419 réponses à ce sujet

[Mathias]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

What's the point of a conventional ending if it's losing?

In fact, that's exactly what Refuse is in the first place. A conventional ending with the galaxy losing.

Lots of stories end in tragedy. In fact, many of them are highly-regarded.

Mass Effect isn't one of those stories. More importantly, it's poor game design to flesh out an alternate path that ends in failure no matter what. Why would anyone choose this over the Crucible?

Actually, I was thinking more down the lines of the Reapers winning no matter what. There may even be no Crucible plans at all, just a horror story of how the whole galaxy crumbles around you and the hero is helpless to stop it.

I mean, it would have been easy to write, and very compatible with the previous two games...

A story like that may work in a novel or a movie, but not a video game series, especially one that spans across three games. I've said this before but the only way the ending could've been any more poorly received is if the Reapers win no matter what. Screw you, you lose. 

[xAmilli0n]

M U P P 3 T Z wrote...

I found the words touching as well. Strangely, I found that it hit more of the right notes than the original options. I'm not exactly sure why, but it was fitting for the choice.

For the most part I agree, though I do not like how it was implemented.  Outside of implementation, I think it did exactly what I expected the "bad" ending of ME3 to be like before the game was released.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

David7204 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I mean, it would have been easy to write, and very compatible with the previous two games...

Not in the slightest. It would have been a complete thematic betrayal of the previous two games.

If they wanted to play to "upbeat" themes, they shouldn't have made the plot about an stopping an enemy that is nigh-impossible to defeat even with the whole galaxy rising up to stop them. At that point, you've kind of made your own bed...

[David7204]

Nonsense.

The more powerful the enemy, the more meaningful the triumph.

Plenty of stories with very powerful enemies end in victory.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...


A story like that may work in a novel or a movie, but not a video game series, especially one that spans across three games. I've said this before but the only way the ending could've been any more poorly received is if the Reapers win no matter what. Screw you, you lose.

The Last of Us did it, most recently.

Grant it, that's not a series. Not much of a defense given how many people complain ME3 is divorced from 2 & 3, though.

[KaiserShep]

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.

[Mathias]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I mean, it would have been easy to write, and very compatible with the previous two games...

Not in the slightest. It would have been a complete thematic betrayal of the previous two games.

If they wanted to play to "upbeat" themes, they shouldn't have made the plot about an stopping an enemy that is nigh-impossible to defeat even with the whole galaxy rising up to stop them. At that point, you've kind of made your own bed...

Thing is the power of the Reapers was pretty inconsistant throughout the trilogy. There's this feeling in Mass Effect 3, especially if you read the Codex entries regarding the war, that not all the writers were on the same page.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

David7204 wrote...

Nonsense.

The more powerful the enemy, the more meaningful the triumph.

Plenty of stories with very powerful enemies end in victory.

I never said it can't end in victory.

However, if they want to demonstrate the enemy is indeed powerful, they kind of have to show it.

So, some prices must be paid along the way to victory (or defeat).

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

There's this feeling in Mass Effect 3, especially if you read the Codex entries regarding the war, that not all the writers were on the same page.

I never got that impression.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 01 octobre 2013 - 02:30 .

[chemiclord]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

There's tragic endings, and then there's "everyone dies, the end." I don't know many highly regarded stories where the protagonist die, fail in their mission, and evil wins. I'm sure they're out there, but haven't heard of them and probably for good reason.

If you play as a heavy Paragon... there's kinda an ironic tragedy in it though.

Tragic stories are ones in which the protagonist's failings lead to his downfall.  I doubt that was Bioware's intent, but there is a sort of twisted Aesop in the failure of the entire resistance because Shepard's morals couldn't allow him to make a terrible choice.

Modifié par chemiclord, 01 octobre 2013 - 02:33 .

[Iakus]

"We fought as a united galaxy, but it wasn't enough"

Just a nice way of saying "No matter how much of a difference you made, it didn't make any difference"

Everything you tried to do the whole trilogy? Warn people of the Reapers? Unite the galaxy? Build allies? Yeah, that's meaningless. All that matters is SACRIFICE! DRAMA! FEELZ!

So shut up and pick a color.

[Mathias]

There's codex entries about the Reaper War that talks about different battles taking place, where some of the other militaries in the galaxy deploy clever tactics and end up doing some damage to the Reaper fleets, including their Capital ships. But this never shown unfortunately. As I've said the power of the Reapers seemed to keep fluctuating.

One minute it's "Reapers are incredibly powerful and intelligent. It takes great effort and strategy to take em down."

and then the next it's "No! Reapers are UNSTOPPABLE. Hardy harr harr! They are gods! Forces of nature! Completely indestructable, nothing can stop them *dun dun dun*"

Modifié par Mdoggy1214, 01 octobre 2013 - 02:41 .

[Iakus]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...



There's codex entries about the Reaper War that talks about different battles taking place, where some of the other militaries in the galaxy deploy clever tactics and end up doing some damage to the Reaper fleets, including their Capital ships. But this never shown unfortunately. As I've said the power of the Reapers seemed to keep fluctuating.

One minute it's "Reapers are incredibly powerful and intelligent. It takes great effort and strategy to take em down."

and then the next it's "No! Reapers are UNSTOPPABLE. Hardy harr harr! They are gods! Forces of nature! Completely indestructable, nothing can stop them *dun dun dun*"

Clever tactics?
Are you suggesting these tactics might have been...unconventional? :innocent:

[Kataphrut94]

By the time you get to that point, the situation presented is that you certainly aren't winning any other way. Hell, they make it pretty clear that that is the case from the get-go.

[wolfhowwl]

Sure the Turians employed some innovative tactics that destroyed several reapers. In the same engagement they also failed to stop the reapers from bombarding their home planet and landing legions of troops.

The Asari delayed the Reaper push to Thessia with hit-and-run tactics but the Reapers bulled through them and when they confronted the Asari directly over Thessia they easily routed a navy over twice as big as the Alliance's in short time.

These "unconventional" tactics never did anything more than inflict some token casualties and buy a little time while still failing at stopping the Reapers from taking their objective.

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 01 octobre 2013 - 02:55 .

[Mathias]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

By the time you get to that point, the situation presented is that you certainly aren't winning any other way. Hell, they make it pretty clear that that is the case from the get-go.

Well that I understand, but the problem I had was that it shouldn't have been written that way. From the starting point of ME3 the game makes it clear that you're not winning conventionally. I don't agree with the direction it took. I think CV should've been a possiblity but discouraged to even attempt to do so. If the game was going to have "wildly different endings", I would've made it so that Conventional Victory is possible but is by far the most difficult ending to get, requiring you to make the best decisions throughout the whole trilogy, and exclusive to the people who play through all of 1-3. 

Modifié par Mdoggy1214, 01 octobre 2013 - 03:02 .

[David7204]

That's a solid premise, but conventional victory can't be anything near as simple as "We used smart tactics and they worked."

[Iakus]

David7204 wrote...

That's a solid premise, but conventional victory can't be anything near as simple as "We used smart tactics and they worked."

That's the very definition of unconventional victory.

[Kataphrut94]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Kataphrut94 wrote...

By the time you get to that point, the situation presented is that you certainly aren't winning any other way. Hell, they make it pretty clear that that is the case from the get-go.

Well that I understand, but the problem I had was that it shouldn't have been written that way. From the starting point of ME3 the game makes it clear that you're not winning conventionally. I don't agree with the direction it took. I think CV should've been a possiblity but discouraged to even attempt to do so. If the game was going to have "wildly different endings", I would've made it so that Conventional Victory is possible but is by far the most difficult ending to get, requiring you to make the best decisions throughout the whole trilogy, and exclusive to the people who play through all of 1-3. 

If anything, the lack of conventional victory was set in stone in ME2. Mass Effect 1 ended on "let's find a way to stop the Reapers". Come Mass Effect 2, nobody believes Shepard, nobody's doing anything to prepare and Shepard is wasting his time dicking around the Terminus Systems with the Dirty Dozen. Nothing is accomplished and the few developments in ME2 that could conceivably relate to the Reaper threat, like the genophage cure data or the geth heretics, are all from optional missions that the game considers to be of equal importance to helping out jaded mercanaries with their daddy issues.

Mass Effect 3 basically starts where Mass Effect 1 left off. If you were going to have conventional victory (which i'm not against), you'd need to change a lot more than Mass Effect 3's ending.

[Xplode441]

HYR 2.0 wrote...
Actually, I was thinking more down the lines of the Reapers winning no matter what. There may even be no Crucible plans at all, just a horror story of how the whole galaxy crumbles around you and the hero is helpless to stop it.

I mean, it would have been easy to write, and very compatible with the previous two games...

While I agree with happy endings being a cliche and annoying most of the times, having the series be basically a game of chess where you're building up to the other player attacking you by studying him and learning his strategy just for the other player to take all of his pieces off the board, flip the board over, throwing your pieces everywhere and declare his victory would be pretty ****ty.

[Mathias]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Kataphrut94 wrote...

By the time you get to that point, the situation presented is that you certainly aren't winning any other way. Hell, they make it pretty clear that that is the case from the get-go.

Well that I understand, but the problem I had was that it shouldn't have been written that way. From the starting point of ME3 the game makes it clear that you're not winning conventionally. I don't agree with the direction it took. I think CV should've been a possiblity but discouraged to even attempt to do so. If the game was going to have "wildly different endings", I would've made it so that Conventional Victory is possible but is by far the most difficult ending to get, requiring you to make the best decisions throughout the whole trilogy, and exclusive to the people who play through all of 1-3. 

If anything, the lack of conventional victory was set in stone in ME2. Mass Effect 1 ended on "let's find a way to stop the Reapers". Come Mass Effect 2, nobody believes Shepard, nobody's doing anything to prepare and Shepard is wasting his time dicking around the Terminus Systems with the Dirty Dozen. Nothing is accomplished and the few developments in ME2 that could conceivably relate to the Reaper threat, like the genophage cure data or the geth heretics, are all from optional missions that the game considers to be of equal importance to helping out jaded mercanaries with their daddy issues.

Mass Effect 3 basically starts where Mass Effect 1 left off. If you were going to have conventional victory (which i'm not against), you'd need to change a lot more than Mass Effect 3's ending.

Given the current state of ME3's story, CV should not have been possible.

Well, lemme rephrase that. CV should've been within the realm of reality during the Battle for Earth specifically, but not the entire war, but that's another conversation. 

But ignoring ME1 and ME2, if ME3's story was torn down and being rebuilt from scratch, I believe the possiblity of CV should've been left a lot more open. I'd like to think that during the past 2 and a half years, the smarter Military leaders like Hackett didn't ignore the obvious threat after Sovereign's attack, and began building their strength and working on projects to help combat the Reapers. But whatever, it doesn't matter anymore cause none of that happened.

[AlanC9]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...
Actually, I was thinking more down the lines of the Reapers winning no matter what. There may even be no Crucible plans at all, just a horror story of how the whole galaxy crumbles around you and the hero is helpless to stop it.

I mean, it would have been easy to write, and very compatible with the previous two games...

A story like that may work in a novel or a movie, but not a video game series, especially one that spans across three games.

Not in the current market. Once upon a time you could make a game out of I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream, but nobody'd sign off on that for an AAA budget.

[David7204]

That game actually has a possible 'happy' ending.

Or at least a hell of a lot happier than the original story.

Modifié par David7204, 01 octobre 2013 - 03:57 .