64 réponses à ce sujet

[Clayless]

StoneSwords wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

No it wouldn't, because everyone that hates the ending would still hate them, even with a non-canon DLC. Arguably they would hate them more due to the fact the only ending they like is meaningless.

What are you talking about?  Who said anything about a canon ending?  as it is right now, there are 4 choices you can make at the end, can you tell me which one is canon? No? That's because as of right now there is no "canon ending".  So how would adding 1 or 2 more endings make any of the others more or less canon?

You're talking about IT as your example. IT would make all other endings non-canon, unless it was specifically referred to as being non-canon, in which case it wouldn't please the people who already hate the endings.

[StoneSwords]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

StoneSwords wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

No it wouldn't, because everyone that hates the ending would still hate them, even with a non-canon DLC. Arguably they would hate them more due to the fact the only ending they like is meaningless.

What are you talking about?  Who said anything about a canon ending?  as it is right now, there are 4 choices you can make at the end, can you tell me which one is canon? No? That's because as of right now there is no "canon ending".  So how would adding 1 or 2 more endings make any of the others more or less canon?

You're talking about IT as your example. IT would make all other endings non-canon, unless it was specifically referred to as being non-canon, in which case it wouldn't please the people who already hate the endings.

I only used IT, because the most visible and most widely known fan made theory with the largest fan base.  And going the IT path would not invalidate the other endings at all if that's the path you want your Shepard to take.  All it would do is add a 5th possible ending to the game, and appease a large chunk of the overall fan base for the Mass Effect series.  I wasn't talking about removing or invalidating the current endings if that's your cup of tea

[Clayless]

StoneSwords wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

You're talking about IT as your example. IT would make all other endings non-canon, unless it was specifically referred to as being non-canon, in which case it wouldn't please the people who already hate the endings.

I only used IT, because the most visible and most widely known fan made theory with the largest fan base.  And going the IT path would not invalidate the other endings at all if that's the path you want your Shepard to take.  All it would do is add a 5th possible ending to the game, and appease a large chunk of the overall fan base for the Mass Effect series.  I wasn't talking about removing or invalidating the current endings if that's your cup of tea

But it would invalidate the current endings.

For example, say on Rannoch your choices were "Save the Geth", "Save the Quarians", and "It doesn't matter which one of those you pick it's only a dream and they both die anyway", then that 3rd choice would invalidate the first two. The first two choices would become non-canon, no matter how much you believe you saved the Geth, you never actually did.

Same with IT. All it would do is turn the endings into "I became indoctrinated and everyone died" and  "I didn't". IT would make it so that the other endings are non-canon, and that would ****** a lot of people off, especially as you'd have to pay for the real ending to the series.

Modifié par Our_Last_Scene, 02 janvier 2013 - 07:54 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

I think (now don't start yelling at me) the breath scene should have been taken out. It does nothing but cause arguments and adds nothing to the story, in fact its better to think Shepard sacrifices himself to complete his task.

[3DandBeyond]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

StoneSwords wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

No it wouldn't, because everyone that hates the ending would still hate them, even with a non-canon DLC. Arguably they would hate them more due to the fact the only ending they like is meaningless.

What are you talking about?  Who said anything about a canon ending?  as it is right now, there are 4 choices you can make at the end, can you tell me which one is canon? No? That's because as of right now there is no "canon ending".  So how would adding 1 or 2 more endings make any of the others more or less canon?

You're talking about IT as your example. IT would make all other endings non-canon, unless it was specifically referred to as being non-canon, in which case it wouldn't please the people who already hate the endings.

No, what's been said is that any new ending is just as valid as what we have because there are 4 endings.  People love to say that if BW created a new ending it would become canon, because too many people would choose it.  I don't agree, because some really do like control or synthesis or the endings as they are.  I think a lot of people would like it and play it, but don't consider any ending canon necessarily, unless it's one that fits the Shepard they are playing.  Some always play a Shepard that chooses Destroy, some Control, some Synthesis.  For Destroyers, that is canon.  And for the others, likewise.  But that means that people are divided on this.  Refuse is canon to some, for its possibilities or for what should be possible or since it seems to return Shepard to sanity.  But all this means is that no one ending is loved by everyone, if they are liked at all.  So, if BW created alternate endings they would not be any more canon than what already exists.

Sure, I would want an ending that showed people actually having some way to fight and defeat the reapers and for Shepard and team to survive.  I'd want that above all else.  However, how to achieve that is open to debate and I'm not forcing myself to see only one way to achieve it.  IT-I'd be ok with that if it did this.  I could fully see refuse as being the "wake up, Shepard" ending choice where the crucible does not shut down but is instead able to be used to weaken the reapers and make them beatable.  I'm not so stuck with my high EMS destroy (no geth/EDI slaughter) pick.  I am more desirous of an ending that just allows some modicum of sense to return, where self-determination and self-reliance and a win do matter.  And the hero can at last grab onto some small bit of happiness that's always been on hold or denied.  S/he has already died once and gone through a lot more than anyone else, so for me it's not appropriate that the only way out is suicide or laying alone in a pile of rubble like garbage.

And yes people make the argument that IT would invalidate everything, but that need not be so.  It all depends on where and what type of indoctrination could take place.  BW is the company of retcons, so surely there's a lot that is not understood about indoctrination, just as the Protheans were largely misunderstood.

Again, I'm no ITer, but I can see how it could work and be fun.  Too many people have seen the current endings and are stuck with "this is just how it is, live with it" mentality, instead of thinking that new ways to complete this could even be fun for themselves.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 02 janvier 2013 - 07:59 .

[Chiggy]

ZombieGambit wrote...

That's assuming that that wasn't Shepard's dying breath or that he was in a fit enough condition to remain alive for much longer, let alone to be meeting and greeting with the Normandy crew right after being blown up and most likely blasted off into space to crash land on the surface of earth.

I came across this re: breath

http://gamerant.com/...ive-tao-157961/

[Clayless]

3DandBeyond wrote...

No, what's been said is that any new ending is just as valid as what we have because there are 4 endings.  People love to say that if BW created a new ending it would become canon, because too many people would choose it.  I don't agree, because some really do like control or synthesis or the endings as they are.  I think a lot of people would like it and play it, but don't consider any ending canon necessarily, unless it's one that fits the Shepard they are playing.  Some always play a Shepard that chooses Destroy, some Control, some Synthesis.  For Destroyers, that is canon.  And for the others, likewise.  But that means that people are divided on this.  Refuse is canon to some, for its possibilities or for what should be possible or since it seems to return Shepard to sanity.  But all this means is that no one ending is loved by everyone, if they are liked at all.  So, if BW created alternate endings they would not be any more canon than what already exists.

Sure, I would want an ending that showed people actually having some way to fight and defeat the reapers and for Shepard and team to survive.  I'd want that above all else.  However, how to achieve that is open to debate and I'm not forcing myself to see only one way to achieve it.  IT-I'd be ok with that if it did this.  I could fully see refuse as being the "wake up, Shepard" ending choice where the crucible does not shut down but is instead able to be used to weaken the reapers and make them beatable.  I'm not so stuck with my high EMS destroy (no geth/EDI slaughter) pick.  I am more desirous of an ending that just allows some modicum of sense to return, where self-determination and self-reliance and a win do matter.  And the hero can at last grab onto some small bit of happiness that's always been on hold or denied.  S/he has already died once and gone through a lot more than anyone else, so for me it's not appropriate that the only way out is suicide or laying alone in a pile of rubble like garbage.

And yes people make the argument that IT would invalidate everything, but that need not be so.  It all depends on where and what type of indoctrination could take place.  BW is the company of retcons, so surely there's a lot that is not understood about indoctrination, just as the Protheans were largely misunderstood.

Again, I'm no ITer, but I can see how it could work and be fun.  Too many people have seen the current endings and are stuck with "this is just how it is, live with it" mentality, instead of thinking that new ways to complete this could even be fun for themselves.

None of the current endings say the other endings don't actually happen and were just a dream.

IT would.

Therefore it would make all other endings non-canon. You don't actually control the Reapers, you instead became indoctrinated and died. You don't actually synthesis the galaxy, you instead became indoctrinated and died.

[Natabre]

3DandBeyond wrote...

No, what's been said is that any new ending is just as valid as what we have because there are 4 endings.  People love to say that if BW created a new ending it would become canon, because too many people would choose it.  I don't agree, because some really do like control or synthesis or the endings as they are.  I think a lot of people would like it and play it, but don't consider any ending canon necessarily, unless it's one that fits the Shepard they are playing.  Some always play a Shepard that chooses Destroy, some Control, some Synthesis.  For Destroyers, that is canon.  And for the others, likewise.  But that means that people are divided on this.  Refuse is canon to some, for its possibilities or for what should be possible or since it seems to return Shepard to sanity.  But all this means is that no one ending is loved by everyone, if they are liked at all.  So, if BW created alternate endings they would not be any more canon than what already exists.

Sure, I would want an ending that showed people actually having some way to fight and defeat the reapers and for Shepard and team to survive.  I'd want that above all else.  However, how to achieve that is open to debate and I'm not forcing myself to see only one way to achieve it.  IT-I'd be ok with that if it did this.  I could fully see refuse as being the "wake up, Shepard" ending choice where the crucible does not shut down but is instead able to be used to weaken the reapers and make them beatable.  I'm not so stuck with my high EMS destroy (no geth/EDI slaughter) pick.  I am more desirous of an ending that just allows some modicum of sense to return, where self-determination and self-reliance and a win do matter.  And the hero can at last grab onto some small bit of happiness that's always been on hold or denied.  S/he has already died once and gone through a lot more than anyone else, so for me it's not appropriate that the only way out is suicide or laying alone in a pile of rubble like garbage.

Only if you had worked at Bioware when they released ME3, what you said is something I would definitely pick. I know we can't always expect a happy ending, but at least give us an option to do so. They can have their own choice of depressing death of Shepard, lol. It sucks being restricted to only suicide to all four endings, with the exception of high EMS for destroy. But even that one's up to interpretations, so we never know...

Modifié par Natabre, 02 janvier 2013 - 08:06 .

[RocketManSR2]

Chiggy wrote...

I came across this re: breath

http://gamerant.com/...ive-tao-157961/

Then show it. I saw no evidence that Shepard would be okay. Also, telling us to basically imagine our reunion? L O L They should've just had us imagine the whole f***ing ending. It would have saved us all a lot of trouble.

Modifié par RocketManSR2, 02 janvier 2013 - 08:10 .

[3DandBeyond]

DinoSteve wrote...

I think (now don't start yelling at me) the breath scene should have been taken out. It does nothing but cause arguments and adds nothing to the story, in fact its better to think Shepard sacrifices himself to complete his task.

No yelling.  Just going to state that had that breath scene not been there, I'd have immediately gotten rid of my games and never wanted to think of this game series again at all.  I don't like the breath, but I can't see Shepard as having to become the galactic sacrifice in every ending scene as somehow worth anything.  The breath is garbage, but there are a lot of people that do feel it's enough for them.  I can head canon the idiocy of it away and then go on an imagine something that comes after.  But, I can also tell you that when I played the EC and saw the memorial wall scene and Liara starting to put Shepard's name on the wall, I was ready to throw my controller.  All that saved it was the gasp.  It's not enough, but it was the difference between this being a totally wasted series and it being merely disgusting and ridiculous as an ending.  The MEHEM is not perfect but it at least achieves a feeling of hope that I was looking for.  The gasp is meant to do that, but merely stops a freefall of disgust.  MEHEM makes it feel better.

And I'm not saying the endings should just be Shepard lives and frolics happily.  I'd have much preferred if Shepard had a really good reason to sacrifice his/her life in one ending and then had a way to live in another, but not through this idea of making a choice of who to screw up merely under the auspice of survival.  My Shepard said that sometimes it's not about just surviving-and I agree.  Rebellions around the world show that many people agree as well.

[3DandBeyond]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

Chiggy wrote...

I came across this re: breath

http://gamerant.com/...ive-tao-157961/

Then show it. I saw no evidence that Shepard would be okay. Also, telling us to basically imagine our reunion? L O L They should've just had us imagine the whole f***ing ending. It would have saved us all a lot of trouble.

I agree.  And since even BW can't agree on what it means and specifically has stated that it is ambiguous so it is whatever the player wants it to be, it is actually the ultimate cop out ending.  You have BW employees saying it could mean Shepard died (no doubt stifling a laugh as they do this) and then others doing the same when saying it means Shepard lives.  But the whole scene makes no sense since it is not surrounded by some exemplary context that anyone could use to state categorically what exactly Destroy will do and how it's possible that the organic material still contained within Shepard's body could survive and not be vaporized by the explosion that occurs.

It's BW's story, that's what everyone loves to say.  Well then BW darn well should have told it completely and unambiguously and not left it up to players to head canon.  Closure is what was promised, but then BW doesn't think promises matter.  And then they even tried to say that ambiguity is closure except it is exactly not closure since that is the removal of ambiguity.

[StoneSwords]

3DandBeyond wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

Chiggy wrote...

I came across this re: breath

http://gamerant.com/...ive-tao-157961/

Then show it. I saw no evidence that Shepard would be okay. Also, telling us to basically imagine our reunion? L O L They should've just had us imagine the whole f***ing ending. It would have saved us all a lot of trouble.

I agree.  And since even BW can't agree on what it means and specifically has stated that it is ambiguous so it is whatever the player wants it to be, it is actually the ultimate cop out ending.  You have BW employees saying it could mean Shepard died (no doubt stifling a laugh as they do this) and then others doing the same when saying it means Shepard lives.  But the whole scene makes no sense since it is not surrounded by some exemplary context that anyone could use to state categorically what exactly Destroy will do and how it's possible that the organic material still contained within Shepard's body could survive and not be vaporized by the explosion that occurs.

It's BW's story, that's what everyone loves to say.  Well then BW darn well should have told it completely and unambiguously and not left it up to players to head canon.  Closure is what was promised, but then BW doesn't think promises matter.  And then they even tried to say that ambiguity is closure except it is exactly not closure since that is the removal of ambiguity.

It wouldn't be as bad if the ending was hopefully ambiguous, but as it is now, all 4 choices are morally ambiguous in some way, and that's without metagaming

[Outsider edge]

3DandBeyond wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

Chiggy wrote...

I came across this re: breath

http://gamerant.com/...ive-tao-157961/

Then show it. I saw no evidence that Shepard would be okay. Also, telling us to basically imagine our reunion? L O L They should've just had us imagine the whole f***ing ending. It would have saved us all a lot of trouble.

I agree.  And since even BW can't agree on what it means and specifically has stated that it is ambiguous so it is whatever the player wants it to be, it is actually the ultimate cop out ending.  You have BW employees saying it could mean Shepard died (no doubt stifling a laugh as they do this) and then others doing the same when saying it means Shepard lives.  But the whole scene makes no sense since it is not surrounded by some exemplary context that anyone could use to state categorically what exactly Destroy will do and how it's possible that the organic material still contained within Shepard's body could survive and not be vaporized by the explosion that occurs.

It's BW's story, that's what everyone loves to say.  Well then BW darn well should have told it completely and unambiguously and not left it up to players to head canon.  Closure is what was promised, but then BW doesn't think promises matter.  And then they even tried to say that ambiguity is closure except it is exactly not closure since that is the removal of ambiguity.

Sure it's Bioware's story they make the game afteral. However that story is very mediocre. I would even go asfar as too say that storywise Mass Effect 3 is the worst product they've brought out in the last decade. Perhaps only eclipsed by the Sonic game since i haven't played that one. It really is that bad.

From subpar writing too contrived plotdevices like the Crucible and the Catalyst too hamfested attempts at emotional response from players. It's all present in the glorious trainwreck called Mass Effect 3.

Modifié par Outsider edge, 02 janvier 2013 - 10:42 .

[Iakus]

David7204 wrote...

They can't put in more content for the breathe scene without heavily implying that it's the right choice. And they're already on thin ice for making choices matter as it is. It would ****** off a lot of people who chose Control or Synthesis.

Yeah because the Ultimate Sacrifice ending in DAO was totally the wrong move

[3DandBeyond]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...



None of the current endings say the other endings don't actually happen and were just a dream.

IT would.

Therefore it would make all other endings non-canon. You don't actually control the Reapers, you instead became indoctrinated and died. You don't actually synthesis the galaxy, you instead became indoctrinated and died.

No, that's your view of how IT would have to play out.  Again, you have a pre-conceived notion of what it would mean and it's not necessarily accurate. 

Also, you are opposed to it even if it would be completely optional, is this correct?  How can anyone be opposed to content they would not have to download and play?  Many people never play anything but a FemShep with blond hair so does that mean others should not have the option to play a male who is bald?

The idea of IT or any T or any ending could be far more nuanced than you are considering.  The context of control or synthesis could be changed-the understanding of it or even just the fact that Shepard always dies.  It could be yes that a certain view of each would show them in a negative light, but pardon me if that's how I see them anyway.  I will never concede that real people would not do this to others, not if they had as a core philosophy the idea that this isn't just about survival at any and all costs-that it's also about what happens after. 

I can't conceive of any real person thinking it's a great idea to have massive serial killers roam around in the midst of people they've committed atrocities against and think there would be no problems.  The slides don't show what I think would logically happen-people wanted Jeffrey Dahmer dead for what he did to their loved ones, and he's dead.  Someone would want the reapers dead.  And after curing the genophage I cannot conceive of a person actually thinking synthesis is a good idea.  Sure, some do, but I can't understand how they can put the two together and make sense of it.  And destroy-well, no one can make sense of what the kid says it does nor what actually happens after and no one can actually put that choice together with Shepard saying, "you don't condemn a race to extinction based upon what might happen" or "you don't kill some people over here to save some over there".

The only thing that can make sense of all this does end up being either drugs, a dream, or IT.  And again, I'm no ITer.  But it makes no sense now.  People are free to love it all, but cannot say it all fits together.  It doesn't.  And what some will say is it was all about making a choice or everyone dying.  Well, so be it.  Real people today are deciding much the same thing-whether to live under some conditions they don't like or that are killing them internally (killing their spirit) or die trying to achieve something more than just survival.

And here's another point.  Am I supposed to care that someone might have to live with the fact that optional content they'd never have to see would dispute their beloved control, synthesis, or destroy?  How many sleepless nights have they had because many of us don't have an ending that fits with the game we played?  I can count on one hand how many people have actually said they like the endings, but think there should be something that others like me would like.  So now I am supposed to be sympathetic to their wishes, when I have been all along.  I have always said I'm glad they got what they like, but I wish they'd offer me the same respect.  It's happened very rarely.

I asked for optional content that I'd pay to get, that people that like what they have would never have to see or play, and I got called a lot of names including selfish.  Well, I don't even say I want IT, but I'd accept it.  If it made sense of all of this in a rational way-sure would.  I'd prefer a high EMS refuse or destroy where the crucible is completed and can be used to make the reapers vulnerable and a real fight with war assets in use could ensue, but if IT was well done, I'd take that.  And I'd play both if they existed.  If BW created my preferred ending and an IT one-I'd play both.  I might not even mind the ones we got-but then I would want them to be forms of indoctrination.  That's the only thing that explains them as they now stand, IMO.  I say this because I don't think drugs would do the job.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 02 janvier 2013 - 10:42 .