260 réponses à ce sujet

[mupp3tz]

iakus wrote...

M U P P 3 T Z wrote...

Agree with @MegaSovereign. I think they did it precisely that way so that the people who wanted to see their Shepard alive would be somewhat pleased, while still leaving room for interpretation. It would have been very easy for them to expand on it if they wanted to.

Then where are the Control and Synthesis endings that imply Shepard lived?

Why does DestroyPlus have to share in "speculations' if every other ending is definitively "Shepard's dead" ?

Because they already wrote the endings in a way that there is no way for Shepard to survive with Control and Synthesis. You are giving yourself up in both of those options. Destroy is the only one where it's possible for him/her to live.. but at the same time, leave some things open ended for fans to dissect the ending how they wish. It's both catering to them and also maintaining their 'artistic integrity.'

I think the whole hoopla with IT's popularity did also have something to do with it.

Modifié par M U P P 3 T Z, 29 août 2013 - 01:31 .

[crimzontearz]

Mcfly616 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

sad if true as the project lead clearly stated the breath scene meant he lives (prior to EC)

.....and? It still means the same thing now. Just because the Dev team may have thought it might be a nice touch to let the players see "their" Shepard stand up out of the rubble in an extension of the breathe scene, but ultimately chose not to because they didn't want to destroy the perspective of some of their fanbase, doesn't change the fact that he lives.

but it implies it could have done much MUCH more elegantly

I am sorry I am NOT going to excuse that Mcfly, we spoke of this before.

no I don't believe we have. I'm sure we've discussed your over-emotional posts regarding the subject months after its been beaten to death. But I'm pretty sure you've never stated how the breathe scene could have been done more "elegantly" without completely destroying a good portion of the fanbases interpretations.

uh....I am pretty sure we have agreed that the delivery of the breath scene was very subpar.....

also, I explained how I would have done it to try and please everyone


also, how silly is it to try not to step on the ITers toes and then slap them in the face with the IT ban on the forums

[Mcfly616]

iakus wrote...

M U P P 3 T Z wrote...

Agree with @MegaSovereign. I think they did it precisely that way so that the people who wanted to see their Shepard alive would be somewhat pleased, while still leaving room for interpretation. It would have been very easy for them to expand on it if they wanted to.

Then where are the Control and Synthesis endings that imply Shepard lived?

Why does DestroyPlus have to share in "speculations' if every other ending is definitively "Shepard's dead" ?

how do you figure there's speculations? Synthesis/Control: Dead. Destroy: Alive. Pretty straightforward.

Whether you believe IT or the "actual" ending, he's alive in the breathe scene regardless. There's no speculation to be had in that aspect.

[MegaSovereign]

crimzontearz wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

....is it really that hard of understand the lack of expansion on the breath scene is about ego?

What do you mean exactly?

If Shepard was given a full and CLEAR reunion scene as opposed to the middle finger of speculation garnished with an insanely poor delivery even with the kickback of the Geth and EDI being obliterated ( or only EDI) an even LARGER majority would have picked destroy (as it stands 60%+ picked destroy already according to the telemetry) thus reducing the artsy endings which were thought to be so awesomely uplifting to...well...afterthoughts.

sure I may be unkind right now ....more of it might be desire to keep things even.....but this begs the question of.....WHY?

I'm pretty sure it's much higher than 60%....The existence of the breath scene in general helped make it a very popular choice. If Bioware was really concerned about the popularity of the other endings (which you are unfairly speculating as "Bioware's favorite endings" even though they seem to be championing the Destroy ending in evey trailer/ME3 Retrospective videos) they wouldn't have added the breath scene.

A reunion scene wouldn't have made much of a difference in terms of which ending the majority of people would have chosen.

they were referred to as the best endings in the original draft remember?

...The same draft that had Javik be the Catalyst? Or the VS being indoctrinated? 

[crimzontearz]

MegaSovereign wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

....is it really that hard of understand the lack of expansion on the breath scene is about ego?

What do you mean exactly?

If Shepard was given a full and CLEAR reunion scene as opposed to the middle finger of speculation garnished with an insanely poor delivery even with the kickback of the Geth and EDI being obliterated ( or only EDI) an even LARGER majority would have picked destroy (as it stands 60%+ picked destroy already according to the telemetry) thus reducing the artsy endings which were thought to be so awesomely uplifting to...well...afterthoughts.

sure I may be unkind right now ....more of it might be desire to keep things even.....but this begs the question of.....WHY?

I'm pretty sure it's much higher than 60%....The existence of the breath scene in general helped make it a very popular choice. If Bioware was really concerned about the popularity of the other endings (which you are unfairly speculating as "Bioware's favorite endings" even though they seem to be championing the Destroy ending in evey trailer/ME3 Retrospective videos) they wouldn't have added the breath scene.

A reunion scene wouldn't have made much of a difference in terms of which ending the majority of people would have chosen.

they were referred to as the best endings in the original draft remember?

...The same draft that had Javik be the Catalyst? Or the VS being indoctrinated? 

plot details vs intention

[MegaSovereign]

It's a tainted source because the context is different.

Bioware has obviously made major modifications after the leak. They even stated that they used the feedback of the leak to make changes to the draft. What does that tell you?

[crimzontearz]

MegaSovereign wrote...

It's a tainted source because the context is different.

Bioware has obviously made major modifications after the leak. They even stated that they used the feedback of the leak to make changes to the draft. What does that tell you?

that they panicked, screwed up and did not really listen

[mupp3tz]

I think they just got overly ambitious. Not just with the all the different options path, but with handling the Reapers. I could have been fine with keeping the mystery of their motives or just having it simply be the strong conquering the weak.. with this time being different since all the species rallied together under Shepard (since all signs point to no collaboration amongst species in the past cycles.) I think they made a mistake of trying to explain too much about the Reapers and making them too invincible - thus, making the only viable solution a super mega awesome weapon that no one has ever built before. It just ugh.

If they just shifted it to expose a Reaper weakness, kept their origins up to speculation or mysterious, and allowed a conventional victory.. I would have been okay with a generic sci fi romp. The awesome parts are already there with the world building. I don't need an unecessarily complicated plot.

Modifié par M U P P 3 T Z, 29 août 2013 - 02:12 .

[MegaSovereign]

Yes and they smell bad too.

[KaiserShep]

iakus, the problem lies in the constraints of the original ending, but it's pretty obvious that Shepard lives with high EMS, regardless of the problems the extended cut inherited.

[Mcfly616]

M U P P 3 T Z wrote...

I think they just got overly ambitious. Not just with the all the different options path, but with handling the Reapers. I could have been fine with keeping the mystery of their motives or just having it simply be the strong conquering the weak.. with this time being different since all the species rallied together under Shepard (since all signs point to no collaboration amongst species in the past cycles.) I think they made a mistake of trying to explain too much about the Reapers and making them too invincible - thus, making the only viable solution a super mega awesome weapon that no one has ever built before. It just ugh.

If they just shifted it to expose a Reaper weakness, kept their origins up to speculation or mysterious, and allowed a conventional victory.. I would have been okay with a generic sci fi romp. The awesome parts are already there with the world building. I don't need an unecessarily complicated plot.

no way....


That is easy to say with the gift of hindsight. If they never attempted to explain atleast a little about the Reapers motives, purpose and/or origins.....there would've been massive outrage. Maybe not on the level of the original ending outrage (which is still ridiculously pathetic til this day), but it would've been big. People would hate the ending for something like that. Uncovering the mysteries of the Reapers is something that had drawn me to Mass Effect since day 1. I'm sure I'm not alone.