176 réponses à ce sujet

[NeonFlux117]

It's deep bro, "high level stuff". It is "art" and it's beyond us brah. So, so deep.


DEEP.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Pick a color. Any color. It ends the game. It doesn't matter. You'll feel an emptiness no matter which one you choose. Just try not to think about it. Or better yet, I've got an idea, after the love scene and before the dream, leave it an open ending. Turn off your console or ctrl-alt-del > end task. It's not even refusal. It's a genuine open ending because there's no closure to be had anywhere. You've got to be quick though.

[Linkenski]

My interpretation right now is something like this (still relies on circular logic...) IIRC:

The Catalyst is the problem he's trying to solve but he doesn't realise it because unlike EDI he's actually not free to have emotions or something like that. So in a sense he is the example/evidence that isn't directly shown of an AI race that's gone wrong and killed its creators and that's why it still makes sense to choose one of three choices, because the problem does actually exist and is in plain sight to the player: The Catalyst. Do you want to take over his job and control the reapers, to dare see if "Shepard AI" has what it takes to maintain peace without committing genocide, do you want to sacrifice yourself to "fix" the Catalyst and his broken cycle or do you want to destroy the Catalyst and his Reapers, putting and end to his misery but at the same time sacrificing all reaper-infected/implanted software/hardware to ensure the broken cycle is forever destroyed?

Something like that :S

I don't know, it's kinda like the same thing conveyed by the original ending and I was kinda tired as I was writing this. But I think it makes the ending sort of bearable to think of it this way, that the point of the Catalyst telling you that Synthetics destroying all organics is intentionally written to be faulty logic and it exhibits the Catalyst's complete and utter lack of empathy and that makes him the reason why there's a relevant Synthetic/Organic struggle that need a solution.

[SwobyJ]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

It's deep bro, "high level stuff". It is "art" and it's beyond us brah. So, so deep.


DEEP.

It's honestly not that deep. And you know the stuff I write about. It's also not beyond us, or a few years of art or humanities degree work.

Bioware only outright failed in providing customer satisfaction. In everything else, it would have gotten a pass. But they did not satisfy their audience and they friggin heard from them. And for good reason.

Modifié par SwobyJ, 15 novembre 2013 - 09:31 .

[Linkenski]

Uuhh, how did you not see the sarcasm in NeonFlux117's post?

[Iakus]

Nothing short of a lot of alchohol, sorry.

[Pressedcat]

Try starting from the premise that just because you don't like the Intelligence's logic and find its solution repugnant and even lunatic, it doesn't mean that the potential for it's predicted synthetic/organic apocalypse is entirely impossible.

BioWare may not have presented their ideas in a wholly clear (or even well argued) way, but the themes they cover certainly aren't new to sci-fi. Try taking a step back from the whole affair, asking yourself 'what if the Intelligence was trying to deal with a genuine threat' and playing along with BioWare's premise. Then it becomes more a question of what your Shepard's opinion of organics are: is Shepard hopeful that organics will reach a stage where they can be trusted to handle technological advances responsibly and are safe to be left to reach such a stage independently; does Shepard hope this is the case, but has sufficient doubts to need a failsafe; does Shepard feel that it is safer/more advantageous to simply sidestep this necessary development all together.

In other words, despite your reservations, try playing ball.

Modifié par Pressedcat, 15 novembre 2013 - 10:23 .

[SwobyJ]

Linkenski wrote...

Uuhh, how did you not see the sarcasm in NeonFlux117's post?

No, I totally see it.

But I'm just alleging that even *Bioware* knows it isn't *that* deep. Calling something art is simple enough to do. I wrote a story recently, and hell yes I will call it my art and artistic expression. People read too much into 'artistic integrity' imo. All it means is that they don't want to change their story itself for the sake of complaints, but for EC will tailor details of it for the audience that they miscalculated for previously.

Modifié par SwobyJ, 15 novembre 2013 - 10:58 .

[darkrogueninja]

The first step is to accept the ending. After that, it's really up to you. My advice is to just have the mindset of "meh," which is what I still have today. Not saying the ending is good or bad, I just feel indifferent about it. The Mass Effect trilogy is still one of the best series this gen, so don't let a "meh" ending spoil it for you.

[SwobyJ]

Pressedcat wrote...

Try starting from the premise that just because you don't like the Intelligence's logic and find its solution repugnant and even lunatic, it doesn't mean that the potential for it's predicted synthetic/organic apocalypse is entirely impossible.

BioWare may not have presented their ideas in a wholly clear (or even well argued) way, but the themes they cover certainly aren't new to sci-fi. Try taking a step back from the whole affair, asking yourself 'what if the Intelligence was trying to deal with a genuine threat' and playing along with BioWare's premise. Then it becomes more a question of what your Shepard's opinion of organics are: is Shepard hopeful that organics will reach a stage where they can be trusted to handle technological advances responsibly and are safe to be left to reach such a stage independently; does Shepard hope this is the case, but has sufficient doubts to need a failsafe; does Shepard feel that it is safer/more advantageous to simply sidestep this necessary development all together.

In other words, despite your reservations, try playing ball.

The good part is that it SEEMS Bioware knows many will not play ball, and for good reason. Destroy is clearly tailored more for the Shepard Series Character (as the definitive basis), with Control introduced mostly more from ME2, and Synthesis introduced mostly more from ME3 for Shepard. With Control, we as players gradually change throughout the series, and with Synthesis, we open up to new possibilties towards the end.

And that's about his cap. Aiming for Destroy, tempted by Control, and wondering about Synthesis. *Then* we make our choice. It doesn't change that before London, even Shepard seemed to pretty much assume..or eventually only hope.. that the Crucible was effective as a WEAPON AGAINST the Reapers. He has doubts of that, as the story continues.

Most EMS choice? Not Synthesis, but Shepard picking Destroy and seeming surviving, in whatever capacity and for however long. IMO Bioware does give Destroy its dues, even though the 'all synthetics will be targetted' seemed hamfisted. I think if Synth/Control had more/better foreshadowing and forms of 'justification' (more Sanctuaries, more Geth Peace), then the writers wouldn't have to present Geth+EDI as moral hostages.


Even playing ME2 right now, the pieces are almost all there (even slightly foreshadowing the Crucible in Lair of the Shadow Broker). It's just that Bioware puts those pieces off to the side, for more attentive players to seek out and remember.
We players can *highly* disagree with their implementation, especially with DLC involved, but ME3's stuff did not totally come out of the blue.

I am seeing the possibility of a ME4 that at least partially validates (through direct narrative, symbolism, or themes) what the Catalyst was attempting, even if it ended up a monster.

Modifié par SwobyJ, 15 novembre 2013 - 11:08 .

[His Name was HYR!!]

 I have a love/hate relationship with the ending. There are things I like, and things I dislike.

So... here are some positive waves:


~~ Good music -- 'nuff said.
~~ Uncovering the truth on the Reaper threat (enhanced by Leviathan DLC) -- ME2 provided further insight on the enemy by revealing their nature: AI with destructively-uploaded organic cultural memory. Only question left was, why? And while others insisted this should have remained as speculation-fodder, I much rather end on a solved mystery than a cold case.

~~ It doesn't end predictably -- predictibility is typically boring; a MEHEM-like ending would have left me wanting.
~~ Choices *do* matter (EC required) -- w/ EC, you can see their lasting repercussions in an epilogue.
~~ Poignant farewell (EC required) -- I thought the Memorial Wall scene was a moving, bittersweet moment. Sad to see things end, but at the same token, it's also a "be happy it happened"-kind of a thing. It was a great ride. (The best).


Again, 'not saying it was flawless, but there are some things about it that are not bad either.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 15 novembre 2013 - 11:35 .

[Linkenski]

In that format my pros and cons would be

+The music (especially the Catalyst's theme)
+The atmosphere (I like the weirdness of the ending (until that TIM and Catalyst conversation))

-The reveal of the Reapers' motive. (just underwhelming in every possible way)
-The choices (arbitrary consequences)
-The ending misses the punchline completely
-Choices = EMS score => High score => best endings.
-TIM's final conversation is pure rambling.

[Sion1138]

Well, it sucked, and sucking can be a positive thing under certain circumstances.

[SwobyJ]

The biggest positive to me is to try to imagine it as a springboard for the developers to tackle concepts far beyond the trilogy itself. Not even saying a plot tie-in - just a way to expand Mass Effect to more things.

[Pressedcat]

To be honest, I'm not particularly concerned by foreshadowing (or the lack thereof) of the three final choices. I had a strong suspicion going in to ME3 that it would transpire the Reapers had motivations for their actions other than being Evil. I hadn't necessarily foreseen the presence of the Intelligence, but had always worked on the assumption that as predominantly AI machines, the Reapers must have been created with a purpose in mind, and that this purpose would eventually be discovered. When this premise was revealed, I could certainly spot a fair few holes in the logic, or reasons why the Intelligence's solution might prove insufficient, but to be honest, I was more interested in the opportunity it gave me to role-play how my Shepards would react to the choices presented to them.

By buying into the whole premise, I got to come to the conclusion that my canon paragade Shepard might consider the Intelligence's predicted future a possibility, but despite this feel that organics have the right to forge their own path, given hope by the unity he was able to forge within the Galaxy - and failing all that he had a mission to complete and a goal already decided: destroy the Reapers.

My renegade biotic Shepard had a far more cynical outlook, was mistrustful of the Reapers, but decided from past experience that organics couldn't be trusted to behave rationally, instead tending towards selfishness and short-sightedness, and therefore needed to be protected from themselves.

My infiltrator Shep was less interested in what the Intelligence had to say than getting the job done, so heard out the Intelligence before unhesitatingly destroying all AI in the galaxy, whilst my impulsive renagon vanguard simply rejected the Intelligence out-of-hand, banking on finding another way of defeating the Reapers... oops! Finally my engineer paragon Shep may very well go for synthesis, though of the three main endings, this one feels the most vague and remains under-developed.

The point is that yes the EC ending still has flaws in logic and presentation, but if you put aside your reservations, it also offers some really good opportunities for roleplaying. I find these opportunities far more rewarding than the alternative of pressing a button and getting a more traditional, uplifting victory. You may very well feel differently (and I entirely understand people who do so), but you did ask for alternative viewpoints that might make the endings 'work' for you.

Edit: just to clarify, the first paragraph was written in response to Swobyj. I thought I'd hit the quote button, but obviously not.

Modifié par Pressedcat, 15 novembre 2013 - 11:53 .

[trenq]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

It's deep bro, "high level stuff". It is "art" and it's beyond us brah. So, so deep.


DEEP.

pick ur favorite color :DDDD
Green is for rape, blue is for dictatorship, red is for genocide! 

the only 'deep' about the ending was the music  & the flashbacks.

[Obadiah]

Just thought of another positive way to look at th ending. Remember Sovereign's, "We have no beginning, we have no end, we are infinite... blah blah blah."?

Control - hijack the troll's account
Destroy - the ultimate troll ban

[JasonShepard]

I... Right.

Everything below this line is me.  It's how I played the game, it's the expectations that I went in with, and it's what I took away from it. That's all I can offer you because that's all I have. You're asking for a way to justify/be at peace with the endings? I can tell you why I am.

****************************************

My Expectations:

I don't have a happy ending to ME3, and I didn't go in expecting one. Stopping Saren and Sovereign, stopping the Collectors... those were both tiny  victories compared to taking on the entire Reaper fleet. People were going to die. That was clear to me right from the start.

Bioware is good with their characters, so my expectations were that ME3's character deaths would be meaningful. "Victory through Sacrifice" is one way of putting it, to steal a quote from Casey, but I never put it into those words. I just knew people would die, but hoped they'd be able to achieve stuff with their deaths. Take a look at Mordin. Take a look at Thane. Take a look at Legion. I went in expecting it, and it's what they delivered.

Which brings us to Shepard. Brings us to the end. Brings us to what I was expecting out of the end. I wasn't expecting Shepard to survive. If people are going to die - if this war is going to be one by people sacrificing themselves - then, narratively speaking, the biggest sacrifice will be the one that wins the war. Morbid, but there you have it. I went in expecting Shepard to win the war against the Reapers, but not to survive. Not a happy ending, but it's one that I'd find narratively satisfying.

I even expected him to be alone in the end. Shepard would be sacrificing himself, not just for the galaxy at large, but for the people within it that mean something to him. That has more... weight... if Shepard is alone when he does it. For me at least.

My Ending:

I heard that ME3's ending was controversial long before I reached it myself. Due to university, I didn't get to play ME3 until about a month after it came out. I avoided spoilers like the plague, but the ending controversy was big enough that I still heard about it. So I settled into a mindset. I would enjoy ME3, even if I had to headcanon-repair the ending. It's worth noting that ME3 was the reward that I'd promised myself for working extra hard that spring term.

When I actually reached the ending, I felt... hollow. I wasn't angry. I didn't consider it a terrible ending, but it wasn't great. Confession time: I picked Destroy first time. I'm somewhat known on BSN for being a Control-ender (just take a look at my sig), and we'll get to that, but my first playthrough ended with Destroy. And my Shepard didn't survive - this was back when it was impossible to get the Shepard Breath scene without multiplayer.

So, in all, I got some  of what I wanted out of the ending. Shepard died, saving the galaxy, but damn if the sacrifice - EDI and the Geth - was bigger than I'd expected...

I spent the next day thinking it over, and went back to pick Control the following evening.

Control:

I've written up a blog entry on the details of why I picked Control. It's in my sig if you're interested. The main reason was the realisation that if I could trust the Catalyst on Destroy, I could trust it on Control as well. If either of them were going to be a trap, both would be.

I wasn't willing to touch Synthesis with a long pole, but Control? With the Geth surviving? With EDI surviving? With Shepard making a physical sacrifice to ensure that "No-one else dies today"? I could accept that. And I gradually came to realise that Control gave me more... well... control over the ending. The original endings were ridiculously  vague, and in this regard it was a strength. I was completely free to decide what Shepard did next. An ending where the Reapers can repair the Mass Relays and then leave the galaxy in peace? That's great, I'll take two.

And I continued to run with my sacrificial-Shepard theme. He'd left everything - and everyone  - behind. My original ME3 ending headcanon - long before the Extended Cut - had Control-Shepard dismantling the Reaper fleet out in Dark Space, before returning through the Citadel Relay, spent and exhausted, ready to finally switch off, but wanting to see Earth and his Romance (Ashley) before doing so. The idea got modified as the various DLCs came out, but the basics never really changed. And it was a satisfying ending - for me.

Mass Effect: Invictus, written earlier this year, is how that idea eventually took form as a fanfic.

The Catalyst:

For anyone wanting a coherent perspective on the Catalyst, I really cannot recommend JShepppp's thread highly enough.

As for my own perspective on the Catalyst and its 'problem'... Organic and Synthetics don't work well together. I feel that we've seen regular evidence of that since the very first mission of ME1. So I can understand peace being difficult to achieve. I can even understand the Leviathans drawing the conclusion that peace was impossible (especially since the Leviathans probably 'enforced' peace via Domination - which wouldn't work on Synthetics). So I'm willing to buy into the Catalyst's backstory - although I'd prefer to have played Leviathan before ever finishing the game, since having the Catalyst come out of nowhere in the last ten minutes was a lot to swallow.

However, I don't agree  with the Catalyst.

Which brings us to Rannoch. Rannoch is the reason that Destroy has never sat well with me - I work so hard to make peace between the Geth and the Quarians, only to wipe out the Geth about a month later?

Do I trust the peace between the Geth and the Quarians? Call me an idealist, but YES.
It was difficult to achieve peace on Rannoch. It's one of the rare occasions when I've allowed myself to reload an earlier save to do things differently, because, damn it, I needed to keep Koris alive... (And that meant I had to fight the Reaper twice... Gah, that boss fight...) Anyway, back on topic.

As difficult as it was to achieve, the peace holds promise. Organics and Synthetics working together, and treating each other as equals? From what we've seen of Mass Effect, that's unprecedented.  Synthetics are created to serve Organics - that's repeated again and again and again. (And it makes sense - why else would you have any reason to make them?) Which means Synthetics will have always been subserviant to Organics - and that's a key part of the Catalyst's problem.

But on Rannoch that isn't the case.

Which means my Control-Shepard is happy to just leave the galaxy be and not to worry about the Catalyst's little problem...

And, again, that's satisfying enough for me.

****************************************

There. I don't know if I've 'justified' the endings, as such, and I don't know if my 'unhappy' (for Shepard) ending to ME3 fits the positive mindset you were looking for, but that's the write up of why I'm at peace with ME3's ending.

Modifié par JasonShepard, 16 novembre 2013 - 12:19 .

[AlanC9]

Linkenski wrote...
-Choices = EMS score => High score => best endings.

Huh?

-TIM's final conversation is pure rambling.

Yep. He's an indoctrinated mess. What's the problem?

(Not saying you should like these, just that I don't see what your problem is)

Modifié par AlanC9, 16 novembre 2013 - 12:42 .

[Obadiah]

JasonShepard wrote...
...
My original ME3 ending headcanon - long before the Extended Cut - had Control-Shepard dismantling the Reaper fleet out in Dark Space, before returning through the Citadel Relay, spent and exhausted, ready to finally switch off, but wanting to see Earth and his Romance (Ashley) before doing so.
...

I had a similar head-cannon for the Control ending. I visualized something similar to that scene in 2010: Odessey 2 where David Bowman appears at his wife's bedside, the Shepard AI would appear as it remembered itself when it was alive, still 30-ish next to the LI who was now old and bedridden near death, who had moved on to have a full life with another spouse and children etc... Shep would say something nebulous and touching, but I could never figure out what.

I suppose the Control Shep AI can still do that after it brings some peace to the galaxy.

Some people hate the Control ending, but the first time I saw the original, then the EC, the possibilities blew my mind.

Modifié par Obadiah, 16 novembre 2013 - 01:36 .

[Linkenski]

AlanC9 wrote...

Linkenski wrote...
-Choices = EMS score => High score => best endings.

Huh?

-TIM's final conversation is pure rambling.

Yep. He's an indoctrinated mess. What's the problem?

(Not saying you should like these, just that I don't see what your problem is)

I was refering to all your choices being boiled down to a high score that determined what endings were available.

And didn't it ever strike you that the whole indoctrination stuff in ME3 were just copouts? TIM being indoctrinated was such a lame way to end his character. When you first caught wind of it, I'd hoped he would surprise you later on where he'd somehow circumvented the indoctrination and besting the Reapers, which would then give him a more powerful stance towards the ending.

Modifié par Linkenski, 16 novembre 2013 - 01:32 .

[Stakrin]

 Well I liked them poetically and actually liked then after EC 

the he reapers want to prove to you that you can't win, but you (kind of) do...you can choose the fate of whole specie and eventually the wwjile galacy, but you can never pick your own fare, even if you pick destroy and manage to win, and live , you made sacrifices, and didn't fully win as eventually more machines will rise up. 

Destroy ot extents the time , but suggests that eventually the sacrifices will be forgotten, you have to pick between an all organic temporary time, where you will live as a hero but risk the future, losing yourself  ( but also living alone eternally) to take hold of the ultimate evil, combine all life, facing the risks because you believe the benefits will pay off losing your life in the process (the only two truths in life, after all, are death and change), or staying strong in your previous convictions , even if it means losing everything you worked for.