories that you must traverse through to get to the end.  You can't refuse to do some missions.  There is one LI that exists through 3 games that becomes somewhat canon in the way presented-people have gotten her as an LI accidentally.  You can avoid her, but they don't make that easy.

But the biggest issue is one of endings.  ME1 had a canon ending.  ME2 had one too.  Whether people like it or not (and I'm frequently told this is BW's story so they decide things), ME3 will need a canon one.  The easiest one to actually go with is the one that pro-ending people will hate and yet that anti-ending people will love.  The reason being those that like the endings are the ones that say BW makes their own story and should be supported for that-so they'd have to be ok with a canon ending they don't like.  People that dislike the endings now would need something to like in order to be brought back into the series for any sequel.  I doubt that will be understood and considered, but I see that as the only way out of all of this.  There's no single ending that will make everyone happy, but if it is their story they need to choose one.

[sdinc009]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Looking back at the previous games. ME1 was done right. ME2 in all was done very well, but in retrospect I think should have had a more vanilla ending. What I'm saying is no suicide mission. I remember thinking when I thought about it in context with a trilogy "there's no way this isn't going to come back and bite them in the ass."

Too many variables in that game. And the narrative director left afterward and wasn't replaced. If they did a vanilla ending in ME2, and did the suicide mission at the end of ME3, they could have had their 16 different endings.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you here in regards to your statement about ME 2. I think Me 2 was done very well in carrying on the series. The suicide mission plot acted as this haunting death march for your entire crew that was looming in the distance throughout the entire story. It acted as the whole reason for aquiring your crew and why they joined to begin with. The multiple variables and having wrong choices bite you in the ass is what made ME 2 so great. Plus, it acted as a thematic prelude to ME 3. In ME 2, you're tasked with traversing the galaxy to recruit special people of every race to defeat a barely understood threat. ME 3 makes the logical expansion on that concept where Shepard now must traverse the galaxy to recruit, not just individuals, but the allegiance of entire races and the forces they bare to defeat an almost insurmountable enemy that threatens them all. This primary theme was exactly what I expected ME 3 to be right after I beat ME 2, I just didn't expect it to end like, well, WORST ENDING EVER!

[Xellith]

They have already chosen synthesis as the canon ending.

ME3 with destroy ending - a few years later synthesis was attained anyhow. Now you have reaper corpses (maybe) lying around in the background and possible some destroyed reapers just lying around. No geth npcs. Oh and everyone is green.

ME3 with control ending - a few years later synthesis was attained anyhow. Now you have reapers walking around people walking around, geth are still around and everyone is green.

ME3 with synthesis ending - synthesis was attained. Now you have reapers walking around people walking around, geth are still around and everyone is green.

[3DandBeyond]

N7 Lisbeth wrote...

magnetite wrote...

N7 Lisbeth wrote...
It's gotten bad enough that when Mac&Co try to force Synthesis as canon, everyone screams no way, not interested in your ME4 anymore.

Why do people have to rely on Bioware for a "canon" ending? Why not decide for yourself? Issue with canon endings for me is that everyone just picks what the developers think is the right choice. If that were the case, every single playthrough would end up the same more or less.

You misread what I was writing, I was not advocating a canonised ending. In ME1 and ME2, most of the decisions you made were at least given lip service to or the results made fuzzy so that you could at least believe your choices are in effect (even if course of events did change minor things later).

The problem is ME3's endings are too divergent, too horribly wrong, to make a game that accomodates all four endings. How can you create a Mass Effect universe that has or doesn't have the any synthetics? We're talking about trivialising most technology in the game to the point that it's not mentioned in any narrative so that it doesn't impact the other ending alternatives too much. In another of the endings every known species is completely wiped out. How do you make a game that takes that into account? There's just no way. Even if you did, it wouldn't be Mass Effect anymore. FUBAR. So they canonise an ending. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying they torched the Mass Effect franchise with those endings in a desperate attempt at fame -- which has instead manifested itself as infamy and notoriety.

The problem is the endings are awful. There is no cohesive narrative, no logic, and no closure. Worst of all, they painted themselves into a corner; any game afterwards has no chance without them canonising an ending, choosing an ending for us, which makes the choice in ME3 completely irrelevant and insulting. To rub salt on the wound, they have this really frelled up affectation with the worst of the endings.

I can see why people get banned on these forums. It's easy to get caught up in the moment and tell Bioware exactly what you think of them. You know what? Bioware deserves it. Their willful stupidity on this subject earns any disrespect they get. The entire thing just makes me so angry.

Heh. Clearly this subject isn't a healthy one for me. Recognising that I think I'll bow out rather than damage this thread. I respect what you're doing, 3DandBeyond and you have my wholehearted support in your endeavours. I just can't divorce myself from my emotions on the matter no matter how much I try. This isn't to say that I forgive Bioware or that "I'll go away and not posting my dislike of the endings." No. I hate Bioware more than ever now with their refusal at changing the endings, what's changed is that I no longer see the point in trying to be constructive. Being vocal and nasty seems like the only thing they'll respond to and that's not the purpose of this thread so I'll continue it elsewhere.

The rift Bioware has created is between themselves and their customers simply too great, especially since they make no effort to bridge it.

The irony is how mild mannered I am. To see this vitriol spew out of me in this way is, well, shocking. It's testament to how badly Bioware has treated everyone with these fully intentional, terrible, agenda-serving endings.

Chris, Mac, Casey, here's my speculation for you. It's from the heart.

I'd appreciate your continued support here.  My main concern when I ask people (and try to remind myself as well) to not bash them too hard, is that I don't like to see people banned.  I do think that discussion cannot avoid criticism of anyone and my opinions aren't always right-I expect to be challenged.  As well, so should they.  If you say something or create something, the last thing you ever want is silence.  Criticism, even if harsh, can lead you to create something better.  And open debate can allow for the free flow of ideas that can help you.  It can also cause others to have to confront their opinions and see just what forms the foundation for them.  I don't expect anything here to change minds.  I merely hope that it can cause some sort of action.  Introspection.  This is one of the least used and yet one of the most constructive word I think that exists.  Along with stepping back and trying to view things unemotionally or even step into the picture from another person's POV can help you gain true perspective.  I believe BW needs to do this.  They should review all the things they've said and try to see how it could be interpreted.  How would they feel if this was how they as fans were treated?

What's most insulting to me is the things that are said and implied about fans who still do want something else, something good.  I've never advocated any harm to them.  But their detachment and twitter posts indicate what they think of me as a fan.  They see all of us who dislike the endings in one light and as one whole group of destructive crazies.  There have been tweets that indicate this.  If you are critical of a game ending, in their eyes it means you hate them as people.  This is childish.  I hate what they did to the game.  I truly dislike the stereotype they now have of me and those like me.  I don't hate them as people.  But their actions are another thing-hate, no, but I loathe being categorized.  This is one other thing I believe they need to take a real look at-how to win friends and influence people.

Bioware needs to form a personal relationship with fans.  And I don't mean at events because at those they are not trying to win over converts; they are preaching to the choir for the most part. 

I too am very mild-mannered.  I believe this is the perfect storm of a company creating a deficient product, a fan base that had finally had too much of it (with KOTOR, DA2, TOR, micro transactions and a lot of lies and false promises), and then the final insult of the war of words they waged against fans.  Yes, there were fans that were in the wrong, but not all fans.  And it didn't help with the pile on from IGN and other "review" sites.  There needs to be a big reset and only Bioware is in the position to do that.  They have the big stick, the voice that could bring this all back together for some common better thing. 

Fans can only ask that they be as introspective as we've tried to be.  We see the failings of those in our midst-we've admitted to that and even seen it in ourselves.  But again it's like we're talking to a wall.  Bioware cannot meet us halfway and say that they too did things wrong.  And I don't mean they have to say it.  I'd prefer that they show that they understand.  We as fans admit that others were destructive.  I can't apologize for them because I didn't agree with that and I didn't do that.  I can only say that I want a constructive dialogue, but all along all of us have just been talking to a wall and not real people.  If they truly don't want us to hate them they have to tear down the wall between us.  They have to want our money and they have to ask for it, not hype things to trick us into giving it away.  Think about what we've endured in just trying to keep being your customers. 

Personally, I've worked with cops who don't always parse their words when talking to you.  I've also worked with a lot of guys who could burn your ears off with the language they use, but I've never actually been called so many different things in such a short period of time and by such a wide variety of people as I have on this forum.  And those are the self-proclaimed lovers.  I'm no masochist.  I'm not spouting my opinions out of any demented notion-obsessed, perhaps.  But actually I'm more driven.  I believe in good things.  I believe in working toward redemption above all.  We all make mistakes.  We all do things we wish we never had.  But we can all try to change the dynamics.  It's what appealed to me in these games and what I think could be learned here, but it requires that both sides talk and agree to listen and mean it.

I truly don't want anyone driven out of this thread.  I just don't want people banned.  All opinions do need to be clearly and succinctly stated and truly listened to.

[3DandBeyond]

Xellith wrote...

They have already chosen synthesis as the canon ending.

ME3 with destroy ending - a few years later synthesis was attained anyhow. Now you have reaper corpses (maybe) lying around in the background and possible some destroyed reapers just lying around. No geth npcs. Oh and everyone is green.

ME3 with control ending - a few years later synthesis was attained anyhow. Now you have reapers walking around people walking around, geth are still around and everyone is green.

ME3 with synthesis ending - synthesis was attained. Now you have reapers walking around people walking around, geth are still around and everyone is green.

Well maybe, but if so then they do risk alienating an ever increasing group of fans.  Synthesis is reviled.  It's also mostly seen even by scientific types as idiotic as presented in ME3 and by the kid-as if it's something that one day will naturally occur.  But the kid says that because they (he and the reapers) know about it, it will happen.  That means that he now knows how to achieve it and one day will make it happen.  He does not mean it will happen naturally (but that may well be part of what some at BW think could happen, though again it couldn't).  If he means that one day he will make it happen, if you destroy the reapers and the kid, he can't do that.

Synthesis as a concept (what synthesis means) does occur in nature.  It's actually why we exist at all.  It's combining two or more things to make another new thing.  But it can't occur naturally that synthetic material (tech) will spotaneously one day just start being a part of organic DNA.  Scientists are exploring and have a proof of concept regarding synthetic DNA, but it isn't tech.  And they are working on nanotech at least partly for medical purposes, but this is not creating new DNA.  What could happen one day would be the accidental explosion into the population of some self-replicating nanite tech that could get into all people and then eventually end up in the food chain through waste dispersal and so on.  But, again this is not tech the creates true synthesis since nanotech is more like small (even if extremely small) implants.  They don't create new beings.  You'd have to create nanotech that alters DNA, but then again you'd have to create some type of tech that would completely bond with DNA to create new beings.  Any tech that remains outside of the genetic code is really just an implant.  I can ever foresee that there would be ways created where nanites could be expelled from the body just in case something went wrong.

The other problem is that so far nothing people create is without flaws.  These flaws may be exceptionally small details, but they exist.  Any tech created then would also be flawed.  Just look at the number of recalls on hip and knee implants right now and imagine someone finding a way to create DNA altering nanotech.  And then just look at the big error made recently in Boeing 757s-seats not bolted down.  What problems could there ever be in people creating tech one day that might fully integrate with our DNA to create new beings?  The fact that ME3 never explores just who created the tech that will be somehow sent out to all the galaxy is also a question. Who in the right mind would want some unknown tech to augment them in this way?  In real life or in the game.

[sdinc009]

magnetite wrote...

N7 Lisbeth wrote...
It's gotten bad enough that when Mac&Co try to force Synthesis as canon, everyone screams no way, not interested in your ME4 anymore.

Why do people have to rely on Bioware for a "canon" ending? Why not decide for yourself? Issue with canon endings for me is that everyone just picks what the developers think is the right choice. If that were the case, every single playthrough would end up the same more or less.

Mass Effect is about picking different choices and ultimately every story plays out differently. Kind of like that "fork in the road" thing. Unlike these "canon" storylines which more or less follow a singular path more or less.

Because Bioware is the architect of the series. Having the audience head canon an ending does not create an ending to the story, it's simply bad writing because it involves no writing at all. If I want to imagine a story I don't need to pay $$$ to do it, I can do that for free. Hold on... done, a whole story, characters and all now in my head. If you want to know what it is then send me $60, I'll set up the premise and you can then imagine the rest. Any takers? No, I WONDER WHY!? We payed for a story to be told not for 99% of a story and then to be told in the final scene to imagine your own ending because they were too damn lazy to create they're own. And that "fork in the road" thing is supposed to happen during the story (idealy in the Rising Action portion of the story arc) not in the end of the story, hense why it's in the "road" not in the "destintation". The only time a "fork in the road" situation can be used in an ending sequence is when it is CLEARLY being used to segway into the plot of the next story, typically used in either the first or second stories of a trilogy, but NEVER as the final. The end of a trilogy is meant to wrap everything up.

[3DandBeyond]

sdinc009 wrote...

magnetite wrote...

N7 Lisbeth wrote...
It's gotten bad enough that when Mac&Co try to force Synthesis as canon, everyone screams no way, not interested in your ME4 anymore.

Why do people have to rely on Bioware for a "canon" ending? Why not decide for yourself? Issue with canon endings for me is that everyone just picks what the developers think is the right choice. If that were the case, every single playthrough would end up the same more or less.

Mass Effect is about picking different choices and ultimately every story plays out differently. Kind of like that "fork in the road" thing. Unlike these "canon" storylines which more or less follow a singular path more or less.

Because Bioware is the architect of the series. Having the audience head canon an ending does not create an ending to the story, it's simply bad writing because it involves no writing at all. If I want to imagine a story I don't need to pay $$$ to do it, I can do that for free. Hold on... done, a whole story, characters and all now in my head. If you want to know what it is then send me $60, I'll set up the premise and you can then imagine the rest. Any takers? No, I WONDER WHY!? We payed for a story to be told not for 99% of a story and then to be told in the final scene to imagine your own ending because they were too damn lazy to create they're own. And that "fork in the road" thing is supposed to happen during the story (idealy in the Rising Action portion of the story arc) not in the end of the story, hense why it's in the "road" not in the "destintation". The only time a "fork in the road" situation can be used in an ending sequence is when it is CLEARLY being used to segway into the plot of the next story, typically used in either the first or second stories of a trilogy, but NEVER as the final. The end of a trilogy is meant to wrap everything up.

This is exactly the point-as the ending of a trilogy, ME3 was supposed to tie up all the dangling loose ends and not leave more.  Ambiguity is not an end, it's a cliff hanger.  There can be fun cliff hangers, but they generally feature an alive protagonist who is just realizing something.  I've seen this done where two people love each other but are constantly flung apart by things in life.  Maybe the protagonist even thinks his/her love interest is not so true or in love with him/her.  At the end that protagonist realizes s/he needs to run to find his/her LI.  It's about the POV of the story.  ME was told from Shepard's POV.  That means everything revolves around how Shepard sees it all.  We only have one instance where at some length the story is taken out of the perspective, when Joker takes over in ME2.  Other than that, we see everything as Shepard sees things.

At the end, Shepard's point of view is gone.  We have only one ending where there is a superficial narrative told by Shepard, but even that is not Shepard any longer.  The only Shepard lives ending is told from a diffferent perspective but that is not the important perspective.  It would have been more effective if it had been where someone sees a blur that gets brighter, from Shepard's point of view.  It could then have merely been a scene of a blurry figure reaching into the rubble-a blur that becomes more clear and is the LI.  And then a final overall scene of Shepard coming out of the rubble and all the teammates there to help.

That's just one thing.  It wouldn't solve everything-it doesn't make the choices any better, but it is at least something.  We have no idea of the fate of so many that we cared about-Shepard of course was the main one, but there are others.  ME3 should have tied all those loose ends up.

[darthoptimus003]

3DandBeyond wrote...

sdinc009 wrote...

magnetite wrote...

N7 Lisbeth wrote...
It's gotten bad enough that when Mac&Co try to force Synthesis as canon, everyone screams no way, not interested in your ME4 anymore.

Why do people have to rely on Bioware for a "canon" ending? Why not decide for yourself? Issue with canon endings for me is that everyone just picks what the developers think is the right choice. If that were the case, every single playthrough would end up the same more or less.

Mass Effect is about picking different choices and ultimately every story plays out differently. Kind of like that "fork in the road" thing. Unlike these "canon" storylines which more or less follow a singular path more or less.

Because Bioware is the architect of the series. Having the audience head canon an ending does not create an ending to the story, it's simply bad writing because it involves no writing at all. If I want to imagine a story I don't need to pay $$$ to do it, I can do that for free. Hold on... done, a whole story, characters and all now in my head. If you want to know what it is then send me $60, I'll set up the premise and you can then imagine the rest. Any takers? No, I WONDER WHY!? We payed for a story to be told not for 99% of a story and then to be told in the final scene to imagine your own ending because they were too damn lazy to create they're own. And that "fork in the road" thing is supposed to happen during the story (idealy in the Rising Action portion of the story arc) not in the end of the story, hense why it's in the "road" not in the "destintation". The only time a "fork in the road" situation can be used in an ending sequence is when it is CLEARLY being used to segway into the plot of the next story, typically used in either the first or second stories of a trilogy, but NEVER as the final. The end of a trilogy is meant to wrap everything up.

This is exactly the point-as the ending of a trilogy, ME3 was supposed to tie up all the dangling loose ends and not leave more.  Ambiguity is not an end, it's a cliff hanger.  There can be fun cliff hangers, but they generally feature an alive protagonist who is just realizing something.  I've seen this done where two people love each other but are constantly flung apart by things in life.  Maybe the protagonist even thinks his/her love interest is not so true or in love with him/her.  At the end that protagonist realizes s/he needs to run to find his/her LI.  It's about the POV of the story.  ME was told from Shepard's POV.  That means everything revolves around how Shepard sees it all.  We only have one instance where at some length the story is taken out of the perspective, when Joker takes over in ME2.  Other than that, we see everything as Shepard sees things.

At the end, Shepard's point of view is gone.  We have only one ending where there is a superficial narrative told by Shepard, but even that is not Shepard any longer.  The only Shepard lives ending is told from a diffferent perspective but that is not the important perspective.  It would have been more effective if it had been where someone sees a blur that gets brighter, from Shepard's point of view.  It could then have merely been a scene of a blurry figure reaching into the rubble-a blur that becomes more clear and is the LI.  And then a final overall scene of Shepard coming out of the rubble and all the teammates there to help.

That's just one thing.  It wouldn't solve everything-it doesn't make the choices any better, but it is at least something.  We have no idea of the fate of so many that we cared about-Shepard of course was the main one, but there are others.  ME3 should have tied all those loose ends up.

and this is why people are STILL mad after all this time because we DID NOT spend this money just to imagine what happens
we paid for a product that didnt deliver

[AJ2324]

Just want to add my voice to the very first post. Very well said.This is not to say I do not appreciate BioWare as a whole, but indeed this represents the strong feelings of many of us concerning the ending. This is a thread that should be paid attention to by BioWare.

[Xellith]

darthoptimus003 wrote...
and this is why people are STILL mad after all this time because we DID NOT spend this money just to imagine what happens
we paid for a product that didnt deliver

Never again.

[darthoptimus003]

sad part is that the 3 things that would fix all of this and people would pay for they wont do because it goes agianst there crap art
sucsessful refusal
destroy(high tms) destroy reapers only
reunion scene with shep and party
this would fix alot of the problems
right now we cant win the game without suicide,suicide,suicide&genocide
i dont know bout yall but i dont play games just to lose, i play to win
i sure as hell dont want to feel depressed after i finish a game.
i want happy. if i want depression id stay in the real world

[Unschuld]

Chris Priestly wrote...

futurepixels wrote...
How can you say that leaving the fate of your hero "up to the individual" is not open-ended and ambigious?

If he lives, he is alive and if he dies he is not. There are 2 interpretations of that breath. Either it is Shepard's first breath after recovering, or it is Shepard's last breath before dying.

Look, I hate to start things up for the sake of it, but this is just.... No. It doesn't make any sense.

There is no differing "interpretation" of the Shepard breath scene. There is NO NARRATIVE REASON for including a scene like that in a book/play/film/movie/story if it just means the character is dead unless the character is SHOWN TO DIE at the end of said scene. Otherwise, it's always meant as a symbol of hope that the hero is still alive. Period. That's the purpose  for this device. To suggest it's otherwise or use it otherwise just makes no sense whatsoever and is at best disengenuous or a complete misuse of the storytelling device.

Then again, this seems to be a growing trend in the ME franchise... Why am I even wasting my breath...

[inversevideo]

Chris is not messing with anyone. I believe he is simply sharing the current corporate direction with respect to that scene and Shepard. BW has stated that this is Shepard's final appearance. No changes to the ending.
It seems like BW is also not planning a resolution to the 'breathe' scene, it is apparently whatever you make of it. I take away from that, there will be no more Shepard appearances, in any DLC or story that thematically continues past the ending.

I think it stinks, to leave Shepard in rubble, but I do not see it changing.

The best I can hope for is that BW will listen to the feedback, everyone has provided, and use it when constructing the next story arc, or even stories in the DA series.

Modifié par inversevideo, 05 octobre 2012 - 06:16 .