256 réponses à ce sujet

[Jaulen]

<edit>

Modifié par Jaulen, 25 février 2013 - 06:15 .

[TheProtheans]

Then how can you listen to fans that are not talking to you.
Only a percentage actually finishes games they buy.
Seeing how a majority of the ones active online that finished the game and then voted overwhelming against the ending, that gives a clear image that the ending is mostly disliked.

[3DandBeyond]

Jaulen wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

Ykulnu wrote...

It takes a considerable lack of environmental awareness to not see that the endings were not well received by a very sizable amount of the community at large.

this made me laugh.  but yes, anyone with a small working knowledge of writing, or has ever written anything, or for that matter, has ever read a good story, knows these endings were not dont well.  you CANT introduce a new antagonist who is also a protagonist (if you believe him and pick control/synthesis) within the last 2 minutes of a 5 year epic journey.  its a true "WTF" if i have ever seen one. 

Exactly.  No way do I believe that anyone was actually proud of this achievement.  Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking.

Anecdotal evidence, but I don't know one person in my circle of firends who have played ME3 (all college graduates aged 25 to 40, all guys except for me, and they play FPS and RPGs) that liked the ending to ME3. Most of them have not played through the game more than once, some have not finished the game after others of us hit the ending first and started railing against it....they have all moved on, and they will never likely never come across a poll to let Bioware or even other users know how they felt.

A year later, and I am still upset about the ending. Why? I thought the storyline was well done, the lore well detailed, the visuals and voice acting lovely, the characters worthy of bonding with (in as much as you can with game characters....Heck I cried bug sobby tears for Mordin....and Youtubed the Renegade option there and cried even harder that someone would do that to Mordin *melodramatic much?*).  

While I played, I WAS Shepard (excellent job of hooking the player to the character), live or die, I wanted my sacrifice, and the sacrifices I made others go through to MEAN something....I wanted to shout triumphantly or cry weepy tears over Shep's death, or just get misty-eyed seeing the combined might of the galaxy fail against the reapers, or have more 'Hell Yeah!" moments in ending cinematics like the thresher-maw taking out a reaper. I wanted a chance to gloriously succeed (even in death) or go out flaming in failure.

Exactly.  The fact that the ability to "see" this exists within people from the literary community (even SF authors of note) as well as just plain old fans who know a good story and yet not the BW writers and devs just speaks volumes.  Even if you consider it to be just a game, there is no "hell yeah!" moment, no rush of adrenaline as you are working the controller or keyboard and trying to get a win (even this is not necessary for that win to happen, but is an example). 

There is no moment of catharsis, no feeling of achievement, no rush of emotion, no "phew, we did it" kind of thing.  And this was a story about a huge cataclysmic war to end all wars.  It ends with a whimper and with one big slow mo cutscene in which the player sometimes presses a button to ask a litany of rather meaningless questions to a new antagonist(?) they have no relevant emotions about.  The kid is even ambiguous enough so that some think he is actually there to help-or that he thinks he is.  This does nothing to provide that emotional connection.  I know I had an emotional connection to the reapers-it was one of horror and hate.  Knowing what they did to people and knowing they kept doing it over and over again.  The writers don't even seem to know if they want you to hate the kid or not.  I sure do detest him, but not for the reasons they very likely would want-I detest him, because he is out of place, his logic is crap, his existence is not in concert with the rest of the story, and that existence ruins the nature of the real antagonists-he breaks my emotional connection to the game/story, to Shepard, and even to the reapers.

You hit it right on the head-ME did what so many writers work hard to achieve.  It got you emotionally connected with the hero right from the start-it made you be the hero.  The writers totally forgot that at the end. 

[Mcfly616]

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

[3DandBeyond]

TheProtheans wrote...

Then how can you listen to fans that are not talking to you.
Only a percentage actually finishes games they buy.
Seeing how a majority of the ones active online that finished the game and then voted overwhelming against the ending, that gives a clear image that the ending is mostly disliked.

Polling companies use much smaller samples (targeted samples) to even view other trends than the numbers used quite often to judge ME3's endings.  And the BSN would be considered a targeted group because the people here by and large actually owne(d) the game.  The fact is most polls have shown fans were not in love with the endings.  Now, some did love them, to be sure.  But even those that said they liked them were not all raving and happy about them.  Many might even have just said they liked them, because they disliked the fan backlash or felt fans had no right to complain.  But you cannot ever convince me that any company would be happy to have fans that vote that way, just to spite other fans, or that would be happy with a product that fans say is "ok", or "not what I wanted or expected", or "better, but not great", or any other version of this.  Most companies would see that as a failure.

The endings could have been something better and we all know that-even those that profess to love them and have created support threads for various choices.  Some of those who have done so have been the biggest critics of the endings and yet have argued about how good they are when someone else thinks they're bad.  It's plain to see that the endings do not fit with the story that came before.  It's also plain to see that the idea of a choice, of a new antagonist, of a hero that must pick something the enemy wants or someone (whoever created the choices) wants is just not part of this story.  At least it's plain to see for me and for a huge portion of previous ME fans.

[Nerevar-as]

Mcfly616 wrote...

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

And learned nothing from them. Seriously, are you Walters? Because defending one of the worst executed DEMs ever takes something.

[Jaulen]

^ Okay....should it be "may have taken a class but wasn't there the day when the prof went over *what makes a good story* or *the three acts to the hero's journey*?

[Hexley UK]

Mcfly616 wrote...

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

No your thinking is incorrect...just because the concepts have all been written before and aren't new concepts doesn't mean they will fit into any story.

And in this case they just don't.

Also...ripping off other stories wholesale is now considered a good thing? Frankly that makes the ending even more lame than it already is, it's crap and unoriginal....well......awesome?

[Some Gamer Guy]

Who did write the Catalyst dialogue? And what else in ME3 did they write?

[Mcfly616]

Hexley UK wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

No your thinking is incorrect...just because the concepts have all been written before and aren't new concepts doesn't mean they will fit into any story.

And in this case they just don't.

Also...ripping off other stories wholesale is now considered a good thing? Frankly that makes the ending even more lame than it already is, it's crap and unoriginal....well......awesome?

clearly you can't read. Because if you could, you would see 3D's quote that "whoever wrote the catalyst never read a book".....and you would come to the realization that you're incorrect in saying that I'm incorrect. You're mad? It's okay. Still doesn't change anything. Whoever wrote the Catalyst has read a book or two.


And if you think that Mass Effect is the only game that takes inspiration from other works of literature or cinema or gaming.....you'd be incorrect about that as well. Bioware took concepts from other works and put their own spin on it. In case you haven't noticed: Everybody does it.


I know the truth is hard to accept. You're still upset about the ending, and its blatantly obvious. You do a good job of letting it cloud your vision of what is correct or incorrect. Basically, if someone doesn't see it your way then they're incorrect. You'll get far with that train of thought. Carry on.....

[3DandBeyond]

Mcfly616 wrote...

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

This is the conundrum-I know very well that this is not a new idea and yet others who like it have said it's fresh and innovative and new.  No, the idea itself is as old as the hills, but just not the inception or the use thereof. 

The point is the writers did not know how to tell this part of the tale.  Sure, they "borrowed" the idea of this kind of ending and this kind of character and all the other ideas that were stuck together at the end, but they did a horrid job of making it all adhere to this story.  They also did a horrid job of using it all to create an ending.  I'd say if you wanted to use the catalyst than the story needed to create a bread crumb trail that led you at the end, to realize the writers had been pointing to him all along-some master manipulator.  But, the "evidence" of this catalyst kid prior to the ME3 ending is so weak and mostly non-existent. 

It's like someone read the Cliff Notes versions of some books or they saw some abridged versions of some movies and read a synopsis of some games and then felt this stuff would work at the end of this series.  It's the implementation of all of it that indicates to me that these people did not actually ever understand how to write a story.  I'm sorry, that's my opinion.  There is no catharsis, no "aha" moment, no feeling of emotional achievement, no sudden realization that all the clues were there.  An example of this that is over the top is the movie, "the Sixth Sense".  The clues as to what was going on there there all along and at some point, every person viewing it understands what is happening.  It's an "aha" moment.

This was a game/story about a huge war that at the end has no conflict really going on-it has concession, agreement, surrender, and even that is not done with real emotion.  It's super silly.  The epilog adds to that "feeling" with slides that don't reinforce any real emotion whatsoever.

Sure, these people know things that exist in other stories/games/movies, but they just did not know how to implement an ending for ME3 and for this series.  Take a look at how Babylon 5 did chaos and order and you can see how it should be done.  Instead, they took that and used it for a one-sided argument to prop up the kid's logic that order is good and chaos is bad.  I may know how the Wizard of Oz ends, too, but that doesn't mean I understand how to write a story or have read any books if I decide to tack that onto a book I'm writing about an assassination.

[ash2880]

JShepppp wrote...

For example, if 3 000 people say they want new endings, then a lot of people want new endings. However, if 2 million people bought Mass Effect, then a minority of people want new endings.

That's not actually how it works. You don't get to go "Well, 1,997,000 people haven't told us if they want a new ending or not, so we'll just assume they don't". You don't know their opinion. As such, their opinion is not factored in.

All you can do is measure the opinions of the people who provide feedback. It is true that the people upset with the ending are more likely to want to give feedback and thus it may skew the results negatively. But it's also true that, as the video shows, people wanting the ending changed have consistently held a clear majority in numerous polls conducted in numerous places.

And unless Bioware is claiming to have identified and polled some of those 1,997,000 people with unknown opinions, saying that their "numbers" prove people are satisifed with the ending is an extremely dubious claim.

Modifié par ash2880, 25 février 2013 - 06:44 .

[Reap_ii]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Hexley UK wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

No your thinking is incorrect...just because the concepts have all been written before and aren't new concepts doesn't mean they will fit into any story.

And in this case they just don't.

Also...ripping off other stories wholesale is now considered a good thing? Frankly that makes the ending even more lame than it already is, it's crap and unoriginal....well......awesome?

clearly you can't read. Because if you could, you would see 3D's quote that "whoever wrote the catalyst never read a book".....and you would come to the realization that you're incorrect in saying that I'm incorrect. You're mad? It's okay. Still doesn't change anything. Whoever wrote the Catalyst has read a book or two.


And if you think that Mass Effect is the only game that takes inspiration from other works of literature or cinema or gaming.....you'd be incorrect about that as well. Bioware took concepts from other works and put their own spin on it. In case you haven't noticed: Everybody does it.


I know the truth is hard to accept. You're still upset about the ending, and its blatantly obvious. You do a good job of letting it cloud your vision of what is correct or incorrect. Basically, if someone doesn't see it your way then they're incorrect. You'll get far with that train of thought. Carry on.....

im unaware of any game/movie/book/shortstory/etc, that introduces a brand new antagonist who is also protagonist 2 minutes before the ending.  i dont think thats a bad idea Bioware stole from anyone, i think its a brand new original bad idea they came up with all by themselves.  they should not be proud, but oddly are very proud. 

[Mcfly616]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

And learned nothing from them. Seriously, are you Walters? Because defending one of the worst executed DEMs ever takes something.

what exactly is your definition of "defending"? Where do you see a single line of dialogue in defense of anything?


Nowhere? Okay then.

[Dabrikishaw]

Liamv2 wrote...

I don't see why i should care if i am minority or majority as bioware is not changeing the ending either way. Clever noob just needs to move on

[Mcfly616]

Reap_ii wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Hexley UK wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

No your thinking is incorrect...just because the concepts have all been written before and aren't new concepts doesn't mean they will fit into any story.

And in this case they just don't.

Also...ripping off other stories wholesale is now considered a good thing? Frankly that makes the ending even more lame than it already is, it's crap and unoriginal....well......awesome?

clearly you can't read. Because if you could, you would see 3D's quote that "whoever wrote the catalyst never read a book".....and you would come to the realization that you're incorrect in saying that I'm incorrect. You're mad? It's okay. Still doesn't change anything. Whoever wrote the Catalyst has read a book or two.


And if you think that Mass Effect is the only game that takes inspiration from other works of literature or cinema or gaming.....you'd be incorrect about that as well. Bioware took concepts from other works and put their own spin on it. In case you haven't noticed: Everybody does it.


I know the truth is hard to accept. You're still upset about the ending, and its blatantly obvious. You do a good job of letting it cloud your vision of what is correct or incorrect. Basically, if someone doesn't see it your way then they're incorrect. You'll get far with that train of thought. Carry on.....

im unaware of any game/movie/book/shortstory/etc, that introduces a brand new antagonist who is also protagonist 2 minutes before the ending.  i dont think thats a bad idea Bioware stole from anyone, i think its a brand new original bad idea they came up with all by themselves.  they should not be proud, but oddly are very proud. 

hmm maybe you should play/watch/read more



Pulling back the curtains and meeting the wizard isn't a new concept by a long shot.

[Jaulen]

ash2880 wrote...

JShepppp wrote...

For example, if 3 000 people say they want new endings, then a lot of people want new endings. However, if 2 million people bought Mass Effect, then a minority of people want new endings.

That's not actually how it works. You don't get to go "Well, 1,997,000 people haven't told us if they want a new ending or not, so we'll just assume they don't". You don't know their opinion. As such, their opinion is not factored in.

All you can do is measure the opinions of the people who provide feedback. It is true that the people upset with the ending are more likely to want to give feedback and thus it may skew the results negatively. But it's also true that, as the video shows, people wanting the ending changed have consistently held a clear majority in numerous polls conducted in numerous places.

And unless Bioware is claiming to have identified and polled some of those 1,997,000 people with unknown opinions, saying that their "numbers" prove people are satisifed with the ending is an extremely dubious claim.

^This.

Many people don't understand how polling works.

[3DandBeyond]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Hexley UK wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

No your thinking is incorrect...just because the concepts have all been written before and aren't new concepts doesn't mean they will fit into any story.

And in this case they just don't.

Also...ripping off other stories wholesale is now considered a good thing? Frankly that makes the ending even more lame than it already is, it's crap and unoriginal....well......awesome?

clearly you can't read. Because if you could, you would see 3D's quote that "whoever wrote the catalyst never read a book".....and you would come to the realization that you're incorrect in saying that I'm incorrect. You're mad? It's okay. Still doesn't change anything. Whoever wrote the Catalyst has read a book or two.


And if you think that Mass Effect is the only game that takes inspiration from other works of literature or cinema or gaming.....you'd be incorrect about that as well. Bioware took concepts from other works and put their own spin on it. In case you haven't noticed: Everybody does it.


I know the truth is hard to accept. You're still upset about the ending, and its blatantly obvious. You do a good job of letting it cloud your vision of what is correct or incorrect. Basically, if someone doesn't see it your way then they're incorrect. You'll get far with that train of thought. Carry on.....

Well, again the problem is that one must be extremely specific or exact in what they say or you will have a problem with it all.

If someone says "happier ending", it's this kind of thinking that people use to say they want a cheesy bunnies and rainbows ending. 
If someone says they wanted a victory, a real victory, others say that a "conventional victory" was impossible.  People are either being told to be extremely literal about what they mean or given a TL;DR reward. 

I know you know what I meant, so no need to act as if you didn't.

Read between the lines here.  The catalyst/kid is the major part of the ending.  His insertion into the story with no relevance to the plot in fact stops the story.  It stops the conflict and yet he exists at a time in the story where the conflict should be the greatest.  Shepard has just made it to that defining place, that point where the war this time and for all time may well be decided-the tension should be overwhelming and in other stories, it is.  Even in other stories where the DeM is more defined and more obvious, as well as rather trite.  The catalyst has the effect of being the defining place where the story (warts and all) totally flies off the tracks.  His use in this story and all that he represents, along with the ending choices that he outlines for you, makes it clear that someone understood that such DeMs are often used (not widely accepted or liked), but that this someone who created him had no idea how to use him constructively.

[Reap_ii]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Hexley UK wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

3D, I find it odd that you say "Whoever thought up the catalyst/kid has never read a book nor taken any writing lessons, I'm thinking".


Not so much odd, but more ironic than anything else. Considering that the Catalyst, its appearance, its character, as well as mostly the entire ending.....aren't new concepts. They've all been written before. Bioware did with the ending as they did with the whole trilogy. They took inspiration from other works in the sci fi genre.


So, your "thinking" is incorrect on the matter. Whoever wrote the Catalyst, whoever wrote the concept for the ending....well, their inspirations are obvious. They've certainly read quite a few books.

No your thinking is incorrect...just because the concepts have all been written before and aren't new concepts doesn't mean they will fit into any story.

And in this case they just don't.

Also...ripping off other stories wholesale is now considered a good thing? Frankly that makes the ending even more lame than it already is, it's crap and unoriginal....well......awesome?

clearly you can't read. Because if you could, you would see 3D's quote that "whoever wrote the catalyst never read a book".....and you would come to the realization that you're incorrect in saying that I'm incorrect. You're mad? It's okay. Still doesn't change anything. Whoever wrote the Catalyst has read a book or two.


And if you think that Mass Effect is the only game that takes inspiration from other works of literature or cinema or gaming.....you'd be incorrect about that as well. Bioware took concepts from other works and put their own spin on it. In case you haven't noticed: Everybody does it.


I know the truth is hard to accept. You're still upset about the ending, and its blatantly obvious. You do a good job of letting it cloud your vision of what is correct or incorrect. Basically, if someone doesn't see it your way then they're incorrect. You'll get far with that train of thought. Carry on.....

im unaware of any game/movie/book/shortstory/etc, that introduces a brand new antagonist who is also protagonist 2 minutes before the ending.  i dont think thats a bad idea Bioware stole from anyone, i think its a brand new original bad idea they came up with all by themselves.  they should not be proud, but oddly are very proud. 

hmm maybe you should play/watch/read more



Pulling back the curtains and meeting the wizard isn't a new concept by a long shot.

wizard of oz was known of by dorothy.  getting to the wizard was her entire motivation, cuz she wanted to get home.  Bioware broke new ground with this bad idea.  nice try, broski, but not good enough. 

[3DandBeyond]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...


im unaware of any game/movie/book/shortstory/etc, that introduces a brand new antagonist who is also protagonist 2 minutes before the ending.  i dont think thats a bad idea Bioware stole from anyone, i think its a brand new original bad idea they came up with all by themselves.  they should not be proud, but oddly are very proud. 

hmm maybe you should play/watch/read more



Pulling back the curtains and meeting the wizard isn't a new concept by a long shot.

Except that when others have done it it is extremely clear just what the pro/antagonist is at that point.  For instance, some movies/books have had a main character who was being helped by a good friend who in the end turns out not to be such an ally.  And vice versa.  A character who is thought to be evil that ends up truly always having been there to help.  There is no clarity given for exactly what the kid is.  And if you say he's just a program living up to what Leviathan told him to do, that's not what I'm getting at.  The kid represents the reapers AND Leviathan's programming.  He is ambiguous as both pro and antagonist.  The fact that he's also the worst program created by the stupidest apex race that ever existed to do solve a problem that he ends up creating, just makes him also the most moronic new DeM character ever. 

You point at the Wizard of Oz.  Well, the Wizard (take the movie) clearly wanted people to fear him because he really couldn't do anything he said he could do or that people thought he could do.  But he wasn't evil, he was just really scared of being discovered.  Clearly, it turned out there was no wizard at all, but a mere man pulling strings.  The kid is pulling strings, but maybe is having his own pulled as well, for good or bad or whatever.  We don't know.

And Bioware didn't call this game The Catalyst Controls the Reapers or The Catalyst in the Citadel.  The goal for Dorothy, to solve her problem was to find the wizard who turns out to be a flawed man who really can't help.  The goal for Shepard is to operate the crucible to destroy the reapers and the kid pops up saying he might help and then says a lot of garbage.  He also self-identifies as the reaper controller and creator.  Enemy or friend?

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 25 février 2013 - 07:05 .

[Jaulen]

One book that always comes to mind when I am thinking about the ME3 ending and what they MAY have been trying to accomplish is Sea of Glass by Barry Longyear.

Dystopian, dark....protagonist that has to make a decision at the end when he finds out the truth of the machine he has been struggling against.....

That was done well.

It was not done well in ME3. If there had been more (better?) hints about the Starchild in other games.....then Starchild would have made more sense....and probably not been as impalpable as it was to many.

The whole synthesis option should never have been included.....it makes no logical or scientific sense as set in a Sci-Fi story.

[SurfaceBeneath]

Reap_ii wrote...
wizard of oz was known of by dorothy.  getting to the wizard was her entire motivation, cuz she wanted to get home.  Bioware broke new ground with this bad idea.  nice try, broski, but not good enough. 

And the Reaper Cycle was known by Shepard. The Catalyst isn't a "character". It's a mechanism. It's not a villain or a "hero", it's an instruction manual and infodump. It fills the same role as Vigil from ME1.

[Hexley UK]

SurfaceBeneath wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...
wizard of oz was known of by dorothy.  getting to the wizard was her entire motivation, cuz she wanted to get home.  Bioware broke new ground with this bad idea.  nice try, broski, but not good enough. 

And the Reaper Cycle was known by Shepard. The Catalyst isn't a "character". It's a mechanism. It's not a villain or a "hero", it's an instruction manual and infodump. It fills the same role as Vigil from ME1.

A Reaper "Off button" if you will.....now wait didn't someone say that there wouldn't be one at the end of ME3....that can't be right.

[JamesFaith]

Mesina2 wrote...

So in politics, less then 100 people are enough to show political opinions of country of several million people living in it, but in video games sample of 1000's and 10,000's of couple of million costumers is not valid?

Can someone explain me how and why this works this way?

OK, I try.

First, political samples are much larger, definitely more then thousand, but most important is that they are representative. They are chosing respondent so all major cathegories are present - male x females, families x singles, employers x bussinessmen, basic school x university, different regions and so on.

My teacher of sociology on university told us great example how irreleant are results without this preparation. Group of his students made poll about political opinion in one city. They got more then 200 respondents and result was more then 20% for Christian democrats - which was shocking because they regulary getting only about 6 or 8% in my country. But students cared about gender, education a work criteria so where was mistake? Explanation was easy - they forgot about place. This poll was made on Sunday near church.

And place is quite improtant in many of these polls. Truly, how many people with positive opinion on ME3 would watch You tube video from guy who was constantly bashing it? Or visit thread with title "Why ME3 sucks" and vote in its poll? Or answer in poll with insulting options?

Without creating some starting criteria, good constructed questions and other things results simply have less value.