543 réponses à ce sujet

[TheRealJayDee]

This needs to be repeated:

drayfish wrote...

My problem with the ending - and how it violates the first half of your definition - if that a racist, totalitarian pyschopath could happily play the end of Mass Effect and not feel morally compromised, nor disgusted, at all.  Indeed, he would be congratulated for playing the game properly, because he did what needed to be done, compromised none of his beliefs, and saved the universe - all the time with the game telling him that he was absolutely right to think that way.

Again, I don't find that deep - I think it's irresponsible, and deeply, deeply idiotic.

Modifié par TheRealJayDee, 07 octobre 2012 - 12:45 .

[TheRealJayDee]

As for the Leviathan discussion - I actually have to kinda agree with both parties.

Yes, there was no Leviathan in my game either, so I really can't take the information from that DLC into consideration when thinking and talking about my playthrough and the decisions I made. And, as some of you explained quite convincingly, ME3 as released in March seemingly wasn't a complete experience. So, what do I learn from this? I guess that there really is no point in buying a Bioware game at release or preodering it. Waiting/hoping for a 'Complete Edition' is the way to go...

[Jamie9]

TheRealJayDee wrote...
As for the Leviathan discussion - I actually have to kinda agree with both parties.

Yes, there was no Leviathan in my game either, so I really can't take the information from that DLC into consideration when thinking and talking about my playthrough and the decisions I made. And, as some of you explained quite convincingly, ME3 as released in March seemingly wasn't a complete experience. So, what do I learn from this? I guess that there really is no point in buying a Bioware game at release or preodering it. Waiting/hoping for a 'Complete Edition' is the way to go...

Ha ha! I return to this thread.

This really depends on how much money you're willing to spend and what your stance is on DLC in the industry. I'm okay with paying for substantial DLC like "Leviathan", but not weapon or armour packs.

On the other hand, I always buy the GOTY editions of Bethesda games, as those are games that I really can't play twice (they can take 300+ hours!). Yes, I haven't played Skyrim yet. Woe is me.

Well, kind of a lie. I've played a bit of it. But it wasn't my copy, and not for long.

[Netsfn1427]

Jamie9 wrote...

TheRealJayDee wrote...
As for the Leviathan discussion - I actually have to kinda agree with both parties.

Yes, there was no Leviathan in my game either, so I really can't take the information from that DLC into consideration when thinking and talking about my playthrough and the decisions I made. And, as some of you explained quite convincingly, ME3 as released in March seemingly wasn't a complete experience. So, what do I learn from this? I guess that there really is no point in buying a Bioware game at release or preodering it. Waiting/hoping for a 'Complete Edition' is the way to go...

Ha ha! I return to this thread.

This really depends on how much money you're willing to spend and what your stance is on DLC in the industry. I'm okay with paying for substantial DLC like "Leviathan", but not weapon or armour packs.

On the other hand, I always buy the GOTY editions of Bethesda games, as those are games that I really can't play twice (they can take 300+ hours!). Yes, I haven't played Skyrim yet. Woe is me.

Well, kind of a lie. I've played a bit of it. But it wasn't my copy, and not for long.

This. It's all a matter of preference and what you're willing to wait for. Everyone who bought ME3 had to know DLC that would have to be purchased would be coming. There were three storyline mission DLCs in ME2, all of which had to be paid for. If you purchased it the day it came out, then if you want the full experience you can wait on the DLC for full edition to drop to 20 bucks, or you can shell out money in pieces. I can't fault anyone who says that they will wait for it. 

Heck I'm doing with the comics I (now rarely) collect. There's one I'm waiting until November for so I can get the trade paper back for one. Been wanting to read it for months. But having it as a trade is worth more than reading it right away.

However, video games are far better than comics in that regard. If you are interested in the story, you can just go to youtube and look up what happened. I'd be more sympathetic to the argument "it's not in the original copy then it's not canon" if the substance of the DLC  wasn't easily found on the internet. You don't have to buy the DLC to know what happened in it. (Though it is solid DLC- I say that honestly not as a Bioware fanboy; I felt ripped off with most Dragon Age:O DLC, not so with ME)

The poster is dismissing the DLC because it contradicts his point. You can make a stand about not purchasing it and still be aware of parts of the story that aren't in the game. He only went to the "where is it in the game?" line of questioning when I showed him the part of the DLC that contradicted Vigil.

I have a general (though not complete) knowledge of the books and comics relating to ME. I never bought them. But if I want to discuss the ME storyline and someone references one of those stories, I shouldn't dimiss them because they aren't in the game. If I come to discuss the storyline Bioware has put out, then I have to accept the whole storyline- not just the parts I've purchased.

[V-rcingetorix]

Maxster_! Netsfn1427! Girls! You're both pretty! Can we get back on topic

EDIT: okay, a bit late, but I was reading through the precious two pages (lots of homework ) and felt moved to quote Megamind.

Modifié par V-rcingetorix, 07 octobre 2012 - 06:43 .

[V-rcingetorix]

Personally, I consider Leviathan to be canon. Certain portions of it were probably added after the ending travesty, but by and large the Leviathan was most likely conceptual only prior to the From Ashes DLC. Planning these things takes time, like years in advance, or months for just one DLC.

The game has been out only 7 months total, and there has to have been a lot of planning for MP, From Ashes and Leviathan, plus all the DLC for the MP.

As for how it affects the ending...meh. LOTSB didn't affect the ending of ME2, nor did Kasumi or Zaeed, except for an extra potential for survival maybe. My point is that DLC doesn't affect endings unless it's supposed to; think Witch Hunt, or Arrival. Both were post-ending DLC's. I suppose that LoTSB could arguably be post-ending, I certainly played it both ways, but it doesn't make a hill of beans worth of difference.

[Maxster_]

A simple question. Why everyone so sure that LOTSB is canon?
Liara says that Shepard helped her to become Shadow Broker, even if you haven't bought DLC?

[Maxster_]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

As for the Leviathan discussion - I actually have to kinda agree with both parties.

Yes, there was no Leviathan in my game either, so I really can't take the information from that DLC into consideration when thinking and talking about my playthrough and the decisions I made. And, as some of you explained quite convincingly, ME3 as released in March seemingly wasn't a complete experience. So, what do I learn from this? I guess that there really is no point in buying a Bioware game at release or preodering it. Waiting/hoping for a 'Complete Edition' is the way to go...

Knowing EAWare, they can easily retcon leviathans into oblivion in ME4. They retconned major things like all human council, and Councilor's choice.

[Netsfn1427]

V-rcingetorix wrote...

Maxster_! Netsfn1427! Girls! You're both pretty! Can we get back on topic

EDIT: okay, a bit late, but I was reading through the precious two pages (lots of homework ) and felt moved to quote Megamind.

Lol. Fair enough. Though since the question was asked- the events of LOTSB is not canon. Shepard doesn't have to help Liara become the Shadow Broker. However that Liara becomes the Shadow Broker IS canon. If you didn't buy it, she hires mercs to take down the Shadow Broker. Likewise, in Arrival, the relay still gets destroyed and the Batarian system with it. However instead of Shepard, it was a black ops team.  So the results still happen, even if the details change. Hence why the information in Leviathan is still canon, even if Shepard himself doesn't have to canonically meet them. Someone does.

As for the topic itself, I didn't really feel like the ending was unfair to paragons. I almost always play paragon, but not because I want to play a good character; I play a character aligned with my moral beliefs. The end choice is difficult because I don't know what the best choice for the galaxy is. I make my best guess based on my own moral beliefs and what I think my Shepard could live with.

There is no paragon and renegade choice. All of the choices have paragon and renegade natures to them. So, the ending is no more unfair to paragon players than renegade.

[Nightwriter]

I think it's more a case of poorly written sacrifice. Mordin and Legion's deaths felt right. Sad, but fitting. A true example of bittersweet. EDI and the geth's deaths didn't feel right to me. They didn't have that ring of dramatic resonance. Loghain sacrificing himself at the end of DA:O would be another example of good sacrifice. It also felt somehow sad but "right."

[Netsfn1427]

Nightwriter wrote...

I think it's more a case of poorly written sacrifice. Mordin and Legion's deaths felt right. Sad, but fitting. A true example of bittersweet. EDI and the geth's deaths didn't feel right to me. They didn't have that ring of dramatic resonance. Loghain sacrificing himself at the end of DA:O would be another example of good sacrifice. It also felt somehow sad but "right."

Probably because it just happens. There's no speech, no final goodbye before the death. It's shoot the tube and that's it; picture of EDI in the montage of the sacrifice.

I'm not sure how they'd have done this though, since no one but Shepard knows what just happened. If they had a different ending where the Normandy was plugged into Shepard's earpiece on the Citadel and EDI explained the choices, where she would know what Shepard was deciding, then it probably would have generated more emotional of an impact.

[V-rcingetorix]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

V-rcingetorix wrote...

Maxster_! Netsfn1427! Girls! You're both pretty! Can we get back on topic

EDIT: okay, a bit late, but I was reading through the precious two pages (lots of homework ) and felt moved to quote Megamind.

~snip~
...the information in Leviathan is still canon, even if Shepard himself doesn't have to canonically meet them. Someone does.

~snip~

There is no paragon and renegade choice. All of the choices have paragon and renegade natures to them. So, the ending is no more unfair to paragon players than renegade.

Hey, I'll agree. Data within the DLC is probably canon, but who knows what the next retcon will decapitate?

Second part, I agree fully; no renegade or paragon options, only optins that are "paragonnish." That is what I think is so unfair about ME3.

You see, ME1 and ME2 had clear paragon/renegade endings. Both were situated in combat/war, the only difference was the scale of the war. ME3 had no clear paragon/renegade endings, which I felt was a real letdown from the epicness I saw to be ME1 and ME2. I have around 14 playthroughs on ME1 and about 23 playthroughs on ME2...that's how much I loved everything. ME3? I have 3 playthroughs

[XxFatalFemalexX]

chadesh wrote...

Actually all of the endings are failures. Either way shepard loses or some other race loses,

I would of preferred a rainbow and bunny ending. As long as my shepard would of be able to at the very least see his/her team and LI. It would of been nice, but I know it will never happen.

I completely agree with Chadesh. I didn't like any of the endings very much and I had hoped my shepard would've been able to see her team and the person she romanced... or at least the person she romanced.

[XxFatalFemalexX]

Getorex wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Getorex wrote...

At the end of the game, no matter how well or how crappy you play, you lose because the terms and conditions of ending the conflict are DICTATED to you and you have NO input, no negotiation on those terms.  That means you lost.  That is true in the real world and it is objectively true in fantasy or scifi or just plain fiction.  If the enemy dictates the terms, you lost.  Period.  If all you can do is choose among options given by your enemy, YOU LOST.

This is extremely silly. The Catalyst didn't build the Crucible, and has no control over the options. If he did, he wouldn't let you pick Destroy.

Unless you want to sign on with The Twilight God's fantasy ending, that is.

Not silly.  Simple fact. If you are at war with X and you get together to discuss terms for ending the war and X sets ALL the terms and conditions and you set none. You lost.  Simple as that. The kid is completely and fully capable of stopping the Reapers, but wont. You have no say so it is all on his terms. That makes you the LOSER.

Consider: this kid thing obviously has control over the Reapers.  The little tike could make them do whatever he wants.  He is offering to let YOU choose an action on HIS terms, provided you kill yourself in all cases.  If you tell the tike you want to control the Reapers and send them on their way...there is no reason the tike couldn't do that.  The result is the same whether the tike does it or Shepard does it, except the tike takes his pound of flesh and sees you dead in making doing so.  OR the tike could accept your wish and do it himself without anyone dying to do so.  Exact same effect either way but the kid demands a pointless victor-determined human sacrifice to do it.  

"Hey kid, I just want this nonsense to stop.  If I'm going to choose, then I will choose to control the Reapers and make them go away".

Kid: "OK, you can do that.  But you have to kill yourself."

"Why?"

Kid: "Because I say so.  I'm in control here and I demand a sacrifice."

"Why?  What do you get out of it?"

Kid: "My pound of flesh."

"What the hell do you need/want a 'pound of flesh' for?!"

Kid: "Because I do."

"You KNOW what my choice is, I just told you and YOU could do it more easily than I can but without the whole deathy thing thrown in.  YOU wont die and I wont die.  Win-win.  So why not do that?  The end result is precisely the same! The end result is the same for you so what difference does it make?  YOU do it.  Win-win."

Kid: "But you would still be alive and I want you to die for whatever choice you make...this is ALL on my terms."

"In that case, ****** off!  I wont choose ANY of those options you give me."

Kid: "As you wish.  You will die anyway because I WANT MY POUND OF FLESH."

"You are quite the little ****."

Agreed and got a good laugh!

[KevShep]

The ending is unfiar to anyone that wanted an original ending that stood out, instead we got an exact copy and paste ending of Deus Ex.

[Maxster_]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

V-rcingetorix wrote...

Maxster_! Netsfn1427! Girls! You're both pretty! Can we get back on topic

EDIT: okay, a bit late, but I was reading through the precious two pages (lots of homework ) and felt moved to quote Megamind.

Lol. Fair enough. Though since the question was asked- the events of LOTSB is not canon. Shepard doesn't have to help Liara become the Shadow Broker. However that Liara becomes the Shadow Broker IS canon. If you didn't buy it, she hires mercs to take down the Shadow Broker. Likewise, in Arrival, the relay still gets destroyed and the Batarian system with it. However instead of Shepard, it was a black ops team.  So the results still happen, even if the details change. Hence why the information in Leviathan is still canon, even if Shepard himself doesn't have to canonically meet them. Someone does.

No, information in leviathan is not canon at all. It is not in the game. And information about Shadow Broker, and Liara becomes one is in game.
Same for the Arrival.
If you are thinking, that leviathans, or any information about them is in game - point me, where they are. And where is lore entries.
I can't find this, in comparison to alpha relay, and Liara's becoming a shadow broker.

As for the topic itself, I didn't really feel like the ending was
unfair to paragons. I almost always play paragon, but not because I want
to play a good character; I play a character aligned with my moral
beliefs. The end choice is difficult because I don't know what the best
choice for the galaxy is. I make my best guess based on my own moral
beliefs and what I think my Shepard could live with.

There is no
paragon and renegade choice. All of the choices have paragon and
renegade natures to them. So, the ending is no more unfair to paragon
players than renegade.

You are not choosing best for a galaxy. Your choice is to surrender uncoditionally to an enemy whim, or don't.
Surrendering means that you have to commit one of 3 variants of war crimes. Refusing to surrender, and attemp to finish the war on Shepard's terms, not Catalyst's terms - leads to extermination.
Both a fails for renegade and for paragon, but for different reasons.

And question is - Is submission preferable to extinction?

Modifié par Maxster_, 08 octobre 2012 - 05:18 .

[Nightwriter]

Netsfn1427 wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I think it's more a case of poorly written sacrifice. Mordin and Legion's deaths felt right. Sad, but fitting. A true example of bittersweet. EDI and the geth's deaths didn't feel right to me. They didn't have that ring of dramatic resonance. Loghain sacrificing himself at the end of DA:O would be another example of good sacrifice. It also felt somehow sad but "right."

Probably because it just happens. There's no speech, no final goodbye before the death. It's shoot the tube and that's it; picture of EDI in the montage of the sacrifice.

I'm not sure how they'd have done this though, since no one but Shepard knows what just happened. If they had a different ending where the Normandy was plugged into Shepard's earpiece on the Citadel and EDI explained the choices, where she would know what Shepard was deciding, then it probably would have generated more emotional of an impact.

Yeah that would have been ten times better.

[Quething]

Netsfn1427 wrote...
Probably because it just happens. There's no speech, no final goodbye before the death. It's shoot the tube and that's it; picture of EDI in the montage of the sacrifice.

Nah, it's not about the speech. It's about the buildup. Mordin's death arises organically from the story. It's the natural conclusion of a well-written redemption arc; it makes sense that he should die both on an immediate level (he's chosen to walk into an exploding building in the middle of a deadly battle between space kaiju for reasons consistent with his behavior and the science and politics of the setting), and on a thematic level (he's committed an act he feels was a great sin and the player is primed to expect some form of costly atonement). Legion's, I personally actually think wasn't particularly good, but it is also thematically justified in the moment; Legion is a leader who wants a significant gift to be given to their people, and significant gifts are expected to come with significant cost. Loghain actually has both going for him; he loves Ferelden and wants to save it, he's the villain and deserves death. Boon and redemption together.

The geth/EDI deaths are just completely arbitrary. They arise from nothing: neither party has any crime to be punished for, redemption to seek, boon to pay for, or people to lead; neither party has put themselves in a uniquely dangerous position (there's no reason they should be more at risk than any other army in the battle); neither party has a unique personal motivation for sacrifice or a story arc that logically finishes in death (in fact both parties are just coming off birth story arcs). It doesn't even make sense within the constraints of the setting's politics; Mordin is intimately linked to the krogan and the genophage and being the lynchpin of its resolution is fitting, but the geth are no more linked to the Reapers than the turians, humans, batarians or anyone else who's ever served them, and EDI is less linked, and being the lynchpin of resolution against the Reapers has no justification.

They're just a random pound of flesh disincentive to choose Destroy. Of course there's no emotional resonance.

[Roguefan]

I'm going to just come out and say this at the outset - the war with the Reapers was unwinnable.  They have been harvesting the galaxy for countless cycles, and had never encountered anything resembling a unified resistance - until Commander Sheppard.  But it wouldn't have made a difference.

Each ending - Control (my ending), Synthesis, Destroy and Refusal - are all designed to reflect these impossible odds.  By choosing one, it would mean that the war with the Reapers would end, but it would not be without tremendous and far-reaching consequences.

Throughout the trilogy, I played my Sheppard as 100% Paragon, never deviating from that course:
 
In ME1, I stopped Wrex from being executed, because he didn't deserve it.  He was a Krogan and was understandably upset at what had happened to his people (I couldn't save Kaiden however.  If I could, I would have);

In ME2, I stood in opposition to the Illusive Man at every opportunity, and chose to destroy the Collector Base at the end.  Why?  Because I was loath to think that countless lives would be lost if Cerberus gained the use of their technology

In ME3, I chose to reveal everything I knew about the Genophage to the Krogan, and refused point-blank to entertain the Dalatrass's request.

I also chose to allow the Geth to upload the Reaper code into their consciousness, and convinced Tali and the Quarians that it was for the best; even managing to keep her as a valued member of my team.

Even at the end, I refused to kill The Illusive Man.  Why?  Because, even in his indoctrinated stupor, I was convinced he could be redeemed.

So when it came to the end, I knew that there really was only one choice for me - countless trillions of sapients (organic and artificial) had lost their lives needlessly, and it would be unconscionable for me to allow any more to die.  Therefore, I chose to sacrifice myself so that 'the many' could be saved; and that their losses would be remembered for eternity.

Despite the countless horrors perpetrated by The Reapers, under my hand, their tremendous power could be used for the betterment of the Galactic Community and assist in post-war reconstruction.

At no point was I expecting (or would ever expect) forgiveness for them, but they could spend the rest of their eternal existence making amends.

To answer the OP's original question - the ending I chose is in no way unfair to my Paragon Sheppard (and the key word here is 'my').  It is merely a reflection of the overwhelming odds she faced at the outset of Mass Effect 3,  and in no way does it betray her ideals.

Aquilla Ivy Sheppard - may your human form rest in piece and your consciousness strive to maintain those ideals you lived by and fought for throughout your career.

The Galaxy will remember you.

Modifié par Roguefan, 08 octobre 2012 - 09:26 .