279 réponses à ce sujet

[wright1978]

Ieldra2 wrote...

JPN17 wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...
The ending being sad is not the problem with the ending.

So much this. Amazing how many pro enders still make this argument.

It appears valid, considering that so many people find MEHEM an acceptable substitute.

I certainly adore MEHEM but it is because it unmangles the trainwreck that is the ME3 ending, cutting out the cancer that is the catalyst, delivering a narratively fitting ending alongside rewarding content for Shep. Yes it is limited by what the modders are able to do. And yes it does result in the removal of the destruction of the geth/edi but the relays are still damaged and the galaxy is still scarred. V0.4 is apparently going to have a much bleaker low EMS variant too.

MEHEM doesn't reflect exactly what i'd want the ending variants to be but it is a best fix with the tools at hand for the horrendous mess.

[Dubozz]

MEHEM removes Starbrat. This is the best thing about this mod.

[AndyAK79]

KaiserShep wrote...

Do you see the irony in insisting that the possibility of an ending in which the protagonist, and many of the protagonist's primary companions come out OK is absurd, while the actual plot involves a giant mysterio device that promises to end the conflict across the entire galaxy somehow?

No, I really don't. Just because something else might be absurd doesn't make other absurd things somehow not absurd. To suggest that it does is absurd (Which is ironic).

The problem I see here is that you are confusing a "happy ending" with an ending that would satisfy everyone. A happy ending, by definition, is a resolution to the plot that typically involves the fate of the protagonist, at least some of the protagonist's primary companions or allies as well as the story's universe itself turning out for the best despite the ordeal. Whether or not that outcome actually makes you happy specifically doesn't affect whether or not the ending itself is defined as such.  

I am not confusing these things at all. They are seperate, albeit connected arguments, in defence of the ending Bioware created.

I've analyzed the endings on their own merits, and I wouldn't really agree that they are particularly powerful or satisfying. If that's the effect the ending had on you, then that's fine, but I wouldn't say that this is something one should see on an objective level. The word I'd probably use before either of those would be anticlimactic. This is because there's no release of dramatic tension leading to the conclusion. Granted, I am not displeased with most of the actual results of high EMS destroy, since the MEU is largely restored in the parts I care about the most. But where it falls flat is its acute lack of catharsis. The series puts a great deal of stock in the player's ability to invest in the protagonist's attachment to the various characters. This is something the writers miscalculated when they assembled the final mission, and the story's epilogue. At the very least, however, the memorial scene does restore some of this, with the tease to hint to us that Shepard is actually alive, though it is a bit awkwardly done.

Whether or not I find something powerful or satisfying isn't objective, it's subjective. And I can see anything I damn well like on a subjective level.

I don't agree that the ending lacks catharsis or dramatic tension (how do you get more dramitically tense than choosing the fate of both your own character and entire in-game species), but fortunately you can see anything you damn well like on a subjective level too, and I am happy to defend your right to do so. I love my free world.

Modifié par AndyAK79, 26 septembre 2013 - 10:20 .

[Zan51]

MEHEM makes sense to those of us who like it, which the actual ending does not. Why on earth would you make  the end of a trilogy depend on choices presented to you by the bad guys? It's like saying that WW2 should have ended with Hitler making choices as to what the Allies did!

All the emotion the original ending gave me was total anger. Each to their own. I am not taking what you got from the game away from you, don't try to take what the rest of us got or didn't get from it away from us. Those of us who prefer it to end with Shep and the dying Anderson, then the Crucible doing more or less what we actually imagined it would do, ie kill the reapers, are no more at fault than you for liking the Traffic Light choices you preferred.

And as for the Dynamite reference in the original post - you have 3 options, not 2.
1) Pick it up.
2) Ignore it.
3) Stay with it, warning those about you to back away from it, and report it to the authorities! That is the logical and safe option, the other 2 re not.

Modifié par Zan51, 26 septembre 2013 - 10:21 .

[AndyAK79]

Zan51 wrote...

MEHEM makes sense to those of us who like it, which the actual ending does not. Why on earth would you make  the end of a trilogy depend on choices presented to you by the bad guys? It's like saying that WW2 should have ended with Hitler making choices as to what the Allies did! 

The catalyst is really a seperate post, since this is about whether a happy ending would ruin the game. You do make an interesting point, though.

All the emotion the original ending gave me was total anger. Each to their own. I am not taking what you got from the game away from you, don't try to take what the rest of us got or didn't get from it away from us. Those of us who prefer it to end with Shep and the dying Anderson, then the Crucible doing more or less what we actually imagined it would do, ie kill the reapers, are no more at fault than you for liking the Traffic Light choices you preferred.

And as for the Dynamite reference in the original post - you have 3 options, not 2.
1) Pick it up.
2) Ignore it.
3) Stay with it, warning those about you to back away from it, and report it to the authorities! That is the logical and safe option, the other 2 re not.

It's a hypothetical scenario, so no, you have two choices. If it was a scenario in real life you would have many choices. You could throw it towards a passerby, giggling to yourself, were you so inclined.

Modifié par AndyAK79, 26 septembre 2013 - 10:29 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I'm against the premise of a game having to have a sad ending when said game is an RPG with an outcome determined by the player. I want to RP that my Shepard survives. I'm not expecting a massive happy ending with rainbows and bunnies. That would be a cop-out. I would like to see my efforts in the trilogy pay off for my Shepard. I don't believe in some sacrificial non-sense. If I have the choice of destroying the Reapers by using myself as a sacrifice, or causing the deaths of a massive number of civilians, I'm going to throw the civilians under the bus. I'm going to see this through to the end, and I'm going to walk away and live with the future I've made.

[ruggly]

I also enjoy the thought that having a less bitter ending will absolutely ruin the game for you.

[AndyAK79]

Since it isn't going to happen it won't ruins anyone's game.

Do you really spend your time imagining hypoyhetical scenario's that would make someone unhappy? The are words for people like that, but the auto-censor tends to remove them.

Modifié par AndyAK79, 26 septembre 2013 - 01:19 .

[AndyAK79]

The person who enjoys the thought of someone's game being ruined is clearly not hoping they have a brilliant day, whatever their feelings on happy endings.

[jtav]

MEHEM is pretty severely flawed, but the memorial scene is probably closer to what Destroy+ should be. Citadel is a better argument for throwing out the narrative in favor of being happy and makes it hard for me to take many complaints about the core game seriously.

[Mathias]

AndyAK79 wrote...

Arguments based around the idea that ME3 COULD have a happy ending are absurd.

It COULD have an ending were Shepard slips on a pink tutu and teaches the Reapers to love through the medium of dance, but it doesn't (Although if anyone wants to create a mod called MESSOAPTATTRTLTTMODM, I'm game). There is an infinite amount of possible endings but you've got what you've got.

Bioware can't write an ending that's going to satisfy everyone (and, for those arguing for a happy ending, do you really think the ending in YOUR head would have made everyone happy? Would nobody be unsatisfied if YOU wrote the ending?). They can only write an ending that's true to themselves and their creative vision. And I believe (and I'm willing to admit there are other valid viewpoints) that if you analyse those endings on their own merits, rather than comparing them to some theoretical ideal that exists only in your mind, those endings are powerful and satisfying.

Furthermore, I would like to point out that those endings, even if I they weren't the one's I would have written, were much enjoyed by myself and many others, and we are as much entitled to enjoy Mass Effect as you are. If you had got your way, we may well be having the same discussion from opposite sides.

I'm not saying my needs are more important than yours, just that we are all equal as fans, and that being the case Bioware have a right to their artistic integrity and can't favour your ideas just because you really want them to.

P.S. I have never, to my knowledge, mentioned sunshine, bunnies, unicorns or rainbows. I may have mentioned billions of people not ending up dead, because this has actually been suggested other forums. I acknowledge that there are many degrees of happy ending.

You're really living inside your own bubble if you believe in all of that.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

AndyAK79 wrote...

The person who enjoys the thought of someone's game being ruined is clearly not hoping they have a brilliant day, whatever their feelings on happy endings.

Explain to me how I'm ruining my game by giving my story a happy ending.

[AndyAK79]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

You're really living inside your own bubble if you believe in all of that.

Ah, a variation on the legendary, "You're Just Wrong" argument. A well known riposte. It is equaled only in it's eloquence and power, perhaps, by "The Chewbacca Defence."

You, sir, are a true wordsmith.

Modifié par AndyAK79, 26 septembre 2013 - 02:14 .

[Chashan]

jtav wrote...

MEHEM is pretty severely flawed, but the memorial scene is probably closer to what Destroy+ should be. Citadel is a better argument for throwing out the narrative in favor of being happy and makes it hard for me to take many complaints about the core game seriously.

Pretty much an example showing how simple that would have been. As for the former statement, I take it that's in relation to reused cinematics? As it happens, custom replacements for that are being worked on and snippets of those don't look too shabby, holding up even to BW's own cutscenes. Which is another thing about MrFob's project: he is still pursuing it and quite transparent about its progress.

The Citadel DLC, it's true that it's wildly out-of-place - placed smack-dab in the middle of the main-plot. As epilogue-material, though, not much of a problem. And it so happens someone went and adjusted it accordingly (easier than thought, given that the great, apocalyptic 'Reaper war' is all but blanked out).

[DecCylonus]

I am generally happy with the endings. I think it was entirely appropriate that defeating the Reapers required a large sacrifice of some sort. That said, the endings could have been better in several ways.

For starters, the Breath Scene was a mistake. I'm fine with having an option for Shepard to survive, but there should have been more payoff for the player when he/she did. It would not have been hard for Bioware to do a reunion with the player's LI and the surviving crewmembers. The Breath Scene was an "artistic" choice to keep things mysterious and "create discussion," but it robbed the player of any real payoff for Shepard survivng. Bioware tried to have it both ways, and it doesn't work.

Priority: Earth was not a good final mission compared to what came before, i.e. the Suicide Mission. It would have been an acceptable final level for another series, but expectations were higher for Mass Effect. Bioware should have borrowed some elements from previous games to end ME3. In DA:O, the allies you gathered helped you defeat the Arch Demon. ME3 could have used a similar mechanic with its War Assets. Maybe not all of them, but at least some of them should have been available to help turn the tide of battle at critical moments. They also could have brought back some elements of the Suicide Mission, where you have tasks to assign your squad to. That way, everyone is important and doing something. They could even have made members of the ME2 crew available in the endgame to reinforce the squad. The squad missions could have had the potential to kill crewmembers, adding an element of risk and tension. The danger could have been there regardless of whether Shepard picked the right person for key tasks, with everyone more likely to survive if the right person was chosen. Knowing that everyone might not survive regardless of what you chose would be appropriate for the setting, for the final act, and it would have added more dramatic tension. Instead, Pirority: Earth was a big missed opportunity for the series to go out with a bang. The Suicide Mission will remain the highlight of the trilogy for many of us.

[Mathias]

AndyAK79 wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

You're really living inside your own bubble if you believe in all of that.

Ah, a variation on the legendary, "You're Just Wrong" argument. A well known riposte. It is equaled only in it's eloquence and power, perhaps, by "The Chewbacca Defence."

You, sir, are a true wordsmith.

Or maybe I only need my riposte to be short and sweet because so many people on this thread already disagree with you and think your logic sucks.

[Mathias]

DecCylonus wrote...

I am generally happy with the endings. I think it was entirely appropriate that defeating the Reapers required a large sacrifice of some sort. That said, the endings could have been better in several ways.

For starters, the Breath Scene was a mistake. I'm fine with having an option for Shepard to survive, but there should have been more payoff for the player when he/she did. It would not have been hard for Bioware to do a reunion with the player's LI and the surviving crewmembers. The Breath Scene was an "artistic" choice to keep things mysterious and "create discussion," but it robbed the player of any real payoff for Shepard survivng. Bioware tried to have it both ways, and it doesn't work.

Priority: Earth was not a good final mission compared to what came before, i.e. the Suicide Mission. It would have been an acceptable final level for another series, but expectations were higher for Mass Effect. Bioware should have borrowed some elements from previous games to end ME3. In DA:O, the allies you gathered helped you defeat the Arch Demon. ME3 could have used a similar mechanic with its War Assets. Maybe not all of them, but at least some of them should have been available to help turn the tide of battle at critical moments. They also could have brought back some elements of the Suicide Mission, where you have tasks to assign your squad to. That way, everyone is important and doing something. They could even have made members of the ME2 crew available in the endgame to reinforce the squad. The squad missions could have had the potential to kill crewmembers, adding an element of risk and tension. The danger could have been there regardless of whether Shepard picked the right person for key tasks, with everyone more likely to survive if the right person was chosen. Knowing that everyone might not survive regardless of what you chose would be appropriate for the setting, for the final act, and it would have added more dramatic tension. Instead, Pirority: Earth was a big missed opportunity for the series to go out with a bang. The Suicide Mission will remain the highlight of the trilogy for many of us.

I like your points. I thought the ending as a whole was stupid and the contrived choices only made it worse, but I generally like what you said here.

Priority Earth was pretty underwhelming. If you had told me 5 years ago "Hey the final mission in the whole trilogy will have you fight in a few streets and alleways of London against husks", I would've called you a liar. It was so not worthy of the franchise that they built up. As other people have mentioned, it should've been like the Suicide Mission but on a galactic scale, where you use your war assets as your progress through the final stages.

[AndyAK79]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

AndyAK79 wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

You're really living inside your own bubble if you believe in all of that.

Ah, a variation on the legendary, "You're Just Wrong" argument. A well known riposte. It is equaled only in it's eloquence and power, perhaps, by "The Chewbacca Defence."

You, sir, are a true wordsmith.

Or maybe I only need my riposte to be short and sweet because so many people on this thread already disagree with you and think your logic sucks.

May I also say how inspiring it is to see a man who is not ashamed to let others fight his battles for him.

My admiration for you grows with every post, it really does.

Modifié par AndyAK79, 26 septembre 2013 - 03:30 .

[Allison_Lightning]

I like being able to RPG choice- hell, I restored an ending for KOTOR where Revan could sacrifice herself in the Star Forge after going too far down the Dark Side. Some of my Shepards I'd kill just for the fun of it, some would survive but there's no logical way I could have any of them pick Control or Synthesis. Allowing the Reapers to survive either by becoming a Reaper and eventually through many millenniums of isolation losing the humanity to stop the cycle from being resumed again or melding everyone together and stripping the free will and determination from the galaxy?

Neither of those choices are alternate endings- even Refuse ends up as a next cycle wins anyway. An absolute loss should have been possible. It's the deprivation of the 'you lose, Reapers win' just as much if not more important a flaw than a sunshine and unicorns ending.

And I've never counted an ending where Shepard had to sacrifice the Geth and EDI for future synthetic and organic life to thrive free of the Reapers as happy.

An ending where Shepard will have to spend months recuperating and dealing with the overwhelming guilt of everyone who died. A galaxy broken and in my main- she never holds a command again because she can't take the weight of what she was forced to sacrifice and vanishes from the public eye. She chooses to help what little surviving children and teenagers of Earth slums remain, better able to deal than most when the Reapers invaded when the galaxy after all was said and done, still only cared about the right survivors. She's banned the Alliance and Council from contacting her on threat of vanishing forever. And as for that romantic epilogue- that'll have to wait while she and Kaidan likely bury his father, Anderson and everyone else who died.

The happy ending that irks me is the lovely visions of Normandy adventures that is probably why I'm reluctant to use the mods as much as I want a 'Reapers win' ending for the PC version.
Pure happy endings in fiction are rare. Even when heroes dust themselves off, they've lost people and things they've wanted. But I will grant this thread wasn't started with 'why Shepard has to die'. I like the option of Shepard's death there as well as living, losing to the Reapers as well as winning against them.

I'm personally a little tired of the modern trend, especially in the genre world that the hero/heroine has to end a story/series as a martyr. No wonder people aren't as interested in genre works of fiction.

[AndyAK79]

So... are you arguing that the endings are too happy or not happy enough?

Whilst your Mass Effect meets Mr Chips ending sounds... different, I'm not convinced it would have produced a universally positive reaction.

Why does every other contributor to this forum think they are more talented than actual professional writers?

Modifié par AndyAK79, 26 septembre 2013 - 08:01 .

[KaiserShep]

Professional is a questionable qualifier for certain things. Uwe Boll is technically a professional filmmaker. That doesn't stop him from being cinematic cancer. Professional writers penned Transformers' script lol.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 26 septembre 2013 - 08:06 .

[AndyAK79]

KaiserShep wrote...

Professional is a questionable qualifier for certain things. Uwe Boll is technically a professional filmmaker. That doesn't stop him from being cinematic cancer. Professional writers penned Transformers' script lol.

You do realise that Trasformers was written by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman right? 

And whilst it's difficult to argue in defence of Uwe Boll, he funds his own films. Publishing anything yourself removes any requirement of talent or ability, for obvious reasons.

Despite this I agree. The really talented writers are here on BSN, arguing endlessly about how annoyed they are about the ending of Mass Effect 3 (usually with a poor grasp of spelling.and grammar). It's a hidden pool of limitless talent.

[KaiserShep]

I know who wrote Transformers. The point is that it's terribly written, as are both of the new Star Trek films. I'm pretty sure Boll's films are funded through some sort of shady practice involving German tax code.