889 réponses à ce sujet

[3DandBeyond]

Seival wrote...

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

A lion lying down with a lamb is logical.
Oh dear, it's a good thing time kills us.

I have a theory...

...Ask some person, who disliked ME3 ending, to read some good old sci-fi book and describe what did he understand afterwards, and that person will call the book "nonsence" or "nice adventure".

Seeing as a lot of great Sci Fi writers already labeled the endings as bad and you ignore that and fans who disliked the endings have stated specifically on numerous occasions that it matter most how the endings fit with the story at hand and you ignored that, why should they bother answering another question when you will ignore the answer?

The fact that ME3's endings are not just derivative of other IPs, but are taken almost completely in pieces that are wedged together to try and make them coherent tells all.  The endings don't work here because they were not created specifically for this story.  Sure some other sci fi tales have bad endings, some don't.  So what?  The question isn't about whether some other ending to some other story is good or bad.  That doesn't matter here.  The question is whether this ending (these endings) are appropriate thematically, plotwise, characterwise, logistically, logically, and etc. for this story and game.  And they fail all the way around.  You're playing a game and don't play this ending.  You watch it and hit a button occasionally to ask questions that are meaningless and don't address the points or the conflict created by the existence of the kid.  There is no confrontation, but there is acquiescence.  There is no logic because everything said is contradictory and not challanged based upon knowledge and circumstances within 97% of the story.

I've read a lot of great SF before now, as well as a lot of history, historical fiction, literature, non-fiction, scientific, and so on, books.  The only piece of work relevant to this game is anything that includes these words, "Mass Effect" and "Video Game".  The fact that Leviathan came out as a way to after the fact create back story for the endings, and all it does is add more contradiction to them and make the logic even less logical, indicates not a lot of real thought went into the choices and their meaning.  The balance you've always asserted they show should have been more real and tangible-win or lose, live or die, save all or lose all, save most or lose some of what matters most, bitter and sweet that were real and palpable.  Emotions and all.  ME was never a game about hard SF.  It was a cross between Star Wars, Star Trek, and in parts, Bladerunner.  The devs, in fact, in many places stated they wanted ME3 to be their "Star Wars".  I don't remember SW ending with a supposed tough choice.  It ended with people deciding what they together wanted the future to be.  I sincerely doubt Disney will give any new SW anything but a Disney ending.

And you don't speak for genius SF writers.  You've requested BW create DLC or some add on to the game where people who don't want to be synthesized are moved to "reservations" on other planets until synthesis naturally occurs.  I can't even begin to say how abhorrent a thought that is. 

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 04 novembre 2012 - 06:18 .

[ghost9191]

@dreman

well i should probably have no comment to that but yeah it does. simple buddy , shep died , uploaded memories. those memories guide and give the shepalyst reason.

but shepard died to achieve that. and if not then well clearly he is batsh*t insane and i would not want him leading a army of unstoppable synthetic machines. just me

but hey proof other then a quote , well half a quote . even if it kills him as a human. my point stays true. it kills what shepard once was . no longer the man he was, and why he no longer has a connection to his kinda or whatever

[Eterna]

 Deleted.

Modifié par Eterna5, 04 novembre 2012 - 06:19 .

[Steelcan]

This is pathetic. OP, saying you ending is best because some authors might agree with it is not a basis for an arguement.

Destroy supporters, don't argue, just ignore.

[DrGunjah]

dreman9999 wrote...
Shepard was not hit by the lazer.
The normandy was close by.
The cunduit was clearly not a back door.
The crucible getting attached even with lowest possible EMS is not a plot hole.
The catalyst says destroy effects all tech, and control has you replace it equaling rewrite for reapers.

That's exactly the kind of flimsy explanation I was talking about.
It's like:
"why is this pig able to fly?" 
-"because it's a flying pig"...

[Grubas]

dreman9999 wrote...

1. The catalyst did not build the crucible nor planned it. Why would it be able have it not effect   non reaper AI. Added EDI and the geth use reaper code anyway. They still would be effected.
2.synthesis is a question of the moralities of advancement and ends vs means. It's just their to persent that question. You don't have to pick it.

If the Catalyst didnt build the Crucible, then it should have been someone else. Why would anyone in his right mind build a superweapon that targets all tech, when its the Reapers that posse a threat? 
Yes, EDI and Geth would still be affected, but the Geth have been doing fine without Reapertech  before... you helped getting rid of the Reapercode fragments on the geth servers yourself. Remember?

Synthesis has no roots in the franchise, it dosnt fit the narrative. 

 

[ghost9191]

i ignored that part lol. but will argue with dreman on sheps fate in control ending . more just to debate it. i see it as no longer shep some see it differently . it is more interesting to me at least.

already posted my thoughts on the ending . but then got off topic. which i did state multiple times but it continued. anyhow each ending is no more valid then another. and solves a problem that was solved over rannoch.

Modifié par ghost9191, 04 novembre 2012 - 06:24 .

[Seival]

Steelcan wrote...

This is pathetic. OP, saying you ending is best because some authors might agree with it is not a basis for an arguement.

Destroy supporters, don't argue, just ignore.

A lot of people like classic sci-fi books. If some particular sci-fi writer would like a story, then people who like this writer's stories would also like that story.

[AlanC9]

HellbirdIV wrote...
What makes Deathworld anymore "classic" and "real" Scifi than older science fiction such as War of the Worlds, Flash Gordon, 1984 or Captain Z-Ro?

Indeed. SF's big enough to find any parallel you want if you search long enough.

[dreamgazer]

Steelcan wrote...

This is pathetic. OP, saying you ending is best because some authors might agree with it is not a basis for an arguement.

Destroy supporters, don't argue, just ignore.

Eh, what else would you expect? All Seival's topics skew like that, especially the "idea" threads. All you can do is roll with the punches.

[The Heretic of Time]

Mass Effect was never deep or well-written and it certainly shouldn't try to be deep or well written in the end. A standard cliche blockbuster shoot-the-reapers-to-oblivion -ending would have been more fitting for a standard cliche blockbuster sci-fi series, which is what Mass Effect really is.

[3DandBeyond]

DrGunjah wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Shepard was not hit by the lazer.
The normandy was close by.
The cunduit was clearly not a back door.
The crucible getting attached even with lowest possible EMS is not a plot hole.
The catalyst says destroy effects all tech, and control has you replace it equaling rewrite for reapers.

That's exactly the kind of flimsy explanation I was talking about.
It's like:
"why is this pig able to fly?" 
-"because it's a flying pig"...

Ha ha ha.  It's like everything said to explain the garbage that is.  The crucible is needed because anything else is doomed to fail.  Why is it doomed to fail?  Because it's impossible.  Why is it impossible?  Because it is.

The whole catalyst conversation falls flat on its face if one logically tears it apart.  Leviathan makes it worse.  There is no logic there.

And yes, the end of Foundation was an "inspiration" for this, but so were a lot of other things.  The problem was nothing was fit together with this story.  It's fine to derive inspiration from other sources, but you need to make it your own.  It needs to mesh with the themes of your story.  ME3's ending is like someone looked at all these sources (B5, BSG, the Matrix, Foundation, Transformers, Deus ex, 2001, and more) and said "that sounds good" and created the original endings with no thought of how to coordinate these things with ME.  They boxed themselves into a corner.  So with the EC they just added glitter.

If they wanted there to be 3 choices, it would even have been better if the kid was Harbinger and said, "do one of these or die".  Better yet, a real confrontation with a real logic tree and a possibility of making the AI have to confront his false logic that disrupts what he's doing.  I'd prefer this story didn't end on choices (that have been done better before in other stories).  And why include green in the one ME game that does not feature any green choices?

[Applepie_Svk]

Seival wrote...


IT is an attempt to refuse almost everything the story is about, and I can't support this.

This made me laugh... Indoctrination is one of the stronger plotdevice of whole Reaper lore, and IT as an explanation is most rational and polishing attempt to explain bad writing.  IT is not the attempt to refuse, but it´s the only attempt to keept Reaper´s nature evil as it was before instead some kind of glowboy trying to force some empty feeling of guilt in main protagonist.

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 04 novembre 2012 - 06:39 .

[Steelcan]

Seival wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

This is pathetic. OP, saying you ending is best because some authors might agree with it is not a basis for an arguement.

Destroy supporters, don't argue, just ignore.

A lot of people like classic sci-fi books. If some particular sci-fi writer would like a story, then people who like this writer's stories would also like that story.

. No not really.  I love The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, yet I find the Silmarillion to be extremely boring and dull.  Interesting, but dull nonetheless 

Modifié par Steelcan, 04 novembre 2012 - 06:41 .

[Bill Casey]

IT is the ****ing ending of the game...
I don't know where the "literal interpretation" came from...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 04 novembre 2012 - 06:41 .

[jstme]

Mcfly616 wrote...

jstme wrote...
Trying to amateurishly force well known semi-philosophical themes from other places into unfitting ME narrative in an abhorent depressing grimdark emo way makes it bad ending.
Going full hipster mode "it is ,like, deep, and has, like ,meaning and stuff" is not going to fool anyone.

the themes the ending choices presented, have been ever-present since the beginning of the series.

I understand what you mean. There indeed are AI issues, Geth "rebellion",synthesis (Saren,husks and co) and destruction from the beginning. Control (TIM) issues have more to do with ME2,but it is still part of narrative.
However - main theme of ME was about stopping the reapers.
Even more:
Player having to choose utopian solution for the galaxy - was clearly not a theme present from the beginning. Architect-like creature (Catalyst) was not present from the beginning. Synthetic vs Organic conflict was nothing more then a side story theme. AI issues ,just as synthesis, are just a background theme with no serious discussion (especially synthesis).  
Untill ME3.
In which reapers becomes a blind force of nature and narrative shifts to side themes.
In the end stopping the reapers is nothing more then a side effect while main choice is about what type of its own adversary will the player become and what type of the actions that we tried to prevent we will actually choose to make.  This twist is completely artificial ,foreign theme for ME. Artificially forcing someone to think about issues writer wants them to think about - does not work. Just like forcing to feel sad about the kid. 
And this artisitc twist not only does not work, it comes with a price - ending is dark, depressing and repulsive because it simply does not fit the type of story that was being told.

 

[3DandBeyond]

Seival wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

This is pathetic. OP, saying you ending is best because some authors might agree with it is not a basis for an arguement.

Destroy supporters, don't argue, just ignore.

A lot of people like classic sci-fi books. If some particular sci-fi writer would like a story, then people who like this writer's stories would also like that story.

Not necessarily.  Just because a friend of mine likes strawberry ice cream, doesn't mean I do.  And you have no way of knowing whether your favorite SF writer would like a certain story unless they say it.

There have been SF writers who came on this forum or who were quoted on this forum as not liking the endings and even big parts of ME3 (but loved some parts), and people ripped them apart (a small group of people) and said they weren't authorities.  Some were well-respected in their field.  As well there are others who have stated the great things they've read and like to read and who got ripped apart for not liking this, because of little minds that said they are meaningless.

I sincerely doubt it that if five of the greatest SF writers of all time were alive today and came here and said they disliked ME3's endings, you would respect that.  You have indicated it would be a bad thing for writers to change their endings for the sake of fans and yet, great well-known writers have done just that.  So, I do doubt you'd care about any opinion if it disagreed with yours.

And I could name SF writers I think that would not like the endings, well known great SF writers, but that would be meaningless. 

[jstme]

Seival wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

This is pathetic. OP, saying you ending is best because some authors might agree with it is not a basis for an arguement.

Destroy supporters, don't argue, just ignore.

A lot of people like classic sci-fi books. If some particular sci-fi writer would like a story, then people who like this writer's stories would also like that story.

But that sci-fi writer did not say he liked the ending of ME3 and for several months he is not with us.
And yet you use his name to promote your agenda.

[GreyLycanTrope]

A Bethesda Fan wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

 Deleted.

It's a good thing you deleted it.
Doesn't suit you at all.

Not knowing what was said is going to bug me

[Bill Casey]

Lizardviking wrote...

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.".

I mean, really?
really?

Modifié par Bill Casey, 04 novembre 2012 - 06:44 .

[DrGunjah]

Seival wrote...
A lot of people like classic sci-fi books. If some particular sci-fi writer would like a story, then people who like this writer's stories would also like that story.

No. False implications.

[Seival]

AlanC9 wrote...

HellbirdIV wrote...
What makes Deathworld anymore "classic" and "real" Scifi than older science fiction such as War of the Worlds, Flash Gordon, 1984 or Captain Z-Ro?

Indeed. SF's big enough to find any parallel you want if you search long enough.

There are many books out there, but too few of them can be compared to Mass Effect story. Mass Effect and Deathworld have some very similar ideas no matter the stories are very different in general.

[Ticonderoga117]

Who is this "Harry Harrison" and why should I care? You know what SciFi authors I read?
Dan Abnett, Ian Douglas, John Ringo, Eric Nylund, David Drake, David Weber, Keith Laumer, William Keith, H. G. Wells, Stanislaw Lem, Robert Heinlein etc.

And you know the closest any one of them got to "Lol, let's throw a last minute curveball that's not really built up"? Weber when he recently wrote a book that was a good ole alien invasion book in modern day and the books ends thanks to a Dues Ex Vampire. Literally. Vampires pop up from no where and finish off the invasion.

And you know what? That's a pretty bad way to end a book. At least that was only one book, where as the end of ME3 ruins 3 whole games!

Modifié par Ticonderoga117, 04 novembre 2012 - 06:50 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Oh Seival you and your perspective on why people dislike the ending. Phrase "the Emperor has no clothes on" comes to mind, whoever knows why gets a cookie.