111 réponses à ce sujet

[Urdnot Amenark]

Not this again.

[TK514]

AlanC9 wrote...

TK514 wrote...
But BioWare didn't even have to go that far.  The problem I see with most pro-enders who are against a happy/triumpant ending is that they treat it like a binary choice.  "Either you have the endings as they are, or you have a happy ending."  Frankly, that's not the case.  If BioWare added a 5th choice, all the current endings could remain in place for those that like their tragedy, and there would be an ending for those that wanted to continue Shepard's trend of beating the odds, remaining true to his principles, and walking away from it with a win.

Doesn't work. Then the tragic ending is just a screw-up.

DA:O proves that doesn't have to be the case.

[Ryuzetsu]

This is ground that is rutted it's been walked so much. Listen OP, much as I agree with you and want the ending fixed, unless Citadel is already the fix we've been begging for( and I don't think it is) it's in the can. There is nothing that can be done at this point. That's why they're releasing it on March 5th, the game came out March 6th last year. It's the end of the games life cycle. They are letting programmers go they're moving ME 4 production to Edmonton, and focusing on DA3. Unless Citadel is some sort of miracle,... it's over.

[High Kicks]

They could, but they won't.
Personally, I think the ending could have been like this:
The reapers being destroyed no matter what at the end and showing you what type of state the galaxy is in at the end of the game. Things could vary based on your decisions throughout the trilogy.

[Nerevar-as]

TK514 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

TK514 wrote...
But BioWare didn't even have to go that far.  The problem I see with most pro-enders who are against a happy/triumpant ending is that they treat it like a binary choice.  "Either you have the endings as they are, or you have a happy ending."  Frankly, that's not the case.  If BioWare added a 5th choice, all the current endings could remain in place for those that like their tragedy, and there would be an ending for those that wanted to continue Shepard's trend of beating the odds, remaining true to his principles, and walking away from it with a win.

Doesn't work. Then the tragic ending is just a screw-up.

DA:O proves that doesn't have to be the case.

DA:O final part involved good writing. I loved the DR option (screw that jerkass Maker´s rules), but there were valid concerns not to do it, and then to make the sacrifice choice. It worked, and made you stop and think what to do (at least until I realized it´ll probably be as important as the Council choice, for the same reasons). ME3 went for cheap and manipulative shock, and that´s why it failed. ME could have been the next SW and it´ll be lucky if it is the next Alien.

Modifié par Nerevar-as, 26 février 2013 - 03:49 .

[Ticonderoga117]

Nerevar-as wrote...

TK514 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

TK514 wrote...
But BioWare didn't even have to go that far.  The problem I see with most pro-enders who are against a happy/triumpant ending is that they treat it like a binary choice.  "Either you have the endings as they are, or you have a happy ending."  Frankly, that's not the case.  If BioWare added a 5th choice, all the current endings could remain in place for those that like their tragedy, and there would be an ending for those that wanted to continue Shepard's trend of beating the odds, remaining true to his principles, and walking away from it with a win.

Doesn't work. Then the tragic ending is just a screw-up.

DA:O proves that doesn't have to be the case.

DA:O final part involved good writing. I loved the DR option (screw that jerkass Maker´s rules), but there were valid concerns not to do it, and then to make the sacrifice choice. It worked, and made you stop and think what to do (at least until I realized it´ll probably be as important as the Council choice, for the same reasons). ME3 went for cheap and manipulative shock, and that´s why it failed. ME could have been the next SW and it´ll be lucky if it is the next Alien.

Way too high. More like... Skyline maybe? Or some other hack job SciFi.

[AlexMBrennan]

2. let his crew protect him whilst he is disabling / hacking the beam to shut it off

I thought the point of the entire assault on London was to get to the Citadel via the beam? What purpose could sacrificing thousands of lives just to shut it off possibly serve?

[Ironhandjustice]

macrocarl wrote...

I love the endings the way they are and I love them even more with the EC. Also it's done. PS it's done. Move on. Get a new game.

Soooooo, there is no room for bender, right??!!! I will make my own game! with mods! and hookers!

That is more! I will pass the game, and the mods!

[DirtyPhoenix]

UrgentArchengel wrote...

Here is the thing here. Let's say you create an IP that becomes relatively popular, and by the time you get to the ending of the story you wanted to tell, lots of people end up hating it, and start bashing, and insulting you. Then those same people demand it to be different, and some might even threaten you with death if it doesn't get fixed. Would you give in to these demands, and change it from what you originally wanted, or do you stick with what you got, and let angry fans continue to stay angry? Honestly, I'm surprised we even got the EC in the first place.

My two cents: Assuing I'm incharge of it.. No I would not change the ending of my IP under any circustances, no matter how uch pressure or threat is applied by whoever. But, but..but before that: I'll make sure I stay true from my end. No false promises, no PR bs, no promises of heaven and being dumped in hell, all pervious promises met with properly, no cut-paste job, no rushing the ending at last minute, staying true to the themes etc.. I'll do all these and then write my own ending. If fans don't like my ending, well sucks to be them. They can play/read a different product, I ain't changing mine to please some fans. If push comes to shove then I'd let it die then continue in a direction I didn't imagine.

[Archonsg]

@marcocarl

Your Avatar ... is ... disturbing.
;-)

[Ticonderoga117]

pirate1802 wrote...

UrgentArchengel wrote...
Here is the thing here. Let's say you create an IP that becomes relatively popular, and by the time you get to the ending of the story you wanted to tell, lots of people end up hating it, and start bashing, and insulting you. Then those same people demand it to be different, and some might even threaten you with death if it doesn't get fixed. Would you give in to these demands, and change it from what you originally wanted, or do you stick with what you got, and let angry fans continue to stay angry? Honestly, I'm surprised we even got the EC in the first place.

My two cents: Assuing I'm incharge of it.. No I would not change the ending of my IP under any circustances, no matter how uch pressure or threat is applied by whoever. But, but..but before that: I'll make sure I stay true from my end. No false promises, no PR bs, no promises of heaven and being dumped in hell, all pervious promises met with properly, no cut-paste job, no rushing the ending at last minute, staying true to the themes etc.. I'll do all these and then write my own ending. If fans don't like my ending, well sucks to be them. They can play/read a different product, I ain't changing mine to please some fans. If push comes to shove then I'd let it die then continue in a direction I didn't imagine.

And here's the crux of the issue. It's one thing if the narrative logically continues down a different path than you liked, but it still makes sense in context.

It's a completely differen't thing if the head honcho lies and breaks with the consistency you set earlier for reasons known only to them.

You have no defense when that happens.

[Obadiah]

Narrative seemed pretty logical to me. The Crucible is WMD weapon designed and built to destroy the Reapers, as well as all Synthetic life. Use it to destroy the Reapers, or select a different option.

We can make up another story if we want, or posit reasons on why the Crucible is designed to do what it does, but that doesn't make the story illogical.

Personally, I'd just rather have an official stickied FAQ with some answers to lore questions.

Modifié par Obadiah, 26 février 2013 - 04:26 .

[Ticonderoga117]

Obadiah wrote...

Narrative seemed pretty logical to me. The Crucible is WMD weapon designed and built to destroy the Reapers, as well as all Synthetic life. Use it to destroy the Reapers, or select a different option.

We can make up another story if we want, or posit reasons on why the Crucible is designed to do what it does, but that doesn't make the story illogical.

Personally, I'd just rather have an official stickied FAQ with some answers to lore questions.

Catalyst is a super AI that can't fix a hack made by primitive organics.
Catalyst can't control his own home.
Catalyst doesn't open his home for another part of him to use.
Catalyst says it wants to prevent organic/AI conflict and instead of doing something, simply kills everyone to "preserve" life.
Reapers go from scarey squid monsters to tools to a chemical reaction.
Why are we building this thing we don't know what it does or how it'll help us?
Why did I sit on my ass for 6 months?
Why is Anderson not on the Citadel?
Why is Udina a councilor?
How'd TIM get all that Reaper tech when I gave him the finger?
What the hell are these Spider Reaper things? Harby pretty much said only certain races get the Reaper treatment.
Why aren't those Reapers shooting the Crucible when it's right in front of them?
Why are the Reapers shooting the Crucible after the Catalyst expresses that it is a better solution?
Why am I trying to solve the Catalyst's problem? My problem is Reapers.
Why did they move the Citadel to Earth now?
Why didn't they shut off all the relays after taking the Citadel?
If the Citadel opens up like that, why doesn't everything fly off?
Legion is software; what happened to copy and paste?

[M74]

I'm a little confused by the OP's point 2. Why is Shepard shutting off the beam? Don't we want more troops on the Citadel if we can get them there?

No, the Crucible was built with the purpose:

- fly to the Citadel
- docking
- disperse energy

There's no need to get troups up the Citadel. In fact evacuation is better than anything else.
The beam is for the Reapers to "transport" husks and humans up there. (perhaps to build the new Reaper.
The beam, shutting it down would disconnect the Reapers from doing more "reaping"). After the beam is shut down, the Crucible has an even better chance to do its job and that no husks try to climb up the Crucible and perheps kill themselves(..because it will get damn hot.).

[AlanC9]

TK514 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
Doesn't work. Then the tragic ending is just a screw-up.

DA:O proves that doesn't have to be the case.

Only because the consequences of the DR were not known. I don't see a good way to apply that to the ME situation. Though the dark energy plot would have worked like that; it would have been entirely unclear whether Shepard had won, or had destroyed everything.

Modifié par AlanC9, 26 février 2013 - 05:09 .

[Brovikk Rasputin]

They can, but they shouldn't and they won't.

[Iakus]

They just needed to provide more alternatives.

[AlanC9]

[quote]M74 wrote...
[quote]I'm a little confused by the OP's point 2. Why is Shepard shutting off the beam? Don't we want more troops on the Citadel if we can get them there?
[/quote]
No, the Crucible was built with the purpose:
- fly to the Citadel
- docking
- disperse energy
There's no need to get troups up the Citadel. In fact evacuation is better than anything else.
The beam is for the Reapers to "transport" husks and humans up there. (perhaps to build the new Reaper.
The beam, shutting it down would disconnect the Reapers from doing more "reaping"). After the beam is shut down, the Crucible has an even better chance to do its job and that no husks try to climb up the Crucible and perheps kill themselves(..because it will get damn hot.).[/quote]

That's assuming you can get the arms open so the Crucible can dock, which is why you need to board it in the first place. But once you've done that you're about to win anyway, so why does it matter if the beam's on or not?




[/quote]

Modifié par AlanC9, 26 février 2013 - 05:13 .

[Mathias]

mcgreggers99 wrote...

Keatstwo wrote...

NeedsMoreTali wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

I don't believe there is anything in need of fixing

of course not, you got the ending you wanted/expected/felt was logical.   and ****** off to the rest of us,  "shape your own story" my ****

YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ENDED IT LIKE THAT BIOWARE, WRITE MY ENDING INSTEAD!!11

This is without question, my favorite BSN post since the ending fiasco started.  

Bravo..good sir....bravo.


For those of you who don't get it. Just lookup Stephen King's "Misery." I've never made the parallel in my mind before now, but now I won't be able to forget it.

Perhaps you missed it when dozens upon dozens of other users made the exact same joke, when the ending fiasco started.

[FOX216BC]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

They can, but they shouldn't and they won't.

They can, but they shouldn't and they won't.

[Argentoid]

crimzontearz wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

You can have depressing ending as much you want Casey- even so much that Edgar Alan Poe would blush, but fix your narrative....

funny...casey is the one who always pushed for a happier ending

In a parallel universe

[IntelligentME3Fanboy]

what do they gain by changing the ending?

[Argentoid]

IntelligentME3Fanboy wrote...

what do they gain by changing the ending?

Two possible reactions


1) Mass outrage, due to the fact that people will complain that Citadel DLC has an effect on the ending and that they have to pay for it. 


2) Appreciation. Plus, people will start recommending ME3 again, play the Trilogy again, etc etc etc.

[Kel Riever]

Keatstwo wrote...

NeedsMoreTali wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...

I don't believe there is anything in need of fixing

of course not, you got the ending you wanted/expected/felt was logical.   and ****** off to the rest of us,  "shape your own story" my ****

YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE ENDED IT LIKE THAT BIOWARE, WRITE MY ENDING INSTEAD!!11

Pictures?  I LOVE PICTURES!

Misery is to someone who doesn't like the ending(s) as this guy on the left is to the fanboi who eats anything shoved down their throats!:



I love pictures.

Multiplayer DLC.  Better than single player DLC for single player role-players.  I'm telling you, GO MONTREAL!

The best thing you could do is get someone else to buy you the Citadel DLC, go to the big party with all your squaddies, and consider that the end of the game.  Wait a sec, maybe they did fix the ending after all!

Modifié par Kel Riever, 26 février 2013 - 05:46 .

[JamieCOTC]

Actually, they can't fix the ending, not without a lot of work as the main problem w/ the end hinges on Starbrat, who, despite what people say, is in the game from the get go.