398 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Grubas wrote...
Your wrong in your judgement of the whole Retake and HTL movement. The lack of a happy ending is not what unites us. The hate for the catalyst is not what unites us. The lack of closure is not what unites us. This are just attempts to understand what happened. The endings are bad, thats what unites us. Thats what we all agree on.

Right. That was the problem with the movement. "The endings are bad" is not something that can be translated into a plan of action for either Bioware or Retake.

[Fawx9]

AlanC9 wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...
Also I want to point out, destory also has a massive con to it, if the Reapers are indead truthful to their word. Destoryers dont get the knoweldge of the past, they dont get the help to rebuild, they get a damaged galaxy with an uncertain future hoping that they were right and that they could find a way to coexist with synthetics. But apparently that still made Destory look to good so Bioware through in edi + geth genocide for kicks for the sake of 'balance'. 

Heres a hint, if 2 endings suck next to the 3rd maybe its those endings and not the 3rd that needs to be changed.

I'll play. How would you have improved the other two endings?

Honestly it's hard for me to improve control after the EC, well unless your speculations involves shepard AI going insane or being !Shepard to begin with and turns against you.

You could make it so that its not an AI duplicate, but instead an uploaded Shepard. Think geth consensus mission, but he stay there permantly (There must always be a Lich King... I mean Catalyst). It can downplay the unknown that comes with an AI replica along with opening up headcannon that involves cyber Shepard visting old friends. It also gets rid of the whole "you will become nothing, but will control us" mess.

The problem that still remains in control, which is a deeper problem that can't be solved by simple improvment, is the fact that something controls the Reapers. Some really dislike this fact, they grew to love the notion that they were cthulu in space and reducing them to pawns just desgrades them. I don't know how to fix that with keeping the current ending.

Edit: Allow us to somewhat agree with TIM throughout the game, yet not his methods. It still seems odd that we kill him and deny him everything, yet go on to use his plan.

As for Synthesis, well thats special. I've never been a fan so what comes next is probably going to annoy anyone that likes it.

1) Make up your mind about Edi being alive already. It's stupid to have it say Edi is supper extra alive. It's like saying that her development leading up to the end meant nothing unless you chose this ending.

2) Rephrase it completely. The last thing people want to hear is that the only way to resolve conflict between two factions is to force change on them and remove/add parts to make them more alike. It carries way to many connotation about things that have happened in the past, that were just plain bad ideas. 

3) Don't say it can't be forced, and then force it.

4) Don't say the thing can't discremenate then make this magic energy wave that can discremenate between all living organics and synthetics to a point where it can alter the DNA perfectly for each of them.

5) Make it clear it's not mind control if you are forcing it. Show what happens in the weeks that follow (turmoil) then show people coming to understand it.

6) Just have the husks and such die. Don't try to make them look like lost puppies.

I could go on nitpicking, but simply clean it up, make it tighter. The biggest problem I find comes from that the other two options are so much simplier in execution and are limited because of that, yet this thing for no given reason can change all organic dna, make us compatible with synthetics, gives us enough understanding of Reapers to tolerate them and yet we can't have a destroy option that excludes genocide?

Please just make them constent in the ridiculous aspects or cut them out all together.

Modifié par Fawx9, 26 septembre 2012 - 03:20 .

[Jadebaby]

Gogzilla wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...
And you too, are also claiming opinion as fact in your control banner which heralds the paragon symbol.

Also while i did borrow this banner from the Control thread, i did so because i felt the banner reflected my play style and not my ending choice. Which was not control, 

I apologise and retract my statement. Sorry.

Fawx9 wrote...

Also I want to point out, destory also has a massive con to it, if the Reapers are indead truthful to their word. Destoryers dont get the knoweldge of the past, they dont get the help to rebuild, they get a damaged galaxy with an uncertain future hoping that they were right and that they could find a way to coexist with synthetics. But apparently that still made Destory look to good so Bioware through in edi + geth genocide for kicks for the sake of 'balance'.

Heres a hint, if 2 endings suck next to the 3rd maybe its those endings and not the 3rd that needs to be changed.

Sorry, but this isn't correct. The synthetics and organic war was only enivitable while the Leviathan controlled these "thralls". Maybe the synthetics understood what was going on and felt sorry for the organics. So went to war to stop it. HOWEVER, in THIS sense, you are right. Because destroy leaves the galaxy ripe for the Leviathan's plucking. This is a broken ending indeed. Leviathans need to go.

AlanC9 wrote...

Grubas wrote...
Your wrong in your judgement of the whole Retake and HTL movement. The lack of a happy ending is not what unites us. The hate for the catalyst is not what unites us. The lack of closure is not what unites us. This are just attempts to understand what happened. The endings are bad, thats what unites us. Thats what we all agree on.

Right. That was the problem with the movement. "The endings are bad" is not something that can be translated into a plan of action for either Bioware or Retake.

I actually agree with Alan here, it's the kind of generalizing that made BioWare hit back with statements like "you just don't get it."

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.

[CronoDragoon]

AlanC9 wrote...

I'll play. How would you have improved the other two endings?

I would have preferred that Shepard jumping into the beam produced a sort of blueprint or prototype for Synthesis instead of changing everyone whether they want it or not. That way the galaxy can choose, on an individual basis, whether or not they want to evolve in such a way. By extension, the player can headcanon whether or not the whole galaxy eventually undertakes this radical change, or whether it simply becomes another form of diversity in the universe with organics, synthetics, synthorganics, and orthetics.

[CronoDragoon]

AlanC9 wrote...
Right. That was the problem with the movement. "The endings are bad" is not something that can be translated into a plan of action for either Bioware or Retake.

Which is why people who hated the OEs are split over the EC. There were simply too many things discussed on these boards to adequately address all of them. And it doesn't help BW when they spend 2 months on something and release it, then hear (some) fans just say, "EC fixed nothing, want new endings." How can that possibly motivate them?

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 26 septembre 2012 - 03:36 .

[Fawx9]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

Also I want to point out, destory also has a massive con to it, if the Reapers are indead truthful to their word. Destoryers dont get the knoweldge of the past, they dont get the help to rebuild, they get a damaged galaxy with an uncertain future hoping that they were right and that they could find a way to coexist with synthetics. But apparently that still made Destory look to good so Bioware through in edi + geth genocide for kicks for the sake of 'balance'.

Heres a hint, if 2 endings suck next to the 3rd maybe its those endings and not the 3rd that needs to be changed.

Sorry, but this isn't correct. The synthetics and organic war was only enivitable while the Leviathan controlled these "thralls". Maybe the synthetics understood what was going on and felt sorry for the organics. So went to war to stop it. HOWEVER, in THIS sense, you are right. Because destroy leaves the galaxy ripe for the Leviathan's plucking. This is a broken ending indeed. Leviathans need to go.

I do like that view myself (that synthetics rebelled only becuase they saw everyone else was controlled and both star kid and levis were too stupid to figure that out) but that still leaves a war torn galaxy with no extra support in getting it started again.This is something the other two endings don't have to deal with. There's also no space police, so a player who let the Krogan live without Wrex or Eve (for example) has to really think about not using the reapers to keep things in check during the rebuilding prcess.

Modifié par Fawx9, 26 septembre 2012 - 03:34 .

[Xilizhra]

CronoDragoon wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Right. That was the problem with the movement. "The endings are bad" is not something that can be translated into a plan of action for either Bioware or Retake.

Which is why people who hated the OEs are split over the EC. There were simply too many things discussed on these boards to adequately address all of them. And it doesn't help BW when they spend 2 months on something and release it, then hear (some) fans just say, "EC fixed nothing, want new endings." How can that possibly motivate them?

Well, they could realize that the EC wasn't what that many people actually wanted and, you know, actually create new endings that have nothing to do with serving the Catalyst. Or Shepard being doomed, that'd be a help.

[CronoDragoon]

Xilizhra wrote...
Well, they could realize that the EC wasn't what that many people actually wanted and, you know, actually create new endings that have nothing to do with serving the Catalyst. Or Shepard being doomed, that'd be a help.

If you make a post with specific issues that you still want addressed with acknowledging what the EC DID address, then I think you still get your point across while not seeming hopelessly hyperbolic about it.

[CaIIisto]

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.

Bad news for anyone planning on not buying the DLC.....

[squee365]

I just ignore the negativity.

[Xilizhra]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
Well, they could realize that the EC wasn't what that many people actually wanted and, you know, actually create new endings that have nothing to do with serving the Catalyst. Or Shepard being doomed, that'd be a help.

If you make a post with specific issues that you still want addressed with acknowledging what the EC DID address, then I think you still get your point across while not seeming hopelessly hyperbolic about it.

Very well. The complete lack of Harbinger, the Catalyst not explaining anything that well (especially Synthesis), Shepard's foretold doom in all endings except the genocide one... none of this is fixed by the EC. I don't personally hate the Catalyst like some do, but I believe they should be catered to in this area as well, possibly by making it the final boss in some manner (if that isn't Harbinger).
What the EC fixed was retconning the galactic apocalypse, not having the Normandy stranded and giving some kind of cursory epilogue scene. Which.... helped, but was insufficient.

[CronoDragoon]

Xilizhra wrote...
Very well. The complete lack of Harbinger, the Catalyst not explaining anything that well (especially Synthesis), Shepard's foretold doom in all endings except the genocide one... none of this is fixed by the EC. I don't personally hate the Catalyst like some do, but I believe they should be catered to in this area as well, possibly by making it the final boss in some manner (if that isn't Harbinger).
What the EC fixed was retconning the galactic apocalypse, not having the Normandy stranded and giving some kind of cursory epilogue scene. Which.... helped, but was insufficient.

I agree completely.

[Xilizhra]

Regarding the negativity, I'm still surprised that even 6 months after release people are still complaining about it. I don't understand why someone would waste their energy complaining about something they can't do anything about.

The hope that it will change something. Failing that, making life as unpleasant as they can muster for anyone who helped worsen ME3, and reminding Bioware that such will not be tolerated in the future.

[CronoDragoon]

magnetite wrote...

In this case, a different ending. By definition, some of these fans could be classified as insane.

Insanity has never been defined as such. That's just a catchy saying.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 26 septembre 2012 - 04:05 .

[CronoDragoon]

Xilizhra wrote...

Regarding the negativity, I'm still surprised that even 6 months after release people are still complaining about it. I don't understand why someone would waste their energy complaining about something they can't do anything about.

The hope that it will change something. Failing that, making life as unpleasant as they can muster for anyone who helped worsen ME3, and reminding Bioware that such will not be tolerated in the future.

Wow.

[Manwards]

 I think the entire game and the endings are fantastic, myself. My opinion, which isn't swayed by others', nor will it change others' minds. I disagree with the bitterness and pessimism but find it oddly amusing, too. If I hated something so much I wouldn't still be on the forums seven months later. Makes me think they enjoy being angry and argumentative. Maybe it's a good outlet for their aggression. That's just my opinion, though, no need to go spreading it around or anything.

[Xilizhra]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Regarding the negativity, I'm still surprised that even 6 months after release people are still complaining about it. I don't understand why someone would waste their energy complaining about something they can't do anything about.

The hope that it will change something. Failing that, making life as unpleasant as they can muster for anyone who helped worsen ME3, and reminding Bioware that such will not be tolerated in the future.

Wow.

Assuming, of course, that anyone's life actually can be made unpleasant via Internet comments. However, I think Walters and Hudson were actually punished for this, so it wasn't without merit.

[clennon8]

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.

Modifié par clennon8, 26 septembre 2012 - 04:29 .

[Xilizhra]

magnetite wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

The hope that it will change something. Failing that, making life as unpleasant as they can muster for anyone who helped worsen ME3, and reminding Bioware that such will not be tolerated in the future.

The Extended Cut was basically Bioware's compromise between what they wanted in the game, and the fans' feedback. However, it seems like the fans want complete control of what happens in this game. Thing about any Mass Effect game is that the choices you make in this game are the ones Bioware writes for you. So there isn't complete control over the story per say.

The trouble here is that, well, it's kind of an Anders situation: there is no compromise.  Either they create new endings or they do not.

[clennon8]

At this point, I do not care about "new endings" or "fixing things." I want more visceral satisfaction. I want ME3 to simply die. I was really hoping Leviathan would be the end of the road. Maybe Omega will be that last gasp. Heh. That would be fitting. Omega.

[Kel Riever]

I'm beginning to think the people who liked the Mass Effect 3 endings are the 'vocal minority.'

[shodiswe]

Gogzilla wrote...

 Whenever i get bored enough to come back to these forums,
I can only roll my eyes as i read one forum thread after the other.

Most of the threads barely consider any perspective other then their own, and as a result there is this illusionary consensus that certain opinnions are facts. Particularly the one regarding the Catalyst logic not making any sence.

I have long ago stopped arguing about the endings in such threads, but most places of ME discourse are filled with dicussions about the topic at hand.

Personally part of me is afraid Bioware may actually listen to this mob and take steps backwards, in the kind of games they deliver. 
 I would be lying if i said i was never dissapointed with Bioware's games. But despite certain failures in execution and 
rather than delivering yet another Lord of the rings or Star wars esqe story, they are choosing to tell a differnt kind of story in their games and i can appriciate that.

So what do the rest of you feel about the continuing negativity ?

Do you think its a sign that Bioware may be better off giving us a more tradational Hero's Journey, or should the rest of us (Clearly the minortiy on these forums atleast) Be more vocal or supportive of Bioware  in the face of all this negativity.

The Catalyst doesn't have to make sense, just like Saren didn't have to make sense. There are however other issues, I think it's a good game but the end game wasn't that great, especialy the London mission and take back earth.

It was uninspired hordemode mostly.

The endings, after the EC I can accept them, but I wouldn't call them great endings. But good enough I guess.
However it feels liek the london mission is part of the ending and it certainly feels lacking, it didn't live up to expectations.

[Clayless]

drayfish wrote...

-Snip-

Then you have a problem with the entire Mass Effect series, not just the endings.