2 réponses à ce sujet

[Dasher1010]

That's the truth. Just make the Inquisitor able to have an ending where he/she lives if it's a completionist playthrough.

[Allan Schumacher]

I think an ending that would have made more narrative sense would not have needed such blatant ooey-gooey happiness, silliness and ridiculousness (Wrex dancing and getting drunk at a party while his species is on the cusp of both war and curing the genocide, not to mention the Reaper threat? Sure... keep telling yourself that...) and the fact that fans are eating it up could be incredibly damaging to story-telling in video games across the board.

If it was in the initial game I'd agree with you.

It's not, and as the Forbes writer mentions, it only works as DLC that comes out much after the fact.

As much as we all thump our chests and go "our in game character is different than ourselves and it should be that way" the point is that Citadel's DLC was a send off for the player, not Shepard. I have no qualms with this and think it works fine.

Narratively it can only exist prior to the destruction of the reapers, but that's only an issue if you adamantly stick to the narrative as it's contextually presented in the game. When I was playing through the DLC, it was going "Hey Allan lets have some fun one last time."

Now you can argue that that is bad writing and shouldn't be done, but it all exists within the context of a DLC that, to me, has a very specific purpose. It's not "thanks for the last several years Shepard" it's "thanks for the last several years players." And that's why I enjoyed it so much.

This works because, as players, 99% of the people are going to experience this DLC much, much after experiencing the ending. And no matter how much we may want to believe each character we play is unique and that we are being Shepard facing what Shepard sees and experiences, we're still the game player that isn't actually Shepard, that will always know more about what's going on than what Shepard does because we can't actively forget the things we already know. We can just choose to not let that affect our decision making (a proposition I feel isn't truly possible, but that's a whole different philosophical discussion).

Citadel was created to give the players more face time with the characters they grew to love so much. Because even though my time on the ME3 boards showed me that there was no consensus as to what people hated about the ending, it did show to me a reasonably strong consensus that people were emotionally invested in the game and setting and a large part of what solicited that emotional investment was the crew of the Normandy.

Just my two cents.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 18 mars 2013 - 07:38 .

[David Gaider]

I think arguments about the ME3 ending should be done on the ME3 forums. Not here.

Unless you have something to tie it to DA3 really quickly, I'll lock this down.