291 réponses à ce sujet

[Fawx9]

crimzontearz wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

do you not see that as a sign that he was told to stop advocating that?

No, because it makes little logical sense to reach that conclusion.  One off-handed comment that had every sign of trolling to get some dander up doesn't change the (admittedly sparse) evidence to the contrary.  Bioware may have run with it... but it felt to me that they were more giving up trying to convince fans otherwise.  "You want to believe we put in a scene of him breathing to just say 'and then he died?'  Fine.  You go ahead and do that.  We really don't give a **** anymore.  Go be miserable."

Question, did Ottway die or live at the end of The Grey?

The final scene of that movie is remarkbably close to ME3 destory yet everyone in their right mind has no hope for that poor man. So why is it any leap of the imagination that the same thought process would occur with the ME3 scene?

The Grey Ending

wanted to watch it, heard about the ending, said **** it and never watched it nor I plan to

Actually, the ending really fits with the movie, once you get past the fact that the trailers were horrible for marketing the type of movie this was. Sure you end up with ambiguity, leaning towards depressing, but the final acts by the character and his growth throughout the film make it much easier to diggest.

It's not like he just stands their and waits to get eaten.

[dreamgazer]

Someone With Mass wrote...

One of their biggest mistakes was putting in several lines of dialogues that hinted at the fact that Shepard would do something like kill all the Reapers, retire and then live on a beach somewhere while making an ass-load of money of all the movies the rest of the galaxy will make about him or just keep on doing what he's good at.

I know it has happened in other fiction before where it doesn't go as planned, but here, it seems like such a dick move. Like them promising something positive, something that they know plenty of players would want, only to smack them in the face and laugh as they're doing the opposite.

Not to mention that it would have saved them a lot of trouble if they hadn't done that.

Well, it's like you said: that kind of thing is very common in other fiction, the "what will happen in a hypothetical world after the impossible has been done" deal, but I suppose it's better-suited for a passive medium instead of an active one. You can't do anything to change the events that happen in a book or film, but you feel compelled to defy those odds in an interactive medium. I got where they were going with that future-planning and was fine with it, but I can see where others would take issue with it.

[Someone With Mass]

dreamgazer wrote...

Well, it's like you said: that kind of thing is very common in other fiction, the "what will happen in a hypothetical world after the impossible has been done" deal, but I suppose it's better-suited for a passive medium instead of an active one. You can't do anything to change the events that happen in a book or film, but you feel compelled to defy those odds in an interactive medium. I got where they were going with that future-planning and was fine with it, but I can see where others would take issue with it.

Especially when defying the odds had been built up to almost be one of the main themes over the three games.

[Fawx9]

dreamgazer wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

One of their biggest mistakes was putting in several lines of dialogues that hinted at the fact that Shepard would do something like kill all the Reapers, retire and then live on a beach somewhere while making an ass-load of money of all the movies the rest of the galaxy will make about him or just keep on doing what he's good at.

I know it has happened in other fiction before where it doesn't go as planned, but here, it seems like such a dick move. Like them promising something positive, something that they know plenty of players would want, only to smack them in the face and laugh as they're doing the opposite.

Not to mention that it would have saved them a lot of trouble if they hadn't done that.

Well, it's like you said: that kind of thing is very common in other fiction, the "what will happen in a hypothetical world after the impossible has been done" deal, but I suppose it's better-suited for a passive medium instead of an active one. You can't do anything to change the events that happen in a book or film, but you feel compelled to defy those odds in an interactive medium. I got where they were going with that future-planning and was fine with it, but I can see where others would take issue with it.

For me it was like: Stop talking, do you know how many death flags you've raised that I now have to fix.

And then I couldn't and I was depressed.

[Kel Riever]

Well, the ending(s) of Mass Effect 3 sucks. IGN was stupid for taking advertising money for a glowing review. I don't think backtracking at this time is going to help them a ton, but it might help a little. You know, finally, in the end saying what fans have been saying all along.

[3DandBeyond]

dreamgazer wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

One of their biggest mistakes was putting in several lines of dialogues that hinted at the fact that Shepard would do something like kill all the Reapers, retire and then live on a beach somewhere while making an ass-load of money of all the movies the rest of the galaxy will make about him or just keep on doing what he's good at.

I know it has happened in other fiction before where it doesn't go as planned, but here, it seems like such a dick move. Like them promising something positive, something that they know plenty of players would want, only to smack them in the face and laugh as they're doing the opposite.

Not to mention that it would have saved them a lot of trouble if they hadn't done that.

Well, it's like you said: that kind of thing is very common in other fiction, the "what will happen in a hypothetical world after the impossible has been done" deal, but I suppose it's better-suited for a passive medium instead of an active one. You can't do anything to change the events that happen in a book or film, but you feel compelled to defy those odds in an interactive medium. I got where they were going with that future-planning and was fine with it, but I can see where others would take issue with it.

It's also the problem that they included content like, "reaper vulnerabilities" and then different things in the game that said you had the chance to beat them-on the war asset screen, especially-the thing you consult to see what assets you have.  Not just the wishful thinking dialogue.  Before, say in ME2, a lot of that kind of dialogue tended to be tongue in cheek (sort of).  The last mission is the suicide mission, but you can do things to avoid suicide.  All they did before was set us up to believe that when they said something was impossible, Shepard would find the only way to make it possible. 

So, it comes off as a false doubleback kind of double fake on people to have Shepard and Garrus wistfully speak of meeting in a bar (to get you to react "oh no they're gonna die"), and then to say, "there's no Shepard without Vakarian" line, but then we see Garrus leave at the conduit (sure he's injured, but c'mon), or Garrus telling Joker it's time to go (huh, what about it buddy?) 

It's like the poisoned wine scene in The Princess Bride-you poison the wine sitting in front of you in order to get me to change glasses so I will drink the poisoned wine.  But that's too obvious.  So, you clearly poisoned the wine in front of me to make me think you switched the glasses so I'd drink the one in front of you.  In ME3, you know all that came before.  The ME2 suicide mission was named so to imply it's a dead end, you won't make it back.  In fact, ME2's beginning set you up with the idea that even death is not permanent.  So, saying something is impossible is not believable.  And implying that Shepard will die or that Shepard is meant to imply s/he will die in order to fool you into thinking s/he won't die, and then s/he will die, starts to seem so stupid.  Great dialogue totally misused.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 09 janvier 2013 - 07:12 .

[Iakus]

dreamgazer wrote...

Perhaps. I'm sure they've learned a lesson or two about what needs to satisfy when going forward, and who they're talking to.

Not enough to patch the scene though.

[gw2005]

Coreniro wrote...

archangel1996 wrote...

Coreniro wrote...

The guy on ign writes about "rewards". An end isn't supposed to be a reward for those who get there. This arguement about the hundreds of hours invested in the game, only to get a reward in the end, is pure bull****. The reward I get from the hours I've played is the hundreds of things I've seen and done, not a stupid price in the end.
That guy on ign is delusional. Talking about giving every single person the ending they want just because it's an rpg. Yeah, there's no problem in doing that.

You speak the truth, in that part and just in that part

One day you'll understand that not everything you dislike is bad or wrong. You and the 18 year-old **** who's blogging on IGN.

Woah there, unless you just aged yourself out of the targeted demographic, know that you just ruined your own argument with a highschool level insult. Congratz.

[DirtySHISN0]

Don't care what "flitters-on-the-winds-of-trend" IGN says.

[TheRealJayDee]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

There should be at least some reason to believe one thing or the other-something that overcomes what logic dictates.

Exactly, I'm just going by what I can see and the information that is actually presented to me. The explosion I can headcanon away, maybe the chamber where Shepard was had Reaper-level shields/armor or something. The rubble scene I just can't. I see no help for a seriously wounded Shepard anywhere in the vicinity. In a state like that, medical attention has mere minutes to be started in order for the patient to survive. Shepard can look forward to a slow, cold, lonely death.

This. People keep telling us that we want to be miserable and actively try to imagine Shepard to die. Not at all, but there is just very little reason to believe he'll be well based on what we see. Suspension of disbelief has limits.

3DandBeyond wrote...

The choices at the end or the highest form of metagaming, because there is nothing in the description of any of them that would lead any person to conclude that Shepard is doing anything Shepard should do.

Aye.

[Epique Phael767]

IGN is still on my s***list along with destructoid. It will take a lot more atoning than this to change my opinion of them.

[dreamgazer]

iakus wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Perhaps. I'm sure they've learned a lesson or two about what needs to satisfy when going forward, and who they're talking to.

Not enough to patch the scene though.

Well, no.  It's not the way they wanted to finish this story.

[Iakus]

dreamgazer wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Perhaps. I'm sure they've learned a lesson or two about what needs to satisfy when going forward, and who they're talking to.

Not enough to patch the scene though.

Well, no.  It's not the way they wanted to finish this story.

Indeed. WHy should the player have any voice in the matter?  What is this, a choice-based rpg or something? 

[Harorrd]

What the heck? is IGN guy getting paid for trolling?

[dreamgazer]

iakus wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

iakus wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Perhaps. I'm sure they've learned a lesson or two about what needs to satisfy when going forward, and who they're talking to.

Not enough to patch the scene though.

Well, no.  It's not the way they wanted to finish this story.

Indeed. WHy should the player have any voice in the matter?  What is this, a choice-based rpg or something? 

I have a Shepard who'd prefer to go rogue and not side with either the Alliance or Cerberus, while using black-market resources, Omega, and Liara's connections to do it all independently. 

Oh well.

[WhiteKnyght]

crimzontearz wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

http://www.ign.com/b...erly-end-a-game


I am speechless

really, I was not expecting this from IGN.....and I did not think I would ever say this but thank god other people are opening their eyes 

It's from one person at IGN, not the whole company.

It's also a load of crap. Mass Effect 3's endings were thematically widely different. That people cant get over the fact that the Crucible can only fire off in one way is petty and childish. It was going to be used no matter what, and it's firing is not the ending itself, the future Shepard chooses is.

Mass Effect 3 has seven endings before Extended Cut, and only a metagamer would be able to even notice the Crucible scene's similarity, and Bioware has stated numerous times as well that they don't make their games to suit metagamers' tastes. They make them for the experience, starting at the beginning and working your way to the end, not for someone who's gonna watch a youtube video of all the variants playing side-by-side and then ****** and moan about it..

ssssssssoooooooooooooo much wrong here.

if the idea is to make a game replayable then not just metagamers would notice the similarities but anyone who made a second playthrough to make different choices

furthermore about the bolded part. Sure, they may have (I would love a direct quote tho) but they did fail as my experience was completely ruined when they told me to start headcanoning the survival of my own character

Incorrect.

Doesn't really matter. The only parts of the scene that are the same is the Crucible firing. To which I have to ask, how many different ways could it fire off? It was established early on in the game that it released large amounts of energy.

But the effects of the Crucible are different. Seeing the Reapers dying, plus collateral damage or no collateral damage, seeing Earth be completely incinerated. Seeing the Reapers come under Shepard's control and retreat from Earth, plus some collateral damage if the Crucible is damaged. Synthesis though, the scenes were mixed from Control and Destroy(reapers retreating + Citadel destroyed)

And after Extended Cut, you see the extra scenes with the soldiers and the Husk that is either vaporized, controlled, or brought to life and stares into the sky. And the scenes on Thessia and Tuchanka which build on Earth's scene and solidify the fact that the Crucible does have the same effect on the Reapers everywhere, and that it doesn't destroy the galaxy in Arrival-style supernovas like everyone misassumed. Plus Synthesis includes a shot of Palaven's moon with the Turians being altered that isn't there on the others.

The scene with the Normandy running away was figurable even before Extended Cut. Throughout the game they didn't know if the Crucible was only going to hurt the Reapers or wipe out all life within range. Precautions are common sense. And the Normandy was involved in a large space battle, so the ship being damaged was to be expected - it's not invincible.

Also if you want the direct quotes, go post hunting through the topics on metagaming in the DA3 forum. David Gaider pretty much laid it out how Bioware considers it. They write for the player to be able to shape their first experience so they will have an original experience, not to give a game replayability, though they don't deny that it helps.

Also leaving Shepard's fate in the High EMS Destroy open ended is smart. Seeing Shepard. . . ex: get married and have a dozen blue babies is not a part of Mass Effect's narrative. It contributes nothing to the actual plot of the game.

[TheRealJayDee]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

Also leaving Shepard's fate in the High EMS Destroy open ended is smart. Seeing Shepard. . . ex: get married and have a dozen blue babies is not a part of Mass Effect's narrative. It contributes nothing to the actual plot of the game.

Debatable.

[Iakus]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

Also leaving Shepard's fate in the High EMS Destroy open ended is smart. Seeing Shepard. . . ex: get married and have a dozen blue babies is not a part of Mass Effect's narrative. It contributes nothing to the actual plot of the game.

So the endings where the Warden lives in DAO were doing it wrong?

[crimzontearz]

I do not want a personalized ending. I only want a clear answer as per whether he lives or not, after that my imagination can very well well do the rest.

but it is useless to argue

also I really could not care less what Gaider said after DA2 and the BS that was spewed about not being rushed ....I will still give him a chance with DA3, at least it looks like he learned something given the DLCs of DA2, and that team proved they know giving options actually matters (as the ending of DAO is what people wanted the ending of ME3 to be apparently)

[StElmo]

ioannisdenton wrote...

Then how on HELL ign rated Me3 this high??
this is infuriating!

It's a promoted IGN-reader blog.

Also, different people have different opinions. No one single publication will be consistant if they have different writers. Ok>

Modifié par StElmo, 10 janvier 2013 - 01:07 .

[WhiteKnyght]

3DandBeyond wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

http://www.ign.com/b...erly-end-a-game


I am speechless

really, I was not expecting this from IGN.....and I did not think I would ever say this but thank god other people are opening their eyes 

It's from one person at IGN, not the whole company.

It's also a load of crap. Mass Effect 3's endings were thematically widely different. That people cant get over the fact that the Crucible can only fire off in one way is petty and childish. It was going to be used no matter what, and it's firing is not the ending itself, the future Shepard chooses is.

Mass Effect 3 has seven endings before Extended Cut, and only a metagamer would be able to even notice the Crucible scene's similarity, and Bioware has stated numerous times as well that they don't make their games to suit metagamers' tastes. They make them for the experience, starting at the beginning and working your way to the end, not for someone who's gonna watch a youtube video of all the variants playing side-by-side and then ****** and moan about it..

Yet you have to metagame the endings that exist in order to even think Shepard made a halfway decent decision since Shepard has no reason be make one of these choices.  It's a crap shoot, random pick if anything, just to get it all over.

ME3's endings are not thematically related to the actual themes of the game, except in that they are thematically the opposite of what many people know their Shepard would do or consider doing.

Okay I'm going to cut a lot of that out because it is simply too long to quote and would make my post really huge.

The theme of the game is survival. You've learned of an impending invasion and have to do two things. 1) get everyone prepared. And 2) find a way to stop the threat.

The subplots of the game resolve within Mass Effect 3, so Shepard can have the forces necessary to stop the threat. You either cure the genophage or deceive the Krogan, which have various results depending on who is leading the Krogan and what you did with Maelon's data(your choices do matter.) And side between the Quarians and the Geth, and if you did the right things in the past, you can make peace between them.

"except that they are thematically the opposite of what many people know their Shepard would do or consider doing."

So destroying the Reapers is something many peoples' Shepards would never do? Or is it just that the Geth and EDI are collateral damage that you don't like? You talk about themes being betrayed, but every choice in the game all the way back to ME1 has potential consequences that you have to deal with. Even Control and Synthesis have their tolls

And Bioware is supposed to mind-read millions of players and end a single mission a million different ways to suit every one of them? Be realistic. Shepard is a player shaped character, that's true, but you have more options with the ending's choices than you do any other choice in the game. In the past, it's been two choices with one result each. In ME3, it's three choices with seven possible results.

The similarity, the crucible's activation, is the same as stabbing the Archdemon in the head in DAO or Meredith getting petrified in DAII. A plot event that's going to have to happen to bring about the ending.

The endings are the paths you choose, and the consequences that follow. And that is a part of one of Mass Effect's main themes. You make the choice you want, but you're not always going to get the result you want. There are potential consequences and collateral damage to every decision.

As for Refuse, complaining that you die if you choose it is ridiculous. Bioware sold the point in ME1 when it took the combined fleets of every Citadel race just to bring down Sovereign, a single Reaper, that there is no conventional way to defeat thousands of identical Reapers. Even Shepard's ending line in ME1 is that he was going to find a way to stop the Reapers. If you're going to give up that way, you're asking to be harvested.

Losing the Mass Relays in the vanilla ending I frankly am not surprised about. You beat the Reapers by turning their own greatest achievement against them. And considering Sovereign gloated in ME1 about how the Reapers have been guiding the development of organic races, it made a lot of sense that ending the games would require giving up that technology and looking for alternatives. Otherwise history repeats itself and the next time might be worse.

Whining over the lack of some super-streamlined Disney fairy tale ending when the entire game has been about choices and consequences is plain stupid.  Each choice is thematically catered to a different taste of player. Destroy for traditionalists who like to smite their enemies; Control's Paragon/Renegade for those who like the idea of their character being a guardian/ruler; and Synthesis for pacifists who want to make peace with the enemy and/or create a "perfect world." And refusal because people demanded it. But each choice has a risk or a price, such is true of all choices in Mass Effect.

Modifié par The Grey Nayr, 10 janvier 2013 - 01:15 .

[Mcfly616]

Fawx9 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

do you not see that as a sign that he was told to stop advocating that?

No, because it makes little logical sense to reach that conclusion.  One off-handed comment that had every sign of trolling to get some dander up doesn't change the (admittedly sparse) evidence to the contrary.  Bioware may have run with it... but it felt to me that they were more giving up trying to convince fans otherwise.  "You want to believe we put in a scene of him breathing to just say 'and then he died?'  Fine.  You go ahead and do that.  We really don't give a **** anymore.  Go be miserable."

Question, did Ottway die or live at the end of The Grey?

The final scene of that movie is remarkbably close to ME3 destory yet everyone in their right mind has no hope for that poor man. So why is it any leap of the imagination that the same thought process would occur with the ME3 scene?

The Grey Ending

wanted to watch it, heard about the ending, said **** it and never watched it nor I plan to

Actually, the ending really fits with the movie, once you get past the fact that the trailers were horrible for marketing the type of movie this was. Sure you end up with ambiguity, leaning towards depressing, but the final acts by the character and his growth throughout the film make it much easier to diggest.

It's not like he just stands their and waits to get eaten.

there's also no scene of Liam Neeson taking a breath of air after the final scene. In fact, The Grey cuts to the credits before the final fight even begins. Therefore its up to the viewer to decide if he lives or dies. Which is unlike ME3 High EMS Destroy, where it literally shows him ALIVE. No need to wonder....he's alive.

The only thing thats up in the air is "how does Shepard spend the rest of his days?". Which is completely up to the player now that you know he survived, only you know how your Shep would live.

I actually thought the Grey's ending was awesome and quite poetic in contrast to the way Liam Neesons characters mindset changes. In the beginning he wants to take his own life. In the end, he's willing to fight for his life even though there's nothing to go home to....

Modifié par Mcfly616, 10 janvier 2013 - 01:16 .

[WhiteKnyght]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

do you not see that as a sign that he was told to stop advocating that?

No, because it makes little logical sense to reach that conclusion.  One off-handed comment that had every sign of trolling to get some dander up doesn't change the (admittedly sparse) evidence to the contrary.  Bioware may have run with it... but it felt to me that they were more giving up trying to convince fans otherwise.  "You want to believe we put in a scene of him breathing to just say 'and then he died?'  Fine.  You go ahead and do that.  We really don't give a **** anymore.  Go be miserable."

Question, did Ottway die or live at the end of The Grey?

The final scene of that movie is remarkbably close to ME3 destory yet everyone in their right mind has no hope for that poor man. So why is it any leap of the imagination that the same thought process would occur with the ME3 scene?

The Grey Ending

wanted to watch it, heard about the ending, said **** it and never watched it nor I plan to

Actually, the ending really fits with the movie, once you get past the fact that the trailers were horrible for marketing the type of movie this was. Sure you end up with ambiguity, leaning towards depressing, but the final acts by the character and his growth throughout the film make it much easier to diggest.

It's not like he just stands their and waits to get eaten.

there's also no scene of Liam Neeson taking a breath of air after the final scene. In fact, The Grey cuts to the credits before the final fight even begins. Therefore its up to the viewer to decide if he lives or dies. Which is unlike ME3 High EMS Destroy, where it literally shows him ALIVE. No need to wonder....he's alive. The only thing thats up in the air is "how does Shepard spend threst of his days?". Which is completely up to the player now that you know he survived, only you know how your Shep would live.

I actually thought the Grey's ending was awesome and quite poetic in contrast to the way Liam Neesons characters mindset changes. In the beginning he wants to take his own life. In the end, he's willing to fight for his life even though there's nothing to go home to....

Actually there is a post-credits scene showing the aftermath of the fight. The wolf is still alive and Ottoway's head is resting on top of it, no indication if he is alive.

The underlying theme of the movie is living for the day, making the most of it even if its your last. Which is emphasized by Ottoway's father's poem. "Once more into the fray, into the last good fight I'll ever know. Live and die on this day. . . Live and die on this day. . ."

The writers of ME3 wrote it with the same mindset, Mac Walters himself even said on a blog post a week before the game came out that "not everybody is going to like the ending" and that the point of the game is a goodbye, to the characters, the story, everything. And even mentioned that old quote "It's not the destination, but the journey that matters." Which is the point of the Grey as well.

True, the Grey and Mass Effect 3 may not end the way everybody wanted it to. But you gotta admit, it was a hell of a ride. Thwarting Saren, bringing down the Collectors, and uniting the galaxy behind you to stop the Reapers from destroying everyone.

[Wayning_Star]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

http://www.ign.com/b...erly-end-a-game


I am speechless

really, I was not expecting this from IGN.....and I did not think I would ever say this but thank god other people are opening their eyes 

It's from one person at IGN, not the whole company.

It's also a load of crap. Mass Effect 3's endings were thematically widely different. That people cant get over the fact that the Crucible can only fire off in one way is petty and childish. It was going to be used no matter what, and it's firing is not the ending itself, the future Shepard chooses is.

Mass Effect 3 has seven endings before Extended Cut, and only a metagamer would be able to even notice the Crucible scene's similarity, and Bioware has stated numerous times as well that they don't make their games to suit metagamers' tastes. They make them for the experience, starting at the beginning and working your way to the end, not for someone who's gonna watch a youtube video of all the variants playing side-by-side and then ****** and moan about it..

Yet you have to metagame the endings that exist in order to even think Shepard made a halfway decent decision since Shepard has no reason be make one of these choices.  It's a crap shoot, random pick if anything, just to get it all over.

ME3's endings are not thematically related to the actual themes of the game, except in that they are thematically the opposite of what many people know their Shepard would do or consider doing.

Okay I'm going to cut a lot of that out because it is simply too long to quote and would make my post really huge.

The theme of the game is survival. You've learned of an impending invasion and have to do two things. 1) get everyone prepared. And 2) find a way to stop the threat.

The subplots of the game resolve within Mass Effect 3, so Shepard can have the forces necessary to stop the threat. You either cure the genophage or deceive the Krogan, which have various results depending on who is leading the Krogan and what you did with Maelon's data(your choices do matter.) And side between the Quarians and the Geth, and if you did the right things in the past, you can make peace between them.

"except that they are thematically the opposite of what many people know their Shepard would do or consider doing."

So destroying the Reapers is something many peoples' Shepards would never do? Or is it just that the Geth and EDI are collateral damage that you don't like? You talk about themes being betrayed, but every choice in the game all the way back to ME1 has potential consequences that you have to deal with. Even Control and Synthesis have their tolls

And Bioware is supposed to mind-read millions of players and end a single mission a million different ways to suit every one of them? Be realistic. Shepard is a player shaped character, that's true, but you have more options with the ending's choices than you do any other choice in the game. In the past, it's been two choices with one result each. In ME3, it's three choices with seven possible results.

The similarity, the crucible's activation, is the same as stabbing the Archdemon in the head in DAO or Meredith getting petrified in DAII. A plot event that's going to have to happen to bring about the ending.

The endings are the paths you choose, and the consequences that follow. And that is a part of one of Mass Effect's main themes. You make the choice you want, but you're not always going to get the result you want. There are potential consequences and collateral damage to every decision.

As for Refuse, complaining that you die if you choose it is ridiculous. Bioware sold the point in ME1 when it took the combined fleets of every Citadel race just to bring down Sovereign, a single Reaper, that there is no conventional way to defeat thousands of identical Reapers. Even Shepard's ending line in ME1 is that he was going to find a way to stop the Reapers. If you're going to give up that way, you're asking to be harvested.

Losing the Mass Relays in the vanilla ending I frankly am not surprised about. You beat the Reapers by turning their own greatest achievement against them. And considering Sovereign gloated in ME1 about how the Reapers have been guiding the development of organic races, it made a lot of sense that ending the games would require giving up that technology and looking for alternatives. Otherwise history repeats itself and the next time might be worse.

Whining over the lack of some super-streamlined Disney fairy tale ending when the entire game has been about choices and consequences is plain stupid.  Each choice is thematically catered to a different taste of player. Destroy for traditionalists who like to smite their enemies; Control's Paragon/Renegade for those who like the idea of their character being a guardian/ruler; and Synthesis for pacifists who want to make peace with the enemy and/or create a "perfect world." And refusal because people demanded it. But each choice has a risk or a price, such is true of all choices in Mass Effect.

you got my vote..

[Kais Endac]

 The ending of a game is one of the most important aspects of an rpg for me. It can.... 

• serve as a justification for the actions of the pc (ends justify the means)
• wrap up unfinished plot points and unanswered questions
• allow the player to choose the tone of his/her ending eg. Dark, Bittersweet, Happy, Evil, Good or any combination of these things.
• set the stage for a sequel
• bring up questions on things like Morality or even Mortality 

But the most important thing in an rpg (for me) is choice and the giving the choices fleshed out endings that do not leave speculation, I've said it before but the plausability of the crucible and the catalyst did not bother me, if the ending had satisfied me I could care less if the crucible was giant red off button that floated in space. (yea I'm simple like that^_^)

But the main problem I had with the ending is the fact that for the enitre trilogy a main theme in the games were victory despite the odds, Shepard made a career on doing the impossible. I recognise the fact he had never faced odds as bad as ME3 before but would it have been that bad to give one possible ending where shepard is not either dead or lying in a pile of rubble.

The current endings cater to those that like dark or bittersweet endings whereas those that actually want Shepard to survive and see his recovery (even if it was only like the final scene for ME1 where csec agents are sorting though the rubble and find shep) they have to headcanon his recovery.

Oh well I suppose it's too late now anyway, I really need to stop playing this game but bioware made the story and characters too engaging (damn you bioware) anyway after my little rant I have to acknowledge that even though the ending will likely never change and I will ner be fond of said endings the trilogy is too good not to play.

                       
On a sidenote I always found it odd that  IGN and the like was so quick to call people "entitled whiners" after all the only reason they are in buisness today is because of the support and money consumers have given them in the past, they are media outlets that need consumer support (even if they are in the pockets of major publishers like people claim) and to call parts of your consumer base whiners does not seem like a smart move especially if you wish to keep your credibility (especially when their concerns were valid). Although I suppose the various threats and abuse that bioware employees had to endure was a validation of these claims. (Anyone feel free to correct me I have no head for buisness and I'm probably looking at it the wrong way)

Modifié par Kais Endac, 10 janvier 2013 - 01:38 .