398 réponses à ce sujet

[clennon8]

"As a writer myself" is a lame appeal to authority. There are plenty of writers, some of whom have actually published novels, who think the endings are garbage.

[CaIIisto]

clennon8 wrote...

"As a writer myself" is a lame appeal to authority. There are plenty of writers, some of whom have actually published novels, who think the endings are garbage.

Perhaps they're just not happy-clappers.

[Jadebaby]

clennon8 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

I will explain it to you, it's because THEY ARE NOT THE ENDINGS! If the EC didn't come out, Leviathan would have been the first dlc to add a dialogue wheel to the Catalyst scene. That, in itself, is creating a new ending. Even if it is just context. But that's not because people "didn't understand it".. It's because people "couldn't understand it" because the Leviathan section was intentionally left out of the game.

It's a clever theory, and I respect the optimism, but even if it were true, BW would deserve to be roasted for releasing a supposedly conclusive game and then making us wait a year for the "real ending."  Bottom line is there is no getting off the hook for Bioware at this point.  They built this series up to an epic crescendo, and then crapped the bed.  Now they get to lie in it, unpleasant as that image is.  The lastingness of the fan outrage is directly proportional to the expectations that they built up.

The fact that this is the only downside to the theory just further fuels it.

Mass Effect 2's ending wasn't on the disc.

BUT you still got a resolution with the suicide ark finishing.

Same as you still get a resolution with the A, B, C and now D endings.

The dlc would just simply make for a better ending.


It's not like they left priority Earth out of the game.....

[Clayless]

clennon8 wrote...

"As a writer myself" is a lame appeal to authority. There are plenty of writers, some of whom have actually published novels, who think the endings are garbage.

Demanding that writers change their story is disgusting though.

[futurepixels]

Jade8aby88 wrote...
Bottom line is there is no getting off the hook for Bioware at this point.  They built this series up to an epic crescendo, and then crapped the bed.  Now they get to lie in it, unpleasant as that image is.  The lastingness of the fan outrage is directly proportional to the expectations that they built up.

This captures how I feel about the negativity.  I don't especially dislike the endings, but I have major problems with the execution of parts of the game.  For example:

- Lack of proper resolution for the hero.
- Lack of ending variety.
- Lack of Reaper interaction.
- Too much Cerberus. 
- Autodialogue

But Bioware put themselves in this situation.  Some people are never going to get over the betrayal they feel, and that should be expected.

Modifié par futurepixels, 26 septembre 2012 - 05:01 .

[Manwards]

Not all writers are the same. It isn't a personality type. I write on occasion too, and if someone demanded I change my story because they obviously understand it and care about it more than I do, I'd politely tell them to bugger off. Constructive criticism is one thing. That's what led tobthe EC. But not threats and demands.

[CronoDragoon]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Demanding that writers change their story is disgusting though.

Demand in this case is short-hand for "I think the endings suck and I'm going to say this loudly in hopes you will change it."

Obviously no one is holding a gun to BioWare's head and demanding stuff.

[clennon8]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

"As a writer myself" is a lame appeal to authority. There are plenty of writers, some of whom have actually published novels, who think the endings are garbage.

Demanding that writers change their story is disgusting though.

Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

In any case, like I said, all I want is the satisfaction of witnessing ME3's death rattle.

[DecCylonus]

Fawx9 wrote...

My arguements for choices always gets clouded between the OE and the EC. OE non of your choices mattered, you made a decision on what direction you wanted to walk in as nothing made sense and were given a pallet swap ending. Your choices amounted to a number that unlocked a certain colour swap.

The EC did do a better job, however with the star kid still there it's extemly hard to pull myself out of the "Oh god just please shut up and point me to your power cord so I can yank it out". It's good at showing what the furture may bring but it still failed at showing what your choices did in the present, though thats more a fault of Priority: Earth. For me, and maybe others, I get the feeling that the EC, while improving the endings surface value, still contains fundamental issues that couldn't be solved by a slide show.

PS I personally wouldn't use the Rachni as an example of choices mattering, but maybe thats just me.

I agree that the OE was bad and needed to be fixed. The EC satisfied me.

Personally I thought that the effects of my choices were dealt with adequately in-game. If Wrex and Eve are alive, it's obvious where the Krogan are headed. If Wreav is in charge, it's obvious they are headed in the opposite direction. I didn't need the ending to elaborate on where exactly they went after the Reaper war. Similarly I felt that effects of your other choices were tied up in the game. I assumed there would be more games in the universe that would explore the future after the Reapers. I also expect that certain choices and one ending will be made canon in future ME games.

I wasn't happy with the way the Rachni choice from ME1 was invalidated in ME3, and you essentially had to make the choice over again. I liked that some of your choices were undone by circumstances outside of your control (Anderson resigning from the council) as I feel that is realistic, but felt that the Rachni were such a monumental choice from ME1 that the player's choice should have been allowed to stand. In the end, you still make the choice about whether they live or die, so I included the choice in my list.

[Clayless]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Demanding that writers change their story is disgusting though.

Demand in this case is short-hand for "I think the endings suck and I'm going to say this loudly in hopes you will change it."

Obviously no one is holding a gun to BioWare's head and demanding stuff.

You don't think people were demanding? I'm pretty sure the Retake movement is the definition of demanding.

[Ticonderoga117]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

"As a writer myself" is a lame appeal to authority. There are plenty of writers, some of whom have actually published novels, who think the endings are garbage.

Demanding that writers change their story is disgusting though.

Having the writers throw out common sense and logic to try and make some kind of point is also disgusting. I would argue even more so than having something changed.

[CaIIisto]

Manwards wrote...

Not all writers are the same. It isn't a personality type. I write on occasion too, and if someone demanded I change my story because they obviously understand it and care about it more than I do, I'd politely tell them to bugger off. Constructive criticism is one thing. That's what led tobthe EC. But not threats and demands.

Do you write your stories offering the reader the ability to completely shape the outcome?

[CronoDragoon]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

You don't think people were demanding? I'm pretty sure the Retake movement is the definition of demanding.

Demand implies a consequence if demands are not met. There was no consequence that Retake could bring into effect that wasn't already inherent in the demands themselves. If the semantics of it is your only problem then fair enough, but I don't find anything disgusting about the idea of Retake itself - separated from what some unbalanced people decided to do which was disgusting.

[wildannie]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

clennon8 wrote...

"As a writer myself" is a lame appeal to authority. There are plenty of writers, some of whom have actually published novels, who think the endings are garbage.

Demanding that writers change their story is disgusting though.

ME is written by a team of writers, and I don't doubt for a minute that there are members of that team who would have done things differently if given the chance.  asking an individual to change their work is different.

[clennon8]

Damn those Retake people! Sending delicious cupcakes to the writers and donating tens of thousands of dollars to charity! Entitled bastards!

[CronoDragoon]

Bester76 wrote...

Do you write your stories offering the reader the ability to completely shape the outcome?

Nothing offers that, including BW games.

[Larryonov]

I did not care much for the endings and can understand the frustration of people expecting something more epic. Especially with all the false advertisement that preceded the release of the game, it's no wonder people are upset.

[CaIIisto]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Bester76 wrote...

Do you write your stories offering the reader the ability to completely shape the outcome?

Nothing offers that, including BW games.

"Experience the beginning, middle and end of an emotional story unlike any other, where the decisions you make completely shape your experience and outcome."

www.masseffect.com/about/story/

[Kamfrenchie]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Demanding that writers change their story is disgusting though.

Demand in this case is short-hand for "I think the endings suck and I'm going to say this loudly in hopes you will change it."

Obviously no one is holding a gun to BioWare's head and demanding stuff.

You don't think people were demanding? I'm pretty sure the Retake movement is the definition of demanding.

It's not like the writers promised 16 widely different endings and failed to deliver ....

Also, how is it disgusting to ask for a change ? See, if this was just made by bioware for bioware, that they made the story with no commercial use in the mind, sure, but the moment you make "art" as a product, as something you sell, you need to conform somewhat to the wishes of your audience.

That's how things have worked for a while, with Mecenes and all that. When the people who pay for your stuff have request about it, it ain't disgusting. Without them there is no subsequent "art".

[Kamfrenchie]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Bester76 wrote...

Do you write your stories offering the reader the ability to completely shape the outcome?

Nothing offers that, including BW games.

Alpha protocol comes close.

Fallout (1, 2 , NV) did this a quite bit aswell. You could impact just about any group and cities you came accross

[HiddenInWar]

I don't have time to care really. I interact in forum posts I want to interact with, and if people want to make posts about the ending, that's their choice. I'll be talking about something else.

[Clayless]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

You don't think people were demanding? I'm pretty sure the Retake movement is the definition of demanding.

Demand implies a consequence if demands are not met. There was no consequence that Retake could bring into effect that wasn't already inherent in the demands themselves. If the semantics of it is your only problem then fair enough, but I don't find anything disgusting about the idea of Retake itself - separated from what some unbalanced people decided to do which was disgusting.

Pretty sure people made it their mission to collapse Bioware if their demands were not met, you can see this by all the insane and extreme negativity that has been spread around by them, and other such actions as creating threads detailing how to get your money back that is, bizzarely, full of praise, and creating movements telling people to "Hold the wallet" and such things. The Mass Effect 3 ending has even been taken to the BBB and the Retake movement forced a charity to stop accepting donations from them and to change it's rules to make sure the charity is never put in a situation like that again.

Even just above me you can see people trying to justify why it's not disgusting to demand that that writers change their work, and for this past few months you've been able to see people openly mocking Bioware when they said they respected the decisions of the people who spent 8 years of their lives on Mass Effect to put bread on the table, by reducing that to a silly "artistic integrity" line.

It's disgusting.

[clennon8]

*rolls eyes*

[DecCylonus]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

DecCylonus wrote...

I disagree. Those deaths along the way were a part of the major theme in the series: if you want victory, you have to be willing to sacrifice someone or something. It should not have been a shock that a sacrifice was required to beat the Reapers.

I also disagree that the endings (other than Refuse) were not a success for Shepard. If you don't want to compromise with the Reapers, pick Destroy. You eliminate the Catalyst's solution completely, for a price.

No, we went from fighting Reapers 2.9 of the game. To choosing 1 of 4 options to a solution that NEVER EVEN EXISTED in the MEverse.

I agree that sacrifices were a necessity, and I was prepared for that. Hell, I was prepared to lose my LI or Shepard for it. However, what sacrifices?

1) Control: Shepard commits suicide at the Catalyst's whim. (This is NOT a sacrifice, you had no idea that this would do what the Catalyst said it would, it's killing herself plain and simple.)

2) Same as control. Even less believable.

3) Same as above, (uhh hello Shepard? Maybe walking at the exploding tube while holding your pistol isn't such a good idea? You're an infiltrator and you were always an amazing shot, how about we stand at the back of the walkway?) NO, SUICIDE!
Then the Geth aren't a sacrifice, they are collateral damage because the other two options can't stand on their own merits so destroy needed to have a "con" tacked on to it.

4) The EC SUICIDE is a suicide on the grandest of scales. But at least in this one Shepard stays true to their character and gives an epic "**** you" speech.

Lots of stories don't introduce the solution until the third act, so I don't fault ME for not having the Crucible until the third game. As for the ending confrontation with the Catalyst, a lot of sci fi stories end with the protagonist confronting the antagonist and coming to a previously unknown solution. I interpret the ending as a conditional surrender of the Catalyst. It has the upper hand in the war, but is allowing something other than another harvest to be the end. As for the endings:

1) You are entitled to that interpretation, but it isn't the only possible interpretation. Some of us felt the Catalyst had no reason to lie. I also think that Control is a viable in-character choice for Paragon or Renegade Shepards, depending on how they were played of course.

2) I assume you were referring to Synthesis with this one. I disliked to space magic aspect of it, but lots of sci fi stories end with a space magic created utopia. I personally don't agree with forcing that evolution on everyone and it isn't something I choose for my Shepards. It's not an original concept, and it's not my personal choice, but Bioware didn't break any sacred conventions by including it as an option.

3) I agree that shooting the tube at close range was an odd implementation and I don't care for it. I liked that Shepard could survive destroy if galactic readiness was high enough. I disagree that a con wasn't necessary. I don't think most players would care about losing the knowledge of the ancient races and damaged mass relays if they could kill the Reapers and have Shepard survive. I think it was necessary to have collateral damage to somebody the player cared about in order to keep Destroy from being the ideal choice.

4) I disagree because I have a completely different interpretation of Shepard. I don't think it's at all in-character for him/her to refuse. I understand your interpretation is different than mine, and can see how you came to it. I think your interpretation is far from the only possible one though.