232 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

jtav wrote...

Well, the last you see of your squad is them mourning you on a strange planet. If she lived and EMS isn't absolute rock bottom, Miranda is always shown  with a good future. From what we see onscreen, if Shepard romanced Miranda, his sacrifice bought something significant for his LI, allowing the player to feel good about it. A Shepard who romances a crew member brings them pain, at leasy onscreen.

And how are you so sure Miranda's future is going to be "good"? If she and Shepard were together and Shepard dies, then she has lost the only person in the galaxy who respects her and loves her as a human being. If I were her, I would be pretty f**king devastated.

The epilogue slides are literally nothing to work on. They just show Miranda either looking at a hologram table or looking at Reaper schematics on a monitor. Literally all you can take from them is "she still exists". Not even her facial expression in the slides displays any emotion to work off of.

[o Ventus]

AlanC9 wrote...

I did read it, o Ventus. What definitive statement are you talking about?

It was a hypothetical example. 

If you want one in-game (rather, in-Twitter) then look at Mac Walters claiming that the original endings signified a galactic dark age. The in-game evidence supported his claim (pretty clearly, I might add).

[jakal66]

o Ventus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I did read it, o Ventus. What definitive statement are you talking about?

It was a hypothetical example. 

If you want one in-game (rather, in-Twitter) then look at Mac Walters claiming that the original endings signified a galactic dark age. The in-game evidence supported his claim (pretty clearly, I might add).

Didn't the EC destroy that idea....Of course I would love more closure ofr all charachters but the most important for me is The sheppard I have invested time and money on and I will add that I don't care so much for closure with the LI just confirmation of sheppards fate in that sequence...that's what we need to end all speculation.

You don't have to kill him Bioware you can show he usrvived, show his fate after that and his retirement from the force BAM.!!!1There you go you can start a new ME with another charachter or do a prequel or whatever...you don't need nobel prize winner writers to write yourself out that tornado of speculation, now do you?

[o Ventus]

jakal66 wrote...

Didn't the EC destroy that idea....Of course I would love more closure ofr all charachters but the most important for me is The sheppard I have invested time and money on and I will add that I don't care so much for closure with the LI just confirmation of sheppards fate in that sequence...that's what we need to end all speculation.

You don't have to kill him Bioware you can show he usrvived, show his fate after that and his retirement from the force BAM.!!!1There you go you can start a new ME with another charachter or do a prequel or whatever...you don't need nobel prize winner writers to write yourself out that tornado of speculation, now do you?

FFS, I made it a point to note that I'm referring to the original endings. I used the words "orignal endings" in my post.

[Galbrant]

Good read OP.

[jakal66]

o Ventus wrote...

jakal66 wrote...

Didn't the EC destroy that idea....Of course I would love more closure ofr all charachters but the most important for me is The sheppard I have invested time and money on and I will add that I don't care so much for closure with the LI just confirmation of sheppards fate in that sequence...that's what we need to end all speculation.

You don't have to kill him Bioware you can show he usrvived, show his fate after that and his retirement from the force BAM.!!!1There you go you can start a new ME with another charachter or do a prequel or whatever...you don't need nobel prize winner writers to write yourself out that tornado of speculation, now do you?

FFS, I made it a point to note that I'm referring to the original endings. I used the words "orignal endings" in my post.

Sorry mate, didn't see that.True it is then

[AlanC9]

o Ventus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I did read it, o Ventus. What definitive statement are you talking about?

It was a hypothetical example. 

If you want one in-game (rather, in-Twitter) then look at Mac Walters claiming that the original endings signified a galactic dark age. The in-game evidence supported his claim (pretty clearly, I might add).

The in-game evidence didn't do anything of the kind. All we see is that one ship crashes when hit by the wave, and that the relays are gone.

[Felis Menari]

Samtheman63 wrote...

Felis Menari wrote...

jpraelster93 wrote...

Shepard didnt die in mine

That's headcanon. The destroy ending only hints that Shepard could be alive. It's Bioware's way of leaving it open to bring Shepard back if they want, or leaving him dead for good. Usually I'm ok with a bit of ambiguity. But this...this is too much.

"Shepard_Alive_Male.bik"
Is the name of the video file for that cutscene, dont be stupid

Yes, that's the file name. But what does the scene actually show? What looks like Shepard, taking a breath after surviving the destruction of the citadel. That's it. For all we know he might not be well enough to live long enough for help to arrive. Unlike the control ending where we know exactly what's going on with Shepard (for the time being, anyways. It's possible later down the line he loses his connection to humanity and starts doing some bad, bad things), the destroy ending's extra breath breath scene is quite vague.

We get no elaboration as to what the fate of Shepard is. The scene merely hints that Shepard could live on beyond the events of ME3, much in the same way the destroy ending's memorial plaque scene hints that just maybe Shepard is still out there, not all burnt and blasted into an unrecognizable mess. I'd like to hope, and I know better than to believe.

Modifié par Felis Menari, 20 octobre 2012 - 11:35 .

[o Ventus]

AlanC9 wrote...

The in-game evidence didn't do anything of the kind. All we see is that one ship crashes when hit by the wave, and that the relays are gone.

Before the writers went on record and said anything, literally almost everybody assumed that the relays exploding would destroy their respective star systems, because thus far that is the only result we've seen.

Never mind the "Destroy wipes out all technology" instead of the new "Destroy only kills synthetic life"?

[Dean_the_Young]

o Ventus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

The in-game evidence didn't do anything of the kind. All we see is that one ship crashes when hit by the wave, and that the relays are gone.

Before the writers went on record and said anything, literally almost everybody assumed that the relays exploding would destroy their respective star systems, because thus far that is the only result we've seen.

People who didn't understand two different types of explosions and narrative cues might have made that mistake, but that was hardly 'literally almost everybody.'

Never mind the "Destroy wipes out all technology" instead of the new "Destroy only kills synthetic life"?

Unsurprisingly, that's not in the game either.

[High Five Revival]

Wow. I'll have to say that's a really well-thought out and comprehensive analysis of the ending of Mass Effect - using pop culture as a benchmark is very well done. I agree overall with a lot of your ideas and themes throughout your essay there, but I will respectfully disagree with the conclusion. While I realize that there might be a romantic partner left behind as most people chose to romance at least one of the romance options in the Mass Effect series, but I think it falls short in the other two categories.

In the arena of most of the friends surviving to enjoy the results of the heroes' victory, the majority do. Some die over the course of the storyline and some may die as a result of what choice you make, but some of those deaths are your choice. In fact, depending on Mass Effect 2 and your choices along the way, the number of surviving team members may be almost entirely up to you. But, squad mates do survive and enjoy the results of your victory. This, as you mentioned, is made pretty clear in the extended cut.

Mass Effect 3 ends with a great and total success in what is the 'best' ending. The makers of Mass Effect provided several endings for fans. In a series entirely dedicated to choice, the fans likely wouldn't have been satisfied with just one ending. In some cases, I'm not sure they would've been satisfied regardless. However, in the "Destroy" ending with the best EMS possible - you get the Reapers destroyed and yes, Shepherd "lives". It's at least pretty heavily implied and I like that because EA/Bioware leaves the final outcome of Shepherd in your hands - as he has been the entire series. You can imagine him alive or dead - up to you. However, regardless of whether he's alive or he sacrificed himself to destroy the Reapers - I don't think it negates the fact that it was a total success and complete victory.

Personally, I was sad to see the game end but I was emotionally satisfied with the resolution for my character. Of course, I'd love to see more - another epilogue - a warm homecoming for Shepherd - more time with the cast and crew I'd come to love - but all good things must come to an end. I went into the game knowing that Shepherd probably wouldn't live and having the possibility that he did makes me feel pretty happy.

But, of course, doesn't take away from the really solid analysis! I love reading this kind of stuff from the fanbase of ME. Even if I don't necessarily agree with it, there are a lot of great points here and it was really great to read. This is the type of debates people should be having about the game's ending! Good stuff.

[High Five Revival]

Wow. I'll have to say that's a really well-thought out and comprehensive analysis of the ending of Mass Effect - using pop culture as a benchmark is very well done. I agree overall with a lot of your ideas and themes throughout your essay there, but I will respectfully disagree with the conclusion. While I realize that there might be a romantic partner left behind as most people chose to romance at least one of the romance options in the Mass Effect series, but I think it falls short in the other two categories.

In the arena of most of the friends surviving to enjoy the results of the heroes' victory, the majority do. Some die over the course of the storyline and some may die as a result of what choice you make, but some of those deaths are your choice. In fact, depending on Mass Effect 2 and your choices along the way, the number of surviving team members may be almost entirely up to you. But, squad mates do survive and enjoy the results of your victory. This, as you mentioned, is made pretty clear in the extended cut.

Mass Effect 3 ends with a great and total success in what is the 'best' ending. The makers of Mass Effect provided several endings for fans. In a series entirely dedicated to choice, the fans likely wouldn't have been satisfied with just one ending. In some cases, I'm not sure they would've been satisfied regardless. However, in the "Destroy" ending with the best EMS possible - you get the Reapers destroyed and yes, Shepherd "lives". It's at least pretty heavily implied and I like that because EA/Bioware leaves the final outcome of Shepherd in your hands - as he has been the entire series. You can imagine him alive or dead - up to you. However, regardless of whether he's alive or he sacrificed himself to destroy the Reapers - I don't think it negates the fact that it was a total success and complete victory.

Personally, I was sad to see the game end but I was emotionally satisfied with the resolution for my character. Of course, I'd love to see more - another epilogue - a warm homecoming for Shepherd - more time with the cast and crew I'd come to love - but all good things must come to an end. I went into the game knowing that Shepherd probably wouldn't live and having the possibility that he did makes me feel pretty happy.

But, of course, doesn't take away from the really solid analysis! I love reading this kind of stuff from the fanbase of ME. Even if I don't necessarily agree with it, there are a lot of great points here and it was really great to read. This is the type of debates people should be having about the game's ending! Good stuff.

[o Ventus]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Unsurprisingly, that's not in the game either.

Have you actually spoken to the Catalyst?

[thefallen2far]

Off th top of my mind of my favorite climax deaths -

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance kid - both characters were killed in Bolivia

Red Dead Redemption - he was gunned down by the government agent.

Halo Reach, he's killed in a cut scene of an army cutting him down.

Dr. Who David Tennet - he sacrificed himself to save an old man.

The Hero from Dragon's Dogma - multiple endings.

I think the difference isn't that it was fair or what was left behind. I think it's consistency. I was sure that Marsden was going to die at the end, but it still hit hard and deep that the character you were experiencing was dying. He was dying getting his wife and child out of danger and with a gun in his hand.... that's what I remebered.

I think that's why it was badly received. It was an open experience adventure that ended with the charater forced to folow a pattern that mos of the time didn't fit the created character. It caused a brreak in the action and took you out of the flow long enough to identify the nonsense of the premise.

[Nightwriter]

jtav wrote...

Statements of writers bear no authority whatsoever. They are irrelevant, powerless to add or take away without revising the work itself. And if we must resort to metagame: "Shepard_Alive"

If only it were so.

[CSunkyst]

thefallen2far wrote...

Off th top of my mind of my favorite climax deaths -

Butch Cassidy and the Sundance kid - both characters were killed in Bolivia

Red Dead Redemption - he was gunned down by the government agent.

Halo Reach, he's killed in a cut scene of an army cutting him down.

Dr. Who David Tennet - he sacrificed himself to save an old man.

The Hero from Dragon's Dogma - multiple endings.

I think the difference isn't that it was fair or what was left behind. I think it's consistency. I was sure that Marsden was going to die at the end, but it still hit hard and deep that the character you were experiencing was dying. He was dying getting his wife and child out of danger and with a gun in his hand.... that's what I remebered.

I think that's why it was badly received. It was an open experience adventure that ended with the charater forced to folow a pattern that mos of the time didn't fit the created character. It caused a brreak in the action and took you out of the flow long enough to identify the nonsense of the premise.

Bucth Cassidy and the Sundance Kid and Red Dead Redemption BOTH have the dying of the old west as a theme running throughout both stories, those protagonist deaths fit in with the themes the works had previously established (also, I could be wrong, but doesn't Butch and Sundance end RIGHT before both characters actually die??

Never played Halo Reach, but isn't it known right upfront that everyone in that game is doomed to begin with?  So at least it's not a visious tacky sucker punch.

And Dr. Who REALLY doesn't count as he always comes right back to life.  Changed maybe, but it's still the Dr.  

I'm completely unfamiliar with Dragon's Dogma, but I'll likely avoid it as protagonist deaths are a pet peeve of mine.  There isn't a single one that I love.  There are a few that I can understand maybe, but I've never LIKED any of them.   (except 300 maybe, but in that case it's kind of the point)

Modifié par CSunkyst, 21 octobre 2012 - 02:02 .

[Kulbelbolka]

I don't like Shepard's death, because of two reasons:
- Game states several times that it's not the end, it's only beginning of Shepard's life.
- Game don't explains enough why Shepard should commit suicide for some strange agreement between him and this devil's machine called Catalyst. Maybe it's writers fault, maybe it was their intention to make it like this, but I want to: why only Shepard was allowed to use the Catalyst to change the whole galaxy? What is it so important in him? Shepard is not The Chosen One, he is just a soldier with strong will, nothing more.

[thefallen2far]

I have to disagree with the Dr. Who thing. He even stated that when he was dying and going through he change, it was like death for him. Everything of who he was died, but his body lived on as someone else. As for Dragonks Dogma, I don't recommend it. I loved it, but you needed OCD to play that game. No fast travel, so it was drawn out artificially.... but in the end, you have a lot of choices.... not dying is one of them, but there's a price for it....it handled the issue of sacrifice a lot better than ME3.

I just thought of a few other deaths I liked

- Spock in wrath of Khan. [Yes, he planned his return, but the death was really cool]

- Ridley at the end of Aliens 3..... it was the worst of the 3, but it was a great scene.

- D'argo at the end of Farscape. His death wasn't neccessary, and hit you really hard [I almost cried] but it also fueled the climax to one of the most wesome scenes in sci fi I've ever seen.

It also might not count, but All that Jazz where it ends with a musical number in his head was really cool.

Jeez, I liked/respcted the story resolution of a New York Jazz choreographer than the "roll over and die" Shepard. By the way, I always wanted to met someone that loved the ending and one on one, ask them one on one, why, but of the 32 people I've met that played the game, none of them liked it. The best compliment I got was "eh, I know what they were going for, they just mised the mark"

Modifié par thefallen2far, 21 octobre 2012 - 03:46 .

[jakal66]

Their biggest mistake was to try to force us to believe that synthesis, the ending they would have used had there only been one ending, was the best option.Turns out a lot chose destroy, they clearly could not READ the fanbase....they went with their high hopes and mighty art and failed miserably.

It wasn't that har to let or clearly show a survivng sheppard in destroy to then show a sequence of still images like in theEC explaining the sacrifices he made when he survived destroy.

Like in fallout 3, you can choose to survive and convice the chick to sacrifice herself and then accept the consequences of what you did...
In this case, EDI and the GETH but they went to hell with the original endings and they were able to improve Control and synthesis but failed miserably in destroy.... and I mean miserably

[Spectre Impersonator]

The "Shepard lives" ending still needs to be fleshed out. There's no question. His/her story was not concluded. Also, why did my Femshep have a male chestplate when she took her breath?

[Red Panda]

What if my Shepard wasn't noble, but instead was borderline sociopathic?

[rekn2]

it has nothing to do with sheps death. im pissed because of deus ex, way to many characters, none of the 10 npc i met in me2 mattered, huge plot holes and retcons, abc ending, weakening the reapers and having them unkillable in the end anyway....shep can die and if they would just tell a good story i would be fine with that

being a "writer" and having that stuff fly is inexcusable and its not because i have an attatchment to the subject matter, its damn bad writing, go back to school.

[jakal66]

I jsut want them to expand on that scene...explain what happened to sheppard, headcannon my ass.
I pay 10 bucks for a movie if I want a piece of crap cliffhanger scene...

[AlanC9]

o Ventus wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Unsurprisingly, that's not in the game either.

Have you actually spoken to the Catalyst?

I believe Dean's referring to the  statement "wiping out all technology," which isn't actually said but somehow gets repeated here a lot. As you just did.

What would wiping out all technology even mean? Does fire count?

Modifié par AlanC9, 21 octobre 2012 - 04:39 .

[Red Panda]

In regards to Shepard_Alive.bik, it could be Shepard's last breath before death, one last breath of life before succumbing to injuries, knowing that their mission was accomplished, once and for all.