378 réponses à ce sujet

[Ozida]

"Disney" = 100% happy? Hm, let me think...

The Lion King - Father of a little child dies in front of his eyes in a terrible accident. The child gets thrown out of his pride full of false guilt and later finds out that his own uncle betrayed him. His mother is being tortured, and he has to kill his own uncle for revenge.

Pocahontas – A young woman is forced to an unwanted marriage when she suddenly meets a man of her dreams. Her fiancé gets killed in front of her because of jealousy and her lover is to be now executed to death. During a conflict he gets shot and has to leave back to England, leaving his lover behind, possible never seeing her again.

The Fox and The Hound – Mother tries to save her baby from a killer, but gets shot. A little baby meets a very good friend; however, when both grow up, one of the friends has to kill another for the pleasure of his
owner. After a fight, they leave in piece, but can never be friends again.

Bambi – should I even go there?..

Now, the morale: do you see a difference between a bitter-sweet ending and dark, gloomy ending? Protagonist usually goes through tough loses, hard battles, sometimes even embarrassing things, and in the end, although he wins, he carries wounds and scars. In The Lion King Simba is looking up to his father he will never see again. He is now fully responsible for wellness of his family, although he fooled around of most of his life with two reckless friends. In Pocahontas both characters are alive, but their love is most likely to end. Pocahontas will marry another tribe man, and her ex-lover will open business in London. Bambi may become an Alfa-male, but he will always remember his mother and hold a hate towards hunters.

I mean, it is not like we are asking for Hana-Montana endings, for God’s sake!

Modifié par Ozida, 16 septembre 2012 - 10:31 .

[CronoDragoon]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...

I wouldn't call that proof. The Dark Ritual is one of the most poorly implemented cop-outs to an otherwise interesting thought experiment Bioware presented us. And it's because the lack of solidly defined consequences.

Consequences that, further more, the player will never have to live with, since BW is extremely unlikely to account for the God Baby is any significant role in future DA games.

As for happy endings, two questions need to be asked:

1. Does it make sense practically? Do you have to jump through convoluted logic hoops and possibly break suspension of disbelief to achieve it?

2. Does it make sense thematically? Do you hurt a game's intended theme or any character arcs by providing a happy ending?

Wanting one isn't a good enough excuse, but it seems that ME3 does the opposite of #1: it makes you jump through convoluted logic hoops simply to not give you a happy ending.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 16 septembre 2012 - 10:59 .

[Pain87]

Ozida wrote...

"Disney" = 100% happy? Hm, let me think...

The Lion King - Father of a little child dies in front of his eyes in a terrible accident. The child gets thrown out of his pride full of false guilt and later finds out that his own uncle betrayed him. His mother is being tortured, and he has to kill his own uncle for revenge.

Pocahontas – A young woman is forced to an unwanted marriage when she suddenly meets a man of her dreams. Her fiancé gets killed in front of her because of jealousy and her lover is to be now executed to death. During a conflict he gets shot and has to leave back to England, leaving his lover behind, possible never seeing her again.

The Fox and The Hound – Mother tries to save her baby from a killer, but gets shot. A little baby meets a very good friend; however, when both grow up, one of the friends has to kill another for the pleasure of his
owner. After a fight, they leave in piece, but can never be friends again.

Bambi – should I even go there?..

Now, the morale: do you see a difference between a bitter-sweet ending and dark, gloomy ending? Protagonist usually goes through tough loses, hard battles, sometimes even embarrassing things, and in the end, although he wins, he carries wounds and scars. In The Lion King Simba is looking up to his father he will never see again. He is now fully responsible for wellness of his family, although he fooled around of most of his life with two reckless friends. In Pocahontas both characters are alive, but their love is most likely to end. Pocahontas will marry another tribe man, and her ex-lover will open business in London. Bambi may become an Alfa-male, but he will always remember his mother and hold a hate towards hunters.

I mean, it is not like we are asking for Hana-Montana endings, for God’s sake!

Nice Examples

[Snoopy1955]

Ozida wrote...

"Disney" = 100% happy? Hm, let me think...

The Lion King - Father of a little child dies in front of his eyes in a terrible accident. The child gets thrown out of his pride full of false guilt and later finds out that his own uncle betrayed him. His mother is being tortured, and he has to kill his own uncle for revenge.

Pocahontas – A young woman is forced to an unwanted marriage when she suddenly meets a man of her dreams. Her fiancé gets killed in front of her because of jealousy and her lover is to be now executed to death. During a conflict he gets shot and has to leave back to England, leaving his lover behind, possible never seeing her again.

The Fox and The Hound – Mother tries to save her baby from a killer, but gets shot. A little baby meets a very good friend; however, when both grow up, one of the friends has to kill another for the pleasure of his
owner. After a fight, they leave in piece, but can never be friends again.

Bambi – should I even go there?..

Now, the morale: do you see a difference between a bitter-sweet ending and dark, gloomy ending? Protagonist usually goes through tough loses, hard battles, sometimes even embarrassing things, and in the end, although he wins, he carries wounds and scars. In The Lion King Simba is looking up to his father he will never see again. He is now fully responsible for wellness of his family, although he fooled around of most of his life with two reckless friends. In Pocahontas both characters are alive, but their love is most likely to end. Pocahontas will marry another tribe man, and her ex-lover will open business in London. Bambi may become an Alfa-male, but he will always remember his mother and hold a hate towards hunters.

I mean, it is not like we are asking for Hana-Montana endings, for God’s sake!

Mass Effect 3 - Shepard may be dead, but the Reaper threat is dealt with and the people in the Galaxy will live on because of his sacrifice and tell stories about him to their children while gazing out at the stars.

Just because Shepard dies does not mean that the ending is too dark to be bitter-sweet.

Really, he got blasted full on by Harbinger's Death beam. He was pretty much going to die anyway, and the fact that he managed to save the galaxy with his last breath is actually kind of uplifting when you think about it that way.

[Bill Casey]

Snoopy1955 wrote...

Just because Shepard dies does not mean that the ending is too dark to be bitter-sweet.

Shepard's death has little to do with it...
You have to do something appallingly unethical or everyone dies...
And your what the hell hero moment gets celebrated...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 16 septembre 2012 - 11:09 .

[Ozida]

Snoopy1955 wrote...

Mass Effect 3 - Shepard may be dead, but the Reaper threat is dealt with and the people in the Galaxy will live on because of his sacrifice and tell stories about him to their children while gazing out at the stars.

Just because Shepard dies does not mean that the ending is too dark to be bitter-sweet.

Really, he got blasted full on by Harbinger's Death beam. He was pretty much going to die anyway, and the fact that he managed to save the galaxy with his last breath is actually kind of uplifting when you think about it that way.

I am sorry, but you still don't get the difference. In bitter-sweet endings the protagonist is a winner. That is what makes it sweet. His/ her experiences and loses, though, make it bitter.

In tragedies main characters are usually dead. That's make it dark and gloomy. Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy. Of course, their families are still around to tell the story... Even Titanic is a bitter-sweet story, because Rose (one of the main characters) leaves. Should they both die, it would be just a bitter. end 

It is not about universe. We didn’t play as universe, we played as Shepard. Shepard is dead (I don’t take a breath scene seriously; sorry, I know they just put it there for “whatever”). It is a tragedy. Whatever is left is just to make this tragedy better, but it doesn’t change the fact that it is not a bitter-sweet ending.

Modifié par Ozida, 16 septembre 2012 - 11:13 .

[Netsfn1427]

Ozida wrote...

I am sorry, but you still don't get the difference. In bitter-sweet endings the protagonist is a winner. That is what makes it sweet. His/ her experiences and loses, though, make it bitter.

In tragedies main characters are usually dead. That's make it dark and gloomy. Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy. Of course, their families are still around to tell the story... Even Titanic is a bitter-sweet story, because Rose (one of the main characters) leaves. Should they both die, it would be just a bitter. end 

It is not about universe. We didn’t play as universe, we played as Shepard. Shepard is dead (I don’t take a breath scene seriously; sorry, I know they just put it there for “whatever”). It is a tragedy. Whatever is left is just to make this tragedy better, but it doesn’t change the fact that it is not a bitter-sweet ending.

The protagonist is the winner in ME3. Shepard's goal was to stop the Reapers. The Reapers are stopped in every ending but refuse (and even then it's just delayed for one more cycle). There are multiple times in ME3 where it's stated that if the galaxy is saved, then it was all worthwhile.

Shepard's story is the battle with the Reapers. That's his/her purpose. It's why he/she is resurrected in ME2. The other stuff is tangential. You don't need to romance anyone. You don't need to care about your squad mates. As Javik suggests, you could view them as tools to stop the Reapers. The end goal is and always has been stopping the Reapers. In the end, Shepard achieves the goal. He/she succeeds, stopping something that had not been stopped in a billion years despite the best efforts of thousands of equally advanced (or even more advanced) civilization. The galaxy is saved against overwhelming odds. That's anything but tragic.

Tragedy? Tragedy would have been if the game ended at Harbinger's beam. ME3 is bitter sweet, but it is not tragedy.

[Ozida]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

The protagonist is the winner in ME3. Shepard's goal was to stop the Reapers. The Reapers are stopped in every ending but refuse (and even then it's just delayed for one more cycle). There are multiple times in ME3 where it's stated that if the galaxy is saved, then it was all worthwhile.

Shepard's story is the battle with the Reapers. That's his/her purpose. It's why he/she is resurrected in ME2. The other stuff is tangential. You don't need to romance anyone. You don't need to care about your squad mates. As Javik suggests, you could view them as tools to stop the Reapers. The end goal is and always has been stopping the Reapers. In the end, Shepard achieves the goal. He/she succeeds, stopping something that had not been stopped in a billion years despite the best efforts of thousands of equally advanced (or even more advanced) civilization. The galaxy is saved against overwhelming odds. That's anything but tragic.

Tragedy? Tragedy would have been if the game ended at Harbinger's beam. ME3 is bitter sweet, but it is not tragedy.

Ahem, dead person is not a winner. How did Javik said that? "Ask the dead about honor, the silence is your answer". You see, it is simmilar to Gladiator's story, for example. The goal is achieved, the main character is dead. Or Hamlet is a tragedy too: he achieved his goal and he is dead. It doesn't matter what happens after protagonist's death. It can be a complete paradise, but this doesn't change it not to be a tragedy.

Modifié par Ozida, 16 septembre 2012 - 11:32 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Consequences that, further more, the player will never have to live with, since BW is extremely unlikely to account for the God Baby is any significant role in future DA games.

Yeah, that's the real killer for DA:O. With ME and decisions like the Rachni, there was at least the guarantee that this would crop up again in the future (even if the presentation was lacking). We knew there had to be an ME2/3. DA:O presents a much more problematic scenario since DA2 is not a direct sequel and deals with a completely different set of events. The God Child is as important to DA2 as choosing the Elves vs. Werewolves. Unless Bioware wants to start choosing canon endings, I don't see the God Child coming back in any significant form. There's not even a guarantee that if we see the God Child again, it would be in a video game since Bioware also employs novels, comics, etc.

As for happy endings, two questions need to be asked:

1. Does it make sense practically? Do you have to jump through convoluted logic hoops and possibly break suspension of disbelief to achieve it?

2. Does it make sense thematically? Do you hurt a game's intended theme or any character arcs by providing a happy ending?

Wanting one isn't a good enough excuse, but it seems that ME3 does the opposite of #1: it makes you jump through convoluted logic hoops simply to not give you a happy ending.

Very well said!

[corkey sweet]

if Shep would have survived synthesis, it would have been considered the "sunshine and daisy's" ending. since he did not, the best we get is high e.m.s destroy

[Netsfn1427]

Ozida wrote...

Ahem, dead person is not a winner. How did Javik said that? "Ask the dead about honor, the silence is your answer". You see, it is simmilar to Gladiator's story, for example. The goal is achieved, the main character is dead. Or Hamlet is a tragedy too: he achieved his goal and he is dead. It doesn't matter what happens after protagonist's death. It can be a complete paradise, but this doesn't change it not to be a tragedy.

Javik makes references about viewing your allies as tools for stopping the Reapers and nothing more during one of the conversations post Genophage/Rannoch. I can't remember which one it is, but I heard today or yesterday while playing and I'm in the Rannoch missions in my current playthrough.

Hamlet is a tragedy because his actions destroy everything. There's nothing left at the end. Everyone Hamlet knew, cared about and respected is dead. Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy because their family's hubris (and their own stupidity) results in their deaths with little being accomplished. Gladiator isn't really a tragedy. Maximus is ready for death and believes he'll be reunited with his family. He was able to achieve his goal of avenging them and taking down a madman in the process. It's bitter sweet.

Shepard's desire was to stop the Reapers, even at the cost of his/her own life. There was never any question about that. If you care about your companions, you are able to save most or all of them, depending on the ending you choose. If you care about the galaxy, you save it in all three endings. If you care specifically about the love interest, you save them in all three and in a high EMS destory, can be reunited with them (even if its not explicitly shown).

There are no other options in the story. If Shepard doesn't take those choices, everyone dies. Given the circumstances of the odds and the options before him/her, Shepard ending the cycle is a clear victory. Unless you believe that if Shepard dies, the galaxy might as well go with him/her.

[Ozida]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Javik makes references about viewing your allies as tools for stopping the Reapers and nothing more during one of the conversations post Genophage/Rannoch. I can't remember which one it is, but I heard today or yesterday while playing and I'm in the Rannoch missions in my current playthrough.

Hamlet is a tragedy because his actions destroy everything. There's nothing left at the end. Everyone Hamlet knew, cared about and respected is dead. Romeo and Juliet is a tragedy because their family's hubris (and their own stupidity) results in their deaths with little being accomplished. Gladiator isn't really a tragedy. Maximus is ready for death and believes he'll be reunited with his family. He was able to achieve his goal of avenging them and taking down a madman in the process. It's bitter sweet.

Shepard's desire was to stop the Reapers, even at the cost of his/her own life. There was never any question about that. If you care about your companions, you are able to save most or all of them, depending on the ending you choose. If you care about the galaxy, you save it in all three endings. If you care specifically about the love interest, you save them in all three and in a high EMS destory, can be reunited with them (even if its not explicitly shown).

There are no other options in the story. If Shepard doesn't take those choices, everyone dies. Given the circumstances of the odds and the options before him/her, Shepard ending the cycle is a clear victory. Unless you believe that if Shepard dies, the galaxy might as well go with him/her.

From a dictionary: "Tragedy - 2. A play, film, television program, or other narrative work that portrays or depicts calamitous events and has an unhappy but  meaningful ending". Is the ending of ME3 meaningful? Yes (well, let's pretend it is). Does Shepard get unhappy ending? Yes. Is it a tragedy? Yes. What is illogical with that?

Once again, it doesn't matter for the rest of the world when you telling a story about 1 character. To my understanding both examples brought above are tragedies. They are classified as tragedies by other people who know more about genres than I do, and I trust their judgement. Once again, in Romeo and Juliet two families stopped the war, and you could say it was one of the main themes of the story as well. Does it make it bitter-sweet in any way?

Besides, as I stated above in my post about "Disney" endings, there are another ways to make story both bitter and sweet, without protagonist's death. However, I agree with you, we have no options and just have to take what we have. Doesn't mean ME3 doesn't deserve a happy-ending.

ETA: I did take Javik's quote out of context a bit, but it still can be explained as: "You are dead and that's all that matters". That's how I heard it anyway.

Modifié par Ozida, 17 septembre 2012 - 12:04 .

[Iakus]

 What people expected in ME3 was Earn your Happy Ending

What we got was, best case scenerio, a pile of rubble.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Ozida wrote...

ETA: I did take Javik's quote out of context a bit, but it still can be explained as: "You are dead and that's all that matters". That's how I heard it anyway.

Yeah, but Javik's also an exceptionally cynical individual, which is understandable growing up/fighting during the Prothean extinction. But there's nothing which requires the player to buy into such reasoning. You're even given opportunities to fight against some of Javik's more questionable ideas.

Of course, even amongst people who believe death is a final end, you'll still find those who would consider the price worth it. Typical example: a parent willing to give up their life for that of their child. Or quotes such as "Give me liberty or give me death" which illustrate that sometimes people consider principles more important than their existence. Generally-speaking, if I was an individual who valued my life above everything else, I probably wouldn't make my profession deadly on a daily basis, which is the case for all of Shepard's backgrounds.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 17 septembre 2012 - 12:21 .

[Netsfn1427]

Ozida wrote...

From a dictionary: "Tragedy - 2. A play, film, television program, or other narrative work that portrays or depicts calamitous events and has an unhappy but  meaningful ending". Is the ending of ME3 meaningful? Yes (well, let's pretend it is). Does Shepard get unhappy ending? Yes. Is it a tragedy? Yes. What is illogical with that?

Once again, it doesn't matter for the rest of the world when you telling a story about 1 character. To my understanding both examples brought above are tragedies. They are classified as tragedies by other people who know more about genres than I do, and I trust their judgement. Once again, in Romeo and Juliet two families stopped the war, and you could say it was one of the main themes of the story as well. Does it make it bitter-sweet in any way?

Besides, as I stated above in my post about "Disney" endings, there are another ways to make story both bitter and sweet, without protagonist's death. However, I agree with you, we have no options and just have to take what we have. Doesn't mean ME3 doesn't deserve a happy-ending.

ETA: I did take Javik's quote out of context a bit, but it still can be explained as: "You are dead and that's all that matters". That's how I heard it anyway.

We're disagreeing on what's "happy" and what's not. Shepard's character, in my interpretation, would absolutely be happy with the outcome of the events. Would he/she rather have lived? Sure. But the goal was always, first and foremost, was saving the galaxy. Paragon would be with the least amount of casulties possible and Renegade just stopping it. In the end, it's stopped. So Shep achieved what he/she wanted. As a soldier they were prepared for death as a possibility. Even in the non-canonical ME2 ending where Shep dies, his/her last words aren't about death, but telling Joker to warn the galaxy about the Reapers. It was always about the Reapers. Everything else was secondary. Of course here's also the fact that in high EMS destroy Shepard does live and in Control, Shepard becomes an immortal being that has the capability to rule the galaxy.

I'd also say "meaningful" doesn't have to mean positive. For example, the most tragic death in the entire ME series, in my opinion, is Wrex's, if you elect not to cure the Genophage. Wrex put all of his hopes with Shepard and when he learns he's been betrayed, he literally has nothing left. So he confronts Shepard knowing he's not walking away from that. But his life no longer matters, he's totally failed the Krogan, even if he manages to kill Shepard. That death is meaningful to the player; at the least it symbolizes that Shepard's decisions have severe ramifications and can destroy trust and it can mean even more if the player likes Wrex. But it is in no way happy. Everyone loses.

[jtav]

ME3 is not a tragedy. Shepard does not bring ruin to the galaxy. He saves those he loves and ushers in one of three bright new futures for the galaxy. Victory came at a high cost, but we still won.

[Taboo]

jtav wrote...

ME3 is not a tragedy. Shepard does not bring ruin to the galaxy. He saves those he loves and ushers in one of three bright new futures for the galaxy. Victory came at a high cost, but we still won.

This.

And he can even survive and reunite with everybody if you so choose.

[Hexley UK]

eddieoctane wrote...

As far as BioWare is concerned, there is no artistic merit in anything that doesn't involve soul-rushing darkness.

This, because apparently BiowEAre are now all edgy and hard.

Plus they really REALLY love Deus Ex....

[Ozida]

to BaladasDemnevanni and Netsfn1427...

Ok, I apologize in advanced, because it will sound cruel, but I just don’t see another way to explain my point.

Imagine this: your father is a policemen. His goal is helping people. One day he sees a drunk driver who is about to run over a little girl. You father pushes the girl but gets driven over. He dies as a hero, but would you really care? And before you answer, I would like you to really think about it for a moment. You will never have a chance to see him again. You will never have a chance to talk to your father again, to hug him, to apologize for those terrible things you said in past. He will never be around for your mother, who is now lost in her grief. You are now fully responsible to support your family and have to deal with burial arrangements. Worst than that, in couple years everybody pretty much forgets about what happened; the little girl grows up and doesn’t even know who the heck you are. Now, would you feel bitter-sweet about your father’s death and think it was victorious (I mean, he saved the girl, right?)?..

Shepard’s death is much darker than some realise. He was already considered dead before and people who cared about him and loved him had to go throw horror of loosing him. Now they have to go through that again, and even worse, they will always keep hope that he may return, like he did before… except, he won’t. He is a hero, sure, but who will care about dead hero in 5/ 10/ 100 years? I don’t see Shepard’s death meaningful. I see it as a cheesy way for writers to cause drama where there is no real need for it. Besides the lack of logic in the actual endings, "the end of Shepard's story" shouldn't always mean "the end of Shepard's life". It just shows that BioWare didn't have real creativity to finish it memorably and meaningfuly.

Now, I am not saying, that Shepard has to live in ALL endings, please don't get me wrong. I support the idea of diversity. We have already lost enough during past 3 games to have a chance to have a full-win scenario. Having just three miserable states of universe isn’t rewarding enough for some of us. For different reasons people find that neither of 3 choices can lead to a happy life afterwards… and as AngryJoe said: “Why the heck not a happy ending?”.

Modifié par Ozida, 17 septembre 2012 - 12:34 .

[Iakus]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

We're disagreeing on what's "happy" and what's not. Shepard's character, in my interpretation, would absolutely be happy with the outcome of the events. Would he/she rather have lived? Sure. But the goal was always, first and foremost, was saving the galaxy. Paragon would be with the least amount of casulties possible and Renegade just stopping it. In the end, it's stopped. So Shep achieved what he/she wanted. As a soldier they were prepared for death as a possibility. Even in the non-canonical ME2 ending where Shep dies, his/her last words aren't about death, but telling Joker to warn the galaxy about the Reapers. It was always about the Reapers. Everything else was secondary. Of course here's also the fact that in high EMS destroy Shepard does live and in Control, Shepard becomes an immortal being that has the capability to rule the galaxy.

And in my interpretation, my own SHepard would hate the outcome of the events.

He mucst make  a chocie presented to him by an insdane AI  that inflicts something horrible on the galaxy as a price to stop the Reapers.  Then die, leaving Ash (whom he had finally reconnected with after her heart was broken the first time he died) bereft once again.

Yeah the Reapers were stoped.  The galaxy didn't die.  If this was "real" sure I guess it's worth it.  But this is a game.  a story where we get to be the hero.  In the end, we're a hero that compromises.  Then dies, never seeing the galaxy we helped create.  

That's just depressing.  Is it any wonder people aren't happy?

[Netsfn1427]

Soul crushing darkness? You mean despite facing seemingly impossible odds, humanity, the asari, turians, salarians, and depending what you choose, the krogan, quarian, geth, rachni and all other galactic civilizations survive and get to build their futures? You mean all of your party members in ME3 which the possible exception of EDI, surviving despite being in the middle of it all? You mean Shepard surviving in high EMS destroy or becoming a god-like figure controlling the galaxy's most fearsome creatures?

Yeah, totally soul-crushing. Might as well have gone the way of the Protheans. Though I suppose if you love the Batarians above all else, you have a point.

[Iakus]

Hexley UK wrote...

eddieoctane wrote...

As far as BioWare is concerned, there is no artistic merit in anything that doesn't involve soul-rushing darkness.

This, because apparently BiowEAre are now all edgy and hard.

Plus they really REALLY love Deus Ex....

Heck even in Deus Ex, Denton or Jensen lives in most of the endings

[Iakus]

Ozida wrote...

Now, I am not saying, that Shepard has to live in ALL endings, please don't get me wrong. I support the idea of diversity. We have already lost enough during past 3 games to have a chance to have a full-win scenario. Having just three miserable states of universe isn’t rewarding for some of us. For different reason people find that neither of 3 choices can lead to a happy life afterwards… and as AngryJoe said: “Why the heck not a happy ending?”.

This.

Bittersweet is a moving target.  "Bitter" and "tragic" mean different things to different people.  If Shepard dies in virtually every ending, you're alienating ast least some players.

[Netsfn1427]

iakus wrote...

And in my interpretation, my own SHepard would hate the outcome of the events.

He mucst make  a chocie presented to him by an insdane AI  that inflicts something horrible on the galaxy as a price to stop the Reapers.  Then die, leaving Ash (whom he had finally reconnected with after her heart was broken the first time he died) bereft once again.

Yeah the Reapers were stoped.  The galaxy didn't die.  If this was "real" sure I guess it's worth it.  But this is a game.  a story where we get to be the hero.  In the end, we're a hero that compromises.  Then dies, never seeing the galaxy we helped create.  

That's just depressing.  Is it any wonder people aren't happy?

Because the options were let Ash and everyone else he cared about die or take one of the three options. Given where the situation was at Thessia, or after Harbinger's beam, or when the Crucible didn't fire, I think Shepard would be okay with that. Because Shepard is a soldier who knows and understands that he might have to die to allow others to live. That's what makes him a hero.

And high EMS destroy, he lives. There isn't a reunion scene or specifics as to what follows for him because who's to say what happens after that point? It largely is irrelevant to Shepard's narrative anyway. The end goal was saving the galaxy. We don't need to know if he married Ashley, Liara, Jack or if he couldn't handle sacrificing the Geth and EDI and ate his own gun. Or if he decided to team up with Javik and Garrus to become the galaxy's greatest bounty hunter team.

The Mass Effect series was about Shepard's journey in stopping the Reapers. That's completed, one way or another, at the end of ME3. It's completed successfully, albiet with losses, making it bitter sweet.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

Ozida wrote...

to BaladasDemnevanni and Netsfn1427...

Ok, I apologize in advanced, because it will sound cruel, but I just don’t see another way to explain my point.

Imagine this: your father is a policemen. His goal is helping people. One day he sees a drunk driver who is about to run over a little girl. You father pushes the girl but gets driven over. He dies as a hero, but would you really care? And before you answer, I would like you to really think about it for a moment. You will never have a chance to see him again. You will never have a chance to talk to your father again, to hug him, to apologize for those terrible things you said in past. He will never be around for your mother, who is now lost in her grief. You are now fully responsible to support your family and have to deal with burial arrangements. Worst than that, in couple years everybody pretty much forgets about what happened; the little girl grows up and doesn’t even know who the heck you are. Now, would you feel bitter-sweet about your father’s death and think it was victorious (I mean, he saved the girl, right?)?..

Certainly I would care. But that's not really relevant: my father made his choice and decided for himself that he would risk himself for the little girl, hence the point that some people do value certain things over their own existence. It's also besides the point because in ME3, it's either Shepard's life or everyone's lives. Shepard died so everyone else could live. I would prefer to at least honor that sacrifice. 

The argument also ignores one basic point: if everyone valued their own life absolutely over everything else, the person in question would not voluntarily join the military, fight for their beliefs, become firemen, etc. As it stands, Shepard became a career officer long before we had to worry about Reapers and rogue Spectres or any of that. For anyone really concerned about not dying above all else, they would not have found themselves on Akuze, Torfan, Skyllian Blitz, etc.

Shepard’s death is much darker than some realise. He was already considered dead before and people who cared about him and loved him had to go throw horror of loosing him. Now they have to go through that again, and even worse, they will always keep hope that he may return, like he did before… except, he won’t. He is a hero, sure, but who will care about dead hero in 5/ 10/ 100 years? I don’t see Shepard’s death meaningful.

Well, considering the aftermath shows that Shepard has lived on as a legend, I can't exactly say I'm buying the argument that he's going to be forgotten. We remember the stories of Achilles, Hercules, etc, how long past when those stories were formulated? Besides that, do you really believe that when people risk their lives whether as a fireman, police officer, whatever, it's only so they can live on forever as a hero?

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 17 septembre 2012 - 12:51 .