356 réponses à ce sujet

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

StreetMagic wrote...

Destroy in the ending isn't so much about destruction. It's about chaos. Destroying the genophage cure isn't chaotic - it's an act of order and playing god.. directing evolution towards specific goals. Same goes for eradicating the rachni. These aren't the same type of "Destroy" as the AI proliferation issue imo.

All you're doing in the end is Destroying the Controller (the Catalyst). He warns that the chaos will come back. This  could still be a good thing in the mindset of a person who cures the genophage or frees the rachni. They take their chances with chaos.

I would say that destroy (along with the two other choices) are far more about removing a threat to make sure they don't come back to bite you, which is a rather renegade attitude. So I do believe this guy's rewrite and idea of the ending choices is complete nonsense.

And really, trying to argue which of the 3 ending choices belongs to which morality is silly, considering even Bioware didn't tag any of them.

Modifié par Lizardviking, 22 janvier 2014 - 02:20 .

[Redbelle]

wolfsite wrote...

I've been going around different threads about this and been seeing a lot of words being brought up again when talking about Mass Effect fans:  "Entitled"  "Whiners" "immature".  Some even called ME fans pathetic for not being able to move on where other game series have had just as bad or worse endings yet those fanbases just got on with it without having to "whine" about how there lives are destroyed by 5 minutes of controversial material.

Many even called this Pompous since fans act like anything they write is automatically better than what Bioware writes even though fans have the advantage of knowing how to manipulate others for a response or since they already have completed work they could change where Bioware did not.

Can't believe how bad of a reputation the ME fanbase still has.


Note: I'm just talking about what I have seen online, non of these are my own opinions.

For all those who brand those, who didn't like the ending, in derogatory tones...... Shame on you.

This chap who wrote 400 pages has demonstrated passion, commitment, imagination.......

Need I go on?

The simple fact is this...... As consumer's we are often forced to seperate out what we want, from what we don't want. Product quality is never a given. Merely taken for granted as manufacturing processes are largely automated. This in turn leads to complatency in expectations as what we buy and consume rarely varies in the satisfaction it delivers.

But this should not, nor should we as consumers, let the manufacturer's play with our expectations by finding the lowest point of satisfaction for the maximum price they can command and deliver that to us.

'ME3's ending' was a travesty when you compare it to the way BW have ended their other titles. The rest of the game had high and low points, but never entered into the same area that the ending went in terms of gaming/narrative quality

It was aweful when you compared it to other endings in Sci-Fi that range from walking into the sunset with a member of the opposite gender hanging off your arm to the hero making a sacrifice...... for reasons that the audience were able to accept in a running narrative and understand. (Buffy Summer's? I'm looking at you during the season final when you fought a god).

This is the truth of it. Those gamers out there who support a franchise and then berate the developers for drop sin quality are the ones who will move gaming excellence forward by demanding high standards be maintained.

The ones who label those who demand quality as whiny...... Who mistake a simple thing like fan devotion as entitled...... They are the ones who will drive gaming into the dark ages....... by simply refusing to entertain the through that game developers need it's fans to have dialogue with them. So the creators will know what fans are willing to accept. So they will know if the way they delivered their stories and gameplay was received well or poorly.

The ME3 debacle was partly fuelled by the fans but it was the media who poured fuel on the fire and started this them vs us mentality that has all the hall marks of Britney Spears sitting down to endorse George Bush by saying that we should all just listen and do whatever he says.

Gamers have more intelligence than that.

So let's bring this debate up to a level of adult maturity.

Those who belittle the opinion's of those who didn't like the ending? They are the whiners. They are the ones who feel entitled the products of the company beyond the point of reason. And given that they cannot, or will not act as a measure of quality control, they will eventually kill that company in that they refuse to acknowledge the wider consumer base that companies also rely upon to make back what they invest in their products.

These die hard company loving whiner's may be a gift to these companies if they need a media sound bite for how great their games are. But without the long-term investment of those who provide constructive critisism, as to what aspects of these games are good and bad, then these companies will fail to keep up with customer demand and expectation.

And just in case....... Because this is where I'm at.

Yes I'm over it.

All's forgiven......

But never forgotten.

Modifié par Redbelle, 22 janvier 2014 - 02:24 .

[Iakus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

I find it funny how playing a Shepard who destroys the genophage cure, destroys the rachni, and destroys the geth... ends up getting locked out of the Destroy ending. Yeah, that makes total sense.

Wow. You would think that a Shepard who likes destorying races would be all for destorying another race at the end. According to this guy, nope. lol!

If you haven't noticed, in this rewrite Destroy is canonically the Paragon choice, in total disregard of the fact that it's based on 100% pure Renegade reasoning - sacrificing a part of your forces to make sure the enemy is DEAD. ROFL, I can't take this guy seriously, but in the face of that dogma, locking that Shepard out of Destroy makes perfect sense.

Except in this version, the Hgh EMS version, there is no sacrifice of forces in choosing Destroy.

Now I don't agree that either option should be canonically Paragon or Renegade, and is in fact the major sticking point I have in these endings.

[Iakus]

Redbelle wrote...

For all those who brand those, who didn't like the ending, in derogatory tones...... Shame on you.

This chap who wrote 400 pages has demonstrated passion, commitment, imagination.......

Need I go on?

The simple fact is this...... As consumer's we are often forced to seperate out what we want, from what we don't want. Product quality is never a given. Merely taken for granted as manufacturing processes are largely automated. This in turn leads to complatency in expectations as what we buy and consume rarely varies in the satisfaction it delivers.

But this should not, nor should we as consumers, let the manufacturer's play with our expectations by finding the lowest point of satisfaction for the maximum price they can command and deliver that to us.

'ME3's ending' was a travesty when you compare it to the way BW have ended their other titles. The rest of the game had high and low points, but never entered into the same area that the ending went in terms of gaming/narrative quality

It was aweful when you compared it to other endings in Sci-Fi that range from walking into the sunset with a member of the opposite gender hanging off your arm to the hero making a sacrifice...... for reasons that the audience were able to accept in a running narrative and understand. (Buffy Summer's? I'm looking at you during the season final when you fought a god).

This is the truth of it. Those gamers out there who support a franchise and then berate the developers for drop sin quality are the ones who will move gaming excellence forward by demanding high standards be maintained.

The ones who label those who demand quality as whiny...... Who mistake a simple thing like fan devotion as entitled...... They are the ones who will drive gaming into the dark ages....... by simply refusing to entertain the through that game developers need it's fans to have dialogue with them. So the creators will know what fans are willing to accept. So they will know if the way they delivered their stories and gameplay was received well or poorly.

The ME3 debacle was partly fuelled by the fans but it was the media who poured fuel on the fire and started this them vs us mentality that has all the hall marks of Britney Spears sitting down to endorse George Bush by saying that we should all just listen and do whatever he says.

Gamers have more intelligence than that.

So let's bring this debate up to a level of adult maturity.

Those who belittle the opinion's of those who didn't like the ending? They are the whiners. They are the ones who feel entitled the products of the company beyond the point of reason. And given that they cannot, or will not act as a measure of quality control, they will eventually kill that company in that they refuse to acknowledge the wider consumer base that companies also rely upon to make back what they invest in their products.

These die hard company loving whiner's may be a gift to these companies if they need a media sound bite for how great their games are. But without the long-term investment of those who provide constructive critisism, as to what aspects of these games are good and bad, then these companies will fail to keep up with customer demand and expectation.

And just in case....... Because this is where I'm at.

Yes I'm over it.

All's forgiven......

But never forgotten.

This post deserves a standing ovation

[GimmeDaGun]

Well, some of the guy's statements are pretty arrogant, and he is quite certain about his rewrite being a lot better than the original script, even if it is...well... far from being awesome or jaw dropping (I even dare to say that I find it weaker than the original script). I've read some of his ideas, and I'm not convinced.

One thing I find amusing and interesting about his "rewrite" though. After a year, I just played the trilogy again with the high resolution texture and lightning mods with a custom character (my most enjoyable playthrough so far), and I was just wondering how much more potential this trilogy has. I have tons of ideas about a possible revisioning and reboot of it. It would bring some drastic changes to the overall tone and to the over-arching story ark (most probably people who love the over-the-top light-hearted and power-trippy stuff of the trilogy would not be fans of my vision). Well, to put it straight: one day I'd definitely would welcome a reboot with updated graphics, and a complete reimagining of the trilogy with a thourough rewrite of the story and many of the characters.

My version would go to a heavily morally ambiguous direction with a lot darker and more "realistic" setting with a darker and grittier overall tone with a lot more mistery, philosophy and even sci-fi horror elements in it. It would put the emphasis on the choices and consequences heavily (even concerning the characters) and there would be no power-trippy, easy-way out, hero man way to play the game. It would be about really hard consequences of truly hard choices. So it would be an epic misterious sci-fi thriller and war-saga. An anti-space-opera if you like.

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 22 janvier 2014 - 02:35 .

[Dubozz]

still a better ending than mass effect 3

[chemiclord]

wolfsite wrote...

I've been going around different threads about this and been seeing a lot of words being brought up again when talking about Mass Effect fans:  "Entitled"  "Whiners" "immature".  Some even called ME fans pathetic for not being able to move on where other game series have had just as bad or worse endings yet those fanbases just got on with it without having to "whine" about how there lives are destroyed by 5 minutes of controversial material.

Many even called this Pompous since fans act like anything they write is automatically better than what Bioware writes even though fans have the advantage of knowing how to manipulate others for a response or since they already have completed work they could change where Bioware did not.

Can't believe how bad of a reputation the ME fanbase still has.


Note: I'm just talking about what I have seen online, non of these are my own opinions.

Hell, even I've had some bile slung my way from angry, embittered readers.  The most recent one I had to forward to local and state authorities because he threatened that if he ever found out where I lived he'd burn my house down.  But I also know to take a deep breath, let it out, and remind myself the people with THAT level of violent pushback are the rarity.

However, the media latches onto the few extremes, and THAT becomes the narrative of the fanbase as a whole, not that they are the gross exception.  Take a look even at the People's Champion (Forbes) and what stories they chose to push during the entire thing.  It was all about the most incendiary headline, it was all about focusing on the over-the-top rather than the genteel.

I'm not convinced the ME fanbase is particularly any worse than any other fanbase... we just had a particularly enthusiastic clump of crazies who chose some very unique ways to express their displeasure.

[MayonnaiseNipple]

iakus wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

For all those who brand those, who didn't like the ending, in derogatory tones...... Shame on you.

This chap who wrote 400 pages has demonstrated passion, commitment, imagination.......

Need I go on?

The simple fact is this...... As consumer's we are often forced to seperate out what we want, from what we don't want. Product quality is never a given. Merely taken for granted as manufacturing processes are largely automated. This in turn leads to complatency in expectations as what we buy and consume rarely varies in the satisfaction it delivers.

But this should not, nor should we as consumers, let the manufacturer's play with our expectations by finding the lowest point of satisfaction for the maximum price they can command and deliver that to us.

'ME3's ending' was a travesty when you compare it to the way BW have ended their other titles. The rest of the game had high and low points, but never entered into the same area that the ending went in terms of gaming/narrative quality

It was aweful when you compared it to other endings in Sci-Fi that range from walking into the sunset with a member of the opposite gender hanging off your arm to the hero making a sacrifice...... for reasons that the audience were able to accept in a running narrative and understand. (Buffy Summer's? I'm looking at you during the season final when you fought a god).

This is the truth of it. Those gamers out there who support a franchise and then berate the developers for drop sin quality are the ones who will move gaming excellence forward by demanding high standards be maintained.

The ones who label those who demand quality as whiny...... Who mistake a simple thing like fan devotion as entitled...... They are the ones who will drive gaming into the dark ages....... by simply refusing to entertain the through that game developers need it's fans to have dialogue with them. So the creators will know what fans are willing to accept. So they will know if the way they delivered their stories and gameplay was received well or poorly.

The ME3 debacle was partly fuelled by the fans but it was the media who poured fuel on the fire and started this them vs us mentality that has all the hall marks of Britney Spears sitting down to endorse George Bush by saying that we should all just listen and do whatever he says.

Gamers have more intelligence than that.

So let's bring this debate up to a level of adult maturity.

Those who belittle the opinion's of those who didn't like the ending? They are the whiners. They are the ones who feel entitled the products of the company beyond the point of reason. And given that they cannot, or will not act as a measure of quality control, they will eventually kill that company in that they refuse to acknowledge the wider consumer base that companies also rely upon to make back what they invest in their products.

These die hard company loving whiner's may be a gift to these companies if they need a media sound bite for how great their games are. But without the long-term investment of those who provide constructive critisism, as to what aspects of these games are good and bad, then these companies will fail to keep up with customer demand and expectation.

And just in case....... Because this is where I'm at.

Yes I'm over it.

All's forgiven......

But never forgotten.

This post deserves a standing ovation

>Implying constructive criticism exists on BSN.
>Implying the internet operates on anything resembling a mature level of public dialogue.

Personally insulting the developers is not constructive criticism. Death threats are not constructive. Whining to the BBB is not constructive. Add in the general hyperbole and the caustic nature of anonymity on the internet, you'll forgive me for thinking that writing 400 pages of "fixes" for someone else's creative work could be considered somewhat arrogant.

Cupcakes were pretty chill though.

Furthermore, why does is have to be a friggin conspiracy if I happen to like Mass Effect 3?

This post deserves a better ending.

[Kel Riever]

This report has more work and better ideas than the ending(s) that were provided for Mass Effect 3.

[dreamgazer]

MayonnaiseNipple wrote...

Furthermore, why does is have to be a friggin conspiracy if I happen to like Mass Effect 3?

Welcome to the world of appreciating a post-DA:O BioWare game. 

[dreamgazer]

Kel Riever wrote...

This report has more work and better ideas than the ending(s) that were provided for Mass Effect 3.

How do you feel about that morality system and utter lack of choice, Kel?

[Redbelle]

dreamgazer wrote...

Kel Riever wrote...

This report has more work and better ideas than the ending(s) that were provided for Mass Effect 3.

How do you feel about that morality system and utter lack of choice, Kel?

ME3's or the one in the blueprint?

Because ignoring the report and the way morality was handled in Me3......

I think that the thing that get's ignored is that BW games allow the gamer to establish the identity of the character. This is something I feel stems from it's TableTop roll play days where, who the character is, is of equal importance to, what the character does.

I hope that BioWare do not forget this distinction as it listens to gamers clamour for doing away with the morality system. For all it's faults it allows you to define who your Shepard is in a way that other games never bother to consider in favour of wham bam thank you maam spectacle.

Modifié par Redbelle, 22 janvier 2014 - 03:59 .

[dreamgazer]

Redbelle wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Kel Riever wrote...

This report has more work and better ideas than the ending(s) that were provided for Mass Effect 3.

How do you feel about that morality system and utter lack of choice, Kel?

ME3's or the one in the blueprint?

The one on the blueprint. Joking or not, the description above doesn't fit ME3's ending.

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...
If you haven't noticed, in this rewrite Destroy is canonically the Paragon choice, in total disregard of the fact that it's based on 100% pure Renegade reasoning - sacrificing a part of your forces to make sure the enemy is DEAD. ROFL, I can't take this guy seriously, but in the face of that dogma, locking that Shepard out of Destroy makes perfect sense.

Except in this version, the Hgh EMS version, there is no sacrifice of forces in choosing Destroy.

Now I don't agree that either option should be canonically Paragon or Renegade, and is in fact the major sticking point I have in these endings.

True, but Paragon/Renegade/Neutral is how the guy saw the original choice. It's not a valid criticism of the rewrite, but it is a valid criticism of the author's comprehension and competence.

The more I look into this, actually, the weaker the author's comprehension looks. There are some really basic goofs here, like how many protheans survived on Ilos.

Modifié par AlanC9, 22 janvier 2014 - 03:53 .

[Clayless]

Redbelle wrote...

For all those who brand those, who didn't like the ending, in derogatory tones...... Shame on you.

This chap who wrote 400 pages has demonstrated passion, commitment, imagination.......

Need I go on?

The simple fact is this...... As consumer's we are often forced to seperate out what we want, from what we don't want. Product quality is never a given. Merely taken for granted as manufacturing processes are largely automated. This in turn leads to complatency in expectations as what we buy and consume rarely varies in the satisfaction it delivers.

But this should not, nor should we as consumers, let the manufacturer's play with our expectations by finding the lowest point of satisfaction for the maximum price they can command and deliver that to us.

'ME3's ending' was a travesty when you compare it to the way BW have ended their other titles. The rest of the game had high and low points, but never entered into the same area that the ending went in terms of gaming/narrative quality

It was aweful when you compared it to other endings in Sci-Fi that range from walking into the sunset with a member of the opposite gender hanging off your arm to the hero making a sacrifice...... for reasons that the audience were able to accept in a running narrative and understand. (Buffy Summer's? I'm looking at you during the season final when you fought a god).

This is the truth of it. Those gamers out there who support a franchise and then berate the developers for drop sin quality are the ones who will move gaming excellence forward by demanding high standards be maintained.

The ones who label those who demand quality as whiny...... Who mistake a simple thing like fan devotion as entitled...... They are the ones who will drive gaming into the dark ages....... by simply refusing to entertain the through that game developers need it's fans to have dialogue with them. So the creators will know what fans are willing to accept. So they will know if the way they delivered their stories and gameplay was received well or poorly.

The ME3 debacle was partly fuelled by the fans but it was the media who poured fuel on the fire and started this them vs us mentality that has all the hall marks of Britney Spears sitting down to endorse George Bush by saying that we should all just listen and do whatever he says.

Gamers have more intelligence than that.

So let's bring this debate up to a level of adult maturity.

Those who belittle the opinion's of those who didn't like the ending? They are the whiners. They are the ones who feel entitled the products of the company beyond the point of reason. And given that they cannot, or will not act as a measure of quality control, they will eventually kill that company in that they refuse to acknowledge the wider consumer base that companies also rely upon to make back what they invest in their products.

These die hard company loving whiner's may be a gift to these companies if they need a media sound bite for how great their games are. But without the long-term investment of those who provide constructive critisism, as to what aspects of these games are good and bad, then these companies will fail to keep up with customer demand and expectation.

And just in case....... Because this is where I'm at.

Yes I'm over it.

All's forgiven......

But never forgotten.

Absolute nonsense.

This post assumes all the feedback Bioware got for the end was remotely constructive, when probably about 98% of it was incredible whining. In fact someone in this thread even pointed out that they sent many e-mails full of hatred to Bioware. That's not constructive. All the lies that got perpetrated after the end came out (I mean how much times do you see people quoting that "No a,b,c ending?), that's not remotely constructive.

It also assumes that the masses are, em, "quality control". Mistaking opinion for fact you were there.

It's not the people that respect creators for their work that's driving in to the "dark ages", it's people that think the masses are "quality control" (probably why the biggest mass appeal game has amazing quality, Call of Duty.. oh..) and that demanding developers don't be creative, or tell the story they want, or try something new, who are dragging gaming to the dark ages.

Someone above said this post deserved a better ending. It actually deserved a better beginning, middle and end.

Modifié par Robosexual, 22 janvier 2014 - 03:59 .

[Daemul]

Someone has to tell this guy to not let personal bias creep into his writing, it's bad form.

[Redbelle]

Robosexual wrote...

Absolute nonsense.

This post assumes all the feedback Bioware got for the end was remotely constructive, when probably about 98% of it was incredible whining. In fact someone in this thread even pointed out that they sent many e-mails full of hatred to Bioware. That's not constructive. All the lies that got perpetrated after the end came out (I mean how much times do you see people quoting that "No a,b,c ending?), that's not remotely constructive.

It also assumes that the masses are, em, "quality control". Mistaking opinion for fact you were there.

It's not the people that respect creators for their work that's driving in to the "dark ages", it's people that think the masses are "quality control" (probably why the biggest mass appeal game has amazing quality, Call of Duty.. oh..) and that demanding developers don't be creative, or tell the story they want, or try something new, who are dragging gaming to the dark ages.

Someone above said this post deserved a better ending. It actually deserved a better beginning, middle and end.

So what your saying is that 2% of it was actually helpful? What do you think that 2% said......

I won't ask where your numbers are coming from because, you know...... we've had that discussion sooooooo many times on BSN that it's kinda....... done with.

@Dreamgazer.

you replied before I finished an edit. Here's my take on morality and how it acts as a bridge between gamer and avatar.



"Because ignoring the report and the way morality was handled in Me3......

I think
that the thing that get's ignored is that BW games allow the gamer to
establish the identity of the character. This is something I feel stems
from it's TableTop roll play days where, who the character is, is of
equal importance to, what the character does.

I hope that BioWare
do not forget this distinction as it listens to gamers talk of
doing away with the morality system. For all it's faults it allows you
to define who your Shepard is in a way that other games never bother to
consider in favour of wham bam thank you maam spectacle.

Morality allowed gamers to turn their builds of Shepard into variations of the same build.

I could take 4d6 and roll up a Rogue, copy the character sheet, then give it to another. What you then get is two completely different Rogues played differently as the two players apply different ethics to how the rogue goes about it's function. You take a game character like Dante, or Snake....... Those character's are locked in stone. The player has no say in who they are. Only how well they do what they do."

Modifié par Redbelle, 22 janvier 2014 - 04:13 .

[Kel Riever]

@RedBelle. Dreamgazer is just trolling me about the ending which he knows is atrocious and yet he likes it

You know I just trolling you back, D

I, of course, am trolling BioWare.  But that's because they trolled me first when they wrote that glowjob into the game.

Modifié par Kel Riever, 22 janvier 2014 - 04:14 .

[Redbelle]

Kel Riever wrote...

@RedBelle. Dreamgazer is just trolling me about the ending which he knows is atrocious and yet he likes it

You know I just trolling you back, D

Your trolling me? That's it......! Wylds seducing Rothan!

[Kel Riever]

No. I am trolling D(reamgazer).

[Fixers0]

Just my 2 cents.

Robosexual wrote...
All the lies that got perpetrated after the end came out

If i recall corectly, most of the lies were actually made before the game got released.

Robosexual wrote...
It also assumes that the masses are, em, "quality control". Mistaking opinion for fact you were there.

Opinion, Like stating that 98% of the critisism on the Mass Effect 3 ending was whining?

[Redbelle]

Kel Riever wrote...

No. I am trolling D(reamgazer).

.......Aren't I good enough for you anymore?

Our Character's were going to kill an Oculous together!

........

It's Lucy isn't it. You like her better than me!

Modifié par Redbelle, 22 janvier 2014 - 04:20 .

[AlanC9]

Redbelle wrote...
I hope that BioWare
do not forget this distinction as it listens to gamers talk of
doing away with the morality system. For all it's faults it allows you
to define who your Shepard is in a way that other games never bother to
consider in favour of wham bam thank you maam spectacle.

Morality allowed gamers to turn their builds of Shepard into variations of the same build.

I could take 4d6 and roll up a Rogue, copy the character sheet, then give it to another. What you then get is two completely different Rogues played differently as the two players apply different ethics to how the rogue goes about it's function. You take a game character like Dante, or Snake....... Those character's are locked in stone. The player has no say in who they are. Only how well they do what they do."

How does a morality system help with this? Most good PnP systems don't have one.

[Chashan]

Nightwriter wrote...
Figured, but I had to be clear, since upgrading us still leaves in the massive "transforming people against their will" thorn that people can't seem to get around.

Which I'm not sure how to remove. Fusion is kind of the essence of Synthesis.

Like your idea though, because in this case people are being changed against their will for the purpose of opposing the Reapers, not the purpose of joining with them. Somehow that changes things a little for me.

To me, granting Übermenschentum for everyone for the purpose of combating the Reapers does more than that. It is part of the package for Green as is, and I'd leave it there simply because otherwise one might as well devise something entirely different.

One would still have to focus on the issues and problems this brings, which the good VI could bring to the table too: permanent changes to psychology, unpredictable impact of this upon the post-war galaxy. Could be shown in the epilogues, too: spread of psychoses, inability of some to adapt to their new form, etc.

All that in exchange for a permanent, improved physical condition, and mayhaps a shot at immortality...

dreamgazer wrote...
Nope, especially with that rigid abomination of a choice-free morality system. 

And why, exactly, are we "scrubs"?

To be fair, that morality-meter still is a result of choices made, so that statement is not entirely true.

As I said before, however, I see the problem with making it not just the sole but prime determiner here.

AlanC9

Another weird thing is that he gets rid of the Catalyst but leaves the
Reaper motivations the same. Usually you don't see one without the
other. What problem is getting rid of the Catalyst supposed to solve,
again?

I found this odd, too, and would have wished the man put certain dialogue's content in prose in general. Green in particular just does not add up in this scenario, possibly moreso than it already doesn't in the base-game, EC included.

Modifié par Chashan, 22 janvier 2014 - 04:24 .

[dreamgazer]

Kel Riever wrote...

@RedBelle. Dreamgazer is just trolling me about the ending which he knows is atrocious and yet he likes it

You know I just trolling you back, D

Well, you know I have my own issues with the ending and that I like and dislike elements of it, but I'm curious about how you (and others) feel towards the author's rigid morality structure in this new ending, where basically everyone with a score of 84% Paragon or lower gets shafted.  That's much, much worse than what was delivered.   CidShep, MelisandreShep, and LisbethShep find this to be a bloody joke. 

People gripe about not being able to RP their Shepards in the decision chamber (which is inaccurate), but this is on another level altogether. 

Modifié par dreamgazer, 22 janvier 2014 - 04:27 .