338 réponses à ce sujet

[Khajiit Jzargo]

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.

You know what's also idiotic, believing that shooting a tube will somehow release energy that will synthetics, that jumping into a beam will release a new framework, and that grabbing two handles will allow you to control the Reapers, and you wanna know what makes is more moronic, the fact that your enemy tells you that.

[ghost9191]

Taboo-XX wrote...

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?

agreed , and i see the crucible as doing exactly what it was built for, destroy the reapers. or you get the other two options . but i don't care for the catalysts problem, see one enemy and i will do what is necessary to destroys them:devil:

[Pitznik]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

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 ?

Because Crucible forces on the Catalyst choices he wouldn't make himself, and that don't fulfill his goal.

[Baa Baa]

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.

This
x1000

[Taboo]

Khajiit Jzargo 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.

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" 

That isn't how war works. That's why people on this site can't get over the endings. You don't always get a choice to save everyone. You didn't have this choice on Virmire and you don't have the choice now.

People are angry because none of the choices offer a clear Paragon "Feel Good" Reaction. You can have that in the EC in each of the three proper endings. Bioware went out of their way to make them happy. Plus Shepard lives in Destroy.

They make you think about the consequences of war. The endings function on logic, not emotion. And that upsets people.

There is no clear right or wrong. You have to think.

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 12 septembre 2012 - 08:27 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

Is it true that choosing Refusal doesn't grant the Mission Accomplished achievement? Because that would be a little.. too explicit.

Modifié par Fiery Phoenix, 12 septembre 2012 - 08:29 .

[Taboo]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Is it true that choosing Refusal doesn't grant the Mission Accomplished achievement? Because that would be a little.. too explicit.

No it doesn't. Because you failed. Intentionally.

You didn't accomplish the mission. Another species does millions of years later.

[Adanu]

yukon fire wrote...

Your just now learning that Bioware is petty and immature?

"Welcome to the party pal"

Lemme guess, retaker?

[m2iCodeJockey]

Yate, there's a perspective:

If person fresh to ME plays games 1-3, the story is fresh in their mind.
The things that Ghostie says are not congruent with the actions of the Reapers so, there is no reason to trust it.

When I first arrived there, as soon as it said "I control the Reapers. They are my solution." I was looking for a way to kill that thing. Everything else looked like a distraction especially its circular reason for doing what it said it was doing.
I next began looking for another option by going the other way (and found some clipping flaws...)

Without meta-gaming, there is no reason to trust that thing so, it's alien for Shepard to not be able to tell it to 'get stuffed.'

There is a spot that was very 'FU': Calling to have the squad picked up in the middle of the battlefield, right in front of Harbinger, when "radio/self-guidance is not working" is the plot device of the previous sequence. It's REALLY alien.

[Village_Idiot]

Taboo-XX wrote...

There is no clear right or wrong. You have to think.

Interestingly, neither ME1 or ME2 had clear-cut "right or wrong" decisions at the climax either (metagaming aside). The difference lay in the tone of the ending more than anything, though admittedly a bloody suicide mission is comparable.

[drayfish]

Absolutely not. Snatching that ending away would be an even more hateful act than putting it in in the first place. (And would simply reveal it to be the petulent 'nyah-nyah' many suspect.)

For some fans (certainly myself) the Refuse ending is the only instance in which we see our Shepard flare back to life, re-emerging from out of the shuffling witless chump she was brow-beaten into being at the end. For one last moment she gets to rise, to tell the Catalyst (and Bioware directly) that their sick ethical no-win compromise can go to hell, and that we won't bow to terrorism.

(And let's not forget that at this moment in the narrative there is no reason at all to trust the leader of the Reapers... Accepting his vile bargain is pure metagaming anyway.)

That the Catalyst (and Bioware) goes on to decimate the universe based upon a vulgar lie of organic and synthetic conflict is on them. They may force Shepard to stand about like a goon, but the universe fought on, still cherishing what they believed and struggled for all along.

My Shepard fought for autonomy - that the will of the few should not be inflicted upon the many without their consent; that terrorism and slaughter were not valid methods of winning war. Refuse is currently the only way of preserving that belief and stopping a giant stamp of approval for war-crimes committed in the name of fear and hate in the Mass Effect universe, so I will take it.

You don't want to choose it, that's fine, you don't have to - but further limiting the already meagre choices we have just because you've decided it's not right for you is the height of selfishness.

Modifié par drayfish, 12 septembre 2012 - 08:39 .

[Bill Casey]

Taboo-XX wrote...

The endings function on logic, not emotion.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Ryzaki]

RiouHotaru wrote...

The thing is they weren't told WHY the Crucible didn't work. And since the next cycle has ALL the time they need to prepare, they could easily find out that the reason it didn't work was because someone didn't take action to make it work.

That they used the Crucible when you refused to doesn't make it bad writing.

You know what they do know works again the Reapers? Guns. Ships. Weapons.

Why on EARTH would any SANE THINKING species with a blatant headstart (remember the Asari found their Prothean beacon AGES ago. Those idiots just hogged it and the Protheans warnings weren't understandable) decided to use the MacGuffin that others said "welp we built it but it didn't work" rather than you know...those things that DID work but the people that died just didn't have enough of? 

That's terrible writing. It makes the next cycle almost as dumb as Shepard's cycle.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 12 septembre 2012 - 08:36 .

[thearbiter1337]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Is it true that choosing Refusal doesn't grant the Mission Accomplished achievement? Because that would be a little.. too explicit.

No it doesn't. Because you failed. Intentionally.

You didn't accomplish the mission. Another species does millions of years later.

Well 50,000 years 

Unless the Yahg derped and was like
"Well **** this Asari tells us it didn't work so should we maybe fix it?" 
"Nawl let's derp around and spend our **** on (Insert new Asari like race here) x (hanar like race....) vids "

[Taboo]

Bill Casey wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The endings function on logic, not emotion.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Let me Rephrase...

You have to think about the choice.

Not the Starchild's fallacious bull****. That is not logic.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

You don't always get a choice to save everyone. You didn't have this choice on Virmire and you don't have the choice now.

I know that, and I agree.

People are angry because none of the choices offer a clear Paragon "Feel Good" Reaction. You can have that in the EC in each of the three proper endings. Bioware went out of their way to make them happy. Plus Shepard lives in Destroy.

No, people aren't unhappy because it didn't offer" a clear paragod feel good ending" people are unhappy and angry because the endings don't make sense and completely undermines the entire trilogy, it's a horrible way to end it, to end it in a Deux Ex Machina. Also, Shepard hasn't been confirmed to be alive, Bioware has stated themselves they wanted to leave his fate ambiguously.

They make you think about the consequences of war. The endings function on logic, not emotion. And that upsets people.

More like the consequences of a giant kill switch, and actually they function on both. That's why people pick different endings, I though that was common knowledge.

There is no clear right or wrong. You have to think.

Then why do you say Refuse is wrong?

[M Hedonist]

This thread barely deserves any kind of response. But I'm feeling generous today.

[Baa Baa]

When some of your players prefer the "you lose" ending over your primary endings I think there's a problem.

[Ryzaki]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

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?

Actually I would've preferred it to be bittersweet. yes you show the cycle being reaped but you also show the next cycle winning...on their terms. THAT would've made it a worthy ending. What we got was a middle finger. (We also should see the Geth dying in destroy and Shep reunited with the crew if he/she's alive.) I have no problem with consequences I just want payoff. Refuse is currently all consequences with no payoff.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Bill Casey wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

The endings function on logic, not emotion.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Let me Rephrase...

You have to think about the choice.

Not the Starchild's fallacious bull****. That is not logic.

What are you trying to say? That I should ignore everything the catalyst is saying?

[Baa Baa]

Ryzaki wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

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?

Actually I would've preferred it to be bittersweet. yes you show the cycle being reaped but you also show the next cycle winning...on their terms. THAT would've made it a worthy ending. What we got was a middle finger. (We also should see the Geth dying in destroy and Shep reunited with the crew if he/she's alive.) I have no problem with consequences I just want payoff. Refuse is currently all consequences with no payoff.

Once again, I agree with you 100 percent

[m2iCodeJockey]

thearbiter1337 wrote...
"Nawl let's derp around and spend our **** on (Insert new Asari like race here) x (hanar like race....) vids "

"I think I have some of that. Lemme see..."

[ThaDPG]

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.

Actually, after being presented with those 3 morally ambiguous choices, I can see a full paragon Shepard  doing just that: refuse and find some other way to win

[Village_Idiot]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

What are you trying to say? That I should ignore everything the catalyst is saying?

More that the Catalyst presents a nonsensical argument. But then again, what the Catalyst says is immaterial. It's Shepard's decision that will have consequence, not the words of an AI.

Modifié par Shadrach 88, 12 septembre 2012 - 08:42 .