616 réponses à ce sujet

[Nefla]

The ending of ME3 didn't suck because it was "sad" it sucked because it made no sense, didn't fit with the rest of the story, or the previous two games, didn't fit with the tone at all, etc...The walking dead had a very sad ending but it was a great, well done and fitting ending for that game. For a game that was about fear and struggle, trying to survive against all odds and coming to terms with staggering losses, that ending was perfect. Add the ending of the Walking Dead to Super Mario Brothers and it's retarded, it doesn't fit at all? In ME1 and ME2 you struggle and fight tooth and nail against your enemies and always come out on top, there is some tragedy but generally the heroes win by banding together and overcoming their differences. The theme of the series is something like "if we put aside our differences, together we can achieve anything." The nonsense, frustrating, hopeless, creepy-as-hell ending don't fit with the tone of the series. You don't achieve a single thing, the reapers randomly decide to LET you kill them or force everyone to become something else against their will, or make you a reaper yourself? WTF? In ME1 and ME2 Shepard was strong and determined, never giving up and always questioning, in ME3 he is weak, ineffectual, incompetent, and achieves nothing. You're running errands for people like in DA2, you're not accomplishing anything.

btw, I think the ultimate sacrifice ending in DA:O is plenty justified. I chose it my very first playthrough (and random others depending on the character I'm playing) because I hated and distrusted Morrigan, I believed she would use this abomination child to start something worse than the blight. If Morrigan gets her way you have no idea what might happen, but if you kill the archdemon the traditional way, the blight ends no question about it.

[esper]

Wozearly wrote...

esper wrote...

So the mere existance of the golden (happy) outcome destroys any enjoyment people like me could get out off the other endings and thus it is not idiotic to ask that they won't be included. It is in fact asking for more options, since the others endings no longer feel outright stupid in comparison.

My concern is that these comments still arrive from a metagaming perspective. We as players know that there is a 'win' option, so why wouldn't we take it?

But the only reason you, the player, has to jump through mental hoops is to justify not picking the golden decision with metagame knowledge. The roleplaying perspective starts from "what would my character do, given these choices". From a character's perspective, its a balance of risks and the effects of past decisions - and not taken with any metagame knowledge about future outcomes.

If you boil the Connor situation down to its three parts:

1) Kill the child to prevent the demon causing more harm
2) Use blood magic to attack the demon in the Fade, hopefully saving the child
3) Travel to the Circle to persuade them to conduct a ritual to attack the demon in the Fade, hopefully saving the child.

Now if my character Psychic McSue uses the knowledge of me the player and knows that 2 and 3 have a guaranteed success rate, then choosing 1 is only going to appeal to someone vicious. But the character doesn't know this. What if the Circle won't help, or the demon runs riot while the Wardens are gone? What if the blood magic ritual makes things worse? 

Also, there is their own personality. A templar-like character that refuses to engage with blood magic and has already purged the Circle has only one palatable choice - the "worst" outcome from a metagame perspective. Otherwise they have to sacrifice the beliefs that they've held and resort to blood magic, without knowing if it will work. That's what makes it an interesting choice for the character - and, as such, an interesting choice for the player.

I have already have stated prior the in character reasom for why travel to the circel would not feel illogical at all in in game universe. Conner has not succeded in destroying the town yet. As it were he could have had between a half to a whole year. There is not reason to think he would suddenly suceed when his hold over the castle was weaknened. As for the the templar like personality that is fair enough, but then just don't pretend that you aren't doing for anything than templar like motives.

As for it applying to the endings. When all that is required to make the right choice in the Big Final Choice and that choice is often fairly obvious I required no meta-gaming at all and the mental (meta-gaming) hoops I have to make a character jump through to not choose the golden ending is simply not worth it and destroys (as said) any enjoyment I would get out of the ending, basically because I would be too busy thinking 'what an idiot'.

Modifié par esper, 03 mars 2013 - 06:05 .

[Medhia Nox]

@esper: If you think raising a child to serve your purposes is okay - please don't have one.

@AlanC: There's a large portion of dialogue about how Morrigan is willing to do anything to survive. You can actually call her something close to craven an cowardly and how her justifications are nothing more than delusions (these are my words - but the spirit of the dialogue is similar)

It's a HUGE approval drop to tell her that anything but survival is worthwhile.

As for the Lyrium solution - you didn't know, the first time you played, that the Lyrium solution would be fine. It's out of game knowledge from second playthroughs - or reading the internet - that you are told it was definitely work.

Wozearly is repeating what I was getting at.

I'm going to get a kneejerk reaction from this - but removing those reactions because some players can't practice self-control and "must" choose the everybody wins options - should punish everyone else who can try to act like a character who doesn't know what is going to happen might act.

A cruel pragmatist would likely not even consider traveling to the tower.
A compassionate idealist might chance the tower with no guarantee it will work.
Someone more moderate might weigh all options.

That people play the role of "gamer who must pick the 'win' option" isn't the fault of people who do not play that way.

It is my #1 gripe with developer commentary for this company which seems to suggest: "You can't control yourselves - so we must remove "full success" options."

===

@Esper: You state "this doesn't make sense to me - so it cannot make sense to anyone".

I'm telling you - The Ultimate Sacrifice makes total sense to me and certain characters I play.

And you're still just repeating: "Yeah, but it doesn't make sense to ME - so nobody should choose it." 

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 03 mars 2013 - 06:27 .

[AlanC9]

Wozearly wrote...

My concern is that these comments still arrive from a metagaming perspective. We as players know that there is a 'win' option, so why wouldn't we take it?

Sure, it's metagaming. If Bio restricts themselves to always providing a golden perfect option, I can't un-know that. I can't avoid metagaming because I will know that Option C is going to work and everything will be just peachy,no matter how risky that choice is said to be.

This makes the games worse for me. I don't think the issue is resolvable.

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 mars 2013 - 06:30 .

[Sanunes]

What I hope BioWare learns from Mass Effect 3 is to ignore the boards and make the game they want to. I found the elements of Mass Effect 3 that I disliked the most related back to what people were making posts about what should be in the final game.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

Wozearly wrote...

My concern is that these comments still arrive from a metagaming perspective. We as players know that there is a 'win' option, so why wouldn't we take it?

Sure, it's metagaming. If Bio restricts themselves to always providing a golden perfect option, I can't un-know that. I can't avoid metagaming because I will know that Option C is going to work and everything will be just peachy,no matter how risky that choice is said to be.

This makes the games worse for me. I don't think the issue is resolvable.

If you want to roleplay a tragic story, roleplay a tragic story.

Don't hamstring everyone because you "can't un-know" that there's a happier solution.

[AlanC9]

Medhia Nox wrote...
@AlanC: There's a large portion of dialogue about how Morrigan is willing to do anything to survive. You can actually call her something close to craven an cowardly and how her justifications are nothing more than delusions (these are my words - but the spirit of the dialogue is similar)

Oh, sure. I'm just saying that's got nothing to do with her support of the DR. 

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

If you want to roleplay a tragic story, roleplay a tragic story.

Don't hamstring everyone because you "can't un-know" that there's a happier solution.

Like I said, it's insoluble. I like having the occasional no-win situation in my RPGs. You don't.

Neither one of us is going to change his tastes because they make the games worse for other people.

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 mars 2013 - 06:36 .

[Medhia Nox]

@AlanC9: So either 1) you look online or in cheat books or 2) you play the game a second time.

And you're accusing Bioware for not having random outcomes to events?

I don't understand what you want - there's always going to be a "better solution" for everybody no matter what type they put in.

Army coming:

Solution 1: Lose love interest (LI wants to do this) - save some soldiers.
Solution 2: Save love interest - lose most of your soldiers.

If love interests are why you play the game - you'll choose that.

If you believe self-sacrifice is more important than your own desires - you'll choose that.

It's not Bioware's fault you have a preference - and only one option is going to nuance your personal desires. It's not a game made for you - but for everyone.

For myself - the Ultimate Sacrifice is the only choice for my character. I despise Morrigan - but more importantly, I distrust everything about her (and her mother). That she wants to abuse childbirth to serve her own needs is the last straw that confirms my hatred of her as a character.

But - I won't sacrifice Alistair or Loghain for my own morality.

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...

If you want to roleplay a tragic story, roleplay a tragic story.

Don't hamstring everyone because you "can't un-know" that there's a happier solution.

Like I said, it's insoluble. I like having the occasional no-win situation in my RPGs. You don't.

Neither one of us is going to change his tastes because they make the games worse for other people.

Having the occassional no-win scenerio isn't necessarilly a problem.  It's when the game itself turns into a no-win scenerio.  When the game ends unhappilly no matter what you do.  

[Medhia Nox]

Or the darkness, pain and tragic tragic tragedy.

[Annie_Dear]

Jayne126 wrote...

Don't forget the butterflies, unicorns and rainbows.

And cake.

[Soundsystem]

I don't see why everyone's complaining you can't have a "bad" ending and a "good" ending without the good one ruining it for metagamers. Did this not happen in DA:O? You could choose the Dark Ritual or have your character do the Ultimate Sacrifice?

For myself personally, the Ultimate Sacrifice would be a bad ending. Even the the Ritual may have worrisome future implications. Something like that, that this team has previously shown they can do and do well, would fit well.

I'm fine with my character dying, if their death has a purpose. And you can argue that it's not realistic because sometimes people die without reason but we're playing a game with dragons and magic so..

Yes. ME3's ending sucked. Completely. But this team didn't make that game, so there's not much of a connection.

[AlanC9]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@AlanC9: So either 1) you look online or in cheat books or 2) you play the game a second time.

And you're accusing Bioware for not having random outcomes to events?

If it's an immutable design principle that one of the choices will always be good for everybody, I wouldn't have needed a cheat book to know that going to the Circle would work at Redcliffe. The supposedly risky choice would always work out and everything would be fine.

I'm fine with your army example. My problem is with the cases like Redcliffe, where you sacrifice nothing, lose nothing, risk nothing.

[AlanC9]

Soundsystem wrote...

I don't see why everyone's complaining you can't have a "bad" ending and a "good" ending without the good one ruining it for metagamers. Did this not happen in DA:O? You could choose the Dark Ritual or have your character do the Ultimate Sacrifice?

 At the time we didn't know what would happen with the DR. Bio could have chosen to make the DR canon, and a horrible disaster.

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...

If you want to roleplay a tragic story, roleplay a tragic story.

Don't hamstring everyone because you "can't un-know" that there's a happier solution.

Like I said, it's insoluble. I like having the occasional no-win situation in my RPGs. You don't.

Neither one of us is going to change his tastes because they make the games worse for other people.

Having the occassional no-win scenerio isn't necessarilly a problem.  It's when the game itself turns into a no-win scenerio.  When the game ends unhappilly no matter what you do.  

Sure. Our difference over endings is only that I find the ME3 endings quite happy, and you don't.

So I guess we don't have a difference in principle here.

Modifié par AlanC9, 03 mars 2013 - 07:08 .

[esper]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@esper: If you think raising a child to serve your purposes is okay - please don't have one.

@AlanC: There's a large portion of dialogue about how Morrigan is willing to do anything to survive. You can actually call her something close to craven an cowardly and how her justifications are nothing more than delusions (these are my words - but the spirit of the dialogue is similar)

It's a HUGE approval drop to tell her that anything but survival is worthwhile.

As for the Lyrium solution - you didn't know, the first time you played, that the Lyrium solution would be fine. It's out of game knowledge from second playthroughs - or reading the internet - that you are told it was definitely work.

Wozearly is repeating what I was getting at.

I'm going to get a kneejerk reaction from this - but removing those reactions because some players can't practice self-control and "must" choose the everybody wins options - should punish everyone else who can try to act like a character who doesn't know what is going to happen might act.

A cruel pragmatist would likely not even consider traveling to the tower.
A compassionate idealist might chance the tower with no guarantee it will work.
Someone more moderate might weigh all options.

That people play the role of "gamer who must pick the 'win' option" isn't the fault of people who do not play that way.

It is my #1 gripe with developer commentary for this company which seems to suggest: "You can't control yourselves - so we must remove "full success" options."

===

@Esper: You state "this doesn't make sense to me - so it cannot make sense to anyone".

I'm telling you - The Ultimate Sacrifice makes total sense to me and certain characters I play.

And you're still just repeating: "Yeah, but it doesn't make sense to ME - so nobody should choose it." 

To start bottom up. I am not saying that it can't make sense to you or anyone else. My original 'for people like me'... I think that is as clear as it can that it is subjective and of course not inclusive of people not like me. But if it is not clear let me say so again: For people like me the mere existance of a golden ending undermines all other endings. I never said that it couldn't make sense to anybody, in fact my very first post in this thread was how I could understand why somebody would pick the dark ritual in theory.

It is just that between Exist or Exist Not there is no real compromise.

A lot of people have a child to serve their purpose, the whole idea of having a heir is built on this, what is important is if the child is loved or not and of course that the child can feel it is loved. Depending on your opinion on Morrigan or how much you influenced her, she might or might not be capable of loving the child, due to her being not so though as she pretends (Almost being in tears and calling my PC a 'sister'), she seems perfectly capable of raising the child with some love. Anyway my PC have no reason to distrust her on this. She certainly seems to learn her survival and soften up enough. As said it is still boiling down to trust Morrigan or not.

If you read my original commet you would see that I could see how the dark ritual at least works to avert the problem in theory, even though I still personally feels like fails in practise and that the dark ritual was a get out of jail for free card.

And again it is not that I must pick the win option. It is that the lose option makes no sense to pick unless that I meta-game and says now I am picking the losing option on purpose to see how it goes. I have no empathy for characters who makes senselss sacrifices. So I can't pick the bittersweet or downer ending in the Big Final Choice, because for people like me these choice stops making sense the moment an easy, with no real consequences, option in the final choice so very clearly says: I am the Golden ending.

Modifié par esper, 03 mars 2013 - 07:10 .

[Little Princess Peach]

I don't care for happy endings, well I do as long as there not cheesey as hell.
But I liked how in Da:o you have have both Alistair and the warden live after fighting off the dragon because you took route A rather than route B, but you still had a darkness looming over the almost happy ending involing morrigan.

what I mean to say is, I like the idea of no matter what you choose you still have some consiquences to you're actions towards the end...so you take the good with the bad

[Mr.BlazenGlazen]

Don't force a happy ending. Simply make it an option.

[esper]

Tali-vas-normandy wrote...

I don't care for happy endings, well I do as long as there not cheesey as hell.
But I liked how in Da:o you have have both Alistair and the warden live after fighting off the dragon because you took route A rather than route B, but you still had a darkness looming over the almost happy ending involing morrigan.

what I mean to say is, I like the idea of no matter what you choose you still have some consiquences to you're actions towards the end...so you take the good with the bad

It think that it is this kind of thinking that leads us to this discussion.

I want to do away with the Big Final Choice. Completely, utterly, and down in the drain to never been seen again.

The problem with the Big Final Choice is that it utterly negates the journey.

Take da:o. The journey to gather the armies are utterly irrelevant to the ending. No matter how you did it.

And in da2. You should have been forced to become more involved in the mage/templar conflict so that in the end you don't have a choice to pick side, because you picked it by your actions doing the game and of course the opposit site is not suddenly going to trust someone who turns in the last minute.

I want the ending to feel more organic and not just a final hub tacked onto the game.

Me3 really highligted the problem with the big final choice.

I am also not against endings that seems happy or golden in such instance, because they would then have to be tainted by some of the sacrifice our character made along the road.

[Wulfram]

I don't think a Big Final Choice has to negate the journey.

If you take the Krogan stuff in ME3 as it's own arc, then the final Cure/Sabotage choice is effectively that arc's "Big Final Choice", but it doesn't make the stuff that's happened earlier in the arc irrelevent. The consequences of your choice will be different depending on what you chose earlier.

DA2 indeed should have allowed you to get more involved in either side of the conflict, but I wouldn't want to be without the chance for my Mage-sceptical Hawke to balk at actually killing all of them.

But I do agree that reflecting previous choices is more important than having a BFC. And ME3 would probably have been better if the writers hadn't felt the need to crowbar a BFC in.

[esper]

Wulfram wrote...

I don't think a Big Final Choice has to negate the journey.

If you take the Krogan stuff in ME3 as it's own arc, then the final Cure/Sabotage choice is effectively that arc's "Big Final Choice", but it doesn't make the stuff that's happened earlier in the arc irrelevent. The consequences of your choice will be different depending on what you chose earlier.

DA2 indeed should have allowed you to get more involved in either side of the conflict, but I wouldn't want to be without the chance for my Mage-sceptical Hawke to balk at actually killing all of them.

But I do agree that reflecting previous choices is more important than having a BFC. And ME3 would probably have been better if the writers hadn't felt the need to crowbar a BFC in.

There is a heck of a difference between an arch in story or the end of the whole story. And, yes, it is ultimately irrellevant. Me3 is the ultimate the Big Final Choice negates the journey because the only thing affection the big final choice in Me3 is how much of a abertery number have you collected.

Perhaps your Hawke should have been able to balk out at killing them, but actually not. There should have been more quest along these questline (in a reasonable place before the ending) where you should have had to kill mages, also seemingly innocent ones. That way the consequence that you must kill them all would just been the next logical step. At some point, it is simply not logical that Meridith (espically her since she is paranoid) or Orsino would simply not trust you anymore. Even if you should be able to try and chicken out when it gets ugly. Of course something simerlary should have been on the mage quest line. Perhaps been forced to support blood mages who actually sacrifice someone.

The ending should be the consequence of the journey- I would so much like to see that.

[esper]

Official DJ Harbinger wrote...

There needs to be multiple DIFFERENT endings (not the so-called 'different' endings we got with ME3) like this:

Very Worst Ending - You Lose
Bad Ending - You win, but your character dies, along with most of your companions, and the world struggles to rebuild, whether they manage to sustain or not is left to interpretation.
Okay ending - You die, and a few companions do, but the world is saved and there is a clear explanation that there is hope for the future.
Good ending - You sacrifice yourself for everyone else, nearly everyone else lives.
Best ending - You survive, as does your companions (maybe one or two deaths to get the emotions going) and peace is restore forever.

The "Best ending" should be very hard to achieve and regardless of which ending we pick we need to be given multiple different epilogues varying on the choices we've made and lots of CLOSURE for the characters we care about.

This is the thing I NEVER EVER want to see.
This is an rpg, by having endings graded like that. (And now we are not even talking golden ending vs. bittersweet anymore) bioware is effectively stating if you don't do precisly as we imagine you do and take the choice we want you to take, then you don't get the best ending where you win in every possible way.