338 réponses à ce sujet

[Yate]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

 

Yate wrote...



@ BioWare:

 But please, TALK TO US LIKE ADULTS. Explain why you made these endings, try and share the way you see it with us. I believe that you did your best to make a beautiful, meaningful ending for this series. We just want the same thing, and maybe if you'd open up this wall of hurtful silence you've been projecting ever since release the people here could see the endings the way you do.

 

Ask to Hudson and Walters, it´s only their creation not a whole team, otherwise I am surprise that you are saying from one hand that endings are beautiful and from the other hand you are asking for explanation of those endings... For me it looks like you didn´t get it.

Yate wrote...



Look, I get the decision to make it impossible to defeat the Reapers without the crucible. I agree with it, in fact. Anything else would've made the Reapers look too weak and/or stupid. But that's no reason to include Refusal. It's painfully obvious that everyone's hopes are on the crucible, and without it we lose. We get it. We don't need a fake ending to drive the point home.

For 98% of game you have no idea who built it, what it does, why the creators built 3 very weird kind of buttons which required bloody sacrifice instead of normal computer or panel, and only two guys which knew something more about Crucible are dishonest. Yet you are saying that the only hope is Crucible without knowing the nature of that structure.

Pretty much. *shrug* I'm not here to judge the rest of the game, I'm just saying that Refusal doesn't fit with everything we've been told and what we've seen Shepard do.

If freedom of choice is so important, then why is there no option to refuse to fight Saren? Or go after the Collectors? Because Shepard will do anything it takes to stop the Reapers, up to and including genocide of synthetics. There are some aspects of Shepard that are universal, and he/she would never walk away when the entire galaxy needs help.

[LucasShark]

I agree: at best, refuse is a cheap cave, at worst, it is a middle finger at the people who disliked the ending. Apparently so lazily done that one line of code to unlock an achievement wasn't included.

I do disagree with the endings being "a beautiful piece of work" but I would like to see some consistancey on that front from Bioware. IE: if they really were behind their "artistic vision" 100 percent, they would feel no need to justify it.

[Rex Fallout]

Yate wrote...

thearbiter1337 wrote...

I would rather say "**** you" to the Catalyst then pick those 3 endings

And if that were an actual viable option, sure. But it's not, it doesn't fit into the universe or Shepard's character.

For your shepard maybe.  Mine would have told him to F*** off.  And he did.  

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Oh there's a giant middle finger. But no it's not because Shep lost. But rather that he went down like a chump, there's a quick fade to black and via twitter canon we learn the next cycle derped and went along with starbrat anyway despite being told the crucible didn't work. 

That was the middle finger.

  

dis...

The fade-to-black is a mercy, unless you want me to believe you'd feel less offended by the presentation if they made you witness the horrific death of your character and everyone else in the galaxy. Somehow, I don't buy it.

And since when have we believed things Mike Gamble says on twitter that we don't want to believe? Why start?

[LucasShark]

yukon fire wrote...

Your just now learning that Bioware is petty and immature?

"Welcome to the party pal"

indeed.

[Applepie_Svk]

Yate wrote...

thearbiter1337 wrote...

Yate wrote...

thearbiter1337 wrote...

I would rather say "**** you" to the Catalyst then pick those 3 endings

And if that were an actual viable option, sure. But it's not, it doesn't fit into the universe or ShMass Effect 3 Story and Campaign Discussion (Spoilers Allowed)epard's character.

Well my Shep doesn't like spitting on the graves of Anderson,Saren,TIM,EDI, and Legion

So Shep lets everyone die? The entire galaxy is depending on Shep and Shep lets them down just to tell the catalyst where to shove it? After all Shep's done? No, it's completely OOC.

Shepard without knowlendge of metagamming should blindly believe words of the enemy ?

If the Crucible was only one thing which could solve the problem than please say me why Reapers just in last cycle had to sabotage the Prothean attempt via their agents ... just didn´t get it.

We get in the end nihilistic AI which doesn´t care for nothing more than fulfilling of own agenda, than why stopping the Protheans ?

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 12 septembre 2012 - 07:57 .

[Mcfly616]

I like refusal. It's not my first choice, but it was a pleasant surprise. I thought it was well done.

If you don't like it, you're always free to ignore it....

Modifié par Mcfly616, 12 septembre 2012 - 07:46 .

[ghost9191]

Mcfly616 wrote...

I like refusal. It's not my first choice, but it was a pleasant surprise. I thought it was well done.

If you don't like it, you're always free to ignore it....

LIES

You cannot , CANNOT ignore a completely optional choice

[Mcfly616]

ghost9191 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

I like refusal. It's not my first choice, but it was a pleasant surprise. I thought it was well done.

If you don't like it, you're always free to ignore it....

LIES

You cannot , CANNOT ignore a completely optional choice

lol

[Dragoonlordz]

Shepard Cmdr wrote...

Master Xanthan wrote...

Some people like refusal, though. It should be left in the game. Though what would be cool would be if they made it so that with a certain amount of EMS you can actually defeat the Reapers by choosing Refuse.

this, although it needs to be able to result in victory.

No it does not. It should stay as it is. Some people wanted a 'Reaper win the cycle' ending. That is their ending as much as it it the one you had decided to pick for other reasons.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 12 septembre 2012 - 07:59 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

What I find so insulting about Refusal is the way they did it. It's the shortest ending and it's absurd, Shepard wouldn't just stand there, he would call someone, Hackett, tell them to try to minimize the Reaper numbers for the next cycle or try to survive to the next cycle via stasis pods or something, but he wouldn't just stand there.

And why are people so offended when we propose a refusal win ending that would kill almost everyone, maybe even your squadmates, but a few in the galaxy will still survive, why is it so offensive?

[Sajuro]

LucasShark wrote...

I agree: at best, refuse is a cheap cave, at worst, it is a middle finger at the people who disliked the ending. Apparently so lazily done that one line of code to unlock an achievement wasn't included.

I do disagree with the endings being "a beautiful piece of work" but I would like to see some consistancey on that front from Bioware. IE: if they really were behind their "artistic vision" 100 percent, they would feel no need to justify it.

Refusing to use the weapon you spent 6 months building to save the current cycle is a big FU to common sense. You derp into refusing, then you deserve what you get. The only thing I would change is you have to shoot the Catalyst twice to get refusal that way, him warning you the first time.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Sajuro wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

I agree: at best, refuse is a cheap cave, at worst, it is a middle finger at the people who disliked the ending. Apparently so lazily done that one line of code to unlock an achievement wasn't included.

I do disagree with the endings being "a beautiful piece of work" but I would like to see some consistancey on that front from Bioware. IE: if they really were behind their "artistic vision" 100 percent, they would feel no need to justify it.

Refusing to use the weapon you spent 6 months building to save the current cycle is a big FU to common sense. You derp into refusing, then you deserve what you get. The only thing I would change is you have to shoot the Catalyst twice to get refusal that way, him warning you the first time.

And that justifies a black fade screen for an ending for a game spent 5 year playing?

[ghost9191]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

What I find so insulting about Refusal is the way they did it. It's the shortest ending and it's absurd, Shepard wouldn't just stand there, he would call someone, Hackett, tell them to try to minimize the Reaper numbers for the next cycle or try to survive to the next cycle via stasis pods or something, but he wouldn't just stand there.

And why are people so offended when we propose a refusal win ending that would kill almost everyone, maybe even your squadmates, but a few in the galaxy will still survive, why is it so offensive?

higher cost then destroy, not saying i get offended but its like just shoot the damn tube then . at least the cost is less

but i just feel that it would make the crucible pointless if they did a refusal ending, not saying i am not for it. just make crucible pointless. but i personally believe that the crucibles main function is destroy and the catalyst is preventing it from firing. hence blowing up the conduit in order to release its energy

but just having shepard standing there is like lul what. my shepard wouldn't just sit there. well at least i don't think so

Modifié par ghost9191, 12 septembre 2012 - 08:09 .

[Sajuro]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Sajuro wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

I agree: at best, refuse is a cheap cave, at worst, it is a middle finger at the people who disliked the ending. Apparently so lazily done that one line of code to unlock an achievement wasn't included.

I do disagree with the endings being "a beautiful piece of work" but I would like to see some consistancey on that front from Bioware. IE: if they really were behind their "artistic vision" 100 percent, they would feel no need to justify it.

Refusing to use the weapon you spent 6 months building to save the current cycle is a big FU to common sense. You derp into refusing, then you deserve what you get. The only thing I would change is you have to shoot the Catalyst twice to get refusal that way, him warning you the first time.

And that justifies a black fade screen for an ending for a game spent 5 year playing?

yep :3
Next time use some sense and pick one of the choices, or you could accept refuse as your Canon, but it ain't an FU if Bioware says you can't win without the crucible and enforce the consequence of your choice.

[Taboo]

To Refuse would be to fail, at least to my Shepard. To let everyone die is so absurd. He would sooner kill a billion to save ten billion that attempt to stand upon some false moral high ground. You have the chance to end it all. AT THIS TIME.

And if choose Destroy with a High EMS you can take responsibility for it. Why would you doom everyone in place of another? Control is also there. No one dies there.

[dirty console peasant]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Shepard Cmdr wrote...

Master Xanthan wrote...

Some people like refusal, though. It should be left in the game. Though what would be cool would be if they made it so that with a certain amount of EMS you can actually defeat the Reapers by choosing Refuse.

this, although it needs to be able to result in victory.

No it does not. It should stay as it is. Some people wanted a 'Reaper win the cycle' ending. That is their ending as much as it it the one you had decided to pick for other reasons.

it is actually a reapers win because I am an idiot ending, if the possibility for actual victory (not compromise with the enemy) also exists through refuse then it would be a valid "reapers win" ending.  As it stands now it is an "I am an idiot" ending.  However the method for victory should come from changing the backround project to a project to upgrade as many ships as possible to thanix weaponry.

[ghost9191]

Taboo-XX wrote...

To Refuse would be to fail, at least to my Shepard. To let everyone die is so absurd. He would sooner kill a billion to save ten billion that attempt to stand upon some false moral high ground. You have the chance to end it all. AT THIS TIME.

And if choose Destroy with a High EMS you can take responsibility for it. Why would you doom everyone in place of another? Control is also there. No one dies there.

except shepard

oh and sure that when the reapers are wiping out the entire galaxy everyone will feel great about shepards high moral standards, that is to the whole refuse thing

[Khajiit Jzargo]

ghost9191 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

What I find so insulting about Refusal is the way they did it. It's the shortest ending and it's absurd, Shepard wouldn't just stand there, he would call someone, Hackett, tell them to try to minimize the Reaper numbers for the next cycle or try to survive to the next cycle via stasis pods or something, but he wouldn't just stand there.

And why are people so offended when we propose a refusal win ending that would kill almost everyone, maybe even your squadmates, but a few in the galaxy will still survive, why is it so offensive?

higher cost then destroy, not saying i get offended but its like just shoot the damn tube then . at least the cost is less

but i just feel that it would make the crucible pointless if they did a refusal ending, not saying i am not for it. just make crucible pointless. but i personally believe that the crucibles main function is destroy and the catalyst is preventing it from firing. hence blowing up the conduit in order to release its energy

but just having shepard standing there is like lul what. my shepard wouldn't just sit there. well at least i don't think so

They could make it so it's extremely high EMS or something, and it wouldn't make the crucible pointless because it would mean almost the entire galaxy is wiped out but you barely win.  And I'm glad you agree, Shepard standing there is retarted to say the least.

[The Night Mammoth]

Sajuro wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

I agree: at best, refuse is a cheap cave, at worst, it is a middle finger at the people who disliked the ending. Apparently so lazily done that one line of code to unlock an achievement wasn't included.

I do disagree with the endings being "a beautiful piece of work" but I would like to see some consistancey on that front from Bioware. IE: if they really were behind their "artistic vision" 100 percent, they would feel no need to justify it.

Refusing to use the weapon you spent 6 months building to save the current cycle is a big FU to common sense. You derp into refusing, then you deserve what you get. The only thing I would change is you have to shoot the Catalyst twice to get refusal that way, him warning you the first time.

Woah woah woah.

There's no way it took that long. No way. 

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Sajuro wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Sajuro wrote...

LucasShark wrote...

I agree: at best, refuse is a cheap cave, at worst, it is a middle finger at the people who disliked the ending. Apparently so lazily done that one line of code to unlock an achievement wasn't included.

I do disagree with the endings being "a beautiful piece of work" but I would like to see some consistancey on that front from Bioware. IE: if they really were behind their "artistic vision" 100 percent, they would feel no need to justify it.

Refusing to use the weapon you spent 6 months building to save the current cycle is a big FU to common sense. You derp into refusing, then you deserve what you get. The only thing I would change is you have to shoot the Catalyst twice to get refusal that way, him warning you the first time.

And that justifies a black fade screen for an ending for a game spent 5 year playing?

yep :3
Next time use some sense and pick one of the choices, or you could accept refuse as your Canon, but it ain't an FU if Bioware says you can't win without the crucible and enforce the consequence of your choice.

So now I don't have sense? Okay, I see people aren't allow to make opinions that don't agree with yours. Also, I do accept the consequences, my question has nothing to do that, the matter of fact is, is completely unlike Shepard to stand there and just die, that's why it's an insult to the fans, it's like insulting a decision they themselve intergrated into the game.

[Taboo]

ghost9191 wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

To Refuse would be to fail, at least to my Shepard. To let everyone die is so absurd. He would sooner kill a billion to save ten billion that attempt to stand upon some false moral high ground. You have the chance to end it all. AT THIS TIME.

And if choose Destroy with a High EMS you can take responsibility for it. Why would you doom everyone in place of another? Control is also there. No one dies there.

except shepard

oh and sure that when the reapers are wiping out the entire galaxy everyone will feel great about shepards high moral standards, that is to the whole refuse thing

And worse yet he doesn't even tell them that he COULD have save ALL OF THEM. He ****s everyone over because he chokes.

If the Geth are dead you have no excuse.

If the enemy offered me something to beat them with I'd take it from his hands and beat him to death with it. That's why I find the the whole "It's the Reapers solution!" to be nonsense. Even if it was why not use it?

[ghost9191]

Shepard Cmdr wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Shepard Cmdr wrote...

Master Xanthan wrote...

Some people like refusal, though. It should be left in the game. Though what would be cool would be if they made it so that with a certain amount of EMS you can actually defeat the Reapers by choosing Refuse.

this, although it needs to be able to result in victory.

No it does not. It should stay as it is. Some people wanted a 'Reaper win the cycle' ending. That is their ending as much as it it the one you had decided to pick for other reasons.

it is actually a reapers win because I am an idiot ending, if the possibility for actual victory (not compromise with the enemy) also exists through refuse then it would be a valid "reapers win" ending.  As it stands now it is an "I am an idiot" ending.  However the method for victory should come from changing the backround project to a project to upgrade as many ships as possible to thanix weaponry.

yeah and if you really think about it. there is not a way to win conventionally, their ground forces are made from civillians and allied troops. they are quantity and quality on their side. best way to fight them is with hit and run tactics, trying to hit them at their weakest but that would only last for so long. and the allied races only have so many ships, there is no way to win a war of attrition. need some sort of wmd to beat them., which is what the crucible is

just saying that thinking about it, there is no way to beat the reapers conventionally, numbers are to great, and they can replenish them

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Taboo-XX wrote...

To Refuse would be to fail, at least to my Shepard. To let everyone die is so absurd. He would sooner kill a billion to save ten billion that attempt to stand upon some false moral high ground. You have the chance to end it all. AT THIS TIME.

And if choose Destroy with a High EMS you can take responsibility for it. Why would you doom everyone in place of another? Control is also there. No one dies there.

Meh, that can apply to everyone.
You say "Killing everyone because you won't kill a specific group because it's the right thing to do is right so I won't doom anybody" is ridicolous
Well I say this is a false moral high ground
"Killing a specific group just to make sure others live is right because it's the right thing to do so that someboy can live" 

Modifié par Khajiit Jzargo, 12 septembre 2012 - 08:21 .