176 réponses à ce sujet

[Kataphrut94]

It's pretty easy actually. The endings don't make anything worse; before they happened, the Reapers were killing everyone. After they happened, they stopped. How is that not a success?

[AlanC9]

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

Plus those choices doing whatever else they did, of course. I don't see how this is very different from DA:O, KotOR, or most other RPGs with big choices at the end.

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.

Someone turning out to be an indoctrinated Reaper stooge is part of the setting, isn't it?

[Iakus]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

It's pretty easy actually. The endings don't make anything worse; before they happened, the Reapers were killing everyone. After they happened, they stopped. How is that not a success?

Is submission not preferable to extinction?

[Mcfly616]

iakus wrote...

Kataphrut94 wrote...

It's pretty easy actually. The endings don't make anything worse; before they happened, the Reapers were killing everyone. After they happened, they stopped. How is that not a success?

Is submission not preferable to extinction?

submission?

[Cobalt2113]

iakus wrote...

Kataphrut94 wrote...

It's pretty easy actually. The endings don't make anything worse; before they happened, the Reapers were killing everyone. After they happened, they stopped. How is that not a success?

Is submission not preferable to extinction?

No it isn't. But thankfully the only people that went extinct in my ending were the reapers.

[KaiserShep]

iakus wrote...

Kataphrut94 wrote...

It's pretty easy actually. The endings don't make anything worse; before they happened, the Reapers were killing everyone. After they happened, they stopped. How is that not a success?

Is submission not preferable to extinction?

Technically the one submitting is the catalyst. If it didn't, it would've left you to die in the control room, and allowed the reapers to destroy the device. Presumably, the crucible either did a hard override, making the catalyst require input from someone else, or saw what the crucible was capable of, and was intrigued that maybe it can finally reach the solution it's been searching for. I tend to lean on the former, since it's far more likely that a soldier that has killed hundreds of people, robots and zombies up until this point is far more likely to just toss the reapers aside and blow the catalyst into oblivion. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 16 novembre 2013 - 04:23 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

AlanC9 wrote...

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

Plus those choices doing whatever else they did, of course. I don't see how this is very different from DA:O, KotOR, or most other RPGs with big choices at the end.

I think what he means is that the ending does not take the actual 'choices' made throughout the game into account, but instead just consideres some number (Effective Military Strength) where 'choices' effect the value of the number. For example, in DA:O if your player character decides to strike the final blow, whether or not your character lives is based off an exact previous choice. The later, in my opinion, gives the previous choice more weight as it has an discernible consequence. In ME3 you don't get that. This is really obvious if you play one of those 'Worst Mass Effect' runs -- the one where you kill off as many characters as possible (kill Wrex on Virmire, let everyone die on the suicide mission except for two squadmates, betray everyone in ME3). However, if you play a little bit of multiplayer you'll get the same 'choices' as the person who didn't make those decisions.

[SwobyJ]

Yeah, ultimately, Mass Effect's choices are.. well, they're caused cosmetic by many, but I'd go as far as to call them 'cinematic choices' instead.

They're rarely significant cause-and-effect ones.

[favoritehookeronthecitadel]

I "umph" "mmph" just go in my closet and masturbate until it's over.

[Kataphrut94]

iakus wrote...

Kataphrut94 wrote...

It's pretty easy actually. The endings don't make anything worse; before they happened, the Reapers were killing everyone. After they happened, they stopped. How is that not a success?

Is submission not preferable to extinction?

Even if we were actually submitting, which we are not in any of the endings that matter (aka the ones that aren't Refuse), of course it bloody is!

[Rotward]

The ending sucks, but so what, the point is to play. Enjoy the game leading up to the end, you don't HAVE to finish.

[favoritehookeronthecitadel]

Rotward wrote...

The ending sucks, but so what, the point is to play. Enjoy the game leading up to the end, you don't HAVE to finish.

That's what she said!

[JDee3]

You can always head cannon that Geth and EDI don't die in destroy. You can head cannon the Citadel opening its arms and starts raping Harbinger in Synthesis. You can head cannon Shepard actually being teleported in synthesis and control ending. You can headcannon Shep coming back in some form for control and reuniting with whoever she romanced.

I would play Citadel DLC after the ending.. it helps.

Modifié par JDee3, 16 novembre 2013 - 07:13 .

[Kataphrut94]

StreetMagic wrote...

Rotward wrote...

The ending sucks, but so what, the point is to play. Enjoy the game leading up to the end, you don't HAVE to finish.

Actually all of Priority Earth sucks. The ending is only a small part of it. I think you have to go back to maybe Horizon or Cronos to get this feeling of "enjoying the game leading up to the end". Earth is just a shooting gallery, where your squad doesn't talk (outside EDI with that missle scene), no music, drab blues and greys, no extended squad actions like ME2's suicide mission, no decent goodbyes from past squadmates.. And last but not last, the crappiest speech in the series.

Which speech was that, the one we give to our team before the final battle? What was wrong with it?

[Kataphrut94]

StreetMagic wrote...

I wouldn't call it submitting. I'll just step out of the story for a sec and speak as a player: I call it lousy gameplay. If I choose Destroy, I want to participate in the act of destruction. It kind of takes the fun out of it to be "allowed" to destroy by the person you want to destroy. In that sense, it's "submission".

All I'm doing is choosing the "concept" of Destroy. Not actually destroying. That's why I think the Reaper baby, and leapfrog Saren, silly as they were, are still better. I got to actually destroy them and interact with a few gameplay elements (mostly just targeting, but still. They were OK boss fights).

I see what you're saying, but to me the real 'gameplay' climax was that last missile defence section and everything afterward was just wrapping up the story. A wave defence like that is probably better suited to the climax of a cover-based shooter than a boss fight anyway. Also, as much as we'd all like it, Destroying the Reapers is simply not something we can really execute in gameplay, same with Controlling or Synthesising.

[Cobalt2113]

I wouldn't say that anything was particularly wrong with it. But I found the speeches from 1 and 2 much more inspiring. And I think that's the general consensus.

[JDee3]

StreetMagic wrote...

Rotward wrote...

The ending sucks, but so what, the point is to play. Enjoy the game leading up to the end, you don't HAVE to finish.

Actually all of Priority Earth sucks. The ending is only a small part of it. I think you have to go back to maybe Horizon or Cronos to get this feeling of "enjoying the game leading up to the end". Earth is just a shooting gallery, where your squad doesn't talk (outside EDI with that missle scene), no music, drab blues and greys, no extended squad actions like ME2's suicide mission, no decent goodbyes from past squadmates.. And last but not last, the crappiest speech in the series.

The fact that they gave each surviving squadmate their own goodbye was good enough for me.. and I actually really liked Liara's goodbye (one of the most memorable Shep and squadmate moments to me) and Jack's romanced goodbye and Javik talking about his future was really interesting. None of the squadmates even know if you're going to die or they're going to die, they're all basically just giving the best of luck and acknowledging the fact that whatever happens, this is the end of a struggle that brought them all together and they were happy to have been by Shepards side in the fight against the Reapers. As the gamers we know it's goodbye but it wouldn't have made sense for them to go really into it story wise because for all these characters know they will be at the Citadel having drinks a week later. And the last battle on Earth was really intense espeically if you played it on Insanity and didn't know what was going to happen. It was just you, probably your 2 favorite squadmates and endless amount of reapers coming at you in the biggest space the game has ever given for a battle and a reaper evenutally shooting at you while a bunch of Banshees attack. And then that beam run and Harbinger and ugh.. it was all great up until they gave those 3 options for an ending when they really could've just ended it with Hackett screaming nothings happening and Shepard pressing something to activate the crucible and wipe out all the reapers

[Linkenski]

AlanC9 wrote...

Linkenski wrote...
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.

Someone turning out to be an indoctrinated Reaper stooge is part of the setting, isn't it?

Of course it was, but I think it was a major disservice to use TIM's character to show it. They did it with both TIM and Udina (rumored) but to me it just seemed like a cheap way for the writers to make them do "evil" stuff.

TIM wanting to control the reapers did seem like something he'd want but for every single conversation you have with him it's just fancy-talk, and he never tells you WHY he wants to control them or what he hopes to achieve with it, at least not in compelling arguments and it's as if the writers just said "Hey, he's indoctrinated, he doesn't have to make sense" and I don't know about you, but I think that's awfully lazy and it made TIM incredibly underwhelming in ME3.

[Linkenski]

JDee3 wrote...

You can always head cannon that Geth and EDI don't die in destroy. You can head cannon the Citadel opening its arms and starts raping Harbinger in Synthesis. You can head cannon Shepard actually being teleported in synthesis and control ending. You can headcannon Shep coming back in some form for control and reuniting with whoever she romanced.

I would play Citadel DLC after the ending.. it helps.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Citadel DLC, but for me it's just not a part of ME3 at all. The tone is different and it's clearly made to be pure lolz and fanservice/closure. ME3 is like a movie and the Citadel DLC is like a whole other movie, so I don't really want to touch that anymore and besides I think I've seen everything it has.

[anmiro]

Personally I like to go with the Sopranos ending. Thats where I play through the entire game until theres nothing left but the final mission and then I shut the game off. If you want to leave ME3 with any feeling of satisfaction, then I suggest turning off the game when you've completed the Citadel DLC.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Killing Robo-Cuttlefish aaaaaand the sexbot is really enough of a "victory" for me.

Haven't played the game in over a year but there it is.