Aller au contenu

Photo

OXM Interview With Hudson, Everman, Gamble. “Lessons Learned.”


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
1470 réponses à ce sujet

#351
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages

Morocco Mole wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, so many BSNers simply just didn't get the ending...yeah, you didn't get it.

If you think the ending wasn't consistent, you didn't get it. It WAS consistent

If you think the ending was about organics vs. synthetics you really didn't get it. That wasn't the final conflict, that was the context of the conflict.


No it was actually a pretty bad ending with little foreshadowing.


It was foreshadowed on Rannoch (his motive) and on Thessia....definitely in Leviathan.

The themes presented in the ending are not only covered in the entire game, but the series itself.

Nevermind the final conflict was about sacrifice, the theme of the entire game, not organics and synthetics, which is only the context anyway. That's both TIM and The Catalyst

#352
Terminus Echoes

Terminus Echoes
  • Members
  • 1 143 messages

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Let's take a look at what happens during this trilogy, shall we?

* The colony of Eden Prime is devastated by a geth attack and a strange ship.
* The colony of Feros is devastated by a geth attack and a strange ship. The colonists are infected by a strange plant life form.
* Binary Helix cloned rachni for the reapers.
* Cerberus, Exogeni, carried out various experiments on humans regarding indoctrination reaper indoctrination, and Thorian experiments.
* Geth continued their husk work and incursions into human space.
* Kaidan Alenko or Ashley Williams died.
* Saren and Sovereign and the Geth fleet attacked the Citadel. Many lives were lost.
* The Collectors began harvesting entire human colonies to make a human reaper -- turning them into slushies.
* 0-11 of your team could have died. Your entire crew could have died.
* 300,000 Batarians died whether or not you did Arrival.
* The reapers invaded. Everyone in that room except for you and Anderson was killed.
* Drayfish did an excellent job of listing individuals who died.
* 400,000,000 - 1,000,000,000 Asari died during the reaper invasion of Thessia. It was lucky the invasion came late.
* Earth's population was 11 billion pre-invasion. I estimate it to be around 5 billion. Its ecosystem is a mess.
* Khar'shan was 15 billion pre-invasion. It was harvested. Its population turned into monsters. Its ecosystem totally destroyed by the reapers.
* Palaven was also devastated. Do I have to look up pre-invasion numbers here as well?
* Not to mention Dekunna, Irune, Illium, and other major worlds that were hit and devastated.

I don't see how anyone can find a redeeming feature in these monsters. I don't see how anyone can call an ending where Shepard survives and gets reunited with his/her crew a "happy ending." Look at it.

Now think about the ending reducing the entire story about that to some kid gives you the choice of the color of the explosions on your screen, Shepard dies, the relays are destroyed, and the Normandy crashes. Maybe you got a breath. WTF? Five years?

We kept being told "this cycle is different". The reapers had never faced a united galaxy. They had only gone one system at a time isolating one cluster at a time and harvesting it. The never faced a united galactic fleet. So we united the galaxy. We brought enemies together. We earned a proper ending, not just picking what color was on our screen at the end.

Even if Shepard survived and reunited with his/her crew, it is not a happy ending. What do we have left after it is all over?

Then they give us the EC, but it took another 4 months before that was out. People who were not emotionally invested from the first game moved on. The EC just added, a stupid pickup scene, some pretty pictures and some additional voice work, and some soundtrack work for Sam Hulick (which are awesome), but otherwise the endings are the same. Pick the color.

MEHEM isn't really a happy ending. It's a community mod that cuts out the one of the more offensive parts of the game IMO -- starbrat. It is the High EMS Destroy ending modded so that the beam only targets the reapers, and Shepard gets rescued by the Shield Fleet before the Crucible fires. Low and Medium EMS versions are planned.


Exactly. The ending is still bittersweet, as the universe underwent great losses, including the entire Citadel. It's a difference between somewhat happy ending and totally negative ending.

The EC made it more "happy" I guess, with scenes of rebuilding and such, but that wasn't the issue.

The issue was the brevity of the ending. That is, how it just "happens" and then nothing else is made of it. The other point is also how thematically inconsistent it is with the rest of the series.

#353
Mcfly616

Mcfly616
  • Members
  • 8 988 messages

Kel Riever wrote...

I'm just busting chops, McFly. On people who would think the ending would be made worse just by having protagonists win and live, or better just because protagonists die. If something is well written, or done well enough, I doubt it has the prerequisite of character death is what I am saying.

If you agree, whether you like the ending or not, fine. If not, well,...then that's how it would apply.


Oh right.... So it doesn't apply.


I never said it was good/entertaining because main characters die. Nor did I say not having a happy ending makes it a good one. Considering I literally said what my problems were with the original endings, it seems like you're trolling haha

Everman said that what he learned is that a bittersweet ending isn't so good for the interactive medium after 3 games.....to which I disagree. The quality of an ending doesn't hinge on who lives and dies. What matters is how its told and whether there's sufficient amount of closure. To which I find the EC far surpasses the original ending in both ways.

I'm not a fan of the standard Hollywood ending cliche. It would seem that Everman was implying that such an ending would be more appropriate. That is my fear. It has nothing to do with who lives or dies.


I'm not a good example of your stereotype.

#354
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages

Bizinha wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, so many BSNers simply just didn't get the ending...yeah, you didn't get it.

If you think the ending wasn't consistent, you didn't get it. It WAS consistent

If you think the ending was about organics vs. synthetics you really didn't get it. That wasn't the final conflict, that was the context of the conflict.


As much as we write and speak English badly wrong, I have no problems with cognition or interpretation, the end was very bad, incomplete and incomprehensible.
It does not fit in the trilogy.

The DLC E.C.'s there to prove it.If it was something so simple, most people would be satisfied without DLC.


The original ending, yes it was...the extended cut, no,...it was comprehensible.

Its hilarious that most of BSN can't even find what the real conflict was with the Catalyst, its so simple, but yet, they chase the organics vs synthetics idiot ball.

#355
Terminus Echoes

Terminus Echoes
  • Members
  • 1 143 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, so many BSNers simply just didn't get the ending...yeah, you didn't get it.

If you think the ending wasn't consistent, you didn't get it. It WAS consistent

If you think the ending was about organics vs. synthetics you really didn't get it. That wasn't the final conflict, that was the context of the conflict.


No it was actually a pretty bad ending with little foreshadowing.


It was foreshadowed on Rannoch (his motive) and on Thessia....definitely in Leviathan.

The themes presented in the ending are not only covered in the entire game, but the series itself.

Nevermind the final conflict was about sacrifice, the theme of the entire game, not organics and synthetics, which is only the context anyway. That's both TIM and The Catalyst


On Rannoch you could unite the Geth and the Quarians. In the ending, you can't bring that up. The Catalyst just says that conflict is inevitable, but he's wrong. But we can't prove him wrong. Shepard just goes along with it.

How was it foreshadowed on Thessia?

Leviathan came out after the game. It was really only made in order to give the ending more foreshadowing/context, which it sorely lacked.

#356
Kel Riever

Kel Riever
  • Members
  • 7 065 messages
@McFly, no problem then. Seriously, it is an 'if the shoe fits' statement. I'm not going to say I don't see it happening at all, but I crack the joke because seriously, for some people it totally applies. I'm going to argue the ending(s) aren't objectively good, and I'm going to even argue that the ending(s) have a lot of stuff that are objectively bad. Nevertheless, there's plenty of even objectively bad media I happen to like (obviously ME3 is not part of them) and that's for me to decide. So if you happen to like the ending(s) to ME3 regardless, then I may disagree, but I'm not going to take up some flag against you.

txgoldrush probably fits my example, though.  I'll let his speaking define him, though.  I don't need to. Image IPB

Modifié par Kel Riever, 09 mai 2013 - 07:55 .


#357
Guest_Morocco Mole_*

Guest_Morocco Mole_*
  • Guests

txgoldrush wrote...
It was foreshadowed on Rannoch (his motive) and on Thessia....definitely in Leviathan.

The themes presented in the ending are not only covered in the entire game, but the series itself.

Nevermind the final conflict was about sacrifice, the theme of the entire game, not organics and synthetics, which is only the context anyway. That's both TIM and The Catalyst


Leviathan was added after release and doesn't count. Unless you believe writers are allowed to cut out important tidbits of information and sell them later.

Rannoch supports the themes of organics vs synthetics, hell the entire trilogy has that theme. But it is still a very poor lead-up to the ending we got. Which was a poorly explained mess until the EC managed to salvage a little of it.

Thessia only has one line that even foreshadows the Catalyst, which is a pretty ****ty way to foreshadow something that big and important (ignoring the plotholes it also creates)

#358
MassivelyEffective0730

MassivelyEffective0730
  • Members
  • 9 230 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Bizinha wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, so many BSNers simply just didn't get the ending...yeah, you didn't get it.

If you think the ending wasn't consistent, you didn't get it. It WAS consistent

If you think the ending was about organics vs. synthetics you really didn't get it. That wasn't the final conflict, that was the context of the conflict.


As much as we write and speak English badly wrong, I have no problems with cognition or interpretation, the end was very bad, incomplete and incomprehensible.
It does not fit in the trilogy.

The DLC E.C.'s there to prove it.If it was something so simple, most people would be satisfied without DLC.


The original ending, yes it was...the extended cut, no,...it was comprehensible.

Its hilarious that most of BSN can't even find what the real conflict was with the Catalyst, its so simple, but yet, they chase the organics vs synthetics idiot ball.


Well, that was the stated conflict. The sacrifice theme is too large and too encompassing to base an entire series around. Define it by the way: What kind of sacrifice is the main theme? There are more than one definition to the term.

Honestly, I don't think there was a central theme to the trilogy, mainly because the writers had no idea where they were going and wrote themselves into a corner with the Reapers. They've admitted as such.

This doesn't excuse the terrible execution in narrative of the ending, or the downer qualities that really sort of force the downer feel on the player.

Going back to themes, these were the ones I saw in the overall trilogy and would have worked far better than "sacrifice" or "organics vs. synthetics":

http://social.biowar...2117/4#16537887

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 09 mai 2013 - 08:11 .


#359
Interloper

Interloper
  • Members
  • 124 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, so many BSNers simply just didn't get the ending...yeah, you didn't get it.

If you think the ending wasn't consistent, you didn't get it. It WAS consistent

If you think the ending was about organics vs. synthetics you really didn't get it. That wasn't the final conflict, that was the context of the conflict.


No it was actually a pretty bad ending with little foreshadowing.


It was foreshadowed on Rannoch (his motive) and on Thessia....definitely in Leviathan.

The themes presented in the ending are not only covered in the entire game, but the series itself.

Nevermind the final conflict was about sacrifice, the theme of the entire game, not organics and synthetics, which is only the context anyway. That's both TIM and The Catalyst


Are you kidding me? Did you even play ME1? The synthetic/organic conflict was NEVER foreshadowed as the reason for the Reapers. You know what was foreshadowed? The dark energy accumulation which was causing Halestrom's sun to act strangely and the nature of 'mass effect' itself. Also, just to rebut your point that this game was about 'organics v synthetics'
-Turians vs humans(only organics)
-geth heretics vs normal geth(only synthetics)
-Krogan species vs everyone else(only organics)
-crazy AI in ME1 who tries to blow up part of the Presidium(crazy synthetic)
-reapers working with geth(this is organics working WITH synthetics, unless of course if you remember that reapers were actually supposed to be SYNTHETICS all along and the apex of synthetic life, in which case the star child's logic makes even less sense since why would synthetics murder organics to stop synthetics killing organics.,..isn't their very existence the only real example of the problem they're supposed to be solving?')

#360
Bizinha

Bizinha
  • Members
  • 321 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, so many BSNers simply just didn't get the ending...yeah, you didn't get it.

If you think the ending wasn't consistent, you didn't get it. It WAS consistent

If you think the ending was about organics vs. synthetics you really didn't get it. That wasn't the final conflict, that was the context of the conflict.


No it was actually a pretty bad ending with little foreshadowing.


It was foreshadowed on Rannoch (his motive) and on Thessia....definitely in Leviathan.

The themes presented in the ending are not only covered in the entire game, but the series itself.

Nevermind the final conflict was about sacrifice, the theme of the entire game, not organics and synthetics, which is only the context anyway. That's both TIM and The Catalyst



http://youtu.be/JvrIFIjTGt0?t=3m

The catalyst was something that was created in the third game, Sovereign is clear ... there is no a boss, each thinking itself.

#361
Guest_tickle267_*

Guest_tickle267_*
  • Guests

Bizinha wrote...



The catalyst was something that was created in the third game, Sovereign is clear ... there is no a boss, each thinking itself.


Image IPB

Modifié par tickle267, 09 mai 2013 - 08:23 .


#362
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 349 messages

Terminus Echoes wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, so many BSNers simply just didn't get the ending...yeah, you didn't get it.

If you think the ending wasn't consistent, you didn't get it. It WAS consistent

If you think the ending was about organics vs. synthetics you really didn't get it. That wasn't the final conflict, that was the context of the conflict.


No it was actually a pretty bad ending with little foreshadowing.


It was foreshadowed on Rannoch (his motive) and on Thessia....definitely in Leviathan.

The themes presented in the ending are not only covered in the entire game, but the series itself.

Nevermind the final conflict was about sacrifice, the theme of the entire game, not organics and synthetics, which is only the context anyway. That's both TIM and The Catalyst


On Rannoch you could unite the Geth and the Quarians. In the ending, you can't bring that up. The Catalyst just says that conflict is inevitable, but he's wrong. But we can't prove him wrong. Shepard just goes along with it.

How was it foreshadowed on Thessia?

Leviathan came out after the game. It was really only made in order to give the ending more foreshadowing/context, which it sorely lacked.


Don't bother.  It's just feeding a troll.  He's just here to pick fights, derail the thread, and get it locked.

#363
The Night Mammoth

The Night Mammoth
  • Members
  • 7 476 messages

iakus wrote...

Don't bother.  It's just feeding a troll.  He's just here to pick fights, derail the thread, and get it locked.


Troll? Don't know about that. Certainly someone with the barest understanding of what 'foreshadowing' is. 

No, it's not properly foreshadowed just because there are one or two vague lines of dialogue a couple of hours before the reveal, but the game has been out for so long and hindisight so difficult to fight against that clearly this is lost. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 09 mai 2013 - 08:26 .


#364
Mahrac

Mahrac
  • Members
  • 2 624 messages
I take it 'learned their lesson' means 'we won't make a universe that you care about in the future'

#365
spockjedi

spockjedi
  • Members
  • 748 messages

Interloper wrote...

Are you kidding me? Did you even play ME1? The synthetic/organic conflict was NEVER foreshadowed as the reason for the Reapers. You know what was foreshadowed? The dark energy accumulation which was causing Halestrom's sun to act strangely and the nature of 'mass effect' itself. Also, just to rebut your point that this game was about 'organics v synthetics'
-Turians vs humans(only organics)
-geth heretics vs normal geth(only synthetics)
-Krogan species vs everyone else(only organics)
-crazy AI in ME1 who tries to blow up part of the Presidium(crazy synthetic)
-reapers working with geth(this is organics working WITH synthetics, unless of course if you remember that reapers were actually supposed to be SYNTHETICS all along and the apex of synthetic life, in which case the star child's logic makes even less sense since why would synthetics murder organics to stop synthetics killing organics.,..isn't their very existence the only real example of the problem they're supposed to be solving?')

I could even say that the Reapers were foreshadowed as hybrids, semi-organic semi-synthetic beings since Mass Effect 1:

Jartar
Location: Milky Way / Hades Gamma / Dis System
Jartar is noted for the discovery of the "Leviathan of Dis," the apparent corpse of a genetically engineered living starship. The Leviathan was found in the bottom of a crater by a batarian survey team, and estimated to be nearly a billion years old. It "disappeared" after a visit to the system by a batarian dreadnought twenty years ago.


Modifié par spockjedi, 09 mai 2013 - 08:52 .


#366
chemiclord

chemiclord
  • Members
  • 2 499 messages

AlanC9 wrote...

I can see why Bio thought they could pull this off . The TV writers work like this most of the time, and get away with it most of the time.


How many TV series can you think of that end all that particularly well? I can only think of a small handful outside of ones that set an episode limit from the start and stick to it without getting baited into more seasons.  Otherwise, they all kinda end in this amorphous blob of WTF because the writing staff had no earthly idea where they were going with it by the time the last episode came into view.

I mean, it's POSSIBLE to write by the seat of your pants and make it work... but it is EXTREMELY difficult to pull off.

#367
RydeCrash

RydeCrash
  • Members
  • 181 messages
The Catalist/Nazaras replie of “There is not enough time.” Is where the bulk of my “Wait, What...” resides.
 
I was expecting a lengthy dialog where questions would be answered, open dialog detailing what I had accomplished throughout my lengthy “Routine” mission that would show “Nazara” the error in his logic.
 
I had expected my P/R score would allow me to rationalize with “Nazara.” These conversations would affect an end result that would combine with my choices made throughout the Trilogy.
 
The Catalyst/Nazara is the only encounter in the trilogy where you are unable to converse and change the opinion/thoughts of the person/synthetic.
 
I can not speak for everyone but “Negation” within conversations in Mass Effect is a very large game play dynamic that I became very accustom to.
 
Ryde...

#368
Mcfly616

Mcfly616
  • Members
  • 8 988 messages

Interloper wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, so many BSNers simply just didn't get the ending...yeah, you didn't get it.

If you think the ending wasn't consistent, you didn't get it. It WAS consistent

If you think the ending was about organics vs. synthetics you really didn't get it. That wasn't the final conflict, that was the context of the conflict.


No it was actually a pretty bad ending with little foreshadowing.


It was foreshadowed on Rannoch (his motive) and on Thessia....definitely in Leviathan.

The themes presented in the ending are not only covered in the entire game, but the series itself.

Nevermind the final conflict was about sacrifice, the theme of the entire game, not organics and synthetics, which is only the context anyway. That's both TIM and The Catalyst


Are you kidding me? Did you even play ME1? The synthetic/organic conflict was NEVER foreshadowed as the reason for the Reapers. You know what was foreshadowed? The dark energy accumulation which was causing Halestrom's sun to act strangely and the nature of 'mass effect' itself. Also, just to rebut your point that this game was about 'organics v synthetics'

a motivation for the Reapers wasnt foreshadowed at all in ME1. However, the organic vs synthetic conflict was most certainly present.

And Dark Energy was never even mentioned until ME2. It was mentioned a grand total of like 4 times, I believe....and it was never mentioned in the same sentence as the Reapers nor was it foreshadowed as one of their motivations. It was simply mentioned.


So, we know the Dark Energy plot was on the table way early in development but was then discarded before any real work began. Seeing as how the Reapers motivations weren't revealed until the very end, I don't think neither Organic vs Synthetic or Dark Energy was ever "foreshadowed" as their motivation. In fact the Organic vs Synthetic conflict is ever-present throughout the entire trilogy, whereas Dark Energy is mentioned several times in the second installment.


Either would've worked fine. The writers chose organic vs synthetic. Contrary to popular belief, "foreshadowing" is merely a writing technique. It isn't something that is required of every narrative in order to be a properly told story. (Imo Dark Energy could've possibly been a bigger pay off but it also needed way more work. Example: "Really? So, you're trying to stop the spread of Dark Energy so that our entire reality isn't wiped from existence.....then why in the name of Zeus' butthole did you make all these gigantic mass relays that emit unfathomable amounts of Dark Energy?! Seems a bit counter-productive to you overall goal. No wonder its taking you guys so long to find a solution." )

Modifié par Mcfly616, 09 mai 2013 - 09:55 .


#369
Guest_Morocco Mole_*

Guest_Morocco Mole_*
  • Guests

Interloper wrote...
Are you kidding me? Did you even play ME1? The synthetic/organic conflict was NEVER foreshadowed as the reason for the Reapers. You know what was foreshadowed? The dark energy accumulation which was causing Halestrom's sun to act strangely and the nature of 'mass effect' itself. Also, just to rebut your point that this game was about 'organics v synthetics'
-Turians vs humans(only organics)
-geth heretics vs normal geth(only synthetics)
-Krogan species vs everyone else(only organics)
-crazy AI in ME1 who tries to blow up part of the Presidium(crazy synthetic)
-reapers working with geth(this is organics working WITH synthetics, unless of course if you remember that reapers were actually supposed to be SYNTHETICS all along and the apex of synthetic life, in which case the star child's logic makes even less sense since why would synthetics murder organics to stop synthetics killing organics.,..isn't their very existence the only real example of the problem they're supposed to be solving?')


Dark Energy was in 2.

Organics and Synthethics was mostly Mass Effect 1 and 3. Note the geth, Hannibal AI, and the rogue AI on the Citadel. Not to mention the Reapers themselves. The Citadel AI even drops it verbatim and the same line is used again in Mass Effect 3.

Modifié par Morocco Mole, 09 mai 2013 - 09:54 .


#370
JamesFaith

JamesFaith
  • Members
  • 2 301 messages

Morocco Mole wrote...


Dark Energy was in 2.

Organics and Synthethics was mostly Mass Effect 1 and 3. Note the geth, Hannibal AI, and the rogue AI on the Citadel. Not to mention the Reapers themselves. The Citadel AI even drops it verbatim and the same line is used again in Mass Effect 3.


You should add virus from Čapek planet in ME2. It was something like proto-AI and it atacked all people on sight.

#371
Morlath

Morlath
  • Members
  • 579 messages
As an additional for those who feel that their choices were taken away at the end of ME3...

At the end of ME1, after tirelessly slogging through Virmire, Ilos and crawling up the tower's external service and potentially talking Saren into killing himself...you're given one choice, Anderson or Udina. The biggest difference between the two is the Sovereign/Saren fight gets switched out for a conversation with a really messed up AI/VI and three choices.

#372
chemiclord

chemiclord
  • Members
  • 2 499 messages

Morlath wrote...

As an additional for those who feel that their choices were taken away at the end of ME3...

At the end of ME1, after tirelessly slogging through Virmire, Ilos and crawling up the tower's external service and potentially talking Saren into killing himself...you're given one choice, Anderson or Udina. The biggest difference between the two is the Sovereign/Saren fight gets switched out for a conversation with a really messed up AI/VI and three choices.


The response you're going to get will be along of the lines of it was the first game of a series, not the final one, and that expectations were higher for ME3 than it was for ME1.

The question that should be asked is "were those higher expectations realistic?"  I would say "No."  The BSN as a rule would say, "Absolutely yes."

#373
spirosz

spirosz
  • Members
  • 16 356 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow, so many BSNers simply just didn't get the ending...yeah, you didn't get it.


Wow, so many BSNer's simply understand the ending... yeah, they just reject the premise and execution.  

Modifié par spirosz, 09 mai 2013 - 11:08 .


#374
chemiclord

chemiclord
  • Members
  • 2 499 messages
I think at this point everyone "gets it"... whether they reject the entire premise or find the execution horribly lacking or both or somewhere else along that sliding scale is a matter of personal preference.

#375
Morlath

Morlath
  • Members
  • 579 messages

chemiclord wrote...

The response you're going to get will be along of the lines of it was the first game of a series, not the final one, and that expectations were higher for ME3 than it was for ME1.

The question that should be asked is "were those higher expectations realistic?" I would say "No." The BSN as a rule would say, "Absolutely yes."


Well, except for when I'm attacked or considered a Bioware apologist.

I've also not heard an answer to how the decisions were supposed to be different. Eventually a game/story comes to an end and all decisions collapse into one main outcome. Even a game like Dishonored that allows you to not kil anyone including bosses the entire game doesn't take into account every decision made. It doesn't say "you killed this one but not this one so the ending will be different".

Once the Crucible is used the endings are affected by what the player has done.