616 réponses à ce sujet

[Pcmag1]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
 Because even though my time on the ME3 boards showed me that there was no consensus as to what people hated about the ending...

I'm actually pretty sure it can be summed in 2 points. Or if need be, by one character/entity.

[Direwolf0294]

Pcmag1 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...
 Because even though my time on the ME3 boards showed me that there was no consensus as to what people hated about the ending...

I'm actually pretty sure it can be summed in 2 points. Or if need be, by one character/entity.

Not really. As I said earlier in the thread, I'd be fine with deus ex machina and plot holes and all that, so long as Shepard had a happy ending. She didn't, and so I hated how ME3 ended.

[Masha Potato]

The main lesson of ME3 is to at least try to keep your **** thematically consistent. Duh.

[axl99]

Every time I hear the words HAPPY ENDING my mind goes into the gutter.

[Direwolf0294]

Masha Potato wrote...

The main lesson of ME3 is to at least try to keep your **** thematically consistent. Duh.

This is actually a really good point. Grimdark and bittersweet endings are easier to swallow if the entire story up until that point had been grimdark or bittersweet and not a Hollywood blockbuster style hero's journey.

[Racky]

axl99 wrote...

Every time I hear the words HAPPY ENDING my mind goes into the gutter.

I wish there was a like button for this. 

[Fast Jimmy]

krul2k wrote...

Just replayed the ending, funniest thing stuck in my mind an made me realise why i dont really like the ending

Shepard saying to TIM "are you willing to bet humanities existence on it?"

without meta gaming thats exactly what shepard needs to do and to knock it all of you have the enemy giving you the choice.

Ach anyhow im away to shot a tube just a pity it no the small one

That's the problem with Control and Synthesis, both. You're putting the fate of the entire galaxy into the hands of the very entity who thought it would be a good idea to commit the largest scale genocide every conceived for millions of years without a second thought. 

In the same vein, you are also trusting that shooting a red tube will somehow kill beings that can take an entire galactic fleet to bring down one, so... yeah, the ME3 endings ask the player to take a LOT on faith. Out of nowhere. From a glowing, holographic child. 

I'm not saying that's incredibly weak and contrived story-writing... but if I did say that, how many people would reply back that I just don't get it and that Bioware was going for a deeper ending that wasn't rainbows and sunshine?

[NovaBlastMarketing]

The Main Lesson of ME3 is to Give the Inquisitor a Happy Ending

if the "Inquisitor" is short form  for DA3 as a whole then.. truth ...nuff said...i want my return of the Jedi perfect ending ....

Modifié par NovaBlastMarketing, 20 mars 2013 - 12:38 .

[mickey111]

Allan Schumacher wrote... wrote...


 Because even though my time on the ME3 boards showed me that there was no consensus as to what people hated about the ending...

Which was caused by a lack of narrative coherence. Narrative coherence is what you get when the audience isn't swimming around in a murky, thick ocean full of unanswered questions. I remember that the ME3 forums filled up at a rate of well over 50 new topics per minute, and the range of questions that these topics covered were quite diverse and this diversity of topics indicates a helluva lot of unresolved dillemnas and uncertainty.

Modifié par mickey111, 20 mars 2013 - 01:25 .

[David7204]

Il Divo wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Compare that to Mass Effect 3, where every ship, every ally, every friend, and every victory counts for nothing in the end. Where love, friendship, heroism, courage - all the traits that have been used to tell fulfilling and magnificent stories for 120 hours - count for nothing. You lose no matter what. You die no matter what. You break all your promises no matter what.

The Earth gets blown up no matter what... wait, no.  That only happens in the bad ending.  Casualties can be a bunch higher if the player hasn't built up a good amound of war assets too.

Pretty much. If Shepard's heroism didn't matter at all, the Reaper genocide would have been successful, no matter what.

Not even anywhere close to good enough.

What is the purpose of uniting the fleets? What's the purpose of bringing the galaxy together? What's the purpose of the past 120 hours of stories and friends and adventures?

Protecting the Crucible for 30 seconds. That's it. That's the entire contribution. That's the only role.

Now, Shepard's heroism is certainly meaningful elsewhere. It's not that the entire series was pointless. But it wasn't meaningful at the end.

Now, I understand that there's supposed to be a point of the Catalyst handing the choice over to Shepard because the current cycle defied his expectations, but given that very few of the people I've seen on the BSN even recognize that (not casual players, devoted fans who spend time on the BSN) and that the Catalyst seems to be utterly despised by fans, I think it's clear the writers did an incredibly poor job of handling that.

Modifié par David7204, 20 mars 2013 - 01:45 .

[Racky]

David7204 wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Compare that to Mass Effect 3, where every ship, every ally, every friend, and every victory counts for nothing in the end. Where love, friendship, heroism, courage - all the traits that have been used to tell fulfilling and magnificent stories for 120 hours - count for nothing. You lose no matter what. You die no matter what. You break all your promises no matter what.

The Earth gets blown up no matter what... wait, no.  That only happens in the bad ending.  Casualties can be a bunch higher if the player hasn't built up a good amound of war assets too.

Pretty much. If Shepard's heroism didn't matter at all, the Reaper genocide would have been successful, no matter what.

Not even anywhere close to good enough.

What is the purpose of uniting the fleets? What's the purpose of bringing the galaxy together? What's the purpose of the past 120 hours of stories and friends and adventures?

Protecting the Crucible for 30 seconds. That's it. That's the entire contribution. That's the only role.

Now, Shepard's heroism is certainly meaningful elsewhere. It's not that the entire series was pointless. But it wasn't meaningful at the end.

Now, I understand that there's supposed to be a point of the Catalyst handing the choice over to Shepard because the current cycle defied his expectations, but given that very few of the people I've seen on the BSN even recognize that (not casual players, devoted fans who spend time on the BSN) and that the Catalyst seems to be utterly despised by fans, I think it's clear the writers did an incredibly poor job of handling that.

This post is beautiful. I want to frame it. <3

[Masha Potato]

NovaBlastMarketing wrote...

The Main Lesson of ME3 is to Give the Inquisitor a Happy Ending

if the "Inquisitor" is short form  for DA3 as a whole then.. truth ...nuff said...i want my return of the Jedi perfect ending ....

Haha well the amount of happiness in your ending would depend on whether you're playing as Luke or as Han Solo. Or an ewok. I'd take ewok.

[AlanC9]

David7204 wrote...
Compare that to Mass Effect 3, where every ship, every ally, every friend, and every victory counts for nothing in the end. Where love, friendship, heroism, courage - all the traits that have been used to tell fulfilling and magnificent stories for 120 hours - count for nothing. You lose no matter what. You die no matter what. You break all your promises no matter what. 

That's only true if you use a crazy definition of lose. The Reapers are defeated or destroyed at the player's whim. The galaxy is saved. That's winning. (Refuse excepted, obviously)

And Shepard doesn't "die no matter what." Is that just your rhetoric running away with you, or are you really confused about that?

And what promises are you talking about? My Shepards didn't make any that they didn't keep. 

Modifié par AlanC9, 20 mars 2013 - 06:25 .

[Nefla]

Masha Potato wrote...

NovaBlastMarketing wrote...

The Main Lesson of ME3 is to Give the Inquisitor a Happy Ending

if the "Inquisitor" is short form  for DA3 as a whole then.. truth ...nuff said...i want my return of the Jedi perfect ending ....

Haha well the amount of happiness in your ending would depend on whether you're playing as Luke or as Han Solo. Or an ewok. I'd take ewok.

Aw crap, I was playing as a stormtrooper >.<

[AlanC9]

David7204 wrote...


What is the purpose of uniting the fleets? What's the purpose of bringing the galaxy together? What's the purpose of the past 120 hours of stories and friends and adventures?

Protecting the Crucible for 30 seconds. That's it. That's the entire contribution. That's the only role.

Right. And delivering the Crucible saves the galaxy. What's the actual problem here?

[Aggie Punbot]

I can confidently say that there are only two ways DA:I can possibly end:

1). The hero dies.
2). The hero "mysteriously disappears."

The former is far less likely than the latter, though.

[HolyAvenger]

TS2Aggie wrote...

I can confidently say that there are only two ways DA:I can possibly end:

1). The hero dies.
2). The hero "mysteriously disappears."

The former is far less likely than the latter, though.

 

Agree. These are the only two endings for a protagonist BioWare has served up in years. What was the last BioWare game with an unambiguously happy ending? Jade Empire?

[Aleya]

No.... the main lesson is to give us an ending that makes sense within the context of the story and the world as it's been presented to us throughout the game and its predecessors.

And don't introduce a new Big Bad in the last 5 minutes.

ME3 suffered from a severe disconnect between the last few minutes and the other 99% of the game. If you actually look at the complaints you'll notice that while a (very) vocal minority is about not being able to see Shepard grow old with his/her LI, the vast majority are about rejecting all or part of the Catalyst's existence.

Modifié par Aleya, 20 mars 2013 - 09:15 .

[Althix]

disconnect? yeah i guess so.

all reapers are keep saying that " you can't possibly understand what we are doing".

well of course we can't because it doesn't make sense at all what you guys doing.

it would be better if shep would die right beside Anderson and crucible thing just shoot those bastards out of existence. At least it would make more sense than 3 tubes filled with space magic and god-child AI with logic of a calculator.

Modifié par secretsandlies, 20 mars 2013 - 10:16 .

[Pcmag1]

secretsandlies wrote...

disconnect? yeah i guess so.

all reapers are keep saying that " you can't possibly understand what we are doing".

well of course we can't because it doesn't make sense at all what you guys doing.

it would be better if shep would die right beside Anderson and crucible thing just shoot those bastards out of existence. At least it would make more sense than 3 tubes filled with space magic and god-child AI with logic of a calculator.

Exactly. Somebody has done it, just cut out the Catalist and schuffle scenes a bit around. I think it works beautifully

youtu.be/dAKaWCnhVo4

This would be, considering the overall theme of the games, acceptable. The jungle planet still makes almost no sense sadly.

Modifié par Pcmag1, 20 mars 2013 - 12:21 .

[Maverick827]

secretsandlies wrote...

all reapers are keep saying that " you can't possibly understand what we are doing".

well of course we can't because it doesn't make sense at all what you guys doing.

It makes sense.  You either refuse to or are unable to understand it.

[Jills Toy]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

And that is how I took and enjoyed the Citadel DLC.

[mickey111]

The thing that made the crucible a load of **** was that pretty much any soldier and any ship had armaments that could hurt the reapers, either with precision shots or with thanix weaponry. A cain missle to the eye, or some armor piercing thannix fighters is all it took to hurt any reaper. Turains destroyed multiple by FTL'ing at them, some people let themselves get taken aboard to detonate consealed boms from the inside, kledaggon can one shot kill reapers... so, it's not as if the story were written into a corner and needed a deus ex machina introduced at the last 10 minutes.

Luckily for you guys, I'm here to shill for a total conversion module that does exactly that. Just buy Sins of a Solar Empire and follow Dawn of the Reapers on ModDB and assuming it's not vapour ware it should allow for a less stupid resolution to the reaper conflict.