103 réponses à ce sujet

[gavccu]

LilLino wrote...

gavccu wrote...

LilLno, you raise agood point about how difficult it will be to creare a sequel that can cater for all three endings. I'd imagine any sequel may be years to centuries after the current trilogy, the farther away from the conclusion of the reaper war would make it easier to bring togrther the ramifications of all three choices to a new story arc

Here, Synthesis isnae that bad by the way... Try it, you might like it

I hate Synthesis in every sense of that word. It's violation, it's completely out of the blue, but ME3 has it because Deus Ex has it. It's an ending that says 'humans/organics suck, go mutate', it also makes least sense tech wise.

A giant wave killing Reapers? Fine, A giant transmission to change Reapers parameters? Fine. A Gianat green energy triggered by suicide that changes everyone into a new organic/synthetic kind of being? Kiss my ass.

Also, I've said it many times, but will repeat myself. Synthesis is supposed to create eternal peace, which is a no-go for the sequel. If it can't even create goddamn peace then this ending is as useless as it gets. Shepard dies, everyone is brainwashed into love-story with the Reapers and war and hate is still there? No no no no.

And I don't want few centuries after the trilogy as that completely kills off 90% of characters and leaves no room for differences between imports, like I mean, not AT all. 

Thats cool. good point about the eternal piece negating possible future conflicts.

But the reason i thought that a sequel may take place far in the future is that as these games have been made, creating a story which accomodates the choices made in the previous games has made it harder and harder to create a coherent story which acknowledges all these variables. As more and more variables are added, it can possibly mean that the creators of the next game would have too make a story which may get bogged down with the complexeties of past decisions at the expense of the overall new narrative.

Modifié par gavccu, 10 novembre 2012 - 11:07 .

[Ieldra]

LilLino wrote...
Also, I've said it many times, but will repeat myself. Synthesis is supposed to create eternal peace

It is not. I don't know why this myth is perpetuated as much. It creates the most interesting and exotic future that leaves the well-worn tracks of the past behind. I'd love it to be the basis of a new game. Unreservedly.

And I don't want few centuries after the trilogy as that completely kills off 90% of characters and leaves no room for differences between imports, like I mean, not AT all.

I think that this is most likely to happen. If I were Bioware, I would hate being pushed around by the characters and lore of a finished trilogy. I'd want a new beginning, a universe that's recognizably the ME universe but which underwent significant change since the time of Shepard. And I definitely wouldn't want conflicts over old characters to carry over to the new game. It won't happen. We'll get a story with as little character continuity as possible, and that's perfectly fine with me, as long as Liara is gone along with everyone else.

Of course, they may make a spin-off instead of a sequel, in which case all bets are off.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 10 novembre 2012 - 11:11 .

[Joy Sauce]

Destroy: good ending, boring set up for a sequel.

"ME4: Rebuilding Infrastructure" just doesn't excite me.

[LilLino]

ATiBotka wrote...

LilLino wrote...


Also, I've said it many times, but will repeat myself. Synthesis is supposed to create eternal peace

BS.

 

Then tell me what the hell is it all about? Just peace about synthetics and organics? That would not even stop a war with the Reapers, as people would still hate them for what they've done. Synthetic or organic, Reapers would still be criminals. You don't suddenly like your former murderer without a brain wash. So what, you say that brainwash wears off after a while and there's hatred again?

And again, if it doesn't even offer  peace then there's nothing good left in the ending. You just forced your worst enemy's idea of evolution onto everybody and died in the process. Good job. 

gavccu wrote...

Thats cool. good point about the eternal piece negating possible future conflicts.

But the reason i thought that a sequel may take place far in the future is that as these games have been made, creating a story which accomodates the choices made in the previous games has made it harder and harder to create a coherent story which acknowledges all these variables. As more and more variables are added, it can possibly mean that the creators of the next game would have too make a story which may get bogged down with the complexeties of past decisions at the expense of the overall new narrative.

Yes, I don't want changes that really change the narrative, but some little things, like cameos, codex changes, or some dialogue with NPCs.
Putting it 50-100 years into the future probably is enough time to erase most differences between destroy and control, while still being able to provide us with something related to the trilogy.

The worst mistake of the trilogy was Suicide mission in ME2, where everyone could die. That forced Bioware in Mass Effect 3 to make a lot of compromises in the narrative and reduce your squadmate's importance in the plot. They overwhelmed themselves and that was bad, I agree.

EDIT: 

Ieldra2 wrote...

It is not. I don't know why this myth is perpetuated as much. It creates the most interesting and exotic future that leaves the well-worn tracks of the past behind. I'd love it to be the basis of a new game. Unreservedly.

I don't understand why would you choose to die, change everyone's way of thinking and biology while still knowing  that in the long run, it will all be for nothing. Seriously, I just don't get it.

Modifié par LilLino, 10 novembre 2012 - 11:27 .

[Ieldra]

@LilLino:
What Synthesis does is create a scenario where synthetics won't surpass organics any more in a way that would make organics lose the evolutionary race with synthetics and become extinct. Nothing more, nothing less. The "galaxy-wide peace" scenario in the epilogue is dependent on having cured the genophage, possibly on other parameters, too.

And what it creates is a fast-tracked advancement and the prospect of an ascension. I'd say all that's far more than nothing. As I said, an interesting and exotic future, where I'd be curious about the ideas writers come up with. A post-Destroy scenario is boring in comparison, just more of what we already had.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 10 novembre 2012 - 11:31 .

[mass perfection]

What's Shepard going to do after ME3?Fight the Super Reapers that harvest not only the galaxy,but the universe?

[Ieldra]

Any new game won't have Shepard.

[Kanaris]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Any new game won't have Shepard.

Based on that some would say "then it isn't Mass Effect" not true of course but I see where they are coming from with that.

You might want to watch the EC Synth ending epilogue again and LISTEN to what EDI says she more or less says that with this change there is understanding and harmony Humans and synthetics know everything and have no reason to fight.

[LilLino]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@LilLino:
What Synthesis does is create a scenario where synthetics won't surpass organics any more in a way that would make organics lose the evolutionary race with synthetics and become extinct. Nothing more, nothing less. The "galaxy-wide peace" scenario in the epilogue is dependent on having cured the genophage, possibly on other parameters, too.

And what it creates is a fast-tracked advancement and the prospect of an ascension. I'd say all that's far more than nothing. As I said, an interesting and exotic future, where I'd be curious about the ideas writers come up with. A post-Destroy scenario is boring in comparison, just more of what we already had.

As far as I know, there's no bad genophage result in Synthesis. Krogans always survive and there's always peace between them and the rest of the galaxy, correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never seen bad Synthesis slide for the Krogan. 

Also, if it's nothing more, nothing less, then it doesn't explain the cease-fire between Reapers and the races of the cycle. That's not how our minds work, noone is ever going to convince me that races who lost their homeworlds and loved ones to the Reapers, who suffered casualties in the millions, would suddenly understand they are at fault here and treat Reapers as good guys. And this is clearly stated by the epilogue.

Also I don't see how fast tracked advancement would be only restricted to Synthesis, in ME the advancement always seemed pretty damn fast. So I don't see how the writers would be really restricted about cool futuristic ideas after control or destroy ending. Maybe things would just be less green.

 I mean there's no way that Bioware guys would think something like: "Hmm, I guess it's a good spaceship idea, but we won't implement it as it should actually be reserved to synthesis ending scenario, which we don't even use in this game, shame, let's try sticks&stones again".

Modifié par LilLino, 10 novembre 2012 - 11:57 .

[StElmo]

magnetite wrote...

Based on all the evidence and clues I found in the game, the destroy option is the right choice.It's what your allies want. All the enemies in this game (eg. Cerberus, Saren, etc), would pick control or synthesis.

It has been hinted that in order to save your friends, you need to pick the destroy option (as hinted by one of their CM's).

yep

[Arturia Pendragon]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

chidingewe8036 wrote...

Destroy - anderson's/hackett's Solution

Control - TIM's solution

Synthesis - Saren's solution

There are thousands of threads that try to justify each process but really this is a simple as it should have been Bioware.

They should have just went to staples and pressed the easy button on this one.

this is more accurate.

And who's Shepard's commanding officer? Oh, right, Anderson. Ergo, it's Shepard's solution. When your CO gives you the order to jump, your only reply should be "Sir, yes sir!" Don't even bother asking "How high?"

Hacket wants dead Reapers. Anderson wants dead Reapers. They are your direct superiors, allies, and friends.
Saren sought "perfection" through amalgamation, resulting from Indoctrination. He was your enemy.
TIM wanted control over everything, the ME equivalent of Palpatine or Adam Sutler/Susan. He is your enemy.

[Dr_Extrem]

Arturia Pendragon wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

chidingewe8036 wrote...

Destroy - anderson's/hackett's Solution

Control - TIM's solution

Synthesis - Saren's solution

There are thousands of threads that try to justify each process but really this is a simple as it should have been Bioware.

They should have just went to staples and pressed the easy button on this one.

this is more accurate.

And who's Shepard's commanding officer? Oh, right, Anderson. Ergo, it's Shepard's solution. When your CO gives you the order to jump, your only reply should be "Sir, yes sir!" Don't even bother asking "How high?"

Hacket wants dead Reapers. Anderson wants dead Reapers. They are your direct superiors, allies, and friends.
Saren sought "perfection" through amalgamation, resulting from Indoctrination. He was your enemy.
TIM wanted control over everything, the ME equivalent of Palpatine or Adam Sutler/Susan. He is your enemy.

it was an observation - not my personal statement. yet, it is more accurate.


(unrelated to mass effect or shepard) 
if your commanding officer gives you an unethical order, it is your job to question it.

[Arturia Pendragon]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

(unrelated to mass effect or shepard) 
if your commanding officer gives you an unethical order, it is your job to question it.

Is it unethical to kill your enemy in wartime? If so, then every soldier in every army throughout history should have questioned their orders.

[Dr_Extrem]

Arturia Pendragon wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

(unrelated to mass effect or shepard) 
if your commanding officer gives you an unethical order, it is your job to question it.

Is it unethical to kill your enemy in wartime? If so, then every soldier in every army throughout history should have questioned their orders.

it would be unethical to kill civilians on the assumption, that they could support the enemy. the my lai massacre in vietnam or germanys scorched earth doctine during ww2 would be good examples.

[garrusfan1]

I agree And if a sequel comes into play that would be cannon but shep being in it would be unlikely

[SimonTheFrog]

I'm sorry, but after this ending I don't want to have ANY story continuing, destroy, synth or whatever. The universe is basically dead for me.

What I would like them to do is to come up with some sort of reboot. Same alien races, different scenario. The whole Reaper business was a good idea in ME1, but in ME3? Not so much. I don't want to spend any more minute in this game if the stupid man story arc is still canon.

[xAmilli0n]

SimonTheFrog wrote...

I'm sorry, but after this ending I don't want to have ANY story continuing, destroy, synth or whatever. The universe is basically dead for me.

Which is why you pick Refuse!  The universe is cleansed clean, the Reapers are defeated somehow that isn't specified, and we are left with pretty much everything the same (except that everyone we knew is dead...but we can get past that lol).

[Dr_Extrem]

xAmilli0n wrote...

SimonTheFrog wrote...

I'm sorry, but after this ending I don't want to have ANY story continuing, destroy, synth or whatever. The universe is basically dead for me.

Which is why you pick Refuse!  The universe is cleansed clean, the Reapers are defeated somehow that isn't specified, and we are left with pretty much everything the same (except that everyone we knew is dead...but we can get past that lol).

also, our new protagonist will be a yagh who explores the citadel who was towed back to the widow nebula.

[xAmilli0n]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

xAmilli0n wrote...

SimonTheFrog wrote...

I'm sorry, but after this ending I don't want to have ANY story continuing, destroy, synth or whatever. The universe is basically dead for me.

Which is why you pick Refuse!  The universe is cleansed clean, the Reapers are defeated somehow that isn't specified, and we are left with pretty much everything the same (except that everyone we knew is dead...but we can get past that lol).

also, our new protagonist will be a yagh who explores the citadel who was towed back to the widow nebula.

Ladys and gentlemen, ME4 right here.  I can smell its greatness already.

[Dr_Extrem]

xAmilli0n wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

xAmilli0n wrote...

SimonTheFrog wrote...

I'm sorry, but after this ending I don't want to have ANY story continuing, destroy, synth or whatever. The universe is basically dead for me.

Which is why you pick Refuse!  The universe is cleansed clean, the Reapers are defeated somehow that isn't specified, and we are left with pretty much everything the same (except that everyone we knew is dead...but we can get past that lol).

also, our new protagonist will be a yagh who explores the citadel who was towed back to the widow nebula.

Ladys and gentlemen, ME4 right here.  I can smell its greatness already.

 i am a script god. the story bends to my will.

[ShadyKat]

Bioware since day one, said that Shepard's story ends with this trilogy. So why do people want Shep yet again. New protagonist and whole new squad. Set ME4 300 - 500 years after ME3, and maybe have Shep mentioned here and there. Maybe even run into Liara or Grunt (not as squad mates).

[d-boy15]

you know bioware mass effect developer always play favorite in their game right?

I doubt this time will be different. if they choose canon, it'll be synthesis.

[Bad King]

Control would be a much better canon for Mass Effect 4 - we'd actually get geth in the game that way. Though tbh, I don't see ME4 as feasible, BioWare have shown in the past that they can't keep up with large amounts of variables. How would they keep track of the state of the krogan, the geth & quarians, etc. based on our decisions? The fact that the quarians or geth could be extinct means that there'd be no important geth or quarian characters in the game as BioWare wouldn't want to write a certain character if he/she is dead in give or take 50% of players' imports.