1258 réponses à ce sujet

[CronoDragoon]

Kabraxal wrote...

Templars/Mages
Werewolves/Elves

Not hard at all, since you aren't forced to choose between them.

Branca/Carridan

Also not a hard choice, because it offers no conflicting consequences within the same moral view. Either you believe the ends justify the means or you don't. This decision is pre-decided by the player's morality. Contrast this with the ME endings where each ending houses benefits/consequences within the same morality.

Harrowmont/Bhalen

I'll give you this one. I was surprised to see the long-term consequences of choosing Harrowmont.

Just to name a few choices that aren't actually all that easy.  It depends on the character being played on how hard some of those will be, but they are often quite difficult.  As for Loghain, that is actually a very hard choice.  He's a capable warrior and would make a great Warden, even if you don't like him.  That choice has actually given me pause a few times.  As has the US and the Dark Ritual.

What are the repercussions of choosing Alistair over Loghain? None that we can see. Ditto for the Dark Ritual. Though I am looking forward to the eventual possibility of something terrible happening in future DA games because of DR.

I find those choices far harder than that mess of endins in ME3.  Especially after truly hard decisions like Tuchanka and Rannoch.  Those were prime examples of choices that were truly hard, could be very bitter, but still fit the narrative structure that existed... there is a reason those are the moments commonly brought up to address teh confusion we feel at how the same team that made those choices, made those horrid narrative breaking endings that aren't tough at all.... just so completely out of place and betraying everything that had come before.

How is Rannoch at all difficult when you can make peace? Unless you are talking about choosing between the geth and the quarians, in which case I agree.

Similarly, I find nothing difficult about Tuchanka, except for one situation: Playing a Renegade and choosing whether or not to shoot Mordin in the back.

All of this is a long-winded way of saying that if you consistently play your BioWare characters as either "Paragon" or "Renegade" then there are very little hard choices to be found. Virmire in ME1, Legion's loyalty mission in ME2.

[AB Souldier]

HagarIshay wrote...

iakus wrote...
Watsup, doc? 

No, not doc. HagarIshay. But I see how you can get confused.

ajsrise wrote...
But i am not fully transformed yet. 

Then you didn't overload with guilt and sorrow and whatever crap I wrote there yet?

HOW DARE YOU?!?

Not yet  

iakus wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

iakus wrote...

If having a happy ending is in there somewhere somehow invalidates the unhappy one, I question the veracity of claims that they like dark, tragic, or bittersweet endings after all.

We are talking about people who like tough choices. Such people like weighing the pros and cons of each choice in order to determine the optimum path forward. In this capacity, they are STILL interested in the "best" ending, which can often be the happiest one. For someone who takes their choices seriously, a happy ending alongside unhappy ones invalidates the process of decision-making and makes it obsolete.

People who like dark-toned endings are a different discussion. In this case, it depends why they like those sorts of endings. Usually people like these endings for a reason: one that comes to mind is that usually dark or tragic endings result as some consequence of an unfortunate series of events, as a consequence of a character making the wrong decisions because of a flawed personality, because of some set of circumstances that are beyond the main character's control. People can like that a story takes those sort of challenges seriously and does not handwave them purely in order to produce a happy tone.

Personally I do not believe that the current endings feel like a natural progression of unfortunate consequences (or fortunate ones). The endings are contrived both to be sad and happy. For example, why does Synthesis need Shepard to die? That's a contrivance to alter the tone. Similarly, having your squadmates escape the beam rush without explanation (in the OEs) is a contrivance to alter the tone in the opposite direction.

However, pointing out the flawed ways that the ME3 endings manipulate the tone is not an argument to install a happy ending alongside other flawed, non-happy endings.

I don't disagree that the consequences of the chocies are massively contrived.  At the same time, though I believe there should have been "happy" outcomes for each of them, depending on playthroughs.  The cost of these "happy outcomes" should have been a selection of choices.  The debt to be paid should have been...distributable...so the player could find a price palatable enough to play.

For example, the geth could be saved in Destroy, but the cost would be far more damage to the relay network.  You you wipe out a race so the rest of the galaxy can have a comparatively easy recovery?  Or do you risk a "galact dark age" so everyone has a chance to live?  Place everyone at risk so all have a chance?

How would the geth being saved in the destroy ending cause more damage to the relay network? You lost me bud.

[CronoDragoon]

iakus wrote...
I don't disagree that the consequences of the chocies are massively contrived.  At the same time, though I believe there should have been "happy" outcomes for each of them, depending on playthroughs.  The cost of these "happy outcomes" should have been a selection of choices.  The debt to be paid should have been...distributable...so the player could find a price palatable enough to play.

For example, the geth could be saved in Destroy, but the cost would be far more damage to the relay network.  You you wipe out a race so the rest of the galaxy can have a comparatively easy recovery?  Or do you risk a "galact dark age" so everyone has a chance to live?  Place everyone at risk so all have a chance?

I would be all for allowing more customization within the 3 endings, so long as the tone remained balanced and there was no clear "happy ending" amongst the 3. However, even in your example you show the downside: adding more customization opens the door for more contrivance.

What possible scenario could set up the situation where Shepard could die instead of synthetics and have it not be contrived? I can't think of any.

So long as we're talking DA Origins, can we admit how massively contrived the entire ending dilemma is? That the Archdemon's soul will collide with the Warden's and both will be destroyed? That the Dark Ritual works because at such an early stage of development the fetus's soul can absorb the archdemon?

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 22 janvier 2013 - 07:09 .

[Kabraxal]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

Templars/Mages
Werewolves/Elves

Not hard at all, since you aren't forced to choose between them.

Branca/Carridan

Also not a hard choice, because it offers no conflicting consequences within the same moral view. Either you believe the ends justify the means or you don't. This decision is pre-decided by the player's morality. Contrast this with the ME endings where each ending houses benefits/consequences within the same morality.

Harrowmont/Bhalen

I'll give you this one. I was surprised to see the long-term consequences of choosing Harrowmont.

Just to name a few choices that aren't actually all that easy.  It depends on the character being played on how hard some of those will be, but they are often quite difficult.  As for Loghain, that is actually a very hard choice.  He's a capable warrior and would make a great Warden, even if you don't like him.  That choice has actually given me pause a few times.  As has the US and the Dark Ritual.

What are the repercussions of choosing Alistair over Loghain? None that we can see. Ditto for the Dark Ritual. Though I am looking forward to the eventual possibility of something terrible happening in future DA games because of DR.

I find those choices far harder than that mess of endins in ME3.  Especially after truly hard decisions like Tuchanka and Rannoch.  Those were prime examples of choices that were truly hard, could be very bitter, but still fit the narrative structure that existed... there is a reason those are the moments commonly brought up to address teh confusion we feel at how the same team that made those choices, made those horrid narrative breaking endings that aren't tough at all.... just so completely out of place and betraying everything that had come before.

How is Rannoch at all difficult when you can make peace? Unless you are talking about choosing between the geth and the quarians, in which case I agree.

Similarly, I find nothing difficult about Tuchanka, except for one situation: Playing a Renegade and choosing whether or not to shoot Mordin in the back.

All of this is a long-winded way of saying that if you consistently play your BioWare characters as either "Paragon" or "Renegade" then there are very little hard choices to be found. Virmire in ME1, Legion's loyalty mission in ME2.

I do not metagame.  I RP.  That means I dont take into account the actual result that I already know... my character has no idea so they actually have to make a choice.  

And that is one of the biggest reasons why ME3's endings fail.  Unlike all these choices that fit the narrative and can be RPed with ease, the endings are locked for only a few kinds of Shepards.  I have one, ONE, Shepard that would even entertain any of the three ideas as presented by the Starchild.  The rest are like me the first time I played... blinking and going "what in the hell is this brat talking about? Why should I believe him?  Wait... why are my limbs moving despite not agreeing with any of these choices?"

At least refuse gave me a little bit of control back over my Shepard to where that character can have some semblance of continuity instead of suddenly turning into a mindless empty drone.  

[Twilight_Princess]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

Going back to DAO... that is actually a game of hard decisions with an ending that isn't exactly an easy choice to make either.  Not only must you decide if you can trust a character enough, but then you have to make the choice of who will make the killing blow.  And sometimes that choice is actually ignored because another choice will override it.  YOu can have an extremely bittersweet victory with DAO.  And people love that ending.  It's a hard choice but its a fitting choice.  ME could have had a hard choice at the ending and still worked.  Most of us were expecting it and hoping for something very much like the US from DAO.  

I COMPLETELY disagree with the bolded. The only choice that has any semblance of being hard is the last one, and then it turns out it isn't a tough choice after all since nothing bad happens in DR ending. You can free the werewolves from their curse without killing the elven clan. You can save both templars and mages at the tower. You can bring in the mages to save both Connor and his mother. Perhaps you can't reconcile Alistair and Logain, but how many people REALLY debated whether to choose Alistair or Logain?

Well the warden I played wasn't the revenge type and believed there was a better way to deal with loghain rather than killing him on the spot. I didn't like logain or his actions but I also felt Alistair wasn’t thinking properly either. It actually was a tough decision for me because I was choosing between my warden’s personal philosophy (letting those who have done wrong have a chance to redeem themselves) and the feelings of my companion.
What was more important, staying true to myself or risk losing Alistair? Plus there were other decisions that had weight to them , which dwarf king did you choose? Neither was a perfect choice. Were you in a relationship with either Morrigan or Alistair at the end? That makes the last decisions difficult when you factor in your LI.  Is it better to harden Alistair and leliana’s personalities or leave them be? Not all the decision making had ideal outcomes and those that did you had to work for if you wanted them.

Modifié par Hyrule_Gal, 22 janvier 2013 - 07:08 .

[CronoDragoon]

Kabraxal wrote...

I do not metagame.  I RP.  That means I dont take into account the actual result that I already know... my character has no idea so they actually have to make a choice.  

And that is one of the biggest reasons why ME3's endings fail.  Unlike all these choices that fit the narrative and can be RPed with ease, the endings are locked for only a few kinds of Shepards.  I have one, ONE, Shepard that would even entertain any of the three ideas as presented by the Starchild.  The rest are like me the first time I played... blinking and going "what in the hell is this brat talking about? Why should I believe him?  Wait... why are my limbs moving despite not agreeing with any of these choices?"

The endings are actually fine for most Shepards. The only people who really still complain about the endings are Paragon Destroyers. (Or Refusers who want to be Destroyers except for the geth/EDI thing)

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 22 janvier 2013 - 07:14 .

[Iakus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

What are the repercussions of choosing Alistair over Loghain? None that we can see. Ditto for the Dark Ritual. Though I am looking forward to the eventual possibility of something terrible happening in future DA games because of DR.

There's several actually.

Allistair will not take the throne if you accept Logain as a Grey Warden unless he has previously been hardened.  Similarly, Anora will not marry Alistair if he executes Logain.
This means that Allistair's possible fates based on this can be:

King of Ferelden
Jointly rule Ferelden with Anora
Remains a Grey Warden
Becomes a wandering drunkard
Is executed by Anora

Additionally, if you allow Logain to slay the archdemon, he is redeemed in the eyes of the people of Ferelden.

[CronoDragoon]

iakus wrote...
There's several actually.

Allistair will not take the throne if you accept Logain as a Grey Warden unless he has previously been hardened.  Similarly, Anora will not marry Alistair if he executes Logain.
This means that Allistair's possible fates based on this can be:

King of Ferelden
Jointly rule Ferelden with Anora
Remains a Grey Warden
Becomes a wandering drunkard
Is executed by Anora

Additionally, if you allow Logain to slay the archdemon, he is redeemed in the eyes of the people of Ferelden.

How are any of these repercussions for choosing Alistair over Loghain? What tangible downside is there to choosing Alistair, considering 1. They both can sacrifice themselves equally well and 2. There's no evidence that Alistair ends up ruling badly in DA2, which should be the logical consequence of choosing him in a situation where he either doesn't marry Anora or a female Warden.

If you choose Alistair, you are rewarded for it and never punished for it.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 22 janvier 2013 - 07:17 .

[Iakus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

I would be all for allowing more customization within the 3 endings, so long as the tone remained balanced and there was no clear "happy ending" amongst the 3. However, even in your example you show the downside: adding more customization opens the door for more contrivance.

What possible scenario could set up the situation where Shepard could die instead of synthetics and have it not be contrived? I can't think of any.

So long as we're talking DA Origins, can we admit how massively contrived the entire ending dilemma is? That the Archdemon's soul will collide with the Warden's and both will be destroyed? That the Dark Ritual works because at such an early stage of development the fetus's soul can absorb the archdemon?

Contrivance became inevitable as soon as plans for an antiReaper superweapon appeared in the Mars archives.  Like it or not we have to accept that.

Besides, this topic is about happy endings, not contrived ones.   If we're to have contrived, there should at least be a contrived ending I can smile at.

[wright1978]

Kabraxal wrote...

I do not metagame.  I RP.  That means I dont take into account the actual result that I already know... my character has no idea so they actually have to make a choice.  

And that is one of the biggest reasons why ME3's endings fail.  Unlike all these choices that fit the narrative and can be RPed with ease, the endings are locked for only a few kinds of Shepards.  I have one, ONE, Shepard that would even entertain any of the three ideas as presented by the Starchild.  The rest are like me the first time I played... blinking and going "what in the hell is this brat talking about? Why should I believe him?  Wait... why are my limbs moving despite not agreeing with any of these choices?"

At least refuse gave me a little bit of control back over my Shepard to where that character can have some semblance of continuity instead of suddenly turning into a mindless empty drone.  

Agree completely i can just about roleplay it enough to headcanon that Shep is shooting the tube to try and cause an explosion that might kill the star brat. The other endings are just non choices in the manner they are presented which basically ME3 choices aren't hard at all imo. Whereas i've spent ages agaonising over other choices in DA and ME, weighing up the possible permutations in my head.

The current endings are the equivalent of having DAO tell you you are going to kill the archdemon. You meet the archdemon at the very end, it reveals to you that you will die if you kill it. It then whispers in your ear that maybe you'd like to do a 'dark ritual' with it instead. The result would have been a non-choice, rather than me weighing up the long term consequences of doing the deed with morrigan based upon my knowledge of her against the benefit of me or another grey warden not dying.

[CronoDragoon]

iakus wrote...
Contrivance became inevitable as soon as plans for an antiReaper superweapon appeared in the Mars archives.  Like it or not we have to accept that.

Besides, this topic is about happy endings, not contrived ones.   If we're to have contrived, there should at least be a contrived ending I can smile at.

What you are saying is that you are okay with the further degradation of the objective quality of endings, so long as it produces a happier result.

That's a fine view to have so long as we're being honest about what's wrong with the endings. Your suggestions would make the endings objectively worse but make you feel better(if you like happy endings). Whether or not that's a good thing comes down to the person.

[AB Souldier]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

I do not metagame.  I RP.  That means I dont take into account the actual result that I already know... my character has no idea so they actually have to make a choice.  

And that is one of the biggest reasons why ME3's endings fail.  Unlike all these choices that fit the narrative and can be RPed with ease, the endings are locked for only a few kinds of Shepards.  I have one, ONE, Shepard that would even entertain any of the three ideas as presented by the Starchild.  The rest are like me the first time I played... blinking and going "what in the hell is this brat talking about? Why should I believe him?  Wait... why are my limbs moving despite not agreeing with any of these choices?"

The endings are actually fine for most Shepards. The only people who really still complain about the endings are Paragon Destroyers. (Or Refusers who want to be Destroyers except for the geth/EDI thing)

The reasons the Paragon destroyers (like myself) are doing the most complaining is because destroying the reapers was always shepards goal. I never heard him say "... so we can finally control the reapers" or "... So we can finally merge synthetics and organics into one"

Of course, if people change their minds in the end (the point of your decisions effecting your game) i am cool with that, but that doesn't change the fact that Shepards goal was always to destroy the reapers, and the paragon destroyers are being punished the hardest for following in what was the original idea, which was to destroy the reapers.

[Iakus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

iakus wrote...
There's several actually.

Allistair will not take the throne if you accept Logain as a Grey Warden unless he has previously been hardened.  Similarly, Anora will not marry Alistair if he executes Logain.
This means that Allistair's possible fates based on this can be:

King of Ferelden
Jointly rule Ferelden with Anora
Remains a Grey Warden
Becomes a wandering drunkard
Is executed by Anora

Additionally, if you allow Logain to slay the archdemon, he is redeemed in the eyes of the people of Ferelden.

How are any of these repercussions for choosing Alistair over Loghain? What tangible downside is there to choosing Alistair, considering 1. They both can sacrifice themselves equally well and 2. There's no evidence that Alistair ends up ruling badly in DA2, which should be the logical consequence of choosing him in a situation where he either doesn't marry Anora or a female Warden.

If you choose Alistair, you are rewarded for it and never punished for it.

Going by ending slides, Allistair proves a more capable ruler with Anora at his side rather than ruling alone.  While Anora is capable but lacks teh "common touch" that Alistair has.

Alistair is overall happiest staying a Warden
Anyone who gets Alistair executed has already been punished as far as I'm concerned

[78stonewobble]

iakus wrote...
I believe the term is called Dog in the Manger denying something others can use even if you don't need it.

As non native english speaker I did not know that term. Thanks for the link.

[AlanC9]

Kabraxal wrote...
And that is one of the biggest reasons why ME3's endings fail.  Unlike all these choices that fit the narrative and can be RPed with ease, the endings are locked for only a few kinds of Shepards.  I have one, ONE, Shepard that would even entertain any of the three ideas as presented by the Starchild.  The rest are like me the first time I played... blinking and going "what in the hell is this brat talking about? Why should I believe him?  Wait... why are my limbs moving despite not agreeing with any of these choices?"

Huh? Pre-EC you didn't have to do anything; you could just stand there and wait for the Reapers to deestroy the Crucible. Just like Refuse, except you don't get to make a big speech before losing.

[Twilight_Princess]

*edit*

I feel I was "rewarded" with a different perspective by sparing Logain. And obviously if you do the right things neither Alistair or Logain needs to die (or be exiled) by your hand. Alistair gets to be a great king and Logain can redeem himself by killing the archdemon (by his choosing). This way both their stories are wrapped up at the end of the game instead of ending abruptly at the landsmeet. I guess if you kill Logain right there you never learn about his motivations or reasons and by not choosing Logain that means it's harder to make that decision at the end. It's easier to let Logian impregnante morrigan or get killed by the archdemon than Alistair (if you cared about him that is).

Modifié par Hyrule_Gal, 22 janvier 2013 - 07:32 .

[Iakus]

CronoDragoon wrote...

iakus wrote...
Contrivance became inevitable as soon as plans for an antiReaper superweapon appeared in the Mars archives.  Like it or not we have to accept that.

Besides, this topic is about happy endings, not contrived ones.   If we're to have contrived, there should at least be a contrived ending I can smile at.

What you are saying is that you are okay with the further degradation of the objective quality of endings, so long as it produces a happier result.

That's a fine view to have so long as we're being honest about what's wrong with the endings. Your suggestions would make the endings objectively worse but make you feel better(if you like happy endings). Whether or not that's a good thing comes down to the person.

What I'm okay with is being able to Earn Your Happy Ending.  Quality of the endings is hardly an issue anymore, unless we want to talk about rewriting the entire game to be less contrived. 

So, yeah, if this is the story we have to have, we should at least be able to affect the ending to a degree that Shepard finds a measure of happiness at the end.

[CronoDragoon]

Hyrule_Gal wrote...

I feel I was "rewarded" with a different perspective by sparing Logain. And obviously if you do the right things neither Alistair or Logain needs to die (or be exiled) by your hand. Alistair gets to be a great king and Logain can redeem himself by killing the archdemon (by his choosing). This way both their stories are wrapped up at the end of the game instead of ending abruptly at the landsmeet.

I actually didn't know this. I always killed Loghain at the Landsmeet. This seems to further augment my opinion that Origins often gives you a way out of choosing between two sides.

[Iakus]

Hyrule_Gal wrote...

I feel I was "rewarded" with a different perspective by sparing Logain. And obviously if you do the right things neither Alistair or Logain needs to die (or be exiled) by your hand. Alistair gets to be a great king and Logain can redeem himself by killing the archdemon (by his choosing). This way both their stories are wrapped up at the end of the game instead of ending abruptly at the landsmeet.

This is why I favor the Redeemer ending.  It costs you your friendship with both Alistair and Morrigan (heck Morrigan was my LI in the playthrough I did this).  Allistair can become king, you redeem the villain.  THere is some personal cost, but no one dies.

[Kabraxal]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

I do not metagame.  I RP.  That means I dont take into account the actual result that I already know... my character has no idea so they actually have to make a choice.  

And that is one of the biggest reasons why ME3's endings fail.  Unlike all these choices that fit the narrative and can be RPed with ease, the endings are locked for only a few kinds of Shepards.  I have one, ONE, Shepard that would even entertain any of the three ideas as presented by the Starchild.  The rest are like me the first time I played... blinking and going "what in the hell is this brat talking about? Why should I believe him?  Wait... why are my limbs moving despite not agreeing with any of these choices?"

The endings are actually fine for most Shepards. The only people who really still complain about the endings are Paragon Destroyers. (Or Refusers who want to be Destroyers except for the geth/EDI thing)

Uh... "fight control for the entire game to just suddenly swtich to thinking it's a good idea"... or "let's violate all life, organic or synthetic, and make them some unknown thing that can't even be explained properly!", not even taking into account you basically repel this very idea in ME1 with Saren... then the infamous destroy, where Shepard commits genocide without consulting anyone.  

Yeah, those will fit a lot of Shepards :innocent:

All the information leading up to the endings is simply dropped for this arbitary choice.  Everything you learned and experienced means almost nothing and you are given two shallow choices with NO supporting evidence and then given a "destroy" ending that negates all the progress on treating synthetics as equals that many Shepards struggled for?  Those aren't hard choices because they are well written, provoking decisions... they are hard choices because there is no good reason to choose any of them.  And that is ignoring the simple fact you are believing a program that has at least claimed it's the mastermind behind the cycles... yeah, real trustworthy.  

It's impossible to RP the endings because there is no basis or foundation for them.  They have been arbitrarily forced into a game where every bit of preceeding information is leading elsewhere.

[CronoDragoon]

Kabraxal wrote...

It's impossible to RP the endings because there is no basis or foundation for them.  They have been arbitrarily forced into a game where every bit of preceeding information is leading elsewhere.

Practically yes, there is little foundation for them. Thematically you are wrong. It is quite easy to see Paragon and Renegade interpretations for Control and Synthesis, and Renegade for Destroy. Paragon Destroy, I have unfortunately not found a way to reconcile the geth/EDI destruction with the desire for autonomy in a way that deepens the playthrough.

[Twilight_Princess]

iakus wrote...

This is why I favor the Redeemer ending.  It costs you your friendship with both Alistair and Morrigan (heck Morrigan was my LI in the playthrough I did this).  Allistair can become king, you redeem the villain.  THere is some personal cost, but no one dies.

I never thought it would but it became my favourite ending too. It sucked if you romanced Alistair though but the horrible truth is there is no "happy" ending to the Alistair romance, it always has some kind of cost. Also the DR is something I prefer to avoid if I can so that was just another bonus (No demon baby for you missy!)

Modifié par Hyrule_Gal, 22 janvier 2013 - 07:45 .

[AB Souldier]

Kinda funny how the topic transformed into another game, but i guess it's about the comparison of endings(?)

Also, i am kinda new to the forums, what are the chances someone from bioware actually sees/replies to this?

[Kabraxal]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

It's impossible to RP the endings because there is no basis or foundation for them.  They have been arbitrarily forced into a game where every bit of preceeding information is leading elsewhere.

Practically yes, there is little foundation for them. Thematically you are wrong. It is quite easy to see Paragon and Renegade interpretations for Control and Synthesis, and Renegade for Destroy. Paragon Destroy, I have unfortunately not found a way to reconcile the geth/EDI destruction with the desire for autonomy in a way that deepens the playthrough.

Thematically, it was more appalling.  ME had been bulit on choices and different idealogies... and suddenly you are locked into two renegade options or a really stupid "paragon" option (synthesis/destroy then control).  Refuse at least allows for that arbitrary railroading of themes and idealogies to be challenged.  It might end up in death... but it's a lot more satisfying than just doing "eenie meenie minie mo!" for your choice of horrible that makes no narrative sense with the story that came before.

[Iakus]

ajsrise wrote...

Kinda funny how the topic transformed into another game, but i guess it's about the comparison of endings(?)

Also, i am kinda new to the forums, what are the chances someone from bioware actually sees/replies to this?

Pretty much because DAO is held as an example on how to do bittersweet endings well (at elast well enough to please its audience) while ME3 is, well, an example on what not to do.

Chances that Bioware sees this?  Eh, maybe?

A reply?  Not a snowball's chance.