889 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

Lizardviking wrote...

I have a feeling that most good writers would say that you should not tape an ending that would fit into 2001:  A space odyssey onto a series that had for the most part had been a heroic sci-fi akin to Star wars or Star Trek. Or vice versa for that matter.

Then you miss the enitre message of the morality of ends vs means inthe story of ME. The catalyst is part of that theme showing you the worse of that concept.  It's not taped on.

[Mathias]

dreman9999 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

A good sci-fi writer would not be making such gaping plot holes...

..What? Sci stories have many plot holes.

Every story has plot holes. But Mass Effect 3's are so... massive... it boggles the mind

What mind boggling plot holes? EC covered most of them. 

And then created new ones.

[Mcfly616]

Fireblader70 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

A good sci-fi writer would not be making such gaping plot holes...

I would love to hear what "plotholes" you speak of....

Well tough I am not getting myself into a long, heated argument again... sorry!

I have no desire to get into a heated discussion with you or anybody. In fact, I haven't seen a legit discussion on these forums in months. They're all diluted with hate and nonsense. But I understand your sentiment. I feel the same way.

[dreman9999]

dreamgazer wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

A lot of writers would appreciate the ideology, the mystical quality of it, and the discussion that the ending sparked.

They wouldn't appreciate the slapdash execution.

The slap dash execution was with the orginal endings.

No, the inherent problems with practicality and clarity of perspective are still there.

It 's made to be open ended. It's  not made to be a liniear story like a book. It leaves what something mean up to the player.
Think the spinning top in the end of inception.

[dreman9999]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

A good sci-fi writer would not be making such gaping plot holes...

..What? Sci stories have many plot holes.

Every story has plot holes. But Mass Effect 3's are so... massive... it boggles the mind

What mind boggling plot holes? EC covered most of them. 

And then created new ones.

Because the normady can't be close by..

[jstme]

dreman9999 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

I have a feeling that most good writers would say that you should not tape an ending that would fit into 2001:  A space odyssey onto a series that had for the most part had been a heroic sci-fi akin to Star wars or Star Trek. Or vice versa for that matter.

Then you miss the enitre message of the morality of ends vs means inthe story of ME. The catalyst is part of that theme showing you the worse of that concept.  It's not taped on.

Lol. Dreman9999 ,i asssure you that if i asked you a year ago what are important messages of ME, message of morality of ends vs means would not be in first 10 things you would have mentioned.
Even Harry Harrison could not have spotted that message as the one that will be ME3 grand finale theme.

[Fawx9]

dreman9999 wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

A good sci-fi writer would not be making such gaping plot holes...

..What? Sci stories have many plot holes.

Every story has plot holes. But Mass Effect 3's are so... massive... it boggles the mind

What mind boggling plot holes? EC covered most of them. 

And then created new ones.

Because the normady can't be close by..

There's multiple problems with that scene other than perfect timing.

A bandaid is still a bandaid even if it's one of the clear ones.

[dreman9999]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Melinda M. Snodgrass, one of the writers for Star Trek TNG, most known for her episode "Measure of Man", actually weighed in on the ending and talked about how bad it was. So i guess she no longer qualifies as a "genius sci fi writer".

As an ending hater, i agree i need to get over the ending, but Pro-Enders like the OP really need to get over their pretentious attitude towards haters as well.

EDIT: Also what about Joss Whedon who also commented on the ending. I guess he isn't a good Sci Fi writer either.

She was taking about the  original endings and she was taking the catalystasthe voice of bw...Which it is not. She missed the fact that this was a machine doing what it was programmed to do. It thatit was an issue with shackled machines.

After the EC, there were some lines from the Catalyst that definitely sounded like it was coming from the mouth of the writers. Like i was being talked down to. So Melissa's point still stands with me.

What? What a character says does not mean the writes feel the same way. This game can have Shepard ruthlessly kill of the geth. Doesthat mean they want all synthetics to be killed?

What the catalyst says is what it believes, on top of that it's programmed to beleive it. That does nto mean we have to believe it or the writers do.

[Seival]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Seival you're not gonna change anyone's mind.

Trying to change hater's mind about ME3 ending is like trying to convince Kerk Pyrrus that nuclear bomb is not a good solution to deal with the "enemy". But even people like Kerk can be reasonable. If I'll manage to convince at least few people, it would be worth trying.

Modifié par Seival, 04 novembre 2012 - 04:54 .

[ghost9191]

dreman9999 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

A lot of writers would appreciate the ideology, the mystical quality of it, and the discussion that the ending sparked.

They wouldn't appreciate the slapdash execution.

The slap dash execution was with the orginal endings.

No, the inherent problems with practicality and clarity of perspective are still there.

It 's made to be open ended. It's  not made to be a liniear story like a book. It leaves what something mean up to the player.
Think the spinning top in the end of inception.

1) the top was falling over

2) judging from the rest of the story , liniear was not a issue for bioware

3) ec actually doesn't leave much to the imagination ,

[Isichar]

Mcfly616 wrote...

 haha I could care less about your "list" lmao. Please show me a spexific post where I mindlessly bashed any individual, without them first bashing someone or some thing. Please do....I'll wait

Well if you dont care then why are you asking me to prove myself?

But ok Ill play

You already made a generalization towards people who disliked the ending in this very thread.

[ghost9191]

Seival wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Seival you're not gonna change anyone's mind.

Trying to change hater's mind about ME3 ending is like trying to convince Kerk Pyrrus that nuclear bomb is not a good solution to deal with the "enemy". But even people like Kerk can be reasonable. If I'll manage to convince at least few people, it would be worth keep trying.

you mean like say someone trying to change your opinion. it is theirs., if they liked or hated it , it is their opinion. you trying to force yours on others just makes you a bad person and you should feel bad<_<

[Mcfly616]

DrGunjah wrote...

How can anyone expect to be taken seriously when stating "the ending makes perfect sense" ?
Liking or disliking it, ok. Though when you ignore all the flaws of the ending, that's by definition ignorance.

please list the ways in which it doesn't make sense before calling on ignorant. Because you sound like the ignorant one. I have no problem with anybody based on whether they like the ending or not. It's all based on how they carry themselves and act. For instance, I never attacked anybody in my first post. I simply agreed with what I read of the OP and the sci fi novels and what not. Yet, some troll wants to take something I said and turn it into an insult towards themselves.....whatever lol. They're the ones that look ignorant. As do you with your last post

[dreamgazer]

dreman9999 wrote...

It's made to be open ended. It's  not made to be a liniear story like a book. It leaves what something mean up to the player.
Think the spinning top in the end of inception.

I'm well-aware of how open-ended it's supposed to be, but that doesn't excuse gaps in scientific logic or the fact that the audience often can't tell what's real and surreal. Interpretation's great, as long as it's anchored to something. 

[Isichar]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Fireblader70 wrote...

A good sci-fi writer would not be making such gaping plot holes...

I would love to hear what "plotholes" you speak of....

Well tough I am not getting myself into a long, heated argument again... sorry!

I have no desire to get into a heated discussion with you or anybody. In fact, I haven't seen a legit discussion on these forums in months. They're all diluted with hate and nonsense. But I understand your sentiment. I feel the same way.

I dont hate the ending or the writers. I disagree with the overall execution of the Catalyst and Crucible. But whenever I type all you see is "ENDING HATE RAWEWTGSTEW" when I think many of the core ideas involved in the ending are actually good themselves.

Do you ever think that the reason you never see a legit discussion is because you label everyone without understanding what they are saying and why?

Modifié par Isichar, 04 novembre 2012 - 04:58 .

[Redbelle]

Seival wrote...

(1) "I'll give you my conclusions," Jason said, twisting in the chair, trying to find a comfortable position for his aching bones. "I've been doing a lot of thinking the last day or two, searching for the answer. The very first thing I realized, was that the perfect and logical solution wouldn't do at all. I'm afraid the old ideal of the lion lying down with the lamb doesn't work out in practice. About all it does is make a fast lunch for the lion. Ideally, now that you all know the real causes of your trouble, you should tear down the perimeter and have the city and forest people mingle in brotherly love. Makes just as pretty a picture as the one of lion and lamb. And would undoubtedly have the same result. Someone would remember how really filthy the grubbers are, or how stupid junkmen can be, and there would be a fresh corpse cooling. The fight would spread and the victors would be eaten by the wildlife that swarmed over the undefended perimeter. No, the answer isn't that easy."

*snip*


Thoughts?

There is a slight, ever so slight, problem with this: the expression, the lion and lamb shall lay down together does not occur in the Bible! The closest we can get to it Isaiah 11:6.

The wolf shall dwell with the lamb,

and the leopard shall lie down with the young goat,

and the calf and the lion and the fattened calf together;

and a little child shall lead them.

Isaiah 11:6

My first thought is where does the phrase or proported ideal of the lion lying down with the lamb actually come from? Seeing as initial reading would seem to suggest a biblical reference. However, it appears to be more of a pop culture, or some such, reference that, if it's origins come from biblical text's, has been taken out of context of it's original transcript to promote alternative agenda's.

When the lion and the lamb were mentioned in Isaiah, it was not actually talking about a real lion, or a real lamb. One of the things that keeps cropping up in biblical text is the use of analogies to describe people and institutions to describe them in such a way as to not give those who exercised power, at that time, an excuse to arrest the story tellers.

Therefore. For the character to paraphrase, or perhaps quote out of context, the analogy that those who wield the power of man over other men are just men before a higher power.  Then turn that into an rationale to keeping city and forest folk seperate while at the same time expressing a racist streak which the charater describes forest folk as filthy Grubbers and stupid cavemen is.............. interesting.

I'll end it there as, having not read the books I can't say if the character has any justification to maintain isolation or if his characterisation's of the outside folk have an element of truth. Just to say that this character does not seem to have an open mind and appears willing to use whatever argument suits his purpose to get his own way.

Modifié par Redbelle, 04 novembre 2012 - 05:05 .

[dreman9999]

jstme wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

I have a feeling that most good writers would say that you should not tape an ending that would fit into 2001:  A space odyssey onto a series that had for the most part had been a heroic sci-fi akin to Star wars or Star Trek. Or vice versa for that matter.

Then you miss the enitre message of the morality of ends vs means inthe story of ME. The catalyst is part of that theme showing you the worse of that concept.  It's not taped on.

Lol. Dreman9999 ,i asssure you that if i asked you a year ago what are important messages of ME, message of morality of ends vs means would not be in first 10 things you would have mentioned.
Even Harry Harrison could not have spotted that message as the one that will be ME3 grand finale theme.

I saw that them from 2007 when I first played ME1.

This is a game that ask you how you do things , a game of choice, to get to your end. It has no road the equal failure out side of bad choices..And bad choice are nether renage or paragon.

You don't thing a game that ask you to save the council and  let allance personal die to save them or hold them back to ensure victory over sovergin and future reaper threats does not question ends vs means?

[dreman9999]

dreamgazer wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

It's made to be open ended. It's  not made to be a liniear story like a book. It leaves what something mean up to the player.
Think the spinning top in the end of inception.

I'm well-aware of how open-ended it's supposed to be, but that doesn't excuse gaps in scientific logic or the fact that the audience often can't tell what's real and surreal. Interpretation's great, as long as it's anchored to something. 

That issue is just with synthesis. And you don't have to pick it.

[MegaSovereign]

DrGunjah wrote...

How can anyone expect to be taken seriously when stating "the ending makes perfect sense" ?
Liking or disliking it, ok. Though when you ignore all the flaws of the ending, that's by definition ignorance.

The only objective flaw I see is with the Normandy evac scene. The rest of it is pretty subjective.

A lot of what was wrong with the original endings were not up to debate. Things like the Mass Relay exploding and the Normandy getting damaged by the Crucible in all the endings were things that contradicted the lore.

If you want my opinion, even post-EC I think they could have given more exposition on the Crucible and how it functions, especially  with the Synthesis "solution." But again, that is just my opinion and some people don't like things to be explained to the very last detail. I also would have done more with the breath scene....

[Argolas]

The ending was not made for genius authors. It was made for players. You know, the ones who hate it.

[dreman9999]

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Isichar wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Ironhandjustice wrote...

Obviously he did not remember that is "very similar" to Asimov's foundation cuatrilogy... right?

-Support the first foundation and kill second foundation and the IA's
-Support the second foundationd and control first foundation and destroy Ia's
-Support the IA's and make a synthesis with first and second foundations.

Very... "similar".

the ending of Foundations Edge (the options you just listed) is the direct inspiration for the ME3 ending.


And OP: I agree. ME3 was given a classic ending of the sci fi genre. Inspired by such writers as you listed. Seems people that say they know sci fi, really just mean Star Wars and Star Trek. I'll take the classic sci fi ending over Ewoks any day of the week.

So in other words:

Anyone who dislikes the ending does not know classic Sci-fi and anyone who likes it does?

did I say that? No, I didn't. I said "some people". Though, it would seem that those that dont like the ending, wouldn't really be satisfied by the majority of classic sci fi novels written in the last 50 years.

For so many people that are calling the OP "ignorant", I find it funny that they're getting upset. Hell, if anything Pro-Enders have some catching up to do in the ignorance department. That's a fact. Every thread I've seen that praises the end, or simply tries to discuss it, turns into a bashfest once the Anti-Enders see it. Troll after troll, jumping in simply to post: "NO. The Ending SUCKS!" or "its a pile of crap" or "its nonsensical and doesn't go with the themes of Mass Effect!".....Riiiight.

The term "ignorant" is a moot and hypocritical point on these forums.....well, if you're asking me atleast. You yourself are doing a fine job of sounding entitled

A) Nothing in Mass effect 3 makes much sense

B)You didn't say some people, to quote you said "seems people that say they know sci fi, really just mean star trek and star wars".
That is aimed at everyone who doesn't agree with your opinions.

C) The whole argument this deluded OP is trying to get across is something along the line "well if you hate MLP then you probably don't like Liara".

1. That's bs.
2.The very point of the topic is to change peoplewho don't like th eending to look at it in a new perspectives.
3. Read point 2.


Also,Bethesda Fan....What did you do in the fallout 3 "the pitt dlc."

[Seival]

ghost9191 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

A lot of writers would appreciate the ideology, the mystical quality of it, and the discussion that the ending sparked.

They wouldn't appreciate the slapdash execution.

The slap dash execution was with the orginal endings.

No, the inherent problems with practicality and clarity of perspective are still there.

It 's made to be open ended. It's  not made to be a liniear story like a book. It leaves what something mean up to the player.
Think the spinning top in the end of inception.

1) the top was falling over

2) judging from the rest of the story , liniear was not a issue for bioware

3) ec actually doesn't leave much to the imagination ,

In fact EC and Leviathan leave a lot to the imagination. Maybe even more than in case of original ending, because we have the full vision of each ending and all info required to base our thoughts upon. In EC our imagination was just... directed correctly. We've got the vectors we needed, and have no need to wander in the dark anymore.

[dreman9999]

Argolas wrote...

The ending was not made for genius authors. It was made for players. You know, the ones who hate it.

Op's point is foryou to think about the endings and stop blindly hating it.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

dreman9999 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

I have a feeling that most good writers would say that you should not tape an ending that would fit into 2001:  A space odyssey onto a series that had for the most part had been a heroic sci-fi akin to Star wars or Star Trek. Or vice versa for that matter.

Then you miss the enitre message of the morality of ends vs means inthe story of ME. The catalyst is part of that theme showing you the worse of that concept.  It's not taped on.

I am talking about an end sequence that goes from your typical "Desperate battle against impossible odds" to some weird sequence filled with dreamy music and symbolism. In a series that has for the most part been rather straightfoward when it comes to these things. We go from a story whose main goal was "Stop the Reapers" to "Help Starkid solve the issue of conflict between organic and synthethic life.".

The tone of the ending does fit with the rest of trilogy.