1258 réponses à ce sujet

[jstme]

Constipator369 wrote...

Because it's a war story. And war does not have a happy ending.

This is why so many people were NOT celbrating end of ,say, WW2. Actually, they all walked around all sad and gloomy. War ended... So sad...

[78stonewobble]

NightAntilli wrote...

I prefer tragic endings to happy endings, since happy endings are so predictable and boring, but they need to make sense. The ME3 ending was confusing..

I do see your point but...

A good (good as in quality not emotional) ending needs to be good. Whether it's a sad or happy ending.

The happy ending have an inherent quality to it that leaves you, even if it might be simplistic or feeling ordinary, feeling happy.

A tragic ending is far more tricky to pull off. Indeed I think they failed at that here (atleast imho).


Considering though the player had so many choices for happy / sad during the journey I think the endings should have reflected that better.

A nice happy ending, a cool renegade selfish ending (also a win / happy ending from that perspective), a tragic ending and plenty of opportunity to loose everything (loose endings).

Basically the ultimate wins should have been hard to get and dependent on making certain right choices throughout all the games.

My own personal favorite for a decent tragic end? Learning that some things you did made it impossible to win, learning that you cannot complete the magic win thing, not enough time/ressources, learning that the plans for it could be lost forever. Sacrificing planets, entire races, squadmates, li's and in the end yourself to make sure that someone... In the future have the chance to win.

Alternative tragic end. Not enough time/ressources to build the win thing. Galaxy looses but they manage to make a ragtag fleet of survivors of the holocaust that get a head start to the next cycle.

Thats just random ideas though.

[Leem_0001]

Motherlander wrote...

What is a happy ending?

To me a happy ending is one that is so emotional and satisfying that you are willing to play over 100 hours of game time over and over again just to see 'your' Shepard, who you have lovingly customised and developed, being victorious in the ending scenes.

In theory, Shepard does not have to live for a happy ending. Shepard dying, destroying the Reapers and saving everyone could be a happy ending for some. However, I think most people, including myself would like to see a total victory option where Shep lives and saves everyone.

The key is that the ending should focus on Shepard. When playing through the trilogy, we should we looking forward with anticipation to seeing that beautiful emotional ending animation where our dynamic heroic Shepard uses his/her talents to finally defeat the reapers.

The ending should be glorious and deliciously emotional, putting a shiver down our spine and provoking tears of joy or sadness.

Even the current three ending options could work if Shep is the focus of the ending and we feel that Shep defeats the reapers on his or her own terms. It should be an epic transcendent moment of glory, a moment of celebration with fire works and cheering crowds showing their appreciation of the great hero, whether he/she lives or dies.

Unfortunately, we get none of that. Shepard is not the focus of the ending. The catalyst is. And that is why the ending is disliked. Because at the end, Bioware took away our hero and made the enemy the protagonist.

When I play ME now, all I can think of is how I will see that damn kid again. That damn kid is the focus of the ending, not the hero. So now I can't contemplate playing over 100 Horus when Shepard, because there will be no glorious emotional ending. Just the cold hard depressing image of the catalyst reducing our hero to a secondary powerless character.

So why can't we have a happy ending?

Because Bioware failed to understand that an epic story needs and equally epic glorious ending. And that the hero of the story needs to be the protagonist of that ending.

And now Bioware is not lilting or able to give us such an ending.

And Bioware's attitude is like the ending itself: cold, illogical, frustrating and tragic.

Wow, well put. I wish everyone at Bioware would read this and take note.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

The Destroy ending was sort of a happy ending. Despite the lack of Geth and EDI, the galaxy was saved and the Reapers were destroyed.

[AB Souldier]

Leem_0001 wrote...

Motherlander wrote...

What is a happy ending?

To me a happy ending is one that is so emotional and satisfying that you are willing to play over 100 hours of game time over and over again just to see 'your' Shepard, who you have lovingly customised and developed, being victorious in the ending scenes.

In theory, Shepard does not have to live for a happy ending. Shepard dying, destroying the Reapers and saving everyone could be a happy ending for some. However, I think most people, including myself would like to see a total victory option where Shep lives and saves everyone.

The key is that the ending should focus on Shepard. When playing through the trilogy, we should we looking forward with anticipation to seeing that beautiful emotional ending animation where our dynamic heroic Shepard uses his/her talents to finally defeat the reapers.

The ending should be glorious and deliciously emotional, putting a shiver down our spine and provoking tears of joy or sadness.

Even the current three ending options could work if Shep is the focus of the ending and we feel that Shep defeats the reapers on his or her own terms. It should be an epic transcendent moment of glory, a moment of celebration with fire works and cheering crowds showing their appreciation of the great hero, whether he/she lives or dies.

Unfortunately, we get none of that. Shepard is not the focus of the ending. The catalyst is. And that is why the ending is disliked. Because at the end, Bioware took away our hero and made the enemy the protagonist.

When I play ME now, all I can think of is how I will see that damn kid again. That damn kid is the focus of the ending, not the hero. So now I can't contemplate playing over 100 Horus when Shepard, because there will be no glorious emotional ending. Just the cold hard depressing image of the catalyst reducing our hero to a secondary powerless character.

So why can't we have a happy ending?

Because Bioware failed to understand that an epic story needs and equally epic glorious ending. And that the hero of the story needs to be the protagonist of that ending.

And now Bioware is not lilting or able to give us such an ending.

And Bioware's attitude is like the ending itself: cold, illogical, frustrating and tragic.

Wow, well put. I wish everyone at Bioware would read this and take note.

Yeah i put his quote on the first post

[Archonsg]

CptBomBom00 wrote...

XM-417 wrote...

As a game allows us to assume the role of the protagonist in a manner that a book or a film will never do it would have good to have had an ending where Shepard clearly lives at the end.Gets back together with li and retires, its a big galaxy out there i would have being happy to move on at that point.

Well they wanted a war story:unsure:.

Badass Hero who survived WW2

This guy's position was overran, had three grenades chucked into his foxhole which he threw out, the third grenade exploding in his hand, fought with 1arm, armed with a Kukhri (nasty big ass knife) killed 30+ ****** soldiers dumb enough to want to take him on, survived to marry, have kids and awe us with a "war hero story".

Also , History : End of WW2 tells us if anything, there *are* "happy endings".

It is human nature to want to find the good after something as terrible as war.
Heroes do survive to tell thier tale.
Shepard should have been one these.

Modifié par Archonsg, 19 janvier 2013 - 12:02 .

[78stonewobble]

Motherlander wrote...

What is a happy ending?

To me a happy ending is one that is so emotional and satisfying that you are willing to play over 100 hours of game time over and over again just to see 'your' Shepard, who you have lovingly customised and developed, being victorious in the ending scenes.

In theory, Shepard does not have to live for a happy ending. Shepard dying, destroying the Reapers and saving everyone could be a happy ending for some. However, I think most people, including myself would like to see a total victory option where Shep lives and saves everyone.

The key is that the ending should focus on Shepard. When playing through the trilogy, we should we looking forward with anticipation to seeing that beautiful emotional ending animation where our dynamic heroic Shepard uses his/her talents to finally defeat the reapers.

The ending should be glorious and deliciously emotional, putting a shiver down our spine and provoking tears of joy or sadness.

Even the current three ending options could work if Shep is the focus of the ending and we feel that Shep defeats the reapers on his or her own terms. It should be an epic transcendent moment of glory, a moment of celebration with fire works and cheering crowds showing their appreciation of the great hero, whether he/she lives or dies.

Unfortunately, we get none of that. Shepard is not the focus of the ending. The catalyst is. And that is why the ending is disliked. Because at the end, Bioware took away our hero and made the enemy the protagonist.

When I play ME now, all I can think of is how I will see that damn kid again. That damn kid is the focus of the ending, not the hero. So now I can't contemplate playing over 100 Horus when Shepard, because there will be no glorious emotional ending. Just the cold hard depressing image of the catalyst reducing our hero to a secondary powerless character.

So why can't we have a happy ending?

Because Bioware failed to understand that an epic story needs and equally epic glorious ending. And that the hero of the story needs to be the protagonist of that ending.

And now Bioware is not lilting or able to give us such an ending.

And Bioware's attitude is like the ending itself: cold, illogical, frustrating and tragic.

If I were bioware I'd also have to ask myself which is more important?

An ending that leaves people thinking: "Wow that was a mindblowingly intelligent ending for shepard and everyone in it. Now I'm intellectually and emotionally satisfied and ready to move on to something else."

Or an ending that leaves people thinking: "That was a bit of a copout but I wonder whats next for Shepard and this universe I care about?"

Note: Personally, and sadly, I think that we got the worst of both of those examples.


PS: Canon shep is a sole survivor right? 


PPS: In any case I think the point is moot now for me3. It won't get changed but some of these thoughts/discussions should have come up during me3's development.

I still think the thoughts / discussions have a place though. Learning what makes different people tick for future games.

Modifié par 78stonewobble, 19 janvier 2013 - 12:09 .

[CptBomBom00]

Archonsg wrote...

CptBomBom00 wrote...

XM-417 wrote...

As a game allows us to assume the role of the protagonist in a manner that a book or a film will never do it would have good to have had an ending where Shepard clearly lives at the end.Gets back together with li and retires, its a big galaxy out there i would have being happy to move on at that point.

Well they wanted a war story:unsure:.

Badass Hero who survived WW2

This guy's position was overran, had at three grenades chucked into his foxhole which he threw out, the third grenade exploding in his hand, fought with 1arm, armed with a Kukhri (nasty big ass knife) killed 30+ ****** soldiers dumb enough to want to take him on, survived to marry, have kids and awe us with a "war hero story".

Also , History : End of WW2 tells us if anything, there *are* "happy endings".

It is human nature to want to find the good after something as terrible as war.
Heroes do survive to tell thier tale.
Shepard should have been one these.

I think BW wasn't bothered to look for proper inspiration if they had thi sgame might've turned out differently.

[chidingewe8036]

JadeShepard wrote...

I don't believe it's over yet. Hang in there OP ; )

I have been saying this for months but if it is really over and the endings stand as they are ME4 will suffter and Bioware will feel it in the numbers a.k.a. money.

Its this easy........
 
Canonize Destroy, crew finds Shepard, reunite, Celebrate, the end, after credits add scene teasing ME4

bada bing bada boooooooooom!!!!!

gees Bioware

[Gervaise]

The simply answer is that the writers didn't want to give you that emotional high that you enjoyed at the end of ME1 and ME2.
Personally I didn't mind Shepard dying because I had picked up on all the clues so it wasn't exactly a surprise.

What sucked was that if you had gone to all the trouble of curing the genophage, reconciling the Geth and Quarians, and uniting an entire galaxy behind you (apart from TIM and Cerberus) it counted for nothing because you got the exact same endings as if you hadn't and the writers had rigged it so that every ending felt like you had betrayed something.

Synthesis is not just chosing what Saren was advocating, it is essentially saying that only through total uniformity can we have a galaxy where organics and synthetics won't automatically kill one another. Plus we still have the big bad machines still flying around. Not everyone is thrilled by this as at least one slide shows. The Intelligence didn't promise peace - how could it unless everyone had been brain washed? It is Shepard who says "And there will be peace?." The response "The cycles will end". That is the current set of cycles but who is to say that if everyone doesn't accept the solution, the Intelligence won't start a new set of cycles? Afterall it is still running the show. I was appalled the first time I saw Joker's eyes and the electrodes on the leaves and realised there was no way I could accept this mass alteration of all lifeforms throughout the galaxy. Some people may believe this is the pinacle of evolution but I don't.

In Control, we have a new set of programming of the Intelligence with Shepard's thoughts and memories but it is still an AI Overlord controlling the galaxy. When Shepard says "So TIM was right", that doesn't just mean about controlling the Reapers. Effectively you endorse the idea that there should be an ultimate ruler with an army of Reapers running the galaxy. If this Overlord doesn't like somebody or their way of doing things, they will intervene with their police force. Now may be that does appeal to some people but not to me. Heck I wasn't even entirely happy about the power Spectres had and that only applied to Council controlled space.

So that leaves Destroy as the only option that even comes close to what I was trying to achieve. But clearly having a situation where only Shepard dies to save the galaxy wasn't enough. So the plotlines were rigged so that all the AIs die too, which shouldn't have happened since the Crucible was designed to only target Reapers - oh no wait, we were forced to allow the Reaper code download to the Geth or let them die and Cerberus used Sovereign parts on EDI. Neither of these needed to happen because the Geth had already shown they could develop without the need of the Reaper code and the principle thing that EDI needed to develop was interaction with Joker and Shepard..

To get round this problem, if you want to enjoy the ending, don't save the Geth on Rannoch - they had chosen slavery to the Reapers after all. Then ensure you have the conversation with EDI where she says she would gladly risk her functionality for Joker, plus Joker says that he thinks TIM's eyes are creepy, so clearly he wouldn't want to end up like that. Then choose Destroy, enjoy the scenes of jubilation as the Reapes fall, knowing that EDI's and Shepard's sacrifice was not in vain. The galaxy is free to determine their own future for good or ill. And if your EMS is high enough you may even get the bonus of the notorious "breath" scene. That is the nearest you will get to a "happy" ending.

Modifié par Gervaise, 19 janvier 2013 - 12:16 .

[Constipator369]

jstme wrote...

Constipator369 wrote...

Because it's a war story. And war does not have a happy ending.

This is why so many people were NOT celbrating end of ,say, WW2. Actually, they all walked around all sad and gloomy. War ended... So sad...

Yeah, but the only happy thing about it, was that trhe nightmare was over. And celebration was overshadowed by burying the dead. I don't know about countries like America, but I'm talking about places that were warzones, like Poland. And in the ME universe, the whole galaxy was a warzone.

[Reorte]

Gervaise wrote...
 
Personally I didn't mind Shepard dying because I had picked up on all the clues so it wasn't exactly a surprise.

I gave them the benefit of the doubt of overlooking any supposed clues and interpreting them as just the usual concerns you'd expect in a dangerous situation. Dropping clues about what's supposed to be an inherently unpredictable event is rather lame IMO, even though too many stories do it. Particularly in a medium that doesn't need to have only one fixed outcome.

Someone earlier said that they like tragic endings? Why's that? I've always found it rather odd, and it's becoming rather boringly predictable these days anyway. I don't see how there's anything enjoyable about sadness and it's a bit weird to get pleasure out of it. Now that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be any tragic endings of course - if all endings were happy and cheerful they'd be boring and predictable. Happiness is much more enjoyable and rewarding when you know that it might not have turned out like that. What is tragic is that a medium that has the means of having both doesn't bother to take that opportunity, particularly when the setting by no means rules it out (if defeating the Reapers is possible at all). Then it can be truly rewarding when you've earned it and know that it could've gone badly wrong if you'd messed up, and that's an experience that is only possible with a game over all other fictional media. Of course it really punches you in the gut more if you mess up and everything turns tragic, and that's good too.

[AB Souldier]

Gervaise wrote...

The simply answer is that the writers didn't want to give you that emotional high that you enjoyed at the end of ME1 and ME2.
Personally I didn't mind Shepard dying because I had picked up on all the clues so it wasn't exactly a surprise.

What sucked was that if you had gone to all the trouble of curing the genophage, reconciling the Geth and Quarians, and uniting an entire galaxy behind you (apart from TIM and Cerberus) it counted for nothing because you got the exact same endings as if you hadn't and the writers had rigged it so that every ending felt like you had betrayed something.

Synthesis is not just chosing what Saren was advocating, it is essentially saying that only through total uniformity can we have a galaxy where organics and synthetics won't automatically kill one another. Plus we still have the big bad machines still flying around. Not everyone is thrilled by this as at least one slide shows. The Intelligence didn't promise peace - how could it unless everyone had been brain washed? It is Shepard who says "And there will be peace?." The response "The cycles will end". That is the current set of cycles but who is to say that if everyone doesn't accept the solution, the Intelligence won't start a new set of cycles? Afterall it is still running the show. I was appalled the first time I saw Joker's eyes and the electrodes on the leaves and realised there was no way I could accept this mass alteration of all lifeforms throughout the galaxy. Some people may believe this is the pinacle of evolution but I don't.

In Control, we have a new set of programming of the Intelligence with Shepard's thoughts and memories but it is still an AI Overlord controlling the galaxy. When Shepard says "So TIM was right", that doesn't just mean about controlling the Reapers. Effectively you endorse the idea that there should be an ultimate ruler with an army of Reapers running the galaxy. If this Overlord doesn't like somebody or their way of doing things, they will intervene with their police force. Now may be that does appeal to some people but not to me. Heck I wasn't even entirely happy about the power Spectres had and that only applied to Council controlled space.

So that leaves Destroy as the only option that even comes close to what I was trying to achieve. But clearly having a situation where only Shepard dies to save the galaxy wasn't enough. So the plotlines were rigged so that all the AIs die too, which shouldn't have happened since the Crucible was designed to only target Reapers - oh no wait, we were forced to allow the Reaper code download to the Geth or let them die and Cerberus used Sovereign parts on EDI. Neither of these needed to happen because the Geth had already shown they could develop without the need of the Reaper code and the principle thing that EDI needed to develop was interaction with Joker and Shepard..

To get round this problem, if you want to enjoy the ending, don't save the Geth on Rannoch - they had chosen slavery to the Reapers after all. Then ensure you have the conversation with EDI where she says she would gladly risk her functionality for Joker, plus Joker says that he thinks TIM's eyes are creepy, so clearly he wouldn't want to end up like that. Then choose Destroy, enjoy the scenes of jubilation as the Reapes fall, knowing that EDI's and Shepard's sacrifice was not in vain. The galaxy is free to determine their own future for good or ill. And if your EMS is high enough you may even get the bonus of the notorious "breath" scene. That is the nearest you will get to a "happy" ending.

The thing is i shouldn't have to change to choices i believe is not right to get a happy ending that isn't even official by your logic.
The peace between Geth and Quarians should of been enought for the Geth to live. And if you talk with EDI enough, that should let her live to, because it is not right for her to understand what it is live to be alive and then die if you pick the destroy ending. 

[Archonsg]

@78stonewobble

There us *nothing* intelligent logical or inspirational with the current endings.

To be that BW had to stick to the rules it had created for itself in the MEU, part of which is that it takes real world physics into account.

For example.
The codex accounts that the Reaper main gun actually fires a stream of molten metal at very high pressures.
Thus that whole "dodging the beam" boss fight on Rannoch / Near miss beam run are *impossibilities* trumping logic, physics and common sense in a baby duck in lieu of gameplay.

People who claim that "its not at full power..." are missing the point that for a stream of liquid to be expelled so far with such a wide footprint , still to be under tremendous pressure as well as the fact that molten metal's temperature will be a constant.

Of course there are more ridiculous lapses but hey, nihilistic pseudo religious message in a game is deep and intelligent right?

[Motherlander]

Of course, it is possible to have a happy ending with Shepard dying. But the death must have personal impact.

What is missing is the warm, personal 'human' connection. That is what ME is full of right up to the ending.

But at the end what  we get is cold, impersonal and calculating. Just like the reapers themselves. That is why the end feels like a defeat. Because the ending itself has the same characteristics of the enemy we are fighting. There is none of the personality,warmth, humanity and yes love which characterised Shepard's interactions in the rest of the trilogy.

Bioware seems to have failed to understand how symbolism works in action/adventure stories. In movies of this nature, no matter how epic the situation is, the hero is always seen to save one individual, whether that be a lover, a child, a friend or a beautiful princess. Why? Because that individual is symbolic of what the hero is fighting for. It shows that the hero is not just fighting for an abstract concept, but for individuals...for people...for love.

And that is a shocking failure. Because they failed to follow the basic rules for ending a story in a way that the public can relate to. What we got is an ending that synthetics would appreciate. But it is not for the emotional organics.

Where the hero dies, I see three ways how this can be done in a way that is satisfying.

Firstly, Shepard dies in the arms of his/her love interest, or another character who is important to the Shepard. That would be very emotional and very sad. But it would cement the personal attachment between us and Shepard. When Shepard's friend or love interest cries and says goodbye to Shepard, it is like the gamer saying goodbye. It could be beautiful. The best example of this for me us when Dizzy says goodbye to Rico in Starshiptroopers. The scene us so sad, but I love it.

Secondly, we could have Shepard remotely saying a tearful goodbye to their love interest or meaningful character just before he/she dies. This would be like in Armageddon. This could actually work in the current ME ending if Shep speaks to his/her love interest just before selecting the destroy, control or synthesis ending.

I realise that Shep does say goodbye. But the timing is wrong to have the real impact. To have a real impact, the goodbye needs to be right at the end just before Shep dies.

The third way is for the hero to die saving his/her love interest or other important character. Again that way we see Shepard sacrificing him/herself for an individual who is symbolic of the world Shep is fighting for...basically freedom and love. This is not really possible in the current ending.

Of course, for me the ideal death ending is to have a combination of the first and third option, where Shepard saves his LI and the there is a tearful goodbye in his/her arms.

In reality, only the second 'Armageddon' ending would be possible in the current ending. Having a such a scene in the EC may have made a difference. But I doubt it.

Modifié par Motherlander, 19 janvier 2013 - 12:57 .

[DirtyPhoenix]

dreamgazer wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

NeroonWilliams wrote...

The death of Shepard was always planned. There was foreshadowing all the way back to ME1 with Shaira. And if you didn't get the message that kept coming at you all throughout ME3, you really weren't paying attention (it comes during Palaven, after Tuchanka, during Thane's death, after Thessia, every time you talk to Garrus on the Normandy, all of the dream sequences, when Liara introduces the time capsule, and a majority of the final talks with your squadmates during Priority:Earth). Shepard was always meant to be a sacrificial hero, because some victories are meant to be Pyrrhic, no matter how well you prepare.

My canon Shepard didn't die.

So you're wrong, no offense.

Tell that to the guy whose gaming rig isn't hooked up to the internet (no EC, no multiplayer, vanilla game). 

I mean, I agree: my (primary) Shepard didn't die either.  But some did.

No internet = no install on Origin. So that guy's Shepard never existed Atleast in ME3.

Modifié par pirate1802, 19 janvier 2013 - 01:03 .

[AB Souldier]

Motherlander wrote...

Of course, it is possible to have a happy ending with Shepard dying. But the death must have personal impact.

What is missing is the warm, personal 'human' connection. That is what ME is full of right up to the ending.

But at the end what  we get is cold, impersonal and calculating. Just like the reapers themselves. That is why the end feels like a defeat. Because the ending itself has the same characteristics of the enemy we are fighting. There is none of the personality,warmth, humanity and yes love which characterised Shepard's interactions in the rest of the trilogy.

Bioware seems to have failed to understand how symbolism works in action/adventure stories. In movies of this nature, no matter how epic the situation is, the hero is always seen to save one individual, whether that be a lover, a child, a friend or a beautiful princess. Why? Because that individual is symbolic of what the hero is fighting for. It shows that the hero is not just fighting for an abstract concept, but for individuals...for people...for love.

And that is a shocking failure. Because they failed to follow the basic rules for ending a story in a way that the public can relate to. What we got is an ending that synthetics would appreciate. But it is not for the emotional organics.

Where the hero dies, I see three ways how this can be done in a way that is satisfying.

Firstly, Shepard dies in the arms of his/her love interest, or another character who is important to the Shepard. That would be very emotional and very sad. But it would cement the personal attachment between us and Shepard. When Shepard's friend or love interest cries and says goodbye to Shepard, it is like the gamer saying goodbye. It could be beautiful. The best example of this for me us when Dizzy says goodbye to Rico in Starshiptroopers. The scene us so sad, but I love it.

Secondly, we could have Shepard remotely saying a tearful goodbye to their love interest or meaningful character just before he/she dies. This would be like in Armageddon. This could actually work in the current ME ending if Shep speaks to his/her love interest just before selecting the destroy, control or synthesis ending.

I realise that Shep does say goodbye. But the timing is wrong to have the real impact. To have a real impact, the goodbye needs to be right at the end just before Shep dies.

The third way is for the hero to die saving his/her love interest or other important character. Again that way we see Shepard sacrificing him/herself for an individual who is symbolic of the world Shep is fighting for...basically freedom and love. This is not really possible in the current ending.

Of course, for me the ideal death ending is to have a combination of the first and third option, where Shepard saves his LI and the there is a tearful goodbye in his/her arms.

In reality, only the second 'Armageddon' ending would be possible in the current ending. Having a such a scene in the EC may have made a difference. But I doubt it.

Man, you should seriously work at Bioware. Then maybe you can knock some sense in.

[78stonewobble]

Archonsg wrote...

@78stonewobble

There us *nothing* intelligent logical or inspirational with the current endings.

To be that BW had to stick to the rules it had created for itself in the MEU, part of which is that it takes real world physics into account.

For example.
The codex accounts that the Reaper main gun actually fires a stream of molten metal at very high pressures.
Thus that whole "dodging the beam" boss fight on Rannoch / Near miss beam run are *impossibilities* trumping logic, physics and common sense in a baby duck in lieu of gameplay.

People who claim that "its not at full power..." are missing the point that for a stream of liquid to be expelled so far with such a wide footprint , still to be under tremendous pressure as well as the fact that molten metal's temperature will be a constant.

Of course there are more ridiculous lapses but hey, nihilistic pseudo religious message in a game is deep and intelligent right?

You're right about that. All of it pretty much.

Though I do allow some leeway for fun/badassery to eek out ahead of "realism".

I think it was sort of worth it since shepard else had little chance to face of with a reaper in it's entirety. Unless we out of the blue got a chance to command a dreadnaught and that would have made little sense as well.

Though obviously they could have maneuvered around the unreality of it in a more or less creative way. Eg. only thing firing at shepard was a small anti fighter laser and the reapers main gun was used on geth colossi helping you out. Something like that.

[Motherlander]

ajsrise wrote...

The thing is i shouldn't have to change to choices i believe is not right to get a happy ending that isn't even official by your logic.
The peace between Geth and Quarians should of been enought for the Geth to live. And if you talk with EDI enough, that should let her live to, because it is not right for her to understand what it is live to be alive and then die if you pick the destroy ending. 

i think there is one way that the death of the Geth and EDI could have been acceptable to us in the destroy ending.

Whst needed to happen es that Shep contacts EDI and/or the Geth leader and explains to that he/she has to destroy them to defeat the reapers.

In a paragon option, Shep would become very emotional and would be in tears as he informs EDI that he has no choice but to end their existence. Shep would beg for forgiveness and would show huge regret.

Being synthetic, EDI would logically accept the decision. But would make the choice even harder. But at least it would be meaningful.

this would at least have made the choice feel personal, rather than cold and brutal.

Modifié par Motherlander, 19 janvier 2013 - 01:14 .

[AB Souldier]

Motherlander wrote...

ajsrise wrote...

The thing is i shouldn't have to change to choices i believe is not right to get a happy ending that isn't even official by your logic.
The peace between Geth and Quarians should of been enought for the Geth to live. And if you talk with EDI enough, that should let her live to, because it is not right for her to understand what it is live to be alive and then die if you pick the destroy ending. 

i think there is one way that the death of the Geth and EDI could have been acceptable to us in the destroy ending.

Whst needed to happen es that Shep contacts EDI and/or the Geth leader and explains to that he/she has to destroy them to defeat the reapers.

In a paragon option, Shep would become very emotional and would be in tears as he informs EDI that he has no choice but to end their existence. Shep would beg for forgiveness and would show huge regret.

this would at least have made the choice feel personal, rather than cold and brutal.

No offence, that will make me feel even more guilty and even more like a Dic. Basically you are saying "Hey EDI, i am gonna kill you and commit genocide so that us organics can live."
That is just adding insult to injury. No thank you.

[Archonsg]

78stonewobble wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

@78stonewobble

There us *nothing* intelligent logical or inspirational with the current endings.

To be that BW had to stick to the rules it had created for itself in the MEU, part of which is that it takes real world physics into account.

For example.
The codex accounts that the Reaper main gun actually fires a stream of molten metal at very high pressures.
Thus that whole "dodging the beam" boss fight on Rannoch / Near miss beam run are *impossibilities* trumping logic, physics and common sense in a baby duck in lieu of gameplay.

People who claim that "its not at full power..." are missing the point that for a stream of liquid to be expelled so far with such a wide footprint , still to be under tremendous pressure as well as the fact that molten metal's temperature will be a constant.

Of course there are more ridiculous lapses but hey, nihilistic pseudo religious message in a game is deep and intelligent right?

You're right about that. All of it pretty much.

Though I do allow some leeway for fun/badassery to eek out ahead of "realism".

I think it was sort of worth it since shepard else had little chance to face of with a reaper in it's entirety. Unless we out of the blue got a chance to command a dreadnaught and that would have made little sense as well.

Though obviously they could have maneuvered around the unreality of it in a more or less creative way. Eg. only thing firing at shepard was a small anti fighter laser and the reapers main gun was used on geth colossi helping you out. Something like that.

Agreed.
Its all about maintaining the suspension of disbelief.
Once you break that, everything else gets to go under the microscope.

Shepard *didn't* even have to die.
How about loosing a limb or two, gets help in time and survives the war.
S/he is taken out of service (no more Shepard for ME4) or even moving the game 200-500 years after the Reaper war.
Liara can cameo in to give Shepard references but Shepard is long gone.

The only reason why we have the ending we have is because the writers wanted to showcase a rather Nihilistic view. 
I just don't agree with it.

Modifié par Archonsg, 19 janvier 2013 - 01:23 .

[Motherlander]

ajsrise wrote...
No offence, that will make me feel even more guilty and even more like a Dic. Basically you are saying "Hey EDI, i am gonna kill you and commit genocide so that us organics can live."
That is just adding insult to injury. No thank you.

Now you can see why I don't work for Bioware. Not all my ideas are great. 

Yes, it would not work for everyone. And it may not work at all. In the end, it is only an idea which will never happen anyway.

My view is that if Shep can apologise for the decision and receive forgiveness, some (but not all of us) may find some closure in this. It MAY work for some of us.

Bear in mind that EDI and the is synthetic and would probably accept the conclusion that it is the only logical wat to defeat the reapers.

To be honest I think each person would have to see how the ending is done before coming to a conclusion.

But one option to avoid upsetting those who don't want to see the aplology is to make the option of contacting EDI optional. That way, the scene can be avoided.

Modifié par Motherlander, 19 janvier 2013 - 01:38 .

[Reorte]

78stonewobble wrote...

You're right about that. All of it pretty much.

Though I do allow some leeway for fun/badassery to eek out ahead of "realism".

I think it was sort of worth it since shepard else had little chance to face of with a reaper in it's entirety. Unless we out of the blue got a chance to command a dreadnaught and that would have made little sense as well.

Though obviously they could have maneuvered around the unreality of it in a more or less creative way. Eg. only thing firing at shepard was a small anti fighter laser and the reapers main gun was used on geth colossi helping you out. Something like that.

The very best games  (and other works of fiction) manage to get the best of both. So yes, I can allow some leeway but ideally it's avoided. But it's hard to avoid the conclusion that BioWare simply didn't care about the realism aspect when it comes to how anything works or what people are doing. It was enough for them for it to look big and impressive (or have a bit of pseudointellectualism), thus ending up with something that's both shallow and immensley annoying - the worst of both worlds. That may sound harsh, and to be honest they'd somewhat painted themselves into a corner anyway by the start of ME3 but it really looks like a case of "We don't think this matters".

[78stonewobble]

Well I can't get too worked up about facing the Reaper. To me it's small potatoes compaired to the catalyst.

The first one I can let go of with a sigh and a shrug. The second one... Well I feel like I would need one of my brains hemispheres peppered with railroad spikes to buy into that one.

[Reorte]

78stonewobble wrote...

Well I can't get too worked up about facing the Reaper. To me it's small potatoes compaired to the catalyst.

The first one I can let go of with a sigh and a shrug. The second one... Well I feel like I would need one of my brains hemispheres peppered with railroad spikes to buy into that one.

I agree with that.

I think that where you overstep the mark and get daft matters a great deal. If the Catalyst had been some mid-game thing that was then dealt with and forgotten it would probably be easier to overlook.