6432 réponses à ce sujet

[Had-to-say]

Great post.

[dreman9999]

LadyWench wrote...

MattFini wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

A successful refuse ending would render the entire plot irrelevant.

A successful refuse ending wouldn't invalidate the current endings any more than the current endings already invalidate the Geth/Quarian storyline forged over three games. 

A successful refuse ending would actually create a compelling plot twist; the Crucible was a sketchy reaper trap, and so we refused to fire it and won anyway. That's actually less sloppy than introducing the StarChild in the trilogy's last ten minutes.

Best of all?  Those of you who really like your pretentious solutions could STILL CHOOSE THEM!  

So much win in these statements. :happy: 100% agreed.

Do you understand how wrong he is? Destory dod not invalived te geth /quarian story line. The geth /quarian story line is a conflict based on morality. Both sides think they are right and nether wants to back down...More so the quarians. You bring logic to the conflict to stop it.

The destroy end is an issue of morality vs logic. Choosing it doesn't mean we can't coexsist with synthetics. People would pick it no matter what race it killed. Choosing it mean we a will to go to any lenghts to kill the reapers.

[avatar0]

Very good post.
The cynic in me feels this to be a lost cause, though.
Talking to Bioware about the ending is like talking to an indoctrinated ghoul...oh wait...

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

3DandBeyond wrote...

I want to appeal to Bioware, one last time to please reconsider all this.  The endings as they are ask many of us to do things we cannot in all good conscience do and so they ruin what has been the favorite game of all time for many of us.  Many of us have said this repeatedly-the endings are genocide, totalitarianism, and forced eugenics, along with suicide.

I mean this from the heart and I'm just asking, not demanding and merely stating my opinions and preferences.  I mean no insult to anyone, but though I am stating my opinions, I think many others share them.

What caused me to write is this: I have quite a few friends on my friend's list here (not saying this to be arrogant, just pointing something out), and no 2 people come from the same backgrounds or experiences or even very similar ones.  I am so lucky.  But, what it reminds me of is the lack of understanding and appreciation for the fans that Bioware somehow managed to get to love their games.  This is important.  It transcends many other things.  There are people from all over the globe and of all ages and of all political, religious, ethnic, racial, and sexual orientation and alignment.  There are people who have had trouble in life who love(d) these games.  And there are people that have loved a good story, writers, literary critics, literary professors, and just plain folks who have loved these games.  What Bioware had was gold.  I'd say it's due to the heart that the games had.  It was the idea that no matter how bad things got in the game, there was a way to overcome it.  The games reinforced what people would like to be in their real lives-the hero and even the superhero.  This has been squandered for a CoD-like experience. 

Well, I'll repeat what I've said before, if I wanted a CoD-type SP and MP game, I'd play CoD games.  If I want a huge story based game with not so fully developed characters, I'd play Bethesda games.  But, if I want a story that allows me to be in it and to show my character has a heart or is a ruthless renegade, I'd go for ME every time.  And, more than anything, even given all the other unfinished games I have, I'd pick ME and a new Shepard every time over them.

But these endings made me hate ME, not because the games are bad and not because ME3 is bad.  It has some of the, no it has the most poignant moments of any game I've ever played and some of the most of any movie or book I've ever read.  Tuchanka and Mordin get me every time.  But, as someone whose lived a lot of life so far and whose parents served in the Canadian military in WWII, whose uncle was under age and lied about it to fight against the things that this game's endings force me to decide between, I don't feel the heart of ME at the end of ME3.  I'm sorry, but it does come down to being forced into genocide, totalitarianism, or forced eugenics on an uninformed galaxy.  It's a game.  This isn't uplifting or fun.  Why can't you talk about this and let us in on what you were going for, if not this?  If you were trying to make a political statement or a religious one, why do it here?  Let us play and finish the game.

My appeal is this: pay attention to the DLC people are begging you to create and sense the theme there.  Sure, you're free to run your company as you wish, but you asked for all this.  You made us care and then you dropped us like radioactive sludge.  Funny thing is, you misunderstand us still.  You don't get it that we still do care.  We still are asking for an ME4 but can't see it if you do nothing to fix this ME.  People are asking you for reunion DLC and ME2 squadmates' DLC and more romance DLC.  Go back and look at youtube vids prior to the ME3 ending debacle.  Most of them centered on the characters and all that they were doing.  There weren't a lot of "look at my new cool gun" videos-they were "full dialogue and romance between Liara and Shepard" and "romancing Tali" and "Garrus, my bro".  It was more about Mordin's sacrifice than it was about coolness.  And the requests for Omega DLC-what are people asking for with that?  More time with Aria.  Why do people care about Omega?  It's not because it's beautiful-it was Bladerunner dark.  It's because of Aria and Patriarch and so on.  Please understand this.

In making Shepard choose those current endings and not giving people one truly satisfying ending that is the result of people truly uniting and lifting themselves up, you have ruined Shepard for many of us.  In leaving Shepard in a heap in the only possible way for Shepard to live, after committing an unconscionable act, you are seeming to show disdain for fans and for Shepard.  In adding refuse, which has the true Shepard back again, you are proving that people are just plainly incompetent and will fail.  Please share with us what you mean by all this.  It's not fun.

I don't hate you, but I've been called a hater, a whiner, a complainer, and worse.  I'm a human being with feelings and ME appealed to my feelings.  I loved it and loved you for creating it.  I do hate what you did to it.  I hate what you seem to be saying about the aspirations, goals, and the ideals of people.  You seem to be saying that people will always only ever choose the easy way out, even if this includes ruining all that they hold dear to get it.  I truly wish you had chosen someone without depression issues to write ME3's ending.

What I wish you would do is use DLC to add onto the endings to make one ending that will achieve the goal of destroying the reapers, viable and attainable.  Along with that, I wish you would make it possible for Shepard to be alive in the end and have a true, even if quick reunion with friends and LI, and cutscenes, an epilogue of Shepard helping in the unity needed for rebuilding and for the galaxy to get its heart and soul back again after the reapers nearly destroyed all that.  I wish you would consider an ME4, not connected to ME3 with characters and story and such, but one that would refer to the events of ME3 and reapers and Shepard from time to time.  In short, I wish you would consider continuing to make these kinds of games and not go for Call of Duty:ME or just single games-you have a unique type of game and what I think you need is to better balance action and story.  Don't abandon the truly wonderful thing you have created, but don't underestimate the strength of the simpler story and resolution.  You don't have to try to be Kubrick or to look for "art", you had it in the game itself in the stories and in the characters.  You needed to work more with that and not throw everything into the ending and call it art.

I wish you would further consider those requests for post-ME3 DLC for those who want it (and I think there would be many) for reunions and the like.  Consider it.  I think you are missing out on the cash cow that you could have had by not adhering to the world you created.  Play your own games and see what they say and talk to people here.

I know this is all water under the bridge, but Bioware still does have a chance with DLC.  And to stave off complaints from those who would get made about having to pay for it, maybe they could release one last patch for free that wouldn't contain the story content of the DLC, but that would allow those that want it to get the additional dialogue, cutscenes, and EMS to get the "final" endings.  I'd either like to see the Puzzle Theory or my own similar theory be correct, but just anything that results in a possible win ending that would make the game fun again.

I understand this would mean you'd have to change your minds again, but I consider it "doing the right thing".  It wouldn't have to be something everyone would be forced into playing or having, but it would just exist for those that want it.  Games and stories that have always shown people trying to rise above and do better, should have endings that reflect that and reward that.  Please.

Thank you for writing this.  You captured the passion of the fans who really care about these characters.

[Warrior Craess]

saracen16 wrote...

And by "doing the right thing", you will force your demands on everyone who plays the game, and that makes you no better than the Shepard who imposes his will on the galaxy. However, the latter, Shepard, has no choice in that matter, but you do. Your parents in the military would understand that there is no easy way out. Never. The story's ending choices do not advocate any of the choices as a valid course of action for humanity. They only add to debate within the universe. Science fiction is greater for exploring these issues philosophically, as these are the hard questions that will haunt humankind in the years to come.

You realise that the DLC would be optional right?  Nothing is written in stone that everyone "must" get it. 

[3DandBeyond]

clennon8 wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@3DAndBeyond:
While I feel with you and regret that you cannot take anything satisfying away from the ME series any more, and as a rule I'm always open to new options, I cannot support your plea. Why? Because what you want is an ending with no downside. No, I am not against those as a rule, but in this case, the ending you want would be perceived as canon and immediately invalidate all others in the eyes of a majority. It would unbalance the whole scenario and I know I would dislike that as much as I did the original endings.

What would you want to sacrifice to make this new option balanced with the others?

You are deliriously happy with Synthesis and are on record as saying that you would still pick it even if Destroy had absolutely no drawbacks.  So I'm just going to continue not taking you seriously.

This is another attempt to imply all anyone wants is bunnies and rainbows with no consequences.  In fact, a better ending should be hard to get.  I've always said that.  I've even said that a truly sacrificial bittersweet should exist, but doesn't.  There are downsides that exist already.  The galaxy is a total mess as it should be for a war of this scale.  The fact that the current endings don't reflect that is part of the craziness of the endings.  Everything's so easily rebuilt, and the sun will come out tomorrow, with sappy cutscenes.  That is why part of my vision of things had to do with the rebuilding aftermath.  Anyone that thinks that people will just skip hand in hand together as they try to dig their way back to normalcy is deluded by the game's "epilogue".

You want downsides how about this:
Palaven burning
Thessia almost totally destroyed
Billions in this cycle made into goo or dead-how many Einsteins, Hawkings, Mother Theresas, and Sharon Osbournes were lost?
Trillions of those in past cycles gone forever
The Batarians decimated (ok, many don't like them, but we don't really know them)
Mordin dead
Thane dead
Legion dead

Samara lost another daughter and the refuge for the other is all but destroyed
Shepard died once
TIM, no matter what he became he was once a hero, dead
Anderson, dead
Earth in ruins-it likely took the brunt of it since humans were the target
Horizon destroyed
Eden Prime destroyed
Other outlying colonies-wiped out

The whole basis for the advancement and knowledge of people is in question-how much of it based on any real independent thought and how much on reaper tech?
The galaxy brought down to the equivalent of its infancy-people given self-determination and reliance, must learn on their own, find their own way.

And more.
Sacrifice has happened, already and is only done when it is for something-the greater good.  In capitulating with the foe the greater good does not exist so sacrificed is pointless suicide.  Why fight to keep an enemy from getting something that in the next minute you will just hand over freely?  And what I see is choices that are not gifts being given by Shepard dying or by killing others, they are chains being placed on the galaxy-chains they may never be rid of.

[MattFini]

dreman9999 wrote...

]Do you understand how wrong he is? Destory dod not invalived te geth /quarian story line. The geth /quarian story line is a conflict based on morality. Both sides think they are right and nether wants to back down...More so the quarians. You bring logic to the conflict to stop it.

The destroy end is an issue of morality vs logic. Choosing it doesn't mean we can't coexsist with synthetics. People would pick it no matter what race it killed. Choosing it mean we a will to go to any lenghts to kill the reapers.

I'm not really talking about the morality specific to Destory.

I'm talking about the revelation that the entire ME trilogy suddenly becomes about "organics vs synthetics" before the three options are even presented to you. 

[dreman9999]

Xellith wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, Sorry but I'm not. The very concept of ME is to question what lenghts the player would go to stop the reapers. It was never to give the player option they would like to do.
Did anyone really wanted to abandon a team mate to their death in ME1 orsacrific ether the council or the live of the alliace fleet.
The first game was  advertied as a game where you had to make hard choices...
 
How does the ending choice counter this? It was never stated we get to pick what the choices were.

Are you ****ing kidding me?

"Did anyone really wanted to abandon a team mate to their death in ME1?"  I always find that decison the most difficult. I always have to ask myself "which one do I like the least?  Why cant I kill them both?"  Really. I dont like Ash or Kaidan. I would gladly sacrifice them both in that mission if the option arose.  But since I can only kill one of them I always kill Kaidan.  Just so I can screw Ash.

"Or sacrfice either the council or the live of the alliance fleet".  Wasnt a hard choice.  Sent in the Alliance.  We wanted to protect the galaxy and now is their chance.

"The first game was advertied as a game where you had to make hard choices..." they lied.

The hardest choice I ever had to make was whether to rewrite the geth or not.

The geth choice is still an example of a hard choice I'm pointed out. Just because the other choices were not hard for you does not mean they were not hard choices to pick. Meny people felt they were.
Bring up the fact that you found the geth choice in ME2 hard provens my point on the theme of Mass effect.

[ATiBotka]

Xellith wrote...

ATiBotka wrote...

jules_vern18 wrote...

...And they also said that they wouldn't change the endings before the EC, after which they retconned major plot points and provided us with a 4th option. 

I'ts not an option. I'ts suicide.

And the other options arnt suicide?

Galaxy wide suicide?

[dreman9999]

MattFini wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

]Do you understand how wrong he is? Destory dod not invalived te geth /quarian story line. The geth /quarian story line is a conflict based on morality. Both sides think they are right and nether wants to back down...More so the quarians. You bring logic to the conflict to stop it.

The destroy end is an issue of morality vs logic. Choosing it doesn't mean we can't coexsist with synthetics. People would pick it no matter what race it killed. Choosing it mean we a will to go to any lenghts to kill the reapers.

I'm not really talking about the morality specific to Destory.

I'm talking about the revelation that the entire ME trilogy suddenly becomes about "organics vs synthetics" before the three options are even presented to you. 

So ME is not about stopping a race of machines that are invading the galexy?

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

Kel Riever wrote...

You don't have to accept anything at all.

BioWare purposely not changing the ending, preferring to stick to atrocious rather than change their minds and do something worthwhile...that's on them. Accepting it is on you.

There's a whole lot of entertainment to be had out of not accepting something that is awful. More, in fact, than what happens once the glowy child starts talking nonsense.

Well said.  Also, ultimately, BioWare will accept these suggestions.  There is too much money not to do it.  And the current state of the franchise's value will compel BioWare to address this segment of its customer base.

[WhiteKnyght]

3DandBeyond wrote...

I want to appeal to Bioware, one last time to please reconsider all this.  The endings as they are ask many of us to do things we cannot in all good conscience do and so they ruin what has been the favorite game of all time for many of us.  Many of us have said this repeatedly-the endings are genocide, totalitarianism, and forced eugenics, along with suicide.

I mean this from the heart and I'm just asking, not demanding and merely stating my opinions and preferences.  I mean no insult to anyone, but though I am stating my opinions, I think many others share them.

What caused me to write is this: I have quite a few friends on my friend's list here (not saying this to be arrogant, just pointing something out), and no 2 people come from the same backgrounds or experiences or even very similar ones.  I am so lucky.  But, what it reminds me of is the lack of understanding and appreciation for the fans that Bioware somehow managed to get to love their games.  This is important.  It transcends many other things.  There are people from all over the globe and of all ages and of all political, religious, ethnic, racial, and sexual orientation and alignment.  There are people who have had trouble in life who love(d) these games.  And there are people that have loved a good story, writers, literary critics, literary professors, and just plain folks who have loved these games.  What Bioware had was gold.  I'd say it's due to the heart that the games had.  It was the idea that no matter how bad things got in the game, there was a way to overcome it.  The games reinforced what people would like to be in their real lives-the hero and even the superhero.  This has been squandered for a CoD-like experience. 

Well, I'll repeat what I've said before, if I wanted a CoD-type SP and MP game, I'd play CoD games.  If I want a huge story based game with not so fully developed characters, I'd play Bethesda games.  But, if I want a story that allows me to be in it and to show my character has a heart or is a ruthless renegade, I'd go for ME every time.  And, more than anything, even given all the other unfinished games I have, I'd pick ME and a new Shepard every time over them.

But these endings made me hate ME, not because the games are bad and not because ME3 is bad.  It has some of the, no it has the most poignant moments of any game I've ever played and some of the most of any movie or book I've ever read.  Tuchanka and Mordin get me every time.  But, as someone whose lived a lot of life so far and whose parents served in the Canadian military in WWII, whose uncle was under age and lied about it to fight against the things that this game's endings force me to decide between, I don't feel the heart of ME at the end of ME3.  I'm sorry, but it does come down to being forced into genocide, totalitarianism, or forced eugenics on an uninformed galaxy.  It's a game.  This isn't uplifting or fun.  Why can't you talk about this and let us in on what you were going for, if not this?  If you were trying to make a political statement or a religious one, why do it here?  Let us play and finish the game.

My appeal is this: pay attention to the DLC people are begging you to create and sense the theme there.  Sure, you're free to run your company as you wish, but you asked for all this.  You made us care and then you dropped us like radioactive sludge.  Funny thing is, you misunderstand us still.  You don't get it that we still do care.  We still are asking for an ME4 but can't see it if you do nothing to fix this ME.  People are asking you for reunion DLC and ME2 squadmates' DLC and more romance DLC.  Go back and look at youtube vids prior to the ME3 ending debacle.  Most of them centered on the characters and all that they were doing.  There weren't a lot of "look at my new cool gun" videos-they were "full dialogue and romance between Liara and Shepard" and "romancing Tali" and "Garrus, my bro".  It was more about Mordin's sacrifice than it was about coolness.  And the requests for Omega DLC-what are people asking for with that?  More time with Aria.  Why do people care about Omega?  It's not because it's beautiful-it was Bladerunner dark.  It's because of Aria and Patriarch and so on.  Please understand this.

In making Shepard choose those current endings and not giving people one truly satisfying ending that is the result of people truly uniting and lifting themselves up, you have ruined Shepard for many of us.  In leaving Shepard in a heap in the only possible way for Shepard to live, after committing an unconscionable act, you are seeming to show disdain for fans and for Shepard.  In adding refuse, which has the true Shepard back again, you are proving that people are just plainly incompetent and will fail.  Please share with us what you mean by all this.  It's not fun.

I don't hate you, but I've been called a hater, a whiner, a complainer, and worse.  I'm a human being with feelings and ME appealed to my feelings.  I loved it and loved you for creating it.  I do hate what you did to it.  I hate what you seem to be saying about the aspirations, goals, and the ideals of people.  You seem to be saying that people will always only ever choose the easy way out, even if this includes ruining all that they hold dear to get it.  I truly wish you had chosen someone without depression issues to write ME3's ending.

What I wish you would do is use DLC to add onto the endings to make one ending that will achieve the goal of destroying the reapers, viable and attainable.  Along with that, I wish you would make it possible for Shepard to be alive in the end and have a true, even if quick reunion with friends and LI, and cutscenes, an epilogue of Shepard helping in the unity needed for rebuilding and for the galaxy to get its heart and soul back again after the reapers nearly destroyed all that.  I wish you would consider an ME4, not connected to ME3 with characters and story and such, but one that would refer to the events of ME3 and reapers and Shepard from time to time.  In short, I wish you would consider continuing to make these kinds of games and not go for Call of Duty:ME or just single games-you have a unique type of game and what I think you need is to better balance action and story.  Don't abandon the truly wonderful thing you have created, but don't underestimate the strength of the simpler story and resolution.  You don't have to try to be Kubrick or to look for "art", you had it in the game itself in the stories and in the characters.  You needed to work more with that and not throw everything into the ending and call it art.

I wish you would further consider those requests for post-ME3 DLC for those who want it (and I think there would be many) for reunions and the like.  Consider it.  I think you are missing out on the cash cow that you could have had by not adhering to the world you created.  Play your own games and see what they say and talk to people here.

I know this is all water under the bridge, but Bioware still does have a chance with DLC.  And to stave off complaints from those who would get made about having to pay for it, maybe they could release one last patch for free that wouldn't contain the story content of the DLC, but that would allow those that want it to get the additional dialogue, cutscenes, and EMS to get the "final" endings.  I'd either like to see the Puzzle Theory or my own similar theory be correct, but just anything that results in a possible win ending that would make the game fun again.

I understand this would mean you'd have to change your minds again, but I consider it "doing the right thing".  It wouldn't have to be something everyone would be forced into playing or having, but it would just exist for those that want it.  Games and stories that have always shown people trying to rise above and do better, should have endings that reflect that and reward that.  Please.

One last plea - get over it!

Mass Effect always has hard moralistic choices.  You're just upset because it doesn't have some perfect fantasy ending where everybody turns out all right and has a happily ever after.

In war, there are sacrifices. Destroy requires you to sacrifice all synthetics in order to destroy the Reapers, Control has you become as close to a god as humanly possible to use the Reapers for good, and Synthesis just requires you sacrifice yourself to create a utopia for the galactic community.

And refusing to use the Crucible at all is a guaranteed loss.

[AresKeith]

ATiBotka wrote...

Xellith wrote...

ATiBotka wrote...

jules_vern18 wrote...

...And they also said that they wouldn't change the endings before the EC, after which they retconned major plot points and provided us with a 4th option. 

I'ts not an option. I'ts suicide.

And the other options arnt suicide?

Galaxy wide suicide?

Synthesis is a forced Galaxy changed so pretty much yea

[LadyWench]

dreman9999 wrote...

LadyWench wrote...

MattFini wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

A successful refuse ending would render the entire plot irrelevant.

A successful refuse ending wouldn't invalidate the current endings any more than the current endings already invalidate the Geth/Quarian storyline forged over three games. 

A successful refuse ending would actually create a compelling plot twist; the Crucible was a sketchy reaper trap, and so we refused to fire it and won anyway. That's actually less sloppy than introducing the StarChild in the trilogy's last ten minutes.

Best of all?  Those of you who really like your pretentious solutions could STILL CHOOSE THEM!  

So much win in these statements. :happy: 100% agreed.

Do you understand how wrong he is? Destory dod not invalived te geth /quarian story line. The geth /quarian story line is a conflict based on morality. Both sides think they are right and nether wants to back down...More so the quarians. You bring logic to the conflict to stop it.

The destroy end is an issue of morality vs logic. Choosing it doesn't mean we can't coexsist with synthetics. People would pick it no matter what race it killed. Choosing it mean we a will to go to any lenghts to kill the reapers.

*sigh* He said "the current endings," (meaning ALL of them, thematically and plotwise, as they are presented) not just the Destroy ending. That is completely different from how you are interpreting and then arguing it.

Modifié par LadyWench, 30 août 2012 - 05:36 .

[ioannisdenton]

EA = electronic ARTS
ART ,get it???

[Binary_Helix 1]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@3DAndBeyond:
While I feel with you and regret that you cannot take anything satisfying away from the ME series any more, and as a rule I'm always open to new options, I cannot support your plea. Why? Because what you want is an ending with no downside. No, I am not against those as a rule, but in this case, the ending you want would be perceived as canon and immediately invalidate all others in the eyes of a majority. It would unbalance the whole scenario and I know I would dislike that as much as I did the original endings.

What would you want to sacrifice to make this new option balanced with the others?

What is it with this fixation on death and destruction? I'm aware it's a war but it seems like many people here and at Bioware live very comfortable lives in suburbia where something dark and depressing is meaningful where as something good isn't.

At any rate I always assumed the final choice would come down to sacrificing Earth or the Citadel where important characters, factions, current and former squadmates, plus billions of people,  would be split evenly amongst the two.

Modifié par Binary_Helix 1, 30 août 2012 - 05:36 .

[ATiBotka]

AresKeith wrote...

Synthesis is a forced Galaxy changed so pretty much yea

So in Synthesis everyone dies?

[MattFini]

dreman9999 wrote...

So ME is not about stopping a race of machines that are invading the galexy?

Yeah.  That's the underlying conflict of the series.  I never said it wasn't.

But "stopping a race of machines that are invading the galaxy" isn't a theme.  

The theme of the ME trilogy on the whole was consistently "victory through diveristy" more than it was ever "organics vs. synthetics".

In your final dialogues with StarChild, however, the game suddenly asks us to swallow that this was always the theme.  And that synthetics will always destory og- blah blah blah, you get the idea.

And refusing to use the crucible, and beating the reapers with a 100% united galaxy would be more fitting to the overall theme of the trilogy. That's parlty why everything about StarChild rubs people the wrong way. 

[dreman9999]

LadyWench wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

LadyWench wrote...

MattFini wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

A successful refuse ending would render the entire plot irrelevant.

A successful refuse ending wouldn't invalidate the current endings any more than the current endings already invalidate the Geth/Quarian storyline forged over three games. 

A successful refuse ending would actually create a compelling plot twist; the Crucible was a sketchy reaper trap, and so we refused to fire it and won anyway. That's actually less sloppy than introducing the StarChild in the trilogy's last ten minutes.

Best of all?  Those of you who really like your pretentious solutions could STILL CHOOSE THEM!  

So much win in these statements. :happy: 100% agreed.

Do you understand how wrong he is? Destory dod not invalived te geth /quarian story line. The geth /quarian story line is a conflict based on morality. Both sides think they are right and nether wants to back down...More so the quarians. You bring logic to the conflict to stop it.

The destroy end is an issue of morality vs logic. Choosing it doesn't mean we can't coexsist with synthetics. People would pick it no matter what race it killed. Choosing it mean we a will to go to any lenghts to kill the reapers.

*sigh* He said "the endings," not the Destroy ending. That is completely different from how you are interpreting and then arguing it.

How does control and synthsis choice even begin to invalidate the geth /quarian choice? 

[Kel Riever]

There is a difference between a not happy ending and awful writing.

The problem with ME3 ending(s) is awful writing. And once you get through the awful writing, you could then accuse them of being dumb for not having a happy ending option.

But if they had non-stupid faux choices, with p*ss poor writing, and a pure lack of paying attention to their own story, even within the story of ME3, even if the endings were not happy endings, they would have been well received. They are not.

The endings suck. And not because they might be considered just unhappy.

[MattFini]

LadyWench wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

LadyWench wrote...

MattFini wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

A successful refuse ending would render the entire plot irrelevant.

A successful refuse ending wouldn't invalidate the current endings any more than the current endings already invalidate the Geth/Quarian storyline forged over three games. 

A successful refuse ending would actually create a compelling plot twist; the Crucible was a sketchy reaper trap, and so we refused to fire it and won anyway. That's actually less sloppy than introducing the StarChild in the trilogy's last ten minutes.

Best of all?  Those of you who really like your pretentious solutions could STILL CHOOSE THEM!  

So much win in these statements. :happy: 100% agreed.

Do you understand how wrong he is? Destory dod not invalived te geth /quarian story line. The geth /quarian story line is a conflict based on morality. Both sides think they are right and nether wants to back down...More so the quarians. You bring logic to the conflict to stop it.

The destroy end is an issue of morality vs logic. Choosing it doesn't mean we can't coexsist with synthetics. People would pick it no matter what race it killed. Choosing it mean we a will to go to any lenghts to kill the reapers.

*sigh* He said "the current endings," (meaning ALL of them, thematically and plotwise, as they are presented) not just the Destroy ending. That is completely different from how you are interpreting and then arguing it.

Thank you! 

[Benchpress610]

3D, this is one of the most eloquent and well thought-out posts I’ve read from you (and you’ve had many). I’m glad you decided to open this thread. You have my complete and unwavering support. …BioWare, do the right thing…

[AlanC9]

dreman9999 wrote...

The destroy end is an issue of morality vs logic. Choosing it doesn't mean we can't coexsist with synthetics. People would pick it no matter what race it killed. Choosing it mean we a will to go to any lenghts to kill the reapers.

Thought experiment: Destroy works differently. It only kills Reapers. However, the uncontrolled energy release causes the Citadel relay to detonate. Earth and 80-90% of the human race are wiped out, along with Wrex and a bunch of the ME2 squadmates. Normandy and the rest of the fleets FTL out and are safe.

Do people still pick it?

Modifié par AlanC9, 30 août 2012 - 05:42 .

[Memnon]

Great post - and while I would love to see BW rework the endings, I'm at the point where I feel like it is unsalvageable for me. The more content they add, the more they just double down on how ludicrous the Catalyst and his creators are. I despised the 3 RGB choices provided by the Catalyst - despised them. I hated the Catalyst himself almost as much - I don't see anything they could do at this point that would rekindle my interest, as those two components are integral to the story now. And that's a shame, because this is one of my favorite franchises ever ...

[Xellith]

dreman9999 wrote...

Xellith wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No, Sorry but I'm not. The very concept of ME is to question what lenghts the player would go to stop the reapers. It was never to give the player option they would like to do.
Did anyone really wanted to abandon a team mate to their death in ME1 orsacrific ether the council or the live of the alliace fleet.
The first game was  advertied as a game where you had to make hard choices...
 
How does the ending choice counter this? It was never stated we get to pick what the choices were.

Are you ****ing kidding me?

"Did anyone really wanted to abandon a team mate to their death in ME1?"  I always find that decison the most difficult. I always have to ask myself "which one do I like the least?  Why cant I kill them both?"  Really. I dont like Ash or Kaidan. I would gladly sacrifice them both in that mission if the option arose.  But since I can only kill one of them I always kill Kaidan.  Just so I can screw Ash.

"Or sacrfice either the council or the live of the alliance fleet".  Wasnt a hard choice.  Sent in the Alliance.  We wanted to protect the galaxy and now is their chance.

"The first game was advertied as a game where you had to make hard choices..." they lied.

The hardest choice I ever had to make was whether to rewrite the geth or not.

The geth choice is still an example of a hard choice I'm pointed out. Just because the other choices were not hard for you does not mean they were not hard choices to pick. Meny people felt they were.
Bring up the fact that you found the geth choice in ME2 hard provens my point on the theme of Mass effect.

One instance in an entire trilogy = thats the theme?

Therefore every other game in the world that has a choice = thats the theme also?