1258 réponses à ce sujet

[Kabraxal]

Faust1979 wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Apparently happiness is not 'in' anymore. Making a bittersweet end, that's all bitter with a shot of sweet in the eye is the way to go.

Honestly, they spend the last two games showing how Shepard achieves things no other person could, like stopping Sovereign, going on a Suicide Mission with no causalities, curing the genephage and having the Krogans and Turians become allies.

Then at the end it's like "LOL NO" and Shepard fails and only gets the get-go due to the dude controlling the Reapers and either dies via materialization or falls into debris and dies after taking a final breath. Yeah, great end Bioware.

EDIT: And yes, I wanted an END. A conclusion. Not this mess of open-ends and speculations and plotholes for fcuk sake.<_<

how do you know it's a final breath? it's obvious to me that Shepard is wounded yes but it doesn't mean he has to die. The breathing scene means that after all the crap he's gone through that he lives and won't succumb to his wounds.  This game does have an end and conclusions just not the ones you like. Why is it so bad to leave some speculations here and there? lots of fiction leaves certain things open to interpetation. Have video gamers become so uninmaginative they can't think of things on their own?

If I wanted a game to make me think and speculate and wonder, there are outlets out there for that.  And I actually do purchase many of those types of games (Lone Survivor, To the Moon, Breakdown, Journey, Spec Ops, and plenty of other games.  I did not buy ME or DA, Bioware games, for the sole purpose of providing an ambiguous narrative that invites intense philosphical debate.  I purchased Bioware games because i knew I'd get to have a good story filled with some of the best characters out there and then actually given choices to influence that particular world.  I did not buy ME3 to have the illusion of choices over three games dumbed down to "choose this arbitrary ending that hardly relies on anything that came before" and then proceeds to forget about the characters that I spent three games with.  

If ME3 had simply included a detailed epilogue, even with Shepard's death, showing where each character ended up and how it differed based on my choices... then it wouldn't be an issue nearly a year later.  The reason the ending is still pointed at as the worst example of an ending is because it fails on the simple little fact that most players were not playing for some vague psuedo intellectual mumbo jumbo... but to see how so many of these beloved characters were changed and how their lives ended up.  

There is a place for Deus Ex out there... it just wasn't at the end of a trilogy that had nothing to do with Deus Ex.  The theme and narrative structure in the current ending does not fit the saga.  That is why so many are still disatisfied, despite it being a year.

[string3r]

Casey and Mac probably thought it would be too generic.

[KotorEffect3]

You can destroy the reapers and save the galaxy. How is that not a happy ending? You thought a war of this scale would not have casualties?

Modifié par KotorEffect3, 20 janvier 2013 - 12:07 .

[78stonewobble]

Sundance31us wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...

Have video gamers become so uninmaginative they can't think of things on their own?

A question I've been pondering for the last 10 months.

Shepard jumps into the light beam. Fade to black.

That would probably have been the obvious place to end the game for an open end.

I just don't think that would have been widely accepted.

[78stonewobble]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You can destroy the reapers and save the galaxy. How is that not a happy ending? You thought a war of this scale would not have casualties>

Noone said that. People expected sacrifices and loss but, as in any other war, life continues and people find good in their lives afterwards.

If anything your interpretation is the unrealistic one. For all 3 endings actually.

Or an argument for only getting half an ending.

Atleast the EC helped a good deal on this.



*sigh* In so many replies I don't see any really enthusiasm for the endings but rather a setling for mediocrity.

Sorry but I prefer better.

Modifié par 78stonewobble, 20 janvier 2013 - 12:10 .

[EpicBoot2daFace]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You can destroy the reapers and save the galaxy. How is that not a happy ending? You thought a war of this scale would not have casualties>

Sums up my thoughts.

[KotorEffect3]

78stonewobble wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You can destroy the reapers and save the galaxy. How is that not a happy ending? You thought a war of this scale would not have casualties>

Noone said that. People expected sacrifices and loss but, as in any other war, life continues and people find good in the lives afterwards.

If anything your interpretation is the unrealistic one. For all 3 endings actually.

I'd like to know how I am being unrealistic.

[TheRealJayDee]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You can destroy the reapers and save the galaxy. How is that not a happy ending? You thought a war of this scale would not have casualties>

I find it really fascinating when people act as if there'd been no casualties at all before the final decision...

[Sundance31us]

I get the impression that what they want is for one interpretation to be validated, so that it becomes the only interpretation.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

TheRealJayDee wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You can destroy the reapers and save the galaxy. How is that not a happy ending? You thought a war of this scale would not have casualties>

I find it really fascinating when people act as if there'd been no casualties at all before the final decision...

There are no casualties in war.

[KiwiQuiche]

Faust1979 wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Apparently happiness is not 'in' anymore. Making a bittersweet end, that's all bitter with a shot of sweet in the eye is the way to go.

Honestly, they spend the last two games showing how Shepard achieves things no other person could, like stopping Sovereign, going on a Suicide Mission with no causalities, curing the genephage and having the Krogans and Turians become allies.

Then at the end it's like "LOL NO" and Shepard fails and only gets the get-go due to the dude controlling the Reapers and either dies via materialization or falls into debris and dies after taking a final breath. Yeah, great end Bioware.

EDIT: And yes, I wanted an END. A conclusion. Not this mess of open-ends and speculations and plotholes for fcuk sake.<_<

how do you know it's a final breath? it's obvious to me that Shepard is wounded yes but it doesn't mean he has to die. The breathing scene means that after all the crap he's gone through that he lives and won't succumb to his wounds.  This game does have an end and conclusions just not the ones you like. Why is it so bad to leave some speculations here and there? lots of fiction leaves certain things open to interpetation. Have video gamers become so uninmaginative they can't think of things on their own?

'Cause Shepard was already greviously injuried and bleeding to death in the Citadel while talking to Starbrat? The additional injuries gained from walking into an explosion and subsequently crashing and bashing around in the Citadel means Shepard is gonna die in a few minutes/seconds after said breath and since obviously no one has found Shepard yet, they will die.

It's the end of a trilogy. Leaving massive holes for speculations pisses people off since they want closure to their adventures, something Bioware found out.

[78stonewobble]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

78stonewobble wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

You can destroy the reapers and save the galaxy. How is that not a happy ending? You thought a war of this scale would not have casualties>

Noone said that. People expected sacrifices and loss but, as in any other war, life continues and people find good in the lives afterwards.

If anything your interpretation is the unrealistic one. For all 3 endings actually.

I'd like to know how I am being unrealistic.

That sacrifice or experiencing loss somehow leaves no room for happyness.

Or are you telling me that during and after ww2. Noone fell in love, noone had kids, noone held a party and noone told a joke?

Basically having one without the other is an oversimplification.

Atleast the EC added some of it but I'd have preferred to have it shown in a more emotionally engaging way (squadmates).

[Sundance31us]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

'Cause Shepard was already greviously injuried and bleeding to death in the Citadel while talking to Starbrat? The additional injuries gained from walking into an explosion and subsequently crashing and bashing around in the Citadel means Shepard is gonna die in a few minutes/seconds after said breath and since obviously no one has found Shepard yet, they will die.

It's the end of a trilogy. Leaving massive holes for speculations pisses people off since they want closure to their adventures, something Bioware found out.

The exact nature of Shepard's wounds are a matter of interpretation.

[SirLysander]

dreamgazer wrote...

Sundance31us wrote...

Faust1979 wrote...

Have video gamers become so uninmaginative they can't think of things on their own?

A question I've been pondering for the last 10 months.

They can, if given the right tools.

The problem with common sense is that it is, unfortunately, not exactly common. 

On seeing the ending - the original, as-released-on-day-One Ending, I formed my opinions about what actually happened.  When the Extended Cut Ending came out, lo and behold! 98% of my opinions appeared to be *confirmed.*  The only reason I am not 100% "in agreement" with the EC presentation is base on interpretation of one phrasing that, if take one way meant the Geth would not be destroyed in the Destroy ending; taken the way Bioware meant, they are destroyed.  And, in the end, 98% confirmed is a number I can live with.

As far as I'm concerned, the tools are there, in the original, and haven't been moved.

[MikeDraws567]

Mass Effect doesn't have a happy ending because it's a war story. War stories in general are tragedies where you witness horrible things. It gives gravity to the choices you make. Do you save everybody, change the galaxy and destroy yourself? Do you make everyone live by controlling the threat against everybody? Or do you destroy the threat and risk the cycle happening yet again?

Each of these choices carries the weight of responsibility of changing how everyone will live their lives. This is a choice that many would not want understandably and I think it's the reason why so many gamers didn't like the choices you had to make at the end.

Commander Shepard is the ultimate hero. Not one from fairy tales, but one that has to make terrible choices to save lives. So while you COULD have a happy ending, it would go against what was built up this whole time.

But that's my opinion.

[ziyon conqueror]

I at least wanted a perfect ending where no one else had to die. But no. I only had three choices that were not perfect. Three days of playing and suddenly my heart tore in two. I had such high hopes of winning like in ME2.

If any of you still want a happy and/or perfect ending, continue to fight for it. Because there are some things worth fighting for.

[KiwiQuiche]

Sundance31us wrote...

KiwiQuiche wrote...

'Cause Shepard was already greviously injuried and bleeding to death in the Citadel while talking to Starbrat? The additional injuries gained from walking into an explosion and subsequently crashing and bashing around in the Citadel means Shepard is gonna die in a few minutes/seconds after said breath and since obviously no one has found Shepard yet, they will die.

It's the end of a trilogy. Leaving massive holes for speculations pisses people off since they want closure to their adventures, something Bioware found out.

The exact nature of Shepard's wounds are a matter of interpretation.

The fact Shepard is bleeding, hobbles slowly and couldn't even stand up to touch the control panel after Anderson dies is a pretty good indication they are fairly extreme injuries.

[Reorte]

MikeDraws567 wrote...

Mass Effect doesn't have a happy ending because it's a war story. War stories in general are tragedies where you witness horrible things. It gives gravity to the choices you make. Do you save everybody, change the galaxy and destroy yourself? Do you make everyone live by controlling the threat against everybody? Or do you destroy the threat and risk the cycle happening yet again?

Each of these choices carries the weight of responsibility of changing how everyone will live their lives. This is a choice that many would not want understandably and I think it's the reason why so many gamers didn't like the choices you had to make at the end.

Commander Shepard is the ultimate hero. Not one from fairy tales, but one that has to make terrible choices to save lives. So while you COULD have a happy ending, it would go against what was built up this whole time.

But that's my opinion.

That has been brought up several times and it doesn't add up.

War stories have lots of sadness and happiness. Horrible things and tragedies happen along the way but at the end there's usually some happiness for someone (or at least relief).

People didn't like the choices at the end simply because they came pretty much out of nowhere, the negative consequences of some of them were highly contrived, and they ran various aspects of nonsense from highly implausible to utterly absurd. People like big choices when they're done well - don't recall hearing too many complaints about the rachni choice in ME1 or the Heretic choice in ME2.

Commander Shepard was pretty much a straightforward larger than life hero (although you can roleplay him more as an antihero, particularly if you're a renegade). What was built up the whole time was hero riding off into the sunset quite frankly, although downgrading to a standing tired, hurt, and worn amongst the detritus of war but with some comfort available would be perfectly fitting and appropriate; the mood can reasonably shift that much.

If you want the sort of story that you're on about go and play The Witcher instead (very good games where that sort of tone fits).

[Reorte]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Sundance31us wrote...

The exact nature of Shepard's wounds are a matter of interpretation.

The fact Shepard is bleeding, hobbles slowly and couldn't even stand up to touch the control panel after Anderson dies is a pretty good indication they are fairly extreme injuries.

Once again we've got common sense getting in the way. What would really happen doesn't belong in the endings. The idea appears to be that if you can't 100% conclusively prove something you're supposed to go with whatever you imagine (sorry, I'm not the author, that's not my job), or you're supposed to work out what was actually meant with a given scene, and that trumps the reality of what's shown.

[o Ventus]

MikeDraws567 wrote...

Mass Effect doesn't have a happy ending because it's a war story.

I have to stop you right here.

ME3 is a war story. ME3 is the only entry in the entire franchise that is a war story.

ME is not. ME2 is not. The novels are not war stories. The comics are not war stories. The spinoff iOS apps are not war stories. Mass Effect, as a whole, isn't even remotely a war story.

Yet, all of them are dragged down by the endings.

Regardless, I don't know why it's some unspoken rule that war stories are automatic tragedies. Has nobody heard of the miracle at Dunkirk (in WW2)?

[o Ventus]

Sundance31us wrote...

The exact nature of Shepard's wounds are a matter of interpretation.

Shepard was nearly directly hit by a cannon that fires molten metal (people need to stop saying it's a laser), had his armor melted by said cannon (while stil wearing the armor), and was shot by Marauder Shields.

We have:

-Possible fragmentation 
-3rd degree burns from the melted armor and Harbinger's gun
-A gunshot wound in the shoulder
-Walking into an explosion (assuming the Destroy ending is chosen; disregard if not applicable)

Realistically speaking, he would be more dead than he was at the beginning of ME2.

[fiendishchicken]

o Ventus wrote...

MikeDraws567 wrote...

Mass Effect doesn't have a happy ending because it's a war story.

I have to stop you right here.

ME3 is a war story. ME3 is the only entry in the entire franchise that is a war story.

ME is not. ME2 is not. The novels are not war stories. The comics are not war stories. The spinoff iOS apps are not war stories. Mass Effect, as a whole, isn't even remotely a war story.

Yet, all of them are dragged down by the endings.

Regardless, I don't know why it's some unspoken rule that war stories are automatic tragedies. Has nobody heard of the miracle at Dunkirk (in WW2)?

WWII had a decent ending as well as I recall.

[o Ventus]

fiendishchicken wrote...

WWII had a decent ending as well as I recall.

Just the right amount of bittersweet.

[fiendishchicken]

o Ventus wrote...

fiendishchicken wrote...

WWII had a decent ending as well as I recall.

Just the right amount of bittersweet.

It was definitely truimphant, with the victors having actually made difficult decisions that paid off, and it set the stage for further conflict (The Cold War).

Modifié par fiendishchicken, 20 janvier 2013 - 01:57 .

[o Ventus]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

Why can't Mass Effect 1 and 2 have bittersweet endings?

There's no accounting for taste. No matter what they do, some people are not going to be satisfied.

That's just the way it goes. I'm sorry.

Mass Effect 2 most certainly CAN have a bittersweet ending.