419 réponses à ce sujet

[RustyLH]

Oh, and to finish my point, I think the main two shortcomings of the ending aren't the actual endings. I think they are fine. I think my problem is the same as many other people's. nothing you do matters. Not one choice you made in the game, not one mistake, etc, alters anything about the ending.

And, it would be nice to have the total happy ending as a possibility.  Shepard and LIara, Tali, Miranda, etc... go off into retirement and have little babies.  Reapers no longer a threat, and everybody is happy.  Geth, Tali, EDI, etc...

It's just one more option that would have made the other 4 seem more of a complete set.

Modifié par RustyLH, 07 octobre 2013 - 02:44 .

[Mathias]

RustyLH wrote...

Tron Mega wrote...


for someone hwo says the ending isnt bad, you sure have alot of things youd like changed with the ending!

in your opinion, what IS good about the ending? (do you really think other developers are going to steal biowares ending to ME3 or try to do something similar???)

I love the implication that Shepard lives at the end of the Destruction sequence.  But with this being the closest to a CV ending, I don't like that many others died.  No Edi, no Geth, and the galactic civiliation is cut off from each other...maybe for a very very very long time.  So Wrex is cut off from his world, Shepard is cut off from his LI, Tali will never see her homeworld again, etc...

It's heavily implied that the Mass Relays are rebuilt relatively quickly in the High EMS Destroy ending. In the slides we see our companions return to their homes.

Modifié par Mdoggy1214, 07 octobre 2013 - 02:48 .

[Iakus]

RustyLH wrote...

I love the implication that Shepard lives at the end of the Destruction sequence.  But with this being the closest to a CV ending, I don't like that many others died.  No Edi, no Geth, and the galactic civiliation is cut off from each other...maybe for a very very very long time.  So Wrex is cut off from his world, Shepard is cut off from his LI, Tali will never see her homeworld again, etc...

It's worse than just "they died" They died as "collateral damage"  never knowing why.  They weren't killed in battle by Reapers, they died by Shepard's own hand.

[Mathias]

I think it's a total injustice to Joker and Edi's story arc to not show Joker's reaction to losing Edi if you choose Destroy. Seriousy wtf Bioware? Not cool.

[RustyLH]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

I think it's a total injustice to Joker and Edi's story arc to not show Joker's reaction to losing Edi if you choose Destroy. Seriousy wtf Bioware? Not cool.

That, and why is synthesis the only ending where we see her with joker?  They had become a pair before the ending, so only the destruction ending should alter her and Joker embracing.  Obviously they do fit better as a couple in the synthesis ending, but she should still be there with Joker in the control ending.

[AlanC9]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...
It's heavily implied that the Mass Relays are rebuilt relatively quickly in the High EMS Destroy ending. In the slides we see our companions return to their homes.

I'm not sure about that. Unless Tali's in the Rannoch scene - my impression is that she's not specifically shown -- the companions we see getting to worlds across the galaxy live long enough to get there without relays.

[CronoDragoon]

They left it open for either interpretation. The Catalyst says any damage to technology can be easily repaired (a line added conspicuously close to where previously he said the relays would be destroyed, I think, which was completely removed), Hackett stresses that they can rebuild anything they want (though he doesn't say within months obviously), they change the animation to be noticeably less explode-y, they show the Citadel rebuilt and they show squadmates going home (though they don't say how much time has passed).

I think it's fine the way it is. Some would rather a post-ME3 universe without relays, at least long enough for an interesting interlude of chaos and the reformation of intergalactic civilization. Others think it's thematically correct that the relays are rebuilt asap.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 07 octobre 2013 - 04:16 .

[KaiserShep]

AlanC9 wrote...
I'm not sure about that. Unless Tali's in the Rannoch scene - my impression is that she's not specifically shown -- the companions we see getting to worlds across the galaxy live long enough to get there without relays.

Tali can't really get a Rannoch scene anyway, since the Normandy crew gets their own bit for the memorial. In any case, it seems reasonable to assume that the slides are somewhat contemporaneous.

[Obadiah]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

I think it's a total injustice to Joker and Edi's story arc to not show Joker's reaction to losing Edi if you choose Destroy. Seriousy wtf Bioware? Not cool.

Doesn't Joker look sad at the Memorial Wall in the epilogue for Destroy? I guess that scene is open to interpretation to Joker's feelings towards EDI.

Modifié par Obadiah, 07 octobre 2013 - 01:39 .

[Mangalores]

Am I the only person who would have loved to get every last of my squadmates killed on Earth? The difference being: They actually do something to help when getting owned and they get screentime for their sacrifice. The lack of investment is really that you don't see anyone doing anything and everyone just getting offed off screen. Personally I feel in ME2 the suicide mission felt a lot less suicidal because you didn't have to sacrifice anyone to pull through, just enjoy all the content of the game and you were fine. In ME3 you also don't see anyone dieing for a purpose.

For consequences and impact you need Shepard actually make choices that are uncomfortable, e.g. tell someone to stay somewhere where you know they get killed because you need them to complete their task. To have a cop out feel good outcome just means that's the perfect play so everyone goes for that route.

Compared that to Virmire. You have to choose between one or the other squadmate, both doing something. You either give the squadmate at the bomb his heroic sacrifice or the squadmate with the STG a tragic end. Heck, you even have the Wrex choice depending on what you did beforehand.

Both choices are more meaningful on a far smaller scale than the nothing in ME3.

In a way there is too little slaughter for a bittersweet bleak ending and too much impersonal slaughter for a feel good ending.

[ConanTheLeader]

 This ending was bad, first time beating the game I refused all three choices and got that, my face was in proper "Wut....?" mode.

It could have worked had it of been more fleshed out and further dependant on your war assets score where you just try to brute force demolish the reapers but it was not and therefore when compared to the full twenty minute endings that show how your decisions have affected entire races and individual characters, it is lacking.

[AlanC9]

KaiserShep wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...
I'm not sure about that. Unless Tali's in the Rannoch scene - my impression is that she's not specifically shown -- the companions we see getting to worlds across the galaxy live long enough to get there without relays.

Tali can't really get a Rannoch scene anyway, since the Normandy crew gets their own bit for the memorial. In any case, it seems reasonable to assume that the slides are somewhat contemporaneous.

How come? Some of the slides are set decades in the future.

[Iakus]

The only characters that are really explicitly shown to be back on theri homeworlds are Grunt and Wrex. And being krogan, that could be pretty far into the future.

Samara and her daughter are shown to be an asari world that might or might not be Thessia. But again, being asari, that could be a long time into the future.

Jack, Miranda, Jacob, Kasumi, it's not really clear where any of them end up settling.

[Mathias]

StreetMagic wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

I think it's a total injustice to Joker and Edi's story arc to not show Joker's reaction to losing Edi if you choose Destroy. Seriousy wtf Bioware? Not cool.

This is the kind of stuff that makes me think that infamous leak on PennyArcade (supposedly Patrick Weekes account) was true, where it criticized Casey Hudson about the ending. One of the points was that Casey is a pretty cerebral person, and if left unchecked, won't register these sort of emotional moments that are required. The game towards the end there reaks of some of that. I know people like this.. really smart, heavy thinkers, but a bit cold and oblivious in emotional and social ways. Some even have kids or spouses, but they're the kind that frustrate their loved ones. They just stare off and say "Yep", "uh huh" at the most emotional moments.

Apparently Weekes even had to insist to get that small hologram section at the end, where you say goodbye to people. So if people are dying and it's barely remarked on, and the game is all heady and abstract, that's the mark of someone who doesn't think of relationships much.

Even if the leak wasn't true, the point still stands. Some of this stuf is meant for nerds who are a bit too depersonalized and remote.

I completely believe that was Patrick Weekes. I can't imagine how frustrating it must've been for him to be with this series for so long, be emotionally invested in it, and then watch one of your bosses just completed blunder it without letting you or the other writers have a say. I'm amazed at the amount of restraint the other devs showed during March and April. It's no surprise that one of them ended up cracking and ranted on the internet as anonymous (or at least tried to be). 

The thing about Casey makes total sense too. The ending, at least the Original, lacks any form of emotion. This is why we say so many people say they felt nothing watching that ending.

[KwangtungTiger]

RustyLH wrote...

Oh, and to finish my point, I think the main two shortcomings of the ending aren't the actual endings. I think they are fine. I think my problem is the same as many other people's. nothing you do matters. Not one choice you made in the game, not one mistake, etc, alters anything about the ending.

And, it would be nice to have the total happy ending as a possibility.  Shepard and LIara, Tali, Miranda, etc... go off into retirement and have little babies.  Reapers no longer a threat, and everybody is happy.  Geth, Tali, EDI, etc...

It's just one more option that would have made the other 4 seem more of a complete set.

I agree with you here but have to say that the casual gamer probably wouldn't. And lets face it, the casual gamer is what runs the market.

As a "Self-Described" hardcore gamer. I would love to have a truely negative type consequence for the path I chose (Curing Genophage or saving the Queen) but doubt the likes of this will ever happen becuase I believe most gamers couldn't handle this. Most (casual) gamers want the "Super Hero saves the day and lives happily after" type scenario.

Problem would also arise with the people who never got to play ME1 or ME2. If they got an ending based solely off of 1 game (ME3) or couldn't change that ending without the other 2 games installed there would be a hellstorm to pay.

This is why (And I hope that I'm wrong) you will never see that type of game played out. The ending of games will always be streamlined to cater to casual gamers.

Modifié par KwangtungTiger, 07 octobre 2013 - 07:00 .

[Reorte]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

The thing about Casey makes total sense too. The ending, at least the Original, lacks any form of emotion. This is why we say so many people say they felt nothing watching that ending.

It's not got anything cerebral either, just things that look like they've been created by someone who's a bit of an idea about what it looks like but none about what it actually is.

[Reorte]

KwangtungTiger wrote...

I agree with you here but have to say that the casual gamer probably wouldn't. And lets face it, the casual gamer is what runs the market.

As a "Self-Described" hardcore gamer. I would love to have a truely negative type consequence for the path I chose (Curing Genophage or saving the Queen) but doubt the likes of this will ever happen becuase I believe most gamers couldn't handle this. Most (casual) gamers want the "Super Hero saves the day and lives happily after" type scenario.

Problem would also arise with the people who never got to play ME1 or ME2. If they got an ending based solely off of 1 game (ME3) or couldn't change that ending without the other 2 games installed there would be a hellstorm to pay.

This is why (And I hope that I'm wrong) you will never see that type of game played out. The ending of games will always be streamlined to cater to casual gamers.

Doesn't the casual gamer want the chance to screw up as well as win? If you just want a fixed outcome go and watch a film instead, or at least something that doesn't claim to be anything more than a shooter. Anyway, even I'm not cynical enough to think that there would be a huge outcry for things not turning out great in a trilogy if you don't bother with two thirds of it.

[KwangtungTiger]

Reorte wrote...

KwangtungTiger wrote...

I agree with you here but have to say that the casual gamer probably wouldn't. And lets face it, the casual gamer is what runs the market.

As a "Self-Described" hardcore gamer. I would love to have a truely negative type consequence for the path I chose (Curing Genophage or saving the Queen) but doubt the likes of this will ever happen becuase I believe most gamers couldn't handle this. Most (casual) gamers want the "Super Hero saves the day and lives happily after" type scenario.

Problem would also arise with the people who never got to play ME1 or ME2. If they got an ending based solely off of 1 game (ME3) or couldn't change that ending without the other 2 games installed there would be a hellstorm to pay.

This is why (And I hope that I'm wrong) you will never see that type of game played out. The ending of games will always be streamlined to cater to casual gamers.

Doesn't the casual gamer want the chance to screw up as well as win? If you just want a fixed outcome go and watch a film instead, or at least something that doesn't claim to be anything more than a shooter. Anyway, even I'm not cynical enough to think that there would be a huge outcry for things not turning out great in a trilogy if you don't bother with two thirds of it.

You would think that but the forums would say otherwise. Most want their cake and eat it too it would seem.

[Bourne Endeavor]

KaiserShep wrote...

But the reapers are pretty much overpowered. There is no conventional solution for them since they are all too powerful individually, and far too numerous.

I disagree. They could have explored alternative technology, further emphasized the Thanix Canon and developed new variations, especially if you kept the Collector Base intact, thus giving some relevancy to ME2. Even if we dabble into the unconventional territory, having the Crucible weaken the Reapers or Harbinger to level the playing field would have been far superior to what we got.

[Mangalores]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...
...

I disagree. They could have explored alternative technology, further emphasized the Thanix Canon and developed new variations, especially if you kept the Collector Base intact, thus giving some relevancy to ME2. Even if we dabble into the unconventional territory, having the Crucible weaken the Reapers or Harbinger to level the playing field would have been far superior to what we got.

More importantly one could have thought up a reason why the Reapers use the Citadel Trojan Horse for their cyclic invasions. This is the one thing indicating a weakness since either for their end goals or due to an actual weakness they have this complex single point of failure in their usual procedure. This should have indicated doing it any other way makes things more difficult for them.

This gets sadly retconned by Arrival and ME3 does not indicate any reason why the Reapers bothered with their ME1 + ME2 plots in the first place when they can overrun the galaxy in a matter of weeks anyway.

E.g. if the Citadel is the only mass relay connecting to where they are between the cycles and they literally can't get from their location to the Milky Way by conventional means or it forces them to sacrifice enormous reserves in energy and resources to bypass this problem.

While we didn't need a reason at all why the Reapers do their Reaping, particularly not shallow bad reasons, an explanation why they do things the way they do could have introduced the plot points to defeat them. Once you brought them in all guns blazing with zero difference from their usual knockout blows ( and apparently the Protheans were far better at defending themselves despite getting the worse of it) you get limited in explaining away how the galaxy can still win.

[Obadiah]

Mangalores wrote...
...
E.g. if the Citadel is the only mass relay connecting to where they are between the cycles and they literally can't get from their location to the Milky Way by conventional means or it forces them to sacrifice enormous reserves in energy and resources to bypass this problem.
...

I thought that was implied, and is one more element in this cycle which makes it so much more different than the ones that came before it.

Just throwing this out there: this would also be one of the reasons Refuse in this cycle is able to weaken the Reapers to the point that the next cycle can defeat them without compromise.

[Five Seven Five]

Continuing the thread about the possibility of a conventional victory - it was always possible, until at the beginning of ME3 Hackett et al begin telling Shepard "victory isn't possible. It was clear in ME1 from the Vigil conversation that the key to the Reaper victory is surprise and shutting down the relays, allowing them to destroy isolated planets one at a time. While the Protheans may have been more advanced than the galaxy at the time of ME3, the unified forces Shepard is able to assemble are pretty clearly an unprecedented thing for the reapers to face. I don't understand why Bioware thought the crucible was necessary or a good story element.

[Excella Gionne]

Five Seven Five wrote...

Continuing the thread about the possibility of a conventional victory - it was always possible, until at the beginning of ME3 Hackett et al begin telling Shepard "victory isn't possible. It was clear in ME1 from the Vigil conversation that the key to the Reaper victory is surprise and shutting down the relays, allowing them to destroy isolated planets one at a time. While the Protheans may have been more advanced than the galaxy at the time of ME3, the unified forces Shepard is able to assemble are pretty clearly an unprecedented thing for the reapers to face. I don't understand why Bioware thought the crucible was necessary or a good story element.

Well, it's pretty obvious that Conventional Victory was not possible. I mean look at the Reaper forces and the Soverign Class Reapers, there's a bunch of them and they can take out dozens of platoons and ships with their red laser beams. The crucible can be debated.....