381 réponses à ce sujet

[GiarcYekrub]

I chose Synthesis because well, I wanted to allow EDI, Joker babies

[Kel Riever]

OP: Since you are making a generalization about ending haters, here's one for you:  If you don't want to be shallow and emo, you'll realize that the problem with Mass Effect is that the ending(s) are just atrocious in quality, and that has nothing to do with whether they are sad or happy.

Straw man arguement applies here. BioWare would like you to think that the problem is that the endings are sad and people don't like sad endings, when the problem is that they just suck regardless, period. And you fell for that straw man argument.

And its okay, none of the ending haters have respect for you either.  There are other ending lovers I have some respect for.  Those are the ones that actually don't have personal hang ups about whether people like or hate the endings.

Modifié par Kel Riever, 12 mars 2013 - 03:26 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

Big Bad wrote...

I can't speak for everybody, but my issues with the ending have absolutely nothing to do with it being "sad."

You kinda do speak for alot of people.

[CronoDragoon]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

I thought that approach was actually a comment about death.  I thought the whole Planet WTF thing was awesome because it was showing me that these people had a new challenge to face, and they were going to have to do it without me.  (But I loved and believed in them so much I had little doubt they'd figure it out – I saw it as an uplifting message rather than the bleak and hopeless one that the Herd The Line crowd insisted it was.)

What type of challenge do you mean? Surviving until rescue comes or making a new life on the planet?

I think that in a stranded Normandy situation without rescue, the bleak and hopeless view is bolstered by the fact that there is only going to be one type of food on that planet, whereas your crew can only eat levo or dextro food depending on the crew member.

If the scene is purely symbolic for a new beginning without the Reapers, and the EC scene is what they actually meant - Normandy repaired/and or rescued quickly - then I think they could have been much clearer about the literal interpretation while still retaining a powerful symbolic message.

Finally, you don't need a technological dark age to have a new beginning. I personally believe that rebuilding the relays represents a new beginning, as it is symbolic of the slaves becoming the masters.

[aj2070]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

This.  Oh so much this.

[GiarcYekrub]

Personally I've seen these complaints:
1.As the OP said Its sad (this seems to be the main complaint still around) and this seems to be based on a desire for some Hollywood style "Independence DaY"/"Party on Endor" ending rather than the "Matrix 3/Alien 3/T2/Wrath of Khan/Buffy(The Gift)" ending we got
2."Plot Holes" as I said before people seem to me to be head canon/retconning plot holes into it rather than genuine ones(where the game contradicts itself(not your head cannon))
3.Assets don't matter except they do, Low EMS gives different endings and this was like this pre EC
4.Choices don't matter, except they do Rannoch and Tuchanka could have wildly different outcomes, your crew could be almost entirely dead. Every character that could be dead is replace with somebody else giving some scenes a completely different feel and in the case of Legion I think that Not Legion was one of my favorite characters. You do need to realize this game is being sold on its own as a stand alone game, bioware could never get away with only giving the best ending to Trilogy players(heck PS3 players didn't have the opportunity to play ME1 at release)
5.ME2 Suicide Mission was better, it was but that was one of the best piece of gaming I've ever played to expect that as a minimum standard is quite frankly absurd.

[GiarcYekrub]

Oh yeah I forgot
6.Its too Cliche
7.Its not formulaic as according to my own writing formula that I'm studying at School/College/Uni

Personally I find that both 6 and 7 get leveled at it pretty funny

[archangel1996]

Another BadAss, BadAss i mean, sorry

Modifié par archangel1996, 12 mars 2013 - 04:05 .

[BSpud]

Kel Riever wrote...

OP: Since you are making a generalization about ending haters, here's one for you:  If you don't want to be shallow and emo, you'll realize that the problem with Mass Effect is that the ending(s) are just atrocious in quality, and that has nothing to do with whether they are sad or happy.

Straw man arguement applies here. BioWare would like you to think that the problem is that the endings are sad and people don't like sad endings, when the problem is that they just suck regardless, period. And you fell for that straw man argument.

And its okay, none of the ending haters have respect for you either.  There are other ending lovers I have some respect for.  Those are the ones that actually don't have personal hang ups about whether people like or hate the endings.

Yup.

[archangel1996]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Personally I've seen these complaints:
1.As the OP said Its sad (this seems to be the main complaint still around) and this seems to be based on a desire for some Hollywood style "Independence DaY"/"Party on Endor" ending rather than the "Matrix 3/Alien 3/T2/Wrath of Khan/Buffy(The Gift)" ending we got
2."Plot Holes" as I said before people seem to me to be head canon/retconning plot holes into it rather than genuine ones(where the game contradicts itself(not your head cannon))
3.Assets don't matter except they do, Low EMS gives different endings and this was like this pre EC
4.Choices don't matter, except they do Rannoch and Tuchanka could have wildly different outcomes, your crew could be almost entirely dead. Every character that could be dead is replace with somebody else giving some scenes a completely different feel and in the case of Legion I think that Not Legion was one of my favorite characters. You do need to realize this game is being sold on its own as a stand alone game, bioware could never get away with only giving the best ending to Trilogy players(heck PS3 players didn't have the opportunity to play ME1 at release)
5.ME2 Suicide Mission was better, it was but that was one of the best piece of gaming I've ever played to expect that as a minimum standard is quite frankly absurd.

Do you believe this?

[AlanC9]

archangel1996 wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...
Personally I've seen these complaints:
1.As the OP said Its sad (this seems to be the main complaint still around) and this seems to be based on a desire for some Hollywood style "Independence DaY"/"Party on Endor" ending rather than the "Matrix 3/Alien 3/T2/Wrath of Khan/Buffy(The Gift)" ending we got
2."Plot Holes" as I said before people seem to me to be head canon/retconning plot holes into it rather than genuine ones(where the game contradicts itself(not your head cannon))
3.Assets don't matter except they do, Low EMS gives different endings and this was like this pre EC
4.Choices don't matter, except they do Rannoch and Tuchanka could have wildly different outcomes, your crew could be almost entirely dead. Every character that could be dead is replace with somebody else giving some scenes a completely different feel and in the case of Legion I think that Not Legion was one of my favorite characters. You do need to realize this game is being sold on its own as a stand alone game, bioware could never get away with only giving the best ending to Trilogy players(heck PS3 players didn't have the opportunity to play ME1 at release)
5.ME2 Suicide Mission was better, it was but that was one of the best piece of gaming I've ever played to expect that as a minimum standard is quite frankly absurd.

Do you believe this?

pBelieve that all these complaints exist, or that they're mostly invalid or overstated?

[Iakus]

Kel Riever wrote...

Straw man arguement applies here. BioWare would like you to think that the problem is that the endings are sad and people don't like sad endings, when the problem is that they just suck regardless, period. And you fell for that straw man argument.

Actually, Bioware's revision of history is that ending haters are "confused" and simply "don't get" the endings.  Thus the EC:  to explain things slower, and using smaller words.  It's a gift to explain how we're wrong and the endings really are awesome.  We simply dont have the mental capacity to decide on our own that the endings are simply terrible on their own merits, for reasons explained in excruciating detail over the last year.

[o Ventus]

So you've allegedly read all these articles and topics explaining why the ending is bad (next to none of which actually mention the emotional aspect), and the conclusion you come to is "who in because its sad"?

I smell a troll.

[AlanC9]

 I'd add points six and seven to that list.

Six: the endings are morally bad because they violate certain standards of morality. The sophisticated version of his argument is that creative works should not depict a world where "evil" methods produce "good" results; artists have a duty to make a world that's better than this one. The unsophisticated one is just that this makes people feel bad. The game-design version is that the endgame doesn't respect being a Paragon.

Seven: The endings are an illogical mess. Arguing against illogic is fine, as long as you don't hold ME3 to higher standards than you hold other Bio games.

[KLGChaos]

The endings were all thematically revolting, imo. The Starchild's sudden appearance, the use of Space Magic, the explanation for the Reapers... they all went against the previously established narrative of the series.

As for the sad ending thing, while it's true I was personally hoping for a happy ending, what bothered me the most was that there wasn't even an option for it. I believe there should have been options for every player-- from happy to bleak to everything in-between. Instead all we got was three choices all with the same exact bittersweetness. In a game about reflecting choices and making the story belong to the player, it took that away in the end.

Between all your previous decisions meaning nothing, your war assets amounting to a number on the screen instead of translating into actual gameplay, a horrible final mission and a lack of choice in the end... that's why the endings are so despised by many. Having ONLY sad options might stick in the craw of some, like myself, but it's far from the only problem.

In the end, Bioware's complete insistence on everything being Grey will drive away anyone who enjoys happy endings. I know I won't be buying another game by them because I can't trust them to really take out choices into account and provide good, bad and in-between for everyone. Dragon Age 2 was just as bad.

I miss the old days when gaming was more black and white at times. True, it may have limited choices throughout the game a bit, but it was better have two colors than the one that permeates all games these days.

Modifié par KLGChaos, 12 mars 2013 - 04:45 .

[aj2070]

Bill Casey wrote...

MacroSpamMK wrote...

- Sacrifice (this is probably where your sadness point comes in).

Commiting a war crime isn't "sacrifice"...
It's ****ing deplorable...

Short and to the point. Well said.

[archangel1996]

AlanC9 wrote...

archangel1996 wrote...

GiarcYekrub wrote...
Personally I've seen these complaints:
1.As the OP said Its sad (this seems to be the main complaint still around) and this seems to be based on a desire for some Hollywood style "Independence DaY"/"Party on Endor" ending rather than the "Matrix 3/Alien 3/T2/Wrath of Khan/Buffy(The Gift)" ending we got
2."Plot Holes" as I said before people seem to me to be head canon/retconning plot holes into it rather than genuine ones(where the game contradicts itself(not your head cannon))
3.Assets don't matter except they do, Low EMS gives different endings and this was like this pre EC
4.Choices don't matter, except they do Rannoch and Tuchanka could have wildly different outcomes, your crew could be almost entirely dead. Every character that could be dead is replace with somebody else giving some scenes a completely different feel and in the case of Legion I think that Not Legion was one of my favorite characters. You do need to realize this game is being sold on its own as a stand alone game, bioware could never get away with only giving the best ending to Trilogy players(heck PS3 players didn't have the opportunity to play ME1 at release)
5.ME2 Suicide Mission was better, it was but that was one of the best piece of gaming I've ever played to expect that as a minimum standard is quite frankly absurd.

Do you believe this?

pBelieve that all these complaints exist, or that they're mostly invalid or overstated?

And you? Do you believe i was askingyou?

Modifié par archangel1996, 12 mars 2013 - 04:37 .

[Dude_in_the_Room]

Well, since you think that everyone hates the ending b/c it's sad....I guess it's safe to say that you don't know what you're talking about.

[Fixers0]

No because it's sad, but because it was poorly written and designend.

[Astartes Marine]

GiarcYekrub wrote...

Personally I've seen these complaints:
1.As the OP said Its sad (this seems to be the main complaint still around) and this seems to be based on a desire for some Hollywood style "Independence DaY"/"Party on Endor" ending rather than the "Matrix 3/Alien 3/T2/Wrath of Khan/Buffy(The Gift)" ending we got

We didn't even get an ending like the ones you described...one sees the death of at least one entire species along with any mechs, VIs, etc.  The other leaves the main antagonists alive leaving the threat of future cyclic violence still open while one man gets far too much power than any one man should have, and the last...I'm not even going to go into that pile of crap.

I don't think many if any at all really wanted a "disney" ending, but one that was a bit more positive would have been nice.  As the Suicide Mission required considerable game time and upgrades/loyalty to complete with all surviving I believe this game should have had a similar ending possibility.  Like I said earlier in the thread they could have kept the original endings, but have a happier one like the MEHEM in the game as the hardest to aqcuire where you do beat the odds and beat the Reapers without having to commit war crimes in the process. 
MEHEM is actually closer to the Wrath of Khan than the original endings: (The Reapers/Khan are beaten, the Normandy/Enterprise speeds away, Shepard/Kirk lives, Anderson/Spock is dead and laid to rest with a memorial/torpedo launch, and we are left to reflect on the lives that have been lost), bittersweet in a way that actually remembers the sweet whereas the original endings are just flat out bitter.

GiarcYekrub wrote...
Personally I've seen these complaints:
3.Assets don't matter except they do, Low EMS gives different endings and this was like this pre EC

I myself feel that they don't matter enough.  Sure they give different variations on the three predetermined endings but that's all they do.  You don't see Geth Prime squads blasting Reaper troops on Earth, or Rachni engineers fixing tanks, or Asari/Jack's team giving biotic support, or the Volus bombers, or the Elcor heavy weapons teams.  All these things ended up being just numbers that determined which variation of the three predetermined endings you got.

GiarcYekrub wrote...
4.Choices
don't matter, except they do Rannoch and Tuchanka could have wildly different outcomes, your crew could be almost entirely dead. Every character that could be dead is replace with somebody else giving some scenes a completely different feel and in the case of Legion I think that Not Legion was one of my favorite characters. You do need to
realize this game is being sold on its own as a stand alone game, bioware could never get away with only giving the best ending to Trilogy players(heck PS3 players didn't have the opportunity to play ME1 at release)

A huge mistake in my opinion.  The series should have stayed exclusive to 360/PC first with the PS3 getting the trilogy pack.  Doing it the way they did hindered their work and limited what they could do. 

Agreed about the choices though.

GiarcYekrub wrote...
5.ME2 Suicide Mission was better, it was but that was one of the best piece of gaming I've ever played to expect that as a minimum standard is quite frankly absurd.

Perhaps they could not have surpassed it, but they could have done alot better.  I'd bet EA is responsible though, they're awfully pushy about release dates.

Modifié par Astartes Marine, 12 mars 2013 - 04:54 .

[geceka]

iakus wrote...

Actually, Bioware's revision of history is that ending haters are "confused" and simply "don't get" the endings.  Thus the EC:  to explain things slower, and using smaller words.  It's a gift to explain how we're wrong and the endings really are awesome.  We simply dont have the mental capacity to decide on our own that the endings are simply terrible on their own merits, for reasons explained in excruciating detail over the last year.

I don't think that Bioware ever intended to insult the people who were complaining about the ending.

What I do think is that the original pre-EC endings suggested a literal reading that Bioware did not intend, e.g. while they wanted to play with the whole "a new beginning" topic by showing the Normandy stranded and the relays destroyed, they always assumed it would be clear that both can and will be fixed rather quickly.

However, without their "inside knowledge" of how the story should unfold, most people (me included – and I like the general idea behind the endings and thus are happy to have things cleared up for me in the EC) read it more like "With the Normandy stranded, all crewmembers are doomed to a life in the wilderness, Tali and Garrus will starve painfully, and Liara can spend the last 800 years of her life alone in the wrecked Normandy with everyone else dead, pining about Shepard. In the meantime, the entire allied fleet is stranded in the Sol system, and it will take thousands of years to restore the galaxy to the point it was at before the Reaper invasion".

This was a misunderstanding, apparently: Bioware didn't intend it to be perceived that way, but without their inside knowledge, it was the most obvious reading. They were too close to their own story and failed to see how easy it was to interpret it in an entirely different direction.

So when Bioware says "We wanted to clear it up in the EC", they are not saying that you/we were too dumb to understand it, they are saying "Sorry, we presented our idea in a way that can easily be interpreted in a way we didn't intend. It's our fault, not yours. Here is the EC that makes those things explicit that *we* thought were already there implicitly, but we understand now that those things weren't implied properly."

[N7 Banshee Bait]

The control ending is AWESOME!!!! It's not sad & Shepard doesn't die. I usually choose the synthesis ending but last night I decided to go with control & I was totally blown away. I've seen it before but I don't remember it being so awesome.

Instead of the Reapers causing misery & death, Shepard used them to help everybody in the galaxy. Doesn't get any better than that. He doesn't live happily ever after with his LI but he's still alive & he can see them all & help them. He became more than just a regular man. How can anybody not like the control ending???

I loved the scene that showed the Reapers rebuilding the mass relays. It was just fricken awesome!  Bioware made the greatest video game ever! It'll be a long time before anything can top it.

Modifié par N7 Shadow SR2, 12 mars 2013 - 05:10 .

[KLGChaos]

Another point to bring is up the Crucible's role in the whole story. In ME3, you find the plans for the Catalyst and instead of Shep doing things to help build it, all he does is go around collecting an army... which doesn't even factor into the end game itself. What's the point of actually building an army unless you're going to beat the Reaper's in a conventional way through strength of arms? There is none.... Shepard's entire journey throughout ME3 is basically just to serve as a distraction while Hackett and his scientists do all the real work on building the thing. There was literally no real point in uniting the galaxy because you could have done fine without them-- you just would have lost Earth as well.

[Astartes Marine]

N7 Shadow SR2 wrote...
How can anybody not like the control ending???

Because of the old phrase; power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

No single man should have the kind of power.  On the other hand, the Illusive Man was fooled into believing he could control the Reapers, there's no guarantee that the same trick wasn't pulled on Shepard.  Even if things are fine at the beginning, the continued existence of the Reapers leaves open the possibility that the cycle will start all over again at some point.


Well that's part of the reason I oppose Control.

Modifié par Astartes Marine, 12 mars 2013 - 05:12 .