220 réponses à ce sujet

[GreyLycanTrope]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

@ LilLino
They're motivations are supposed to be beyond our comprehension as in beyond our grasp, we can grasp their motivation, it's just completely stupid.

False.

The Reapers motives are not within our comprehension, the problem they deal with is typically never seen in our civlization. Why? Because they deal with it before our galaxy advances to that point. You don't even need Leviathan DLC to know that: the patterns are in the data. ME1 is when the harvest was supposed to begin, synthetics were primitive. After the delay, "true" AI (like EDI/geth) were created. They're still new, and too small a population to be threats to anyone.

So, no. If this fanbase is an indication, Sovereign was right. The majority of us do not comprehend it. The fact that people see Rannoch as "proof" that they're wrong goes to show that.

Ah no they are wrong, they argue certain and absolute inevitability of something that is merely a possiblity. "Proof" from the outcome of their cycle of origin is no more absolute than the "proof" from the outcome of ours.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 08 novembre 2012 - 06:39 .

[Chief Commander]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

@ LilLino
They're motivations are supposed to be beyond our comprehension as in beyond our grasp, we can grasp their motivation, it's just completely stupid.

False.

The Reapers motives are not within our comprehension, the problem they deal with is typically never seen in our civlization. Why? Because they deal with it before our galaxy advances to that point. You don't even need Leviathan DLC to know that: the patterns are in the data. ME1 is when the harvest was supposed to begin, synthetics were primitive. After the delay, "true" AI (like EDI/geth) were created. They're still new, and too small a population to be threats to anyone.

So, no. If this fanbase is an indication, Sovereign was right. The majority of us do not comprehend it. The fact that people see Rannoch as "proof" that they're wrong goes to show that.

So you would gladly accept being shot in the face if someone says "Sorry one day you might launch a nuke that starts WW3. It may not happen though, but yeah." If you really believe in this then you are...already indoctrinated.

We all might just kill ourselves, because it is possible for our governments to erase humanity at any point of time with one push of a button. THAT´s the logic of the Reapers. Do you support this?

[Dr_Extrem]

Yate wrote...

LilLino wrote...

I don't agree. I prefer Bioware's ending. This mod actually offers less choice than the original and doesn't explain the Reapers origins nor goals.

If the ending was like this I'd be pissed.

No, I really appreciate modder's good work, it's very nice of him, but don't turn his good will to a weapon against Bioware and it's employees. I doubt he'd want that.

this

I'm glad ME3 didn't end with a cheesy romance scene

if it had originally been in the game (as a possible outcome), would you have played it? .. my guess is no and thats perfectly ok ..

i dislike cheasy romance scenes. but in fact, the original memorial scenes are no better - in the original endings, they are just cheasy, threnodial scenes.

[David7204]

This is ridiculous.

If this ending was actually the one that was released, people would be be complaining about it even more than the endings now. As they should.

[David7204]

I've come to expect very little from the BSN. But this is just basic, basic, basic stuff. There is really no excuse for not recognizing that too many people will claim any idea as the best thing EVER, EVER!!! so long as it isn't in the game. Any of the substantial problems are forgotten. And it's moronic.

Modifié par David7204, 08 novembre 2012 - 06:39 .

[Chief Commander]

David7204 wrote...

This is ridiculous.

If this ending was actually the one that was released, people would be be complaining about it even more than the endings now. As they should.

Ah yes, the typical "You are wrong, but I am right" post. Care to post any proof? Care to evaluate further?

David7204 wrote...

I've come to expect very little from
the BSN. But this is just basic, basic, basic stuff. There is really no
excuse for not recognizing that people will claim any idea as the best
thing EVER, EVER!!! so long as it isn't in the game. And it's moronic.

Again, care to evaluate why you are the superior? I am saying that adding this in any way, either as the only possible ending, or just as one very high EMS ending would make a lot of people happy. Go look at this poll (social.bioware.com/633606/polls/28989/ ) if you don´t believe me. Where is your hard evidence for your posts?

[His Name was HYR!!]

Greylycantrope wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

@ LilLino
They're motivations are supposed to be beyond our comprehension as in beyond our grasp, we can grasp their motivation, it's just completely stupid.

False.

The Reapers motives are not within our comprehension, the problem they deal with is typically never seen in our civlization. Why? Because they deal with it before our galaxy advances to that point. You don't even need Leviathan DLC to know that: the patterns are in the data. ME1 is when the harvest was supposed to begin, synthetics were primitive. After the delay, "true" AI (like EDI/geth) were created. They're still new, and too small a population to be threats to anyone.

So, no. If this fanbase is an indication, Sovereign was right. The majority of us do not comprehend it. The fact that people see Rannoch as "proof" that they're wrong goes to show that.

Ah no they are wrong, they argue certain and absolute inevitability of something that is merely a possiblity. "Proof" from the outcome of their cycle of origin is no more absolute than the "proof" from the outcome of ours.

Changing the subject, right or wrong has got nothing to do with it.

You asserted that their motives were supposed to be beyond our comprehension, and that we comprehend them fine.

We do not.


*edit* OP got lost along the way as well.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 08 novembre 2012 - 06:45 .

[David7204]

The proof is inherent. It's basic storytelling. You don't end a story like Mass Effect without a confrontation with the antagonist. You don't end it by solving the central conflict with Deus Ex Machina. The current endings suck, but at the very least they give some context for why the choices exist, which this fails to do. You don't end it by completing leaving out any motivation or reason for the antagonist to exist.

[LilLino]

Chief Commander wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

@ LilLino
They're motivations are supposed to be beyond our comprehension as in beyond our grasp, we can grasp their motivation, it's just completely stupid.

False.

The Reapers motives are not within our comprehension, the problem they deal with is typically never seen in our civlization. Why? Because they deal with it before our galaxy advances to that point. You don't even need Leviathan DLC to know that: the patterns are in the data. ME1 is when the harvest was supposed to begin, synthetics were primitive. After the delay, "true" AI (like EDI/geth) were created. They're still new, and too small a population to be threats to anyone.

So, no. If this fanbase is an indication, Sovereign was right. The majority of us do not comprehend it. The fact that people see Rannoch as "proof" that they're wrong goes to show that.

So you would gladly accept being shot in the face if someone says "Sorry one day you might launch a nuke that starts WW3. It may not happen though, but yeah." If you really believe in this then you are...already indoctrinated.

We all might just kill ourselves, because it is possible for our governments to erase humanity at any point of time with one push of a button. THAT´s the logic of the Reapers. Do you support this?

You're wrong, again. I don't support this, that's why I destroy them. Others prefer controling them and others seek solution in a compromise -> Synthesis. It's not 'us' or our goverment we're talking about. We're talking the Reapers, who are our enemy.

Catalyst thinks that we're gonna eventually going to kill ourselves and he's trying to prevent that, by 'storing' us in Reaper form. It's pretty clear he doesn't have any feelings and doesn't see right from wrong. He even admits that synthetics will never truly understand such things without synthesis and he is an AI himself.
It's a way of thinking that's completely unorganic and so, beyond our comprehension. For us, saving lives doesn't work that way, for machines, it does.


You're making it pretty clear you don't even try to understand what the hell it is all about, while it's pretty clearly laid out in both Leviathan&EC.

Modifié par LilLino, 08 novembre 2012 - 06:51 .

[DirtyPhoenix]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

Why is it so hard to accept that some people may prefer Bioware's endings over this?

you can prefer what ever you want. it is not about getting rid of the endings, it is about adding one ending, like this. the choice is up to you. nobody has to play a happier ending - but now, we all have to play the grim ones.

Thats perfectly fine. I was just responding to OP's response to those who said they'd prefer the ingame endings. A little preemptive on my part, I admit. xD

Modifié par pirate1802, 08 novembre 2012 - 06:51 .

[futurepixels]

I understand Bioware sticking to their endings, but I don't understand their reluctance to add more endings to a game that is supposed to be about choice.

Every piece of DLC should come with a new ending.  Positive or grim, just give use more ways to end the story, so we can keep playing with new versions of Shepard.

Modifié par futurepixels, 08 novembre 2012 - 06:58 .

[MattFini]

David7204 wrote...

This is ridiculous.

If this ending was actually the one that was released, people would be be complaining about it even more than the endings now. As they should.

Not me.

Obviously if this were the real ending, it would be a bit more polished...but this is pretty much all I was looking for with ME3's ending:  a sense of victory and a little bit of immediate closure for my Shepard.

I even like the way the Normandy sweeps across the screen in the final shot.  Far, far more heroic, epic and appropriate than the nonsense we initially got.

Also, I like that this cut leaves the Reapers a mystery.  As it should be. 

Very well done, and far better than what BioWare managed. 

[GreyLycanTrope]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

False.

The Reapers motives are not within our comprehension, the problem they deal with is typically never seen in our civlization. Why? Because they deal with it before our galaxy advances to that point. You don't even need Leviathan DLC to know that: the patterns are in the data. ME1 is when the harvest was supposed to begin, synthetics were primitive. After the delay, "true" AI (like EDI/geth) were created. They're still new, and too small a population to be threats to anyone.

So, no. If this fanbase is an indication, Sovereign was right. The majority of us do not comprehend it. The fact that people see Rannoch as "proof" that they're wrong goes to show that.

Ah no they are wrong, they argue certain and absolute inevitability of something that is merely a possiblity. "Proof" from the outcome of their cycle of origin is no more absolute than the "proof" from the outcome of ours.

Changing the subject, right or wrong has got nothing to do with it.

You asserted that their motives were supposed to be beyond our comprehension, and that we comprehend them fine.

We do not.

How do we not? They explain quite clearly how they see teh universe functions, what they do and why they do what they do.They're not unknowable they're quite clear.

[MattFini]

futurepixels wrote...

I understand Bioware sticking to their endings, but I don't understand their reluctance to add more endings to a game that is supposed to be about choice.

Every piece of DLC should come with a new ending.  Positive or grim, just give use more ways to end the story, so we can keep playing with new versions of Shepard.

Yeah, I respect BioWare's vision even if I despise it.

I think the Catalyst is possibly the greatest storytelling mistake I've seen in any medium (and i'm talking about games/movies/books that were otherwise GOOD) - but if the Destory ending was left as is, and included a little bit more after the breath scene ... something similar to the end of ME1, with your crew searching the Citadel ruins and descovering Shepard alive (or dead, depending on EMS?), I would've been perfectly content with that.

It's their crappy cling to worthless ambiguity that makes Destory infuriating. I get high EMS and you still can't tell me whether or not my main character is alive or not?  And that's the end of his story!?  What a load of crap. 

[Chief Commander]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

OP got lost along the way as well.

Got lost? I think that´s called "having a discussion", no?

David7204 wrote...

The proof is inherent. It's basic
storytelling. You don't end a story like Mass Effect without a
confrontation with the antagonist. You don't end it by solving the
central conflict with Deus Ex Machina. The current endings suck, but at
the very least they give some context for why the choices exist, which
this fails to do. You don't end it by completing leaving out any
motivation or reason for the antagonist to exist.

Well I agree with your first half of your post. You simply don´t end it like this. But ending it without giving any information about the Reapers and their motivations is still acceptable. What always was the main theme in the Mass Effect games was the sheer will to survive, nothing else matters. Shepard didn´t want to know why the Reapers did what they did. No one wanted to. He just wanted to save the galaxy.

@LiILino
Make up your mind please.

LilLino wrote...

And how can you even say that their story is not believable? Jesus,
it's a story of Giant Homocidal Mechanical Cuttlefish Firing Giant Red
Las0rs From Dark Space trying to kill organic life.
What kind of writing did you expect to justify that? Shakespearean?

OR

LilLino wrote...

You're
making it pretty clear you don't even try to understand what the hell
it is all about, while it's pretty clearly laid out in both
Leviathan&EC.

Which stance are you taking now? "I understand this!" Or "I don´t understand this! Shakespeare come help me"!

[fil009]

Making a plain ol happy ending probably would have been easier for them but instead they were really reaching.

[David7204]

If you don't care about an ending being thematically consistent with heroism mattering and you just want a happy ending, fine. That's your opinion.

However, what's not fine is complaining about those things in the current game (such as in the current ending) and then claiming an ending that has the same problems (such as this one) is a masterpiece. That is blatant hypocrisy, and that is what I see here.

Modifié par David7204, 08 novembre 2012 - 07:12 .

[Binary_Helix 1]

David7204 wrote...

The proof is inherent. It's basic storytelling. You don't end a story like Mass Effect without a confrontation with the antagonist. You don't end it by solving the central conflict with Deus Ex Machina. The current endings suck, but at the very least they give some context for why the choices exist, which this fails to do. You don't end it by completing leaving out any motivation or reason for the antagonist to exist.

In the context of the EC this modded ending would have been appreciated as it adds/removes what most fans wanted.

Otherwise yes I'd agree that the ending and game itself is still flawed for other reasons although lack of enemy motive isn't the problem. We went two games and most of the third without one and it worked well. The Half Life games haven't revealed much about the G-man and that's what makes him so endearing. Sometimes the questions are better than the answers.

Modifié par Binary_Helix 1, 08 novembre 2012 - 07:09 .

[Dr_Extrem]

MattFini wrote...

David7204 wrote...

This is ridiculous.

If this ending was actually the one that was released, people would be be complaining about it even more than the endings now. As they should.

Not me.

Obviously if this were the real ending, it would be a bit more polished...but this is pretty much all I was looking for with ME3's ending:  a sense of victory and a little bit of immediate closure for my Shepard.

I even like the way the Normandy sweeps across the screen in the final shot.  Far, far more heroic, epic and appropriate than the nonsense we initially got.

Also, I like that this cut leaves the Reapers a mystery.  As it should be. 

Very well done, and far better than what BioWare managed. 

every story needs a mystery. we could see the reapers urge too gooify people as a macguffin - far more satisfiing than the simple explanation of the starchild.

a. hitchcock to f. truffaut:

“It might be a Scottish name, taken from a story about two men in a train. One man says "What's that package up there in the baggage rack?", and the other answers "Oh, that's a McGuffin". The first one asks "What's a McGuffin?". "Well", the other man says, "It's an apparatus for trapping lions in the Scottish Highlands". The first man says "But there are no lions in the Scottish Highlands", and the other one answers "Well, then that's no McGuffin!". So you see, a McGuffin is nothing at all.”

[Alxea_Eve]

I am one who wants all possible endings. I don't just stick to one ending. The fact a happy ending was never made was BS. I like this ending and the EC endings. Was just a dumb option to think it was impossible to beat the reapers conventionally. This ending should have been the ending when you shoot star child in the head and you tell him to frack off with enough war asset points this ending would be the 5th ending. What should have always been in the game.

[Mcfly616]

LilLino wrote...

I don't agree. I prefer Bioware's ending. This mod actually offers less choice than the original and doesn't explain the Reapers origins nor goals.

If the ending was like this I'd be pissed.

No, I really appreciate modder's good work, it's very nice of him, but don't turn his good will to a weapon against Bioware and it's employees. I doubt he'd want that.

agreed. The mod is well done. But hardly carries the emotional impact that the Extended Cut has

[Dr_Extrem]

fil009 wrote...

Making a plain ol happy ending probably would have been easier for them but instead they were really reaching.

for what? ... half the people here left because of the shi**y endings and the people left are arguing about it.

they played with fire and hoped for an nice campfire (neat speculations about the game) but instead they unleasched  hell.

[NRieh]

I chose...headcanon. 8) And I could make it pre-EC, basing on my "perfect destroy".

Neither EC nor MEHEM represents my headcanon, but MEHEM at least does not make things harder. I had no problem with star-kid. And I'm fine with "open" endings, but "perfect destroy" pre-EC was not about "feel free to imagine what happens next", it was "try to understand what just happened on your screen". EC fixes some stuff, while it also adds BS (like Normandy beam evac). Jungle planet still makes no sense, but (at least) you know how your final squad could get there....

MEHEM is an unique example, imo. It's first time I can remember when people could not stomach dev's vision of ending like that. And mismatch was that big, that it resulted in all sorts of headcanons (some - totally discarding huge part of in-game events) and even real in-game mod for ending replacement. I hope that BW made some conclusions here. Lesson must be learned.