53 réponses à ce sujet

[kleindropper]

Yes, pre-EC you would think you made a huge mistake and should have let the Reapers win instead. You basically destroy the entire galaxy and kill everybody. Meanwhile, your LI is stuck on another planet forever apart from you. (and that's the best ending possible).

[NeonFlux117]

Nope. It was and still is bad, plot hole littered, deus ex ripoff, disjointed, poorly executed, anti-climatic, lazy, unprofessional and lore breaking material. It's bad. nuff said.

[Reorte]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

Nope. It was and still is bad, plot hole littered, deus ex ripoff, disjointed, poorly executed, anti-climatic, lazy, unprofessional and lore breaking material. It's bad. nuff said.

The thing is that you can actually get away with a lot of that (although the very best writing doesn't, and is visibly better for it) if you strike the right tones, manage to keep the audience running with you. At least as long as you don't screw up so badly that suspension of disbelief is totally shattered (if people spot your flaws instantly instead of having to think about them later you'll break suspension of disbelief).

[Robhuzz]

neubourn wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

I didn't enjoy the citadel DLC all that much, it was only kind of funny. The troll shep just freaks me out I guess. Seemed like cynical brand of humor, compared to the rest of the story.

Most games ends up with a boss fight, so that catalyst gig was ok as a different 'type cast' of villain, as we're never really privy to the actual villain that way. Gotta kind of look in the mirror on that one?

The weirdest part of the ME series with 3 is the star gazer scene. Who are those people?

Funny that...they actually HAD a final "Boss" lined up, it was supposed to be some hideous Reaper-Brute looking Illusive Man construct. Fortunately, they scrapped it before finishing the game. (Imagine the rage if you had a ridicuous Boss like that PLUS the endings?)

Hard to imagine more rage than what was going on about a year ago though it would've been fun to see. Still wondering why they couldn't just add 'normal' TIM with yellow glowing eyes and harbinger speaking through him like he did through Kenson and the collector general and scrap everything to do with the starkid but I guess that wasn't artistic enough.

The thing is that you can actually get away with a lot of that (although the very best writing doesn't, and is visibly better for it) if you strike the right tones, manage to keep the audience running with you. At least as long as you don't screw up so badly that suspension of disbelief is totally shattered (if people spot your flaws instantly instead of having to think about them later you'll break suspension of disbelief).

So true. Also adding actual closure and an ending afterwards that the fans wanted to see (instead of a stupid breath scene with speculations, buzz aldrin and dropping your crew on gilligan's planet) would've solved a lot as well. I think I would've been utterly disappointed with the starkid and its nonsense regardless but if the ending afterwards had actual closure, Shepard reuniting with the crew and a good epilogue then I think I would've shrugged and been happy with it. Regardless of how utterly ridiculous the actual end of the story was...

Modifié par Robhuzz, 02 avril 2013 - 03:24 .

[Michotic]

Even watching the pre-EC endings now doesn't have the same impact as before EC was released. Instead of a "EC made it more palatable" (your mileage may very), it was a "Seriously? That's it? Thanks for playing now give us more money<interrobang>"

[katamuro]

What I found most insulting was not even the bleakness of the ending but the blatant Deus Ex ripoff. Exactly the same, even with EC. At the last minute you get some facts, and you decide. What is different in Deus Ex is that it was thematically appropriate there. In ME games it was not.
There were dozens of different ways of writing off shepard so that he would not be in the next games but preserving his "legacy". Instead they made a clusterfrack that hampers the continuation of the series.

Bottom line, I have no Idea what the hell they were thinking and I see no truly logical reason for them do have done that. Even now more than a year later.

[Reorte]

katamuro wrote...

There were dozens of different ways of writing off shepard so that he would not be in the next games but preserving his "legacy". Instead they made a clusterfrack that hampers the continuation of the series.

Why write him off at all? Simply don't put him in the next game if you don't want him there. The only time characters need writing off is if there's otherwise a logical reason for them appearing in the next part. There's a hell of a lot more to the MEU than Shepard.

[mtmercydave09]

kleindropper wrote...

Yes, pre-EC you would think you made a huge mistake and should have let the Reapers win instead. You basically destroy the entire galaxy and kill everybody. Meanwhile, your LI is stuck on another planet forever apart from you. (and that's the best ending possible).

Damn glad I never saw the pre-EC endings.  That would have pissed me off royally.  Endings are supposed to provide finality, not that.  I wouldn't like having my Ash stranded on another planet forever either.

[mtmercydave09]

Reorte wrote...

katamuro wrote...

There were dozens of different ways of writing off shepard so that he would not be in the next games but preserving his "legacy". Instead they made a clusterfrack that hampers the continuation of the series.

Why write him off at all? Simply don't put him in the next game if you don't want him there. The only time characters need writing off is if there's otherwise a logical reason for them appearing in the next part. There's a hell of a lot more to the MEU than Shepard.

Agreed, Shepard didn't need to die or be written off in any of the endings.  He could have lived in all the endings but just end it how the Citadel DLC ends it, with him flying off with his crew.

Sort of like riding off into the sunset.

[Ryzaki]

M25105 wrote...

Sentient6 wrote...

M25105 wrote...

You know there's a reason why they added the EC, right?

I played with EC...

My point exactly.

This everytime I see one of these threads and hear they played the EC I just facepalm.

Point. Missing it.

[CDR David Shepard]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

Nope. It was and still is bad, plot hole littered, deus ex ripoff, disjointed, poorly executed, anti-climatic, lazy, unprofessional and lore breaking material. It's bad. nuff said.

It wouldn't be the BSN if people weren't here to do nothing else except hate on the game.

classic.

[Cainhurst Crow]

People need to let go of the past, because bringing up the original endings as a complaint, when they already released the EC, seems like a simple appeal of emotional trauma rather than an actual complaint.

[arathor_87]

I don't mind if Shepard dies in 3 out of 4 endings as long as they make sense and at least have a happy ending. I think many players are disappointed over the fact that they spent several houndred hours on gameplay and making choices, and then got trolled. I like both happy and sad endings, but I think they failed when all of the endings are sad or bittersweet in some way. It feels like the game have no replay value thanks to this. Look at Dragon Age Origins, they have something for all (happy, sad and bittersweet ending). And thats why DA:O have higher user scores on every site than Mass Effect 3 do. Just my opinion.

[Michotic]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

People need to let go of the past, because bringing up the original endings as a complaint, when they already released the EC, seems like a simple appeal of emotional trauma rather than an actual complaint.

I disagree. Yes, BioWare did give us more content (at no charge), but only because there was a large demand for it. The fact is that BioWare would have done nothing if that demand wasn't there. Reminding them of it is a good way to make sure they don't do it again.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Michotic wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

People need to let go of the past, because bringing up the original endings as a complaint, when they already released the EC, seems like a simple appeal of emotional trauma rather than an actual complaint.

I disagree. Yes, BioWare did give us more content (at no charge), but only because there was a large demand for it. The fact is that BioWare would have done nothing if that demand wasn't there. Reminding them of it is a good way to make sure they don't do it again.

But they did do something, and that does make all the difference in this case.

When a person crashes into your car, does he or she give your their insurance information and help pay for damages because they want to? Or because it is demanded of them?

And yet we don't constantly horde it in peoples faces that "Your only helping me because you were told to!", at least I hope no one acts that ****y in real life.

So why is it that bioware, having released the EC, is not credited for releasing the EC at all? Why do people only mention the original endings if the endings were already improved by bioware?

Why the obssession?

[katamuro]

mtmercydave09 wrote...

Reorte wrote...

katamuro wrote...

There were dozens of different ways of writing off shepard so that he would not be in the next games but preserving his "legacy". Instead they made a clusterfrack that hampers the continuation of the series.

Why write him off at all? Simply don't put him in the next game if you don't want him there. The only time characters need writing off is if there's otherwise a logical reason for them appearing in the next part. There's a hell of a lot more to the MEU than Shepard.

Agreed, Shepard didn't need to die or be written off in any of the endings.  He could have lived in all the endings but just end it how the Citadel DLC ends it, with him flying off with his crew.

Sort of like riding off into the sunset.

By writing off i meant getting shepard out of the next games. So that he would be still present in the greater ME universe but he would not be controlled by us.

[CDR David Shepard]

Michotic wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

People need to let go of the past, because bringing up the original endings as a complaint, when they already released the EC, seems like a simple appeal of emotional trauma rather than an actual complaint.

I disagree. Yes, BioWare did give us more content (at no charge), but only because there was a large demand for it. The fact is that BioWare would have done nothing if that demand wasn't there. Reminding them of it is a good way to make sure they don't do it again.

Well...obviously.

Not sure if that was meant to be serious or not.

[katamuro]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Michotic wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

People need to let go of the past, because bringing up the original endings as a complaint, when they already released the EC, seems like a simple appeal of emotional trauma rather than an actual complaint.

I disagree. Yes, BioWare did give us more content (at no charge), but only because there was a large demand for it. The fact is that BioWare would have done nothing if that demand wasn't there. Reminding them of it is a good way to make sure they don't do it again.

But they did do something, and that does make all the difference in this case.

When a person crashes into your car, does he or she give your their insurance information and help pay for damages because they want to? Or because it is demanded of them?

And yet we don't constantly horde it in peoples faces that "Your only helping me because you were told to!", at least I hope no one acts that ****y in real life.

So why is it that bioware, having released the EC, is not credited for releasing the EC at all? Why do people only mention the original endings if the endings were already improved by bioware?

Why the obssession?

i think you are partly right. Yes we should take in account the EC. But for me the problem was not just abruptness of it but also the clear disregard of the "make your own destiny" vibe that has been present since the first game.

[BalooTheBear]

If they'd put out ME 3 with the extended cut there would have been less of an outrage. And probably very minimal if they had added Leviathan and Citadel DLC at the same time. People would have complained here still, people always do, but nothing like it was.

[Ecrulis]

Reorte wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

Nope. It was and still is bad, plot hole littered, deus ex ripoff, disjointed, poorly executed, anti-climatic, lazy, unprofessional and lore breaking material. It's bad. nuff said.

The thing is that you can actually get away with a lot of that (although the very best writing doesn't, and is visibly better for it) if you strike the right tones, manage to keep the audience running with you. At least as long as you don't screw up so badly that suspension of disbelief is totally shattered (if people spot your flaws instantly instead of having to think about them later you'll break suspension of disbelief).

While true, ME3 so so far from accomplishing that it's not even funny, it pulls the crucible out of no where (arguably a Deus Ex Machina itself) then intorduces a new character 5 minutes before the end of the trilogy just to invent a non-existant problem that promptly gets solved with said Deus Ex Machina, resulting in an ending that pretty much invalidates everything in ME2. 

[Jukaga]

I'm so glad I waited until ME3 was complete before diving in. My first playthru had all the DLC (except Citadel, I was a week early but bought it on day 1) and the EC ending. I was and am quite satisfied with ME3, I just wish Priority: Earth was longer and more epic. There really should have been at least one big battle, but overall I was happy with the experience. It's a great feeling importing your Shepard from 1-2-3, I feel really sorry for people who played ME3 without the benefit of importing their Shepards, just imagine all the content they missed.

[RedBeardJim]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

People need to let go of the past, because bringing up the original endings as a complaint, when they already released the EC, seems like a simple appeal of emotional trauma rather than an actual complaint.

It's a valid thing to bring up in a thread about someone who never saw the original endings and doesn't quite get what all the fuss about the endings was.

[Sky651]

MEHEM

[Liraelx]

Ecrulis wrote...

Reorte wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

Nope. It was and still is bad, plot hole littered, deus ex ripoff, disjointed, poorly executed, anti-climatic, lazy, unprofessional and lore breaking material. It's bad. nuff said.

The thing is that you can actually get away with a lot of that (although the very best writing doesn't, and is visibly better for it) if you strike the right tones, manage to keep the audience running with you. At least as long as you don't screw up so badly that suspension of disbelief is totally shattered (if people spot your flaws instantly instead of having to think about them later you'll break suspension of disbelief).

While true, ME3 so so far from accomplishing that it's not even funny, it pulls the crucible out of no where (arguably a Deus Ex Machina itself) then intorduces a new character 5 minutes before the end of the trilogy just to invent a non-existant problem that promptly gets solved with said Deus Ex Machina, resulting in an ending that pretty much invalidates everything in ME2. 

Kinda true, the catalyst tells you that synthetics will always wipe out organics, but the games argueably centre around synthetics/ partial synthetics failing to wipe out organics, Saren, the geth, the rogue AI's you fight and sovreign are all defeated by Shepard, or weren't actually hostile to begin with.