1638 réponses à ce sujet

[CronoDragoon]

Yeah but we'd have two new IPs! One space and one Mad Max BW style!

[AlanC9]

No one made up anything, well, except for the indoctrination theorists maybe, but lets not talk about them...

 

 

 

Don't forget nova theory. Or all of the bad things people make up about Synthesis -- everyone's the same, etc. Or people saying that the Sheplyst will inevitably institute some sort of soul-crushing tyranny.

[CronoDragoon]

Don't forget nova theory. Or all of the bad things people make up about Synthesis -- everyone's the same, etc. Or people saying that the Sheplyst will inevitably institute some sort of soul-crushing tyranny.

 

 

To be fair, expecting people to know a mass relay will simply fall apart if it explodes from within as opposed to destroying planets when impacted by a meteor is....well, let's just say I sympathize with that theory more than the others. Not insofar as people thought it was actually true so much as pointing out something poorly explained.

[AlanC9]

Sure. Pre-EC it was understandable. Though it's contradicted by what's seen onscreen; the first relay to blow is the Citadel relay, which conspicuously fails to even annihilate the Citadel, let alone Earth. But it's not crazy to think that the first blast wasn't the same thing as what we see happen at the Charon relay, even though the VFX for both are the same.

[AlanC9]

I maintain that until they acknowledge that the endings were a mistake, there is cause for concern. If EC had actually been something more than "let us explain this to you louder and slower" then maybe this could have been just a terrible miscalculation, but they know better now".  Or even a paid Broken Steel-like DLC.  But Bioware seems hellbent on alienating a big chunk of their more devoted audience.  they're like the Leviathans, insisting "There was no mistake, it still serves its purpose"

 

You have a point, at least about your personal concerns. Bio never has shrunk from the moral implications of the ending they presented. Maybe they will do that again, or something like it. If you find that sort of thing unacceptable, it's conceivable that Bio's simply done with you.

[Iakus]

You have a point, at least about your personal concerns. Bio never has shrunk from the moral implications of the ending they presented. Maybe they will do that again, or something like it. If you find that sort of thing unacceptable, it's conceivable that Bio's simply done with you.

 

Bio never shrunk from the moral implications of the ending because Bio never acknowledged them to begin with.

 

And rather than actually deal with that, they seemed to thnk that if enough people cheer Shepard fro the chcoie, that will magically make it okay. 

 

And so the gethand EDI become un-persons, nobody cares that they were genetically violated "for their own good" or the people welcome their new Reaper overlords. This is not dealing with the moral implications. This is an outright whitewash.

 

Some people seem to like comparing the endings to how Arrival ended.  And while I wasn't exactly fond of it, at least it (and ME3) let Shepard deal with the fact that Shep was responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths.  it didn't shrink (much) from how horrible an action it was.

 

And that was one colony. 

[dublin omega 223]

Do I still hate ME3 let me think.

 

Yes!

 

Honestly only 1 thing would make me not hate it was if the extended cut DLC had Joker say 1 line of dialogue at the end "I just got word from Admiral Hackett, Shepard's alive."

[AlanC9]

Bio never shrunk from the moral implications of the ending because Bio never acknowledged them to begin with.

 

And rather than actually deal with that, they seemed to thnk that if enough people cheer Shepard fro the chcoie, that will magically make it okay. 

 

And so the gethand EDI become un-persons, nobody cares that they were genetically violated "for their own good" or the people welcome their new Reaper overlords. This is not dealing with the moral implications. This is an outright whitewash.

 

Some people seem to like comparing the endings to how Arrival ended.  And while I wasn't exactly fond of it, at least it (and ME3) let Shepard deal with the fact that Shep was responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths.  it didn't shrink (much) from how horrible an action it was.

 

And that was one colony. 

 

What would Bio have to do to "acknowledge" the moral implications? And what would the significance of such acknowledgement be? I'm not at all clear what you're asking for when you're not asking for the whole thing to be retconned out of existence.

[Iakus]

What would Bio have to do to "acknowledge" the moral implications? And what would the significance of such acknowledgement be? I'm not at all clear what you're asking for when you're not asking for the whole thing to be retconned out of existence.

 

Ideally, they never would have made such endings to begin with.  These implications aren't really hard to imagine, so a little thought, or some more peer reviewing of these endings could have stopped this before it even started.

 

Barring that, in my wildest dreams, I'd like them to actually acknowledge that they didn't think these endingsthrough.  Not try to claim that they simply "weren't clear" about the endings, not claim that "they had no idea players would get so attached"  Simply say "We didn't do right by some of our fans in ending Shepard's story the way we did.  We promise to do better next time"

 

Then start over, and don't let Shepard's arc impinge in any way on what comes next.

 

Like I said, this is a wild, pie-in-the-sky dream.It will never happen IRL.

[Dean_the_Young]

So... groveling, okay, but what else? Was there anything but 'make an ending I like?'

[Iakus]

So... groveling, okay, but what else? Was there anything but 'make an ending I like?'

Since when is acknowledging a mistake "grovelling"?

 

And yes, making a product a buyer actually likes does a lot for goodwill.

 

But then, why am I talking to you?

[Mcfly616]

Since when is acknowledging a mistake "grovelling"?
 
And yes, making a product a buyer actually likes does a lot for goodwill.
 
But then, why am I talking to you?

they acknowledged their "mistake" with the EC. If you weren't satisfied then, you should've moved on.

[Iakus]

EC was the same ending, louder and slower.  It acknowledged nothing but their belief we were too dense to "get it"

[Mcfly616]

EC was the same ending, louder and slower. It acknowledged nothing but their belief we were too dense to "get it"

the narrative concept was the same....yeah. You were never going to get a new and different ending.

It acknowledged plenty of complaints people had with the original ending. Just not those complaints that called for an entirely rewritten ending.

Why did the squadmates just sit at the top of a hill and watch Shepard charge to his death? Where did they disappear to after the beam run? Why the hell did Shepard just magically appear in a keeper tunnel? Why the hell doesn't the Catalyst explain itself in anyway whatsoever? Why is there no dialogue wheel when we encounter the Catalyst so that we can tell it to go screw itself? What 'new beginning' did our choices provide for the galaxy? The EC acknowledged these mistakes. You didn't like the acknowledgement. You should've moved on.

[themikefest]

The extended cut may of acknowledged a few things, but it can't explain how Steve got back on the Normandy. I would be interested to hear the explanation for that.

[Major Crackhead]

I've got my issues with the series (especially ME3), but as a whole, no.

The Mass Effect trilogy is still better than a decent amount of things out there.

[Iakus]

Like I said, same garbage, with more details.  Some of which caused even more problems than before.

 

the "tell the Catalyst to screw itself' was particularly telling of what they thought of those who didn't like the endings.  Might as well have given the Catalyst a trollface.

[Major Crackhead]

Like I said, same garbage, with more details.  Some of which caused even more problems than before.

 

the "tell the Catalyst to screw itself' was particularly telling of what they thought of those who didn't like the endings.  Might as well have given the Catalyst a trollface.

Oh christ you just reminded me of that.

Dat "SO BE IT".

[Mcfly616]

Like I said, same garbage, with more details. Some of which caused even more problems than before.

the "tell the Catalyst to screw itself' was particularly telling of what they thought of those who didn't like the endings. Might as well have given the Catalyst a trollface.

ahhh riiiight.. I forgot you were one of those sensitive types that took offense to that little bit and thought BW was giving you the "finger". BW is damned if they do and damned if they don't with the likes of you.

Unless they gave you a way to destroy the Reapers with zero collateral and Shepard making it out unscathed and alive, you were never going to be happy Iakus.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

the "tell the Catalyst to screw itself' was particularly telling of what they thought of those who didn't like the endings.  Might as well have given the Catalyst a trollface.

 

What else should they have done with that scene, other than lead to a failure and angry Catalyst?

 

The Extended Cut's job was to modify/change the ending, and the ending didn't establish the Reapers' near-invincibility as a fleet. The plot did.

 

I'm sure if they made Refuse an option in the original endings, it would have gone the same way, but they probably weren't expecting... well...

[Iakus]

Yes, that's right.  There is absolutely nothing between frakking up the galaxy before burning Shepard to a crisp and no consequences whatsoever

 

Thanks for clearing that up for everyone 

 

And yes, that scene was undoubtedly "Don't like the 'choices' I gave you?  Frak You!  Rocks fall, everyone dies!"

[Iakus]

What else should they have done with that scene, other than lead to a failure and angry Catalyst?

 

 

Not use it to troll the already angry audience, I'll tell you that much.

 

Who do you think would pick refuse but those who already hated the endings to begin with?  the ones who spend Maker-knows how long shooting the Catalyst rather than make that sadistic decision?

[MrMrPendragon]

Nah. I've made my peace.

Although as a guy who played the trilogy in the mindset of the protagonist (seeing things through Shepard's perspective, instead of a player's perspective), all those complaints about the story and its consistency, and the flaws of some supporting characters, I did notice them, but I was already emotionally invested on every character that my experience of the 3rd game didn't suck as much.

I experienced the whole trilogy while looking at it from Shepard's POV, so to me, most of the things that were flawed, weren't. That's really all I can do, basically try to see the errors as aspects of the game that were intentionally placed there instead of flaws.

I didn't have a lot of complaints to begin with, but the few complaints that i had were big enough to push me to this site and start ranting. Basically most of the stuff in the final half-hour of the 3rd game, and a few complaints in the 2nd game, and a good chunk on the romance.

Overall, this trilogy was still better than most of the stuff out during its time, so yeah, thanks Bioware for giving us, well me atleast (can't speak for others), a good experience and characters that got me emotionally invested in them that it drove me to buy your DLCs (except for Omega - that's overpriced)

[shepard1038]

Not use it to troll the already angry audience, I'll tell you that much.

 

Who do you think would pick refuse but those who already hated the endings to begin with?  the ones who spend Maker-knows how long shooting the Catalyst rather than make that sadistic decision?

Choosing destroy,control or synthesis is sadistic? I would like to know how choosing refuse is better than destroy, control or synthesis.

[Mcfly616]

Yes, that's right.  There is absolutely nothing between frakking up the galaxy before burning Shepard to a crisp and no consequences whatsoever
 
Thanks for clearing that up for everyone 
 
And yes, that scene was undoubtedly "Don't like the 'choices' I gave you?  Frak You!  Rocks fall, everyone dies!"

'it' didn't give you any choices. The ancient super-weapon constructed by the allied races of the galaxy did. What'd you expect, to save the galaxy by 'yelling'? Good luck with that. You were dealt your hand, you didn't like it....and if you didn't play it, well, that's your own stubborn and selfish fault. Like I said, you wanted to destroy the Reapers your way or you were never going to be happy.


I didn't have to clear anything up, Iakus. You're blatantly obvious. Your sig as well as basically every post you make when it comes to all aspects of the ending 'clears it up' for anyone who hasn't been on the BSN in the last 2 years.