591 réponses à ce sujet

[Nerevar-as]

Yes

[The Elder King]

iakus wrote...


According to legend, Dumat was the one who taught the magisters blood magic, so I doubt many would consider him "good"

Corypheus certainly thought he was communicating with Dumat, though I believe it was through dreams or visions.  Which makes sense if teh Old Gods are trapped/slumbering beneath the earth

I know about the legends. While I don't think he was good, we have no certain proof about it. The same about Urthemiel, which could lead to a disaster, if he's evil.
I agree about the type of communications between magisters and Old Gods. Which, by the way, seems to have inspired the creation of a certain spoiler race in a certain dlc (I read about them today, after seeing a post in this thread, and my reaction wasn't.....positive<_<).

[General User]

EntropicAngel wrote...

General User wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

General User wrote...

Side bar: if it's true that Dumat, Urthemiel and the rest of the Old Gods were actual high dragons (or they were beings enough like high dragons as makes no difference), then they would all have been female.

Because of that I was actually expecting the OGB to be a girl and was a bit surprised when Morrigan said it was a boy.

Oh snap!  I must have missed that.  At the end of Witch Hunt, right?

Well, soul =/= gender, one could argue.

Of course.  I just got a vision in my head of a young woman who (unknown to her?) was born with the soul of a Old God, who leaves her inscrutable mother to discover her destiny and return peace to a broken world.

classic RPG stuff.  Plus, Urthemiel being the Dragon of Beauty and all, it just works better with a female OGB I think.  Oh well, water over the dam I guess.

Modifié par General User, 29 octobre 2012 - 04:39 .

[garrusfan1]

I want the option for a happy ending as in the main character survives and they add closure

[Lennard Testarossa]

Well, Dumat was referred to as "Lord", so I do not think he's supposed to be female.

[General User]

EntropicAngel wrote...

General User wrote...
Of course.  I just got a vision in my head of a young woman who (unknown to her?) was born with the soul of a Old God, who leaves her inscrutable mother to discover her destiny and return peace to a broken world.

classic RPG stuff.  Plus, Urthemiel being the Dragon of Beauty and all, it just works better with a female OGB I think.  Oh well, water over the dam I guess.

[Cunning] classic RPG for female characters, or males?

It does make sense, I agree.

Better for females.  It still works for a male character, just not as well I think.

[Arppis]

Might be why I didn't mind DA2 and ME3 endings. I don't care about being a supa hero. I just want to play a good and fun game, which I had with both (thou DA2 wasn't quite as fun, but still fun).

[General User]

EntropicAngel wrote...

General User wrote...

Better for females.  It still works for a male character, just not as well I think.

I was suggesting that one traditionally plays male character in a "classic RPG"--unless you're given the choice, of course. But it's tangential.

True.  I guess I was looking at it as more of a "new twist on an old standard" sort of thing.

[Iakus]

garrusfan1 wrote...

I want the option for a happy ending as in the main character survives and they add closure

I'd toss in at least some companions/LIs as well, but yeah.  A job well done=life goes on for your character.

[PinkysPain]

David7204 wrote...
Finally, it's the reason why I've yet to play the Dragon Age games despite being blown away by Mass Effect.

You don't need to be afraid of Dragon Age: Origins, if you do everything just right you don't get punished for being a goody two shoes hero ... you only get substandard outcomes if you screw stuff up. It follows the (formerly) standard Bioware MO. At some point you might have to chose between self-sacrifice and your morals, but self sacrifice is still heroic ...

Dragon Age 2, well ... that's the beginning of the end it seems.

Modifié par PinkysPain, 29 octobre 2012 - 07:45 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

R: Dont' press that bottun you fool!
P: But I must! My moral code dictates that I do it!
R: You will destroy the entire universe if you press it! Waht kind of a f***-up moral code are you following anyway? Don't do it!
P: *presses the bottun* Yay! I'm morally superior to everyone!
R: *facepalms*

No moral code would make someone destroy the universe, I don't imagine.

Also...I thought you were one of us, Lotion. A paragon. A dirty-Cerbie, to be sure, but a blue!

I am lawfull Good, not Lawfull Stupid.

[shadow-warlord]

I think your problem is with lack of choice rather than with bittersweetness.
Yeah DA2's ending was too linear for an RPG but IMHO Dragon Age nailed it in terms of ending.

You could have tons of different endings not strictly good,bad etc but rather just endings based on the choices you have done.

In terms of the game itself, personally i like it when we are presented with a dillema with both results being "bad" or futile heroism.

After all it doesn't matter if you win or lose, only if you fight

[WhiteThunder]

I suppose one could look at the Mass Effect ending almost existentially, nothing we do during the games matters, so all that matters is what we do!

Unfortunately, I'm not Angel so that doesn't really satisfy me.

[zsom]

Foolsfolly wrote...

God walked out of the machine and said your choices don't matter, forget about what happened to anyone you've spent 7 years knowing, now here's your choices Red, Blue, or Green. Then the Normandy shows up running somehow, the relays are destroyed, intergalactic civilization is doomed, and the same ending cutscenes play with different colored energy. Then after the credits Buzz Aldrin sleeps through some cring inducing lines, my sweet. And you're politiely told to buy more DLC.

That's the more mature ending ME3 offers?

Or the how about the one they released months later in which any of the three arbitary choices given at the end divorced from the rest of the game or choices you've made all results in the same happy ending? Where any choice you pick has no consquences (except the new refuse which means you picked the choice where everyone dies). This is despite the fact that there ARE consquences we're told such as the death of all synthetics in the Destroy ending but the EC never shows negative impacts to your choices only the happy sunshine endings to your choice.

No. If their other games are fairy tales I'd rather they continue to tell fairy tales like Dragon Age: Origins where your character or your likely best friend dies to save the world... or you sleep with a witch to create what could be some god that will bite the world in the ass... or not. We have no idea what the ramifactions of that is and all because the Warden/Player could not sacrifice themselves for the greater good.

Your choices do actually matter, even the ones from ME2. If you didn't make the right choices then you couldn't save Eve for instance what's that if not a consequence? But that's not even the issue here. Choices and bittersweet vs. happy ending are mostly unrelated. You can have tons of choices and only bittersweet endings (PS:T), or choices and only happy endings (Skyrim). What I am against is the choice of a sunshine and butterfly endings where your fleets swoop in (swooping is good!), destroy the reapers and you get to raise blue babies / build a house. The only ending not invalidating heroism according to the OP, which is plain wrong. I think mature RPGs are more like PS:T and less like Skyrim, even though both have choices in the story!
Also I don't really like your double standard.. on one part you accept and embrace the ambiguity of Morrigan's god child, on the other hand you dislike the destroy endings openness. It is never even hinted at what the god child will turn into, it can be the next Diablo or the next Jesus Christ. The same way destroy can turn out right because the catalyst is wrong and synthetics will not eventually annihilate us, or it can just be a postponed genocide. Same open interpretation left for the player to chose.

[David7204]

I really did not do as good of a job starting this thread out as I should have. That's what I get for posting things at 3 AM while mucking through chemistry homework.

I'll make some edits and repost it in about a week on the ME 3 forum.

[Nerevar-as]

zsom wrote...

Foolsfolly wrote...

God walked out of the machine and said your choices don't matter, forget about what happened to anyone you've spent 7 years knowing, now here's your choices Red, Blue, or Green. Then the Normandy shows up running somehow, the relays are destroyed, intergalactic civilization is doomed, and the same ending cutscenes play with different colored energy. Then after the credits Buzz Aldrin sleeps through some cring inducing lines, my sweet. And you're politiely told to buy more DLC.

That's the more mature ending ME3 offers?

Or the how about the one they released months later in which any of the three arbitary choices given at the end divorced from the rest of the game or choices you've made all results in the same happy ending? Where any choice you pick has no consquences (except the new refuse which means you picked the choice where everyone dies). This is despite the fact that there ARE consquences we're told such as the death of all synthetics in the Destroy ending but the EC never shows negative impacts to your choices only the happy sunshine endings to your choice.

No. If their other games are fairy tales I'd rather they continue to tell fairy tales like Dragon Age: Origins where your character or your likely best friend dies to save the world... or you sleep with a witch to create what could be some god that will bite the world in the ass... or not. We have no idea what the ramifactions of that is and all because the Warden/Player could not sacrifice themselves for the greater good.

Your choices do actually matter, even the ones from ME2. If you didn't make the right choices then you couldn't save Eve for instance what's that if not a consequence? But that's not even the issue here. Choices and bittersweet vs. happy ending are mostly unrelated. You can have tons of choices and only bittersweet endings (PS:T), or choices and only happy endings (Skyrim). What I am against is the choice of a sunshine and butterfly endings where your fleets swoop in (swooping is good!), destroy the reapers and you get to raise blue babies / build a house. The only ending not invalidating heroism according to the OP, which is plain wrong. I think mature RPGs are more like PS:T and less like Skyrim, even though both have choices in the story!
Also I don't really like your double standard.. on one part you accept and embrace the ambiguity of Morrigan's god child, on the other hand you dislike the destroy endings openness. It is never even hinted at what the god child will turn into, it can be the next Diablo or the next Jesus Christ. The same way destroy can turn out right because the catalyst is wrong and synthetics will not eventually annihilate us, or it can just be a postponed genocide. Same open interpretation left for the player to chose.

The tone of ME, ME2 and ME3 until the beam shoots is more for blue babies than new galactic dark age as best possible outcome. It goes both ways, I doubt anyone would be happy if ASoF&I ends with the big everybody still alive happy, new era of everlasting peace and so on. The ending must match the tone of the story so far, but with the obsession some creators have to make the end memorable they seem to forget and forsake that to create a cheap emotional impact that will get fans angry, sad and wanting to forget they ever liked that show/game/whatever.

[Vicious]

About the rest of the post, I agree that it's almost impossible to make DR having a relevant role in the game without canonizing it.

This has been taken care of. Morrigan has stated that the DR was unneeded for her designs.

[David7204]

I am not saying that every story has to end with sunshine and bunnies and beer. That's ridiculous. I'm perfectly okay with dark and bleak endings.

I'm just not okay with it for Mass Effect. Because Mass Effect is unique. There has never been a story with the degree of heroism that Mass Effect portrays.There has never been a character like Shepard. And there has never been a story where the protagonist's actions affect so much. Shepard unites a galaxy.

Modifié par David7204, 29 octobre 2012 - 09:11 .

[Nerevar-as]

David7204 wrote...

I am not saying that every story has to end with sunshine and bunnies and beer. That's ridiculous. I'm perfectly okay with dark and bleak endings.

I'm just not okay with it for Mass Effect. Because Mass Effect is unique. There has never been a story with the degree of heroism that Mass Effect portrays.There has never been a character like Shepard. And there has never been a story where the protagonist's actions affect so much. Shepard unites a galaxy.

You need to read more. Shepard is up there, but not unique.

[David7204]

I've read a lot. And people sure have posted that remark a lot. I'm sure you can list off some examples for me?

[Vicious]

He got spaced in ME2, Can die in ME2 and fail, and I think ME3 did a fine job of bludgeoning you over the head and shoulders that despite his accomplishments, Shepard is still one man/woman. Just as capable of getting flash fried by Harbinger as anyone else... and it happened.

Too bad Bioware didn't have the guts to kill him during his heroic charge and give you an epilogue based on your efforts to unify the galaxy rather than starkid'ing the plot away. It would have fit the tone more. Yes, Shepard dies, but his efforts stopped the reapers. etc

Modifié par Vicious, 29 octobre 2012 - 09:24 .