211 réponses à ce sujet

[hiraeth]

Jagri wrote...

No one seems able to counter the Deus Ex angle... In fact whenever mentioned it is flat out ignored. The sad thing about it is in 2000 I picked the "destroy" ending. In 2012 I picked the "destroy" ending once again. Same color... Same choice... Same results just on a smaller scale.

Agreed. I've heard some people point out some differences, but I can't get over the HUGE deja vu I felt when I first went through the ME3 ending. Even if there are differences, the feeling of being presented with the choices and the theme of singularity was definitely there and was definitely screaming "wow they ripped off Deus Ex."

[ld1449]

Olympiclash wrote...

ld1449 wrote...

Olympiclash wrote...

They dedicated a lot of time, money and hard work from their lives on those endings a

 Ten minutes out of HUNDREDS of hours of gameplay is apparently "so bad" that they are willing to let it ruin the entire franchise for them.

Is it really that bad?

They plagiarised off of an earlier, better game, that the director and Lead writer flat out admitted before ME3's release, that the piece in question (Deus Ex) Was their "All time favorite game"

Hardly a lot of time and hard work for doing a cut and paste job.

If I have a friend, for years, then suddenly he up and shoots my wife in the face I will not think "Oh well. It was a good friendship till that point."  I will focus on those last few seconds and it will sour the rest of my memories with that individual.

Ohhhhh yes. I could write a freakin thesis paper on how bad the endings are. If you REALLY want to hear even a portion of it send a PM. I could use a good debate without the whole hubub. It gets rather old. 

I might do that actually. A good clean debate is always fun.

The friend analogy really only seems fair if your feelings on the ending are that negative. Mine are not so that seems like two WAY different things.

Given my expectations for ME3 I'll be the first to say I am far harsher than most in my critisism.

However, even stepping as far back away from this as I possibly can, I can say that on every literary criteria known to western society, this ending fails on almost every single level that I can think of even with my most optimistic analisis I can just barely scratch out a 4/10 for it and that's with me trying to be as objective as possible.

[Maniccc]

There are many things that contributed to the generally poor quality and total narrative breakdown in the endings.  Some of these issues began back in ME2.  I have zero interest in going through all of that again.

I get that some people like the endings, but that does not mean they are not objectively bad.  People like things that are bad, just look at the awful syfi saturday night movies like sharkosaur or whatever.... 

I don't know how anyone can "defend" the endings and still be operating strictly within rational boundaries.  I'm not, like I said above, going to summarize the many objective narrative errors that were made, not only in the endings, but with increasing frequency throughout the series, but they are there, and there are many of them  Any "defense" can only be emotional.

As to the PR handling of the situation, I'm not really sure what they could have done.  They did the EC, which was something.  The only thing they really could do is make some sort of public apology to the fans about the so-called broken "promises" Casey Hudson made about the game's ending.  Short of admitting a total failure on their part and making a mass apology, the only other thing left for PR to do is...go silent, really.  They had a knee-jerk defensive reastion at first, which was sloppy.  But at this point...what can PR do or say?  I don't think they were "classy", I think they were at first just stunned, then angry, and now resigned and tired of the whole thing.

I don't know what the future is for BW.  They can learn from their mistakes in the ME trilogy and DA2 and make better products in the future, or they can get arrogant and cocky and make increasingly inferior products.  Maybe they'll transform into some sort of BW reboot making action games, maybe they'll die.  I've never been a huge die-hard BW fan, so I don't have a lot of emotional investment in the company.  I think it would be unfortunate, though, if a company making story heavy and story-centric RPG games with deeper characters and greater emotional involvement from fans died or became just another developer churning out shallow linear action games.

[hiraeth]

vivaladricas wrote...

Dues Ex is Casey's favorite game..... really?!!!

Whatever melts his butter I guess. Guessing they love the entire Matrix trilogy as well. Aliens is sexier IMO.

IDK about being his favorite, but he sure likes it:

twitter.com/CaseyDHudson/status/106400850922053632

[ld1449]

vivaladricas wrote...

Dues Ex is Casey's favorite game..... really?!!!

Whatever melts his butter I guess. Guessing they love the entire Matrix trilogy as well. Aliens is sexier IMO.

In the famous "speculations for everyone" paper Mac had some comparrisons of ME3's future plot with the Matrix sequel and final installment. Not sure how far that would apply to casey

Modifié par ld1449, 28 décembre 2012 - 03:23 .

[Mcfly616]

TMZuk wrote...

Yeah, sorry. I am not religious, and being forced into a messiah/saviour role is not to my liking. The endings suck, simply because the player is forced to have their character commit suicide. ( No matter the wriggling finger in high EMS/destruction )

Ther are many other reasons why they suck, but none as important as this, IMO. I find them utterly and totally depressing, and I don't play video-games to become depressed.

I'm not religious either. But if you didn't expect Shepard to possibly sacrifice himself, and become the savior of the galaxy....well, you were a bit naive.

And if you don't like playing videogames that evoke a full spectrum of emotions, well, maybe you shouldn't play Mass Effect.....there's plenty of emotionless games out there.

[JamesFaith]

MassEffectFShep wrote...

Jagri wrote...

No one seems able to counter the Deus Ex angle... In fact whenever mentioned it is flat out ignored. The sad thing about it is in 2000 I picked the "destroy" ending. In 2012 I picked the "destroy" ending once again. Same color... Same choice... Same results just on a smaller scale.

Agreed. I've heard some people point out some differences, but I can't get over the HUGE deja vu I felt when I first went through the ME3 ending. Even if there are differences, the feeling of being presented with the choices and the theme of singularity was definitely there and was definitely screaming "wow they ripped off Deus Ex."

Well, similarity with Deus Ex is here, no doubt, but what about not conspiratory theory, that ME ending are just variations of natural result of any big war, which are:

1) Destruction of enemy - Destroy
2) Subjugation of enemy - Control
3) Making peace with enemy - not here
4) Make alliance with former enemy - Synthetis
5) Lost in fight with enemy - Refuse

[clennon8]

The "can't please most people" refrain is a pretty major cop-out.

And, yes, the ending is really that bad. It really does spoil the entire franchise. I will never play these games again unless they miraculously repair the ending. Well, aside from multiplayer, that is. The saving grace of ME3 is the thing I initially cared least about.

[ld1449]

JamesFaith wrote...

MassEffectFShep wrote...

Jagri wrote...

No one seems able to counter the Deus Ex angle... In fact whenever mentioned it is flat out ignored. The sad thing about it is in 2000 I picked the "destroy" ending. In 2012 I picked the "destroy" ending once again. Same color... Same choice... Same results just on a smaller scale.

Agreed. I've heard some people point out some differences, but I can't get over the HUGE deja vu I felt when I first went through the ME3 ending. Even if there are differences, the feeling of being presented with the choices and the theme of singularity was definitely there and was definitely screaming "wow they ripped off Deus Ex."

Well, similarity with Deus Ex is here, no doubt, but what about not conspiratory theory, that ME ending are just variations of natural result of any big war, which are:

1) Destruction of enemy - Destroy
2) Subjugation of enemy - Control
3) Making peace with enemy - not here
4) Make alliance with former enemy - Synthetis
5) Lost in fight with enemy - Refuse

When the options of Deus ex are literally mirror immages, its not coincidence.

Destroy the illuminati though the technologies of the world will be lost letting people start anew

Take control of the oppresive government and rule through it.

Or MERGE. Not make an alliance MERGE with an AI to ascend to a new level of evolution.

That is practically word for word the ending of Mass Effect save a change in names

[Olympiclash]

Jagri wrote...

No one seems able to counter the Deus Ex angle... In fact whenever mentioned it is flat out ignored. The sad thing about it is in 2000 I picked the "destroy" ending. In 2012 I picked the "destroy" ending once again. Same color... Same choice... Same results just on a smaller scale.

I didn't mention it because I didn't know what the endings to Deus Ex were. I could only assume that they were conceptually the same. In which case I'm fine with that. I've never played Deus Ex and concepts are ripped off all the time in film and games and...well, everything. 

Upon a quick Google of Deus Ex's endings I can't deny there are striking similarities. To say that it is a straight "cut and paste" job though is hyperbole. Shepard does not become a dictator in the synthesis ending. He's completely removed from the picture actually. In DE's "control" ending the main character also seems to rule the world with the technology given. This is open to interpretation but, at least with the Paragon Control speech, Shepard does not appear to rule the galaxy. And in DE's "destroy" ending, the intentions seem to be to send the world into a second dark age in order to protect the world. And while I MIGHT agree that that is the implications in ME3 pre-EC, post-EC, I believe, differentiates itself just enough from Deus Ex to be it's own. There is no "dark age" in destroy. the relays are damaged but fixable. The trade-off is in wiping out ALL synthetics if you want to destroy the Reapers.

[hiraeth]

Mcfly616 wrote...

TMZuk wrote...

Yeah, sorry. I am not religious, and being forced into a messiah/saviour role is not to my liking. The endings suck, simply because the player is forced to have their character commit suicide. ( No matter the wriggling finger in high EMS/destruction )

Ther are many other reasons why they suck, but none as important as this, IMO. I find them utterly and totally depressing, and I don't play video-games to become depressed.

I'm not religious either. But if you didn't expect Shepard to possibly sacrifice himself, and become the savior of the galaxy....well, you were a bit naive.

And if you don't like playing videogames that evoke a full spectrum of emotions, well, maybe you shouldn't play Mass Effect.....there's plenty of emotionless games out there.

The only emotion mentioned in the post is depression, which isn't the full spectrum of emotions.

Personally, within ME3, I very rarely felt positive emotions (save for the occassional witty Garrus remark). Mostly just a sense of dread for most of the game followed by depression with the ending. It's funny how people can have such different [emotional] reactions to the game.

[Kabooooom]

It's not a matter of liking the idea of the endings, or what they present - it's a matter of them being rushed, poorly written, and inserting a deus ex machina in the last ten minutes of a massive RPG trilogy. That's a no-no for like, any scifi story, let alone one that spans three games.

Most people aren't objecting to the endings because they don't like the idea of them, most people are objecting because they are...pretty much without question...poorly done - especially in comparison to the rest of the game and trilogy. I think they have a very legitimate point.

In contrast to most people, I actually love priority:Earth, and I give Bioware props for it. But from the moment Shep steps foot on the Citadel, the narrative falls apart. 

Modifié par Kabooooom, 28 décembre 2012 - 03:46 .

[Zhen-Lin]

The end is bad. It is nothing to do with please everyone. I don't think the developing team was trying to please anyone at all. They rushed it.

We don't like it, not only because there isn't a happy ending as one of the possible out come. Also because it isn't going in the same direction of the rest of the story. Mass Effect is suppose to be a sic-fiction story. But with that end, it feels like I was reading Arab night. They have completely different taste.

[ld1449]

Olympiclash wrote...

Jagri wrote...

No one seems able to counter the Deus Ex angle... In fact whenever mentioned it is flat out ignored. The sad thing about it is in 2000 I picked the "destroy" ending. In 2012 I picked the "destroy" ending once again. Same color... Same choice... Same results just on a smaller scale.

I didn't mention it because I didn't know what the endings to Deus Ex were. I could only assume that they were conceptually the same. In which case I'm fine with that. I've never played Deus Ex and concepts are ripped off all the time in film and games and...well, everything. 

Upon a quick Google of Deus Ex's endings I can't deny there are striking similarities. To say that it is a straight "cut and paste" job though is hyperbole. Shepard does not become a dictator in the synthesis ending. He's completely removed from the picture actually. In DE's "control" ending the main character also seems to rule the world with the technology given. This is open to interpretation but, at least with the Paragon Control speech, Shepard does not appear to rule the galaxy. And in DE's "destroy" ending, the intentions seem to be to send the world into a second dark age in order to protect the world. And while I MIGHT agree that that is the implications in ME3 pre-EC, post-EC, I believe, differentiates itself just enough from Deus Ex to be it's own. There is no "dark age" in destroy. the relays are damaged but fixable. The trade-off is in wiping out ALL synthetics if you want to destroy the Reapers.

Ohhh but you're talking about the EC.

You said before that they put a lot of work, time and effort into these endings. And you were referring to the original. Because it was only after that statement that you brought the EC into the picture.

After the originals of course everyone accused them of plagiarising. Its why they made it "somewhat" different but still unbelievably similar.

The originals were cut and paste,The EC was a "shift" in context to avoid an embarrassment that the whole world was calling them out on. And they still can't largely avoid it because the premise is exactly the same in all three aspects. The results are arguably "different" but the plagiarism is still there and only obscured by retroactive "fixing"

Modifié par ld1449, 28 décembre 2012 - 03:49 .

[Bob Garbage]

lol, ten minutes of gameplay.

[ME859]

I don't understand why they're opposed to alternate ending DLC per their public statements. I can't speak for everyone but I personally am not asking them to do it for free, nor are a lot of other people who want an alternate ending with concepts and events that would violate the art defense. They fulfilled their 'no ABC ending' pre-release quotes with the free EC.

However the fact of the matter is their is a sizable part of the fan base that has a high level of demand for alternate ending DLC, which given it's following the safest bet would be something that would cover IT. I personally don't care, I just want something else besides the current ending that gives us an alternative to the current crucible/catalyst situation.

Heck I don't even think the EC was bad.  However it was like expecting filet mignon from a top chef and ending up with a regular steak from Applebees.  Sure it's good but I was expecting filet mignon.  

Modifié par ME859, 28 décembre 2012 - 04:05 .

[Mathias]

Olympiclash wrote...

I enjoy the endings and I believe it would be pretty much impossible for Bioware to please even most people, let alone everyone.

That's total BS. Of course they could've. If they had spent the time and effort delivering the "wildly different" endings that they told us about, and give us different degrees of success/failures, most people would've been satisfied. Let's acknowledge the fact that we're saying "satisfied" and not "loved".

They dedicated a lot of time, money and hard work from their lives on those endings and when a very vocal portion of their audience DEMANDED "BETTER"...(let that sink in a bit)...they went back in and gave players more and didn't ask them to pay for it.

Let's get a couple things straight here.

1. The ending was written by two guys in a very short amount of time, and obviously had no idea what they were doing, nor gave the ending any true thought previous to that. They didn't allow anyone else to look at or critique it. It was also plagiarizing the ending to Deus Ex. Blatantly plagiarizing it. And then in the end it ended up being a rushed mess.

2. They had to fix the ending. Many of the complaints the players had were very legitamate, and ended up creating a lot of problems with the lore of the franchise. Not only that but future sales and loyalty of their consumers were at stake. If they had done nothing it would've been suicide.

Bioware has reacted to this whole controversy with nothing but class IMO.

More like disrespectful. I'm not gonna sit here and act like some fans were being jerks themselves,  but Bioware's PR was terrible during the month of March and April. Maybe a lot of that had to do with EA, but whenever a letter was written to the fans from Bioware, you can tell it was written in spite, and some of the wording felt like insulting our intelligence. 

 

Believe it or not, they actually DO care about their audience.
 

I'm sure some of them do, but let's look at Bioware as a whole for a moment. Given their actions this year, that is up for debate. But even i'm not sure where to lean on that one. I definitely feel like some of them don't give a crap though.

That does not mean they have to cave in to every demand.

I agree with that. But at the same time you gotta know when and when not to cave in to people's demands. For example, they should've buckled and gave Destroyers a reunion so they could have their satisfying ending. That was one of the most requested changes. But instead they didn't do it, and insulted us with speculations (final breath).

Personally, I just find it quite sad that a property I love so much, and clearly others do as well, is being looked at in such a negative light now because of ten minutes of gameplay. Ten minutes out of HUNDREDS of hours of gameplay is apparently "so bad" that they are willing to let it ruin the entire franchise for them. Is it really that bad?
 

A really bad ending can ruin a franchise. This is nothing new. I know plenty of people who won't even rewatch Battlestar Galactica cause of the ending. If a desitination is truly bad and leaves you with disappointed and/or empty feelings, then it can definitely ruin the journey.

The endings make me think and allow for what is ultimately a philosophical debate among players.

And that is one of the reasons why the ending failed with so many people. They weren't making Blade Runner, or 2001: A Space Odyssey. They were making a Space Adventure game. It needed an ending that made you feel, not think. And it doesn't help when the logic behind the ending is total BS. If it wasn't so horribly executed it wouldn't have been so bad. I don't see what's to think about this ending. It's pretty clear what happens in the end. It just sucks.

The franchise needed to go out with a bang, not a fart in the wind.

[Olympiclash]

ld1449 wrote...

Olympiclash wrote...

Jagri wrote...

No one seems able to counter the Deus Ex angle... In fact whenever mentioned it is flat out ignored. The sad thing about it is in 2000 I picked the "destroy" ending. In 2012 I picked the "destroy" ending once again. Same color... Same choice... Same results just on a smaller scale.

I didn't mention it because I didn't know what the endings to Deus Ex were. I could only assume that they were conceptually the same. In which case I'm fine with that. I've never played Deus Ex and concepts are ripped off all the time in film and games and...well, everything. 

Upon a quick Google of Deus Ex's endings I can't deny there are striking similarities. To say that it is a straight "cut and paste" job though is hyperbole. Shepard does not become a dictator in the synthesis ending. He's completely removed from the picture actually. In DE's "control" ending the main character also seems to rule the world with the technology given. This is open to interpretation but, at least with the Paragon Control speech, Shepard does not appear to rule the galaxy. And in DE's "destroy" ending, the intentions seem to be to send the world into a second dark age in order to protect the world. And while I MIGHT agree that that is the implications in ME3 pre-EC, post-EC, I believe, differentiates itself just enough from Deus Ex to be it's own. There is no "dark age" in destroy. the relays are damaged but fixable. The trade-off is in wiping out ALL synthetics if you want to destroy the Reapers.

Ohhh but you're talking about the EC.

You said before that they put a lot of work, time and effort into these endings. And you were referring to the original. Because it was only after that statement that you brought the EC into the picture.

After the originals of course everyone accused them of plagiarising. Its why they made it "somewhat" different but still unbelievably similar.

The originals were cut and paste,The EC was a "shift" in context to avoid an embarrassment that the whole world was calling them out on. And they still can't largely avoid it because the premise is exactly the same in all three aspects. The results are arguably "different" but the plagiarism is still there and only obscured by retroactive "fixing"

A fair point. I am mostly talking post-EC. However I did address that I don't believe it is a straight "cut and paste job" even pre-EC.

I don't know their intentions but let's assume they did make that "shift" to "avoid embarrassment", fine that was a bit dumb but at least they fixed it. Another reason why I like the Extended Cut more.

[JamesFaith]

ld1449 wrote...

When the options of Deus ex are literally mirror immages, its not coincidence.

Destroy the illuminati though the technologies of the world will be lost letting people start anew

Take control of the oppresive government and rule through it.

Or MERGE. Not make an alliance MERGE with an AI to ascend to a new level of evolution.

That is practically word for word the ending of Mass Effect save a change in names

Shut down internet is little different then destroying of Reaper army. In DE it was question of rule of technology - yes or no. In ME it was destroying enemy or trying to use them.

And Helios end wasn't about evolution, it was about secret control by one entity (remember that quote about making own God?), evolution point was hinted later in Deus Ex 2 in Denton and Omar end.

[Shadow Storm]

I noticed the same thing and i had a whole speech preparred but i went to post and whack we get hit over the head. I saved it so i will post it. Yes it is long winded but is a relevant response to the defenders.

[Shadow Storm]

Because they don't want to admit that their "artistic
integrity" was a load of crap. Truth be told i am actually surprised they
have not caved in yet. Every single review i have read so far from Game
Informer to individual professional reviews online have all said the same
thing. That being that the game series was a popular hit and was fantastic to
play until you come to the ending. The ending turned away a massive number of
people from the game and pissed off even more. The reason why complainers are in the minority now is because they have left for other games!



My main problem with it along with so many others is NOT that Shepard dies the
problem is this ending itself, not to mention raising so many plot holes and
confusing possible outcomes, there is also the issue of real choice. Mass
Effect has always been praised from day one for their use of game changing
choices that caters to all gamers play styles. The moron who came up with the
ending decided "here you go fans you have a choice between defeat (follow
Sarens philosophy of merging with AI and thus lose everything that makes you
human which is no different to husks in a lot of ways. I mean look at Saren he
merged and look where that got him), defeat (follow TIM's philosophy of control
which is only delaying the inevitable of course until Harbinger doesn't like
Shepards reasoning and rebels), and oh defeat (Andersons philosophy of destroy
which goes against all that Shepard stood for. This is no different from
putting humanity first against other races which is why conflict was born in
the first place it was all meant to be about working together). People
complained so they added the extended cut which filled in a few small plot
holes and gave us another option...say "get lost" and be defeated
outright hence "kick in the teeth" which is used so commonly by
reviewers.



A lot of people on forum claim to be satisfied with the outcome wether that be
because they genuinely enjoyed a defeatist ending or because they have resigned
themselves to the fact that, in all likelihood, they will never change it so
they might as well jump on the love bandwagon to avoid any further bitter
feelings. I ask you why do you feel we MUST have one or the other? This game is
about choice is it not? So why not just add the option of winning the war by
actually defeating the Reapers? How many Reaper ships did the fleet manage to
take out in the end sequence? There is hundreds of thousands of vessels in the
galaxy and they paint it as impossible to defeat the Reapers when a relatively
small armada of ships managed to take out several Reapers. They should have
went back and said "hey a lot of fans are unhappy with a defeatist ending
so why not cater to all players and give the option to go back and amass a real
fleet and destroy the Reapers for good". Plus this option would ensure
they can make a sequel without losing credibility by creating even more plot
holes. And of course the added issue of everybody having flashing green
eyes...just a thought.



I agree with an article i read by a reviewer i read recently who said
"when i initially read about IT i was very excited because this would have
answered so many questions. This idea had me hooked because it would have been
the most exciting plot twist in a game i have seen to date and would have turned
a bad ending into one of the best of its kind." Without Bioware
subscribing to IT (wether that was what they had intended all along) or
actually adding and ending in which Shepard fights to the end and never
compromises on his beliefs it is likely ME3 will go down in history as one of
the biggest fails in gaming history. Not to say the series wasn't a pleasure to
play because in fact it was. ME will not be remembered for its triumphs it will
be remembered for its one massive failure and i find that sad. Artistic
Integrity my foot!

Modifié par Raiden Storm, 28 décembre 2012 - 04:06 .

[ld1449]

Olympiclash wrote...




A fair point. I am mostly talking post-EC. However I did address that I don't believe it is a straight "cut and paste job" even pre-EC.

I don't know their intentions but let's assume they did make that "shift" to "avoid embarrassment", fine that was a bit dumb but at least they fixed it. Another reason why I like the Extended Cut more.

Its a fix, as far as this:  



Is a fix for a flat tire.

The ending is "fixed" in terms of it no longer being unequivocably, and irrevocably broken.

Now its just broken.

[Grubas]

How many threads have been closed just for pointing out that its not possible to get the best ending with Singleplayer alone. How long did bioware officials claim the contrary, only months later to admit that it was an incentive to play Multiplayer?

its just an example for the corporate culture and their attitude towards the fans.

[ME859]

Raiden Storm wrote...

I agree with an article i read by a reviewer i read recently who said
"when i initially read about IT i was very excited because this would have
answered so many questions. This idea had me hooked because it would have been
the most exciting plot twist in a game i have seen to date and would have turned
a bad ending into one of the best of its kind." Without Bioware
subscribing to IT (wether that was what they had intended all along) or
actually adding and ending in which Shepard fights to the end and never
compromises on his beliefs it is likely ME3 will go down in history as one of
the biggest fails in gaming history. Not to say the series wasn't a pleasure to
play because in fact it was. ME will not be remembered for its triumphs it will
be remembered for its one massive failure and i find that sad. Artistic
Integrity my foot!

They've played with IT.  Even allowing Merizan to say on Twitter that EC did not confirm nor deny IT.  Personally at this point I think the best option is to do an outright IT Ending DLC and stick with the no cannon ending claim.  Charging would also bring revenue that if nothing else would cover the cost while bridging the gap with the disenchanted part of the fan base as well as allowing the IT opponents to keep their literal interpertation of the ending.   I mean can anyone imagine an IT DLC not selling well?  

Modifié par ME859, 28 décembre 2012 - 04:13 .