580 réponses à ce sujet

[maaaad365]

Hating the ending for your own reasons as a piece of writing, or art if you like is one thing, but saying that it is not an actual ending or that it does not fulfill its purpose as an ending is something I can't see or agree with. 

The only purpose that I got from the ending is to screw with our minds. It wasn't a resolution at all concerning Shepard. This is why, in my humble opinion , ME4 or Bioware needs to explain further what the canon ending is. ME3 is an unfinished game to me, that's why I would buy a ME4 game to finish what I started in ME1. I am sure I am not alone on this one.

But I agree with what you said for the most part.


As for the idea with 2 games, one about Shepard and one about another protagonist, I agree, they should/could come up with a new ME game each year , like COD. Make it shorter and release games more frequently.

[CronoDragoon]

maaaad365 wrote...
As for the idea with 2 games, one about Shepard and one about another protagonist, I agree, they should/could come up with a new ME game each year , like COD. Make it shorter and release games more frequently.

No please gods no. If anything longer development times.

[Dr_Extrem]

CronoDragoon wrote...

maaaad365 wrote...
As for the idea with 2 games, one about Shepard and one about another protagonist, I agree, they should/could come up with a new ME game each year , like COD. Make it shorter and release games more frequently.

No please gods no. If anything longer development times.

exactly my thought.

you can give each game 2 years of developementtime (once the ground structure stands, this should be more than enough) and release one mass effect game every year.


pros ..
no shortage of mass effect games
fresh content on a regular base
episodic releases possible


cons:
second team needed (but this could pay off on the long run)

[Excella Gionne]

If you already publicly stated that it will not be about Shepard, then it cannot be about Shepard. Can it be done, yes. Is it wise, probably not.

[Dr_Extrem]

johnnythao89 wrote...

If you already publicly stated that it will not be about Shepard, then it cannot be about Shepard. Can it be done, yes. Is it wise, probably not.

it depends ...

making a sequel with shepard would not work. a reboot on the other hand can.

restart the story on eden prime ... the first new game could be about how shepards becomes a spectre by blowing a conpriracy that would grant an elete circle of spectres and background politicians ultimate power.


they stated, that the new protagonist will not be like shepard .. ok ... and he/she will not have a military/combat background. now its getting difficult.
if the new character has no background as a fighter, then suddenly becoming one (mass effect depends on action as well) will be difficult to explain. mars does not simply come to you and choose you as his avatar ... at least not in our days.

or new the pc is a volus trader and the new mass effect is a galaxy-whide trading simulation. *grasp* run you bastards *grasp*

[Han Shot First]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

I have to quote myself from another thread, but here it goes:

Shepard got a whole trilogy of his own, his squad got a whole trilogy, the Normandy got a whole trilogy, the reapers,cerberus, the genophage, the geth-quarian conflict, the prothean legacy got a whole trilogy of their own. These conflicts and problems are all solved one way or another, and Shepard and co. fulfilled their roles in the history of the ME-universe. Time to let them go.

It's high time to move on and see the ME-universe from another perspective, with a different main character, with completely new faces, with a new ship (if we have our own ship) and with a new type of conflict (not necessarily a galaxy-wide threat), and of course tons of new explorable planets, places, even species, and lore.

The game can have a few references here and where to the original trilogy, but it should not be a tribute or nostalgia game. It should stand on its own and be memorable for what it has to offer. 

This.

[Khavos]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

I have to quote myself from another thread, but here it goes:

Shepard got a whole trilogy of his own, his squad got a whole trilogy, the Normandy got a whole trilogy, the reapers,cerberus, the genophage, the geth-quarian conflict, the prothean legacy got a whole trilogy of their own. These conflicts and problems are all solved one way or another, and Shepard and co. fulfilled their roles in the history of the ME-universe. Time to let them go.

It's high time to move on and see the ME-universe from another perspective, with a different main character, with completely new faces, with a new ship (if we have our own ship) and with a new type of conflict (not necessarily a galaxy-wide threat), and of course tons of new explorable planets, places, even species, and lore.

The game can have a few references here and where to the original trilogy, but it should not be a tribute or nostalgia game. It should stand on its own and be memorable for what it has to offer.

Plus, I don't think Bioware would lie about this. Continuing Shepard's story would feel very forced.

Perfectly said.

[DoomsdayDevice]

The funny thing is that things seem to be resolved by the end of ME3, but if you look carefully there are a few sneaky backdoors they could take.

Apart from IT (the Reapers weren't destroyed and still need to be defeated), there are several more possibilities.

Imagine for a moment that they run with some version of IT. The Geth (and the Reapers) were not destroyed.

Then we have an interesting possibility. Allowing the Geth to use the Reaper code and making peace with the Quarians results in the Geth uploading themselves into the suits of the Quarians to help boost their immune systems. I could easily see how over time, the Quarians would start using implants to help speed up the process even more. The Reaper code could at some point rewrite itself / be rewritten by the Reapers and the (now Reaper controlled) Geth could take control of / synthesize with the Quarians, resulting in some kind of Geth/Quarian version of Collectors/Marauders/ etc.

This idea is not as crazy as it sounds, there's actually a perfect precedent set for it in From Ashes. Javik tells us about the Zha'til, a race in the Prothean cycle that enhanced themselves with synthetic implants and eventually were taken over by them and turned into Reaper monstrosities. I actually believe it's very possible they included this as serious foreshadowing for the Geth/Quarian decision, because the similarities are striking.

In that case, players who killed the Geth would lose the Quarians because they ultimately can't survive without the Geth boosting their immune systems.
Players who killed the Quarians would lose the Geth to the Reaper forces.
Players who made peace would lose both to the Reaper forces.

So in all three scenarios every player would lose both allies, and in two cases you'd have made the enemy even stronger. At the same time, players who sided with the Quarians wouldn't have to feel bad about the Quarians dying, because they stuck with the Quarians and didn't allow the Geth to upload the Reaper code. The Quarians then dying would be something that hardly anyone could have foreseen.

Then of course there's the Krogan situation that has all kinds of possibilities, and the Salarians who have barely been involved in the war so far. Salarians and Krogan could end up going to war with each other.

Not that I seriously think they will actually do this, I'm just saying there are lots of possibilities still, even though things may seem to be more or less resolved right now.

Modifié par DoomsdayDevice, 06 février 2014 - 08:42 .

[Iakus]

GimmeDaGun wrote...


As for Shepard, it's pretty clear also: either he is as dead as dead can be, or his memories and thoughts become one with the Intelligence and the reapers, or lives and has a chance to carry on with his life in what way the individual player sees fit. In the latest case Bioware was wise enough not to railroad Shepard's survival scenario, since they knew that showing a "happily ever after" scene would have taken way too many resources and time, and even then it wouldn't have been able to satisfy everybody's needs. Plus it would have made destroy an even more obvious choice for everybody, taking away the difficulty of choice from the ending. So instead they gave us a small hint about Shepard being alive... they let you interpret it and continue the thread of thought in whatever way you like. 

Except Shepard is dead in too many permutations (all but one, really)

The "Shepard lives" outcome as shown is also clearly not good enough for all too many fans.  SO, yeah, bravo there, Bioware.

Plus, if showing Shepard clearly alive would make such a scenerio too obviously the "right one" despite the hilariously over-the-top "everything is JUST PERFECT" monologue in Synthesis then maybe there's something fundamentally wrong with the endings themselves, no?

[DoomsdayDevice]

StreetMagic wrote...

One other thing, if you sabotage and face Wrex, he's got a pretty cool line about how one of them is going to witness the revenge for this. And since Wrex gets killed after that, it isn't going to be him.

Ooh, nice. Haha. See what I mean?

Sneaky li'l backdoors!

[AlanC9]

StreetMagic wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...
Do you mean that it's a ****ty story since the game does not show Shepard reuniting with his or her LI at its end? Come on! The story of ME is not about ....

If you want to know where I'm coming from, simply ask something. It isn't that difficult to have a conversation with me. But don't ask rhetorical questions and then write a paragraph responding to some bullsh*t you imagined about me.

You did kinda leave the door open for a post like that with:

Turned out to be a ****ty story that didn't address all of it's elements properly.

No actual content there, unless everyone already knows what you mean by "elements."

Modifié par AlanC9, 06 février 2014 - 09:59 .

[GimmeDaGun]

StreetMagic wrote...

One other thing, if you sabotage and face Wrex, he's got a pretty cool line about how one of them is going to witness the revenge for this. And since Wrex gets killed after that, it isn't going to be him.

The game only wraps up nicely if you're a Paragon. In which case, f*ck that. Kind of defeats the purpose of why I started playing these games.

People say many things before they get killed. It could have been an empty threat. Although I agree that the trilogy is heavily paragon-biased and unbalanced when it comes to either decisions or morality system. 

[Farangbaa]

maaaad365 wrote...

Astartes Marine wrote...

Also, when did they canonize an ending? Did I miss some news post or announcement?

http://www.vg247.com...-ending-detail/

This isn't a confirmation, but that is the rumor.

Lol... what?!?!

It ONLY says that the LI thinks Shepard might be alive. That's it. No canonizing, not even a confirmation that Shepard is indeed alive.

[AlanC9]

StreetMagic wrote...

One other thing, if you sabotage and face Wrex, he's got a pretty cool line about how one of them is going to witness the revenge for this. And since Wrex gets killed after that, it isn't going to be him.

The game only wraps up nicely if you're a Paragon. In which case, f*ck that. Kind of defeats the purpose of why I started playing these games.

I don't get what you mean by the second paragraph. What counts as "wrapping up nicely"?

Modifié par AlanC9, 06 février 2014 - 10:02 .

[AlanC9]

iakus wrote...

Plus, if showing Shepard clearly alive would make such a scenerio too obviously the "right one" despite the hilariously over-the-top "everything is JUST PERFECT" monologue in Synthesis then maybe there's something fundamentally wrong with the endings themselves, no?

The design intent was that there would be something wrong with each one of the endings, yep.

[DoomsdayDevice]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

One other thing, if you sabotage and face Wrex, he's got a pretty cool line about how one of them is going to witness the revenge for this. And since Wrex gets killed after that, it isn't going to be him.

The game only wraps up nicely if you're a Paragon. In which case, f*ck that. Kind of defeats the purpose of why I started playing these games.

People say many things before they get killed. It could have been an empty threat. Although I agree that the trilogy is heavily paragon-biased and unbalanced when it comes to either decisions or morality system. 

Yeah, but see, it doesn't even matter what that line was originally intended to mean. What matters is that it's a line that is kind of open to interpretation, so it leaves wiggle room; the writers could use it as a backdoor to continue that plotline.

[GimmeDaGun]

iakus wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...


As for Shepard, it's pretty clear also: either he is as dead as dead can be, or his memories and thoughts become one with the Intelligence and the reapers, or lives and has a chance to carry on with his life in what way the individual player sees fit. In the latest case Bioware was wise enough not to railroad Shepard's survival scenario, since they knew that showing a "happily ever after" scene would have taken way too many resources and time, and even then it wouldn't have been able to satisfy everybody's needs. Plus it would have made destroy an even more obvious choice for everybody, taking away the difficulty of choice from the ending. So instead they gave us a small hint about Shepard being alive... they let you interpret it and continue the thread of thought in whatever way you like. 

Except Shepard is dead in too many permutations (all but one, really)

The "Shepard lives" outcome as shown is also clearly not good enough for all too many fans.  SO, yeah, bravo there, Bioware.

Plus, if showing Shepard clearly alive would make such a scenerio too obviously the "right one" despite the hilariously over-the-top "everything is JUST PERFECT" monologue in Synthesis then maybe there's something fundamentally wrong with the endings themselves, no?

Well, it's pretty obvious we have differing opinions about this. 

I know that many people are not alright with the breath-scene and want more than that. I only wrote the reason why I think that Bioware took the right path with it. 

And yes, there is only one well, ending scenario and not so much ending permutation, since the state of the galaxy and your crew determines that too, in which Shepard survives. I'm totally ok with that, since he had to defeat a ridiculously powerful enemy. Too many ending scenarios where Shepard would have a chance to live happily ever after would cheapen the terror and overwhelming force that the reapers represent. 

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 06 février 2014 - 10:11 .

[GimmeDaGun]

DoomsdayDevice wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

One other thing, if you sabotage and face Wrex, he's got a pretty cool line about how one of them is going to witness the revenge for this. And since Wrex gets killed after that, it isn't going to be him.

The game only wraps up nicely if you're a Paragon. In which case, f*ck that. Kind of defeats the purpose of why I started playing these games.

People say many things before they get killed. It could have been an empty threat. Although I agree that the trilogy is heavily paragon-biased and unbalanced when it comes to either decisions or morality system. 

Yeah, but see, it doesn't even matter what that line was originally intended to mean. What matters is that it's a line that is kind of open to interpretation, so it leaves wiggle room; the writers could use it as a backdoor to continue that plotline.

That's true, but I never expected them to continue the reaper-Shepard saga after the third game. It was intended to be a trilogy. I expected it to be finished with ME3. It is finished. So I never gave any meaning to anything in the games that would pass or outlast ME3. 

As for it not having any consequences in the game, well it's a shame. Unfortunately the choices and consequences in the trilogy is not the strongest and most well done feature. 

[MegaIllusiveMan]

Well, they did have Shepard's body in the beggining of ME2

He was on the Citadel... It was blown to pieces... Right?

StreetMagic wrote...

Yeah, the Krogan is the big thing on
my mind. It's a great quest, but it creates more possibilties than ever.
And some not so obvious ones. Some people think Grunt has been reduced
to "filler", but he is not. Not from where I stand at least. I'm
actually interested in what happens to him if you DON'T cure the
genophage. My favorite scenario is helping Arlakh company and killing
the rachni queen, but also sabotaging the genophage. This leaves the
Krogan in a state much like what was championed by the male Shaman in
ME2. Tuchanka becomes a place where only the most badass Krogan survive.
And their core would be Grunt and Arlakh company. And I wonder if he'd
ever hold it against Shepard for sabotaging the cure.. or just take
delight in the state of pain and survival I'd leave him in.

This pretty much sums it all up...

[GimmeDaGun]

StreetMagic wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

Do you mean that it's a ****ty story since the game does not show Shepard reuniting with his or her LI at its end? Come on! The story of ME is not about Shepard's romance. It's about the reapers, the genophage, the quarian-geth conflict, the rachni extinction, cerberus etc.. All of these are resolved in one way or another in the game. The game also addresses the stories of your squad properly. Those who die in the game reach a point of resolution in the story itself. Those who remain... well, they live their lives as they did before. Showing how these guys become promoted for what they did and carry on with their lives as heroes, celebrities, soldiers, pizza delivery guys, you name it would not change a thing concerning the story itself. You know they made it, you know that there's a future ahead of them. 

As for Shepard, it's pretty clear also: either he is as dead as dead can be, or his memories and thoughts become one with the Intelligence and the reapers, or lives and has a chance to carry on with his life in what way the individual player sees fit. In the latest case Bioware was wise enough not to railroad Shepard's survival scenario, since they knew that showing a "happily ever after" scene would have taken way too many resources and time, and even then it wouldn't have been able to satisfy everybody's needs. Plus it would have made destroy an even more obvious choice for everybody, taking away the difficulty of choice from the ending. So instead they gave us a small hint about Shepard being alive... they let you interpret it and continue the thread of thought in whatever way you like. 

So there you have it: all threads wrapped up. The story ended, no matter how you miss some scenes which would make it complete for you personally. It's impossible to directy continue it. If they do that, it would be the cheapest and least creative fan-service, selling-out way ever. 

Hating the ending for your own reasons as a piece of writing, or art if you like is one thing, but saying that it is not an actual ending or that it does not fulfill its purpose as an ending is something I can't see or agree with. 

If you want to know where I'm coming from, simply ask something. It isn't that difficult to have a conversation with me. But don't ask rhetorical questions and then write a paragraph responding to some bullsh*t you imagined about me.

Well you wrote a non-defined, quite open statement concerning the game as a story. So I took the chance and interpreted it in all ways I could and wrote my reasons why I did not agree with it. 

You don't need to get offended because of it. 

But here it goes: my question to you. Why do you think that ME was a ****ty story that did not address all its elements properly? What elements were you talking about? And why did these unaddressed elements or the fact that they are unaddressed make ME a ****ty story to you? 
In other words: could you elaborate?

[maaaad365]

Guys, there is no resolution regarding Shepard in ME3. Let me explain :

Red ending : we don't know for sure if Shepard survives, but there is a small chance, so no final resolution. The player is left to guess what happened when the Citadel exploded.

Blue Ending : Shepard becomes a Reaper, Question; HOW ? He takes the body of Harbinger ? He controls the Reapers from the Citadel ? Makes no sense, so we have a bogus resolution.

Green Ending : Space Magic turns everything alive or syntethic into a bio-mechanic being and Shepard is in everyone and everywhere ( like God ). This contradics all laws of phisics and common sense. It isn't a resolution to blame it all on Space Magic.

That's why I believe we need a REAL resolution explained in ME4, that's why bringing back Shepard will answer the riddle of the ME3 ending.

[GimmeDaGun]

maaaad365 wrote...

Guys, there is no resolution regarding Shepard in ME3. Let me explain :

Red ending : we don't know for sure if Shepard survives, but there is a small chance, so no final resolution. The player is left to guess what happened when the Citadel exploded.

Blue Ending : Shepard becomes a Reaper, Question; HOW ? He takes the body of Harbinger ? He controls the Reapers from the Citadel ? Makes no sense, so we have a bogus resolution.

Green Ending : Space Magic turns everything alive or syntethic into a bio-mechanic being and Shepard is in everyone and everywhere ( like God ). This contradics all laws of phisics and common sense. It isn't a resolution to blame it all on Space Magic.

That's why I believe we need a REAL resolution explained in ME4, that's why bringing back Shepard will answer the riddle of the ME3 ending.

And how the hell would you bring Shepard back from all those pretty final endings in order to answer the "riddle of the ME3 ending". 

Lets say that someone chose Synthesis or Control, or Refuse, or Low-Mid EMS destroy? How would you make those Shepards return and explain whatever you need explanation for?

Also I don't quite agree with your statement, nor about the need for another Shepard game. To me all the endings are quite self-explanatory and final. I don't see how they are not.