202 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

Again, at the end of it all, the GMs decided that had something "cool" they wanted to do with our characters, so they broke the agreement. The backlash shows that.
 
If that was what BioWare wanted to do all along. I have no issue with this, but they should NOT have marketed the game as an action RPG because it ceases to be an RPG in any way at that point.

Eh, then the series ceased to be an RPG in any way and the DM/GM/developer broke this "agreement" in the very first mission of ME1, since the entire thing started out with Shepard being forced to throw Kaidan/Ashley out of the Prothean beacon's impact radius and, quite dramatically, having doomsday images flushed into their brains while levitating in green light. The constraints continue from there, including another canonical death at the beginning of ME2 that isn't hinged on player choice whatsoever.

[Iakus]

Eh, then the series ceased to be an RPG in any way and the DM/GM/developer broke this "agreement" in the very first mission of ME1, since the entire thing started out with Shepard being forced to throw Kaidan/Ashley out of the Prothean beacon's impact radius and, quite dramatically, having doomsday images flushed into their brains while levitating in green light. The constraints continue from there, including another canonical death at the beginning of ME2 that isn't hinged on player choice whatsoever.
 

 

Computer rpgs do, unfortunately, have limits.  And of course, part of the agreement is for the player to be willing to go along with the GM's adventure.

 

However, that does not excuse switching out an RPG experience for a "cinematic" experience.  Especially when the overall fate of the player's avatar becomes an issue.  I found Shepard's Refusal speech "I fight for freedom mine and everyone's.  I fight for the right to choose our own fate" to be little short of actively trolling the player.

 

And yes, I found Shepard getting spaced at the start of ME2 ridiculous as well.

[q5tyhj]

Yes, it does make sense.

Well no, not really. You're saying the endings broke some sort of agreement regarding player control. Only, there was no such agreement, and even if there had been, it would've been violated many, many, MANY times over before that anyways. We simply don't have total control over what happens to Shepard at really ANY point during the trilogy. All we have is what we have at the endings- a limited control or choice over pre-ordained alternatives, and in many other cases, the different choices end up amounting to the same thing anyways. So say what you will about the Mass Effect series not giving us enough control, or not presenting choices that are distinct enough, but this isn't anything unique to the endings. 

 

And for my part, I would've been far more satisfied with the endings if they had managed to shore up some of the glaring plotholes and unanswered questions, which struck me as far more problematic than the lack of variety between the different endings, or not allowing your choices throughout the course of the series to have a more significant impact on the endings. No matter how good the endings were, they were ultimately up to Bioware and not the consumers (again, "partial" control only), and that Shepard died is simply not a valid complaint in my mind. A little more narrative consistency would've made all the difference in the world, but even as it is, its really not as bad as people are making it out to be.

 

And all this nonsense about Bioware having to deal with some fan boycott as reckoning for the endings is nothing more than bluster (which will be demonstrated when the next title drops and they all rush out to buy it).

[Gkonone]

Mass Effect was about choice, fighting incredible odds and overcoming them. ME3 was basically a big f*ck you to those ideas, 'we want a deep, pseudo intellectual ending that no one expected' (and made no sense). No matter what you do in ME3, you're screwed.

That's what the Mehem mod rectifies and that's why it's awesome.

[frylock23]

And I'm saying if they want to just take control of our characters, then stop telling us we're playing an RPG. Yes, video games are limited in the freedom they can allow, but not so much that they can expect be able to just end the game, especially one that is the end of a trilogy, however they want, tell us it will have a lot of variety in how it ends, and then yank that away to make the ending a cinematic experience that robs the player of control.

 

It was the end. They had not indicated they expected to make more games or anything else. As far as anyone knew, they were free to let the game end in a wide variety of ways. And even if they were intending to make more games, they still chose to end the game in a set of ways that will work poorly. How do you rectify a synthesis ending with a control ending with a destroy ending into the beginning condition of a new game? Control and destroy I can see, but synthesis is left field. So even then, they painted themselves into a corner it will be hard to get out of. So, they simply felt they had something "cool" they felt they needed to do, and they hijacked all our characters because they thought we'd all agree it was great, too.

 

Well, not as many of us did, as didn't.

[q5tyhj]

And I'm saying if they want to just take control of our characters, then stop telling us we're playing an RPG. Yes, video games are limited in the freedom they can allow, but not so much that they can expect be able to just end the game, especially one that is the end of a trilogy, however they want, tell us it will have a lot of variety in how it ends, and then yank that away to make the ending a cinematic experience that robs the player of control.

Why couldn't they expect to "be able to just end the game however they want", when its their game that they're writing/designing? Was the writing team supposed to, what, ask you whether you were OK with how the endings went before they released the game? And there's not really any way you can credibly say there wasn't a fair mount of diversity in the endings- depending on your choice and your EMS rating, Earth may get destroyed, or not, Shepard may die, or not, the Normandy crew may die, or not, the Reapers may get destroyed, or not.. etc. That's obviously quite a bit of variety. 

 

But all this about "robbing the player of control" and "hijacking our characters" still doesn't make any sense. We had as much control over the endings as we had during any other point of the series- the ability to choose from among pre-ordained choices. Just because you don't like any of the options doesn't mean the game "hijacked" your character. Or was Bioware "robbing the player of control" when we had to choose between, say, either shooting Mordin or letting him go die to disperse the genophage cure? 

[chemiclord]

Wow... two years later, and this is still a discussion going on?

 

No matter how much you wish it was, a computer RPG is NEVER going to be able to emulate a true roleplaying experience.  I think we all agree on that.  The disagreement stems on when and where the developers decided to impose their control and deny the illusion of choice that had sucked in so many people.  The people dissatisfied with that decision have found a mod that gives them some peace of mind.  More power to them.  I hope they enjoy it.  They deserve it.

 

But no, I don't think Bioware needs or even should reach out to Mr. Fob or any modder for any reason.  No matter how much you hate it, no matter how much it pisses you off, Mass Effect is not, and never was, the player's story.  Shepard was never yours.  Go ahead and boycott the next game, because they're not going to change the ending.  Period.

 

Deal with it however you can, but you need to deal with it.  If that requires a mod and washing your hands of everything that comes next, so be it.  But this discussion can have no resolution that will satisfy even a simple majority of the players.  It really is long past time to move on and go in peace with whatever solution is palpable to you.

[Iakus]

Wow... two years later, and this is still a discussion going on?

 

No matter how much you wish it was, a computer RPG is NEVER going to be able to emulate a true roleplaying experience.  I think we all agree on that.  The disagreement stems on when and where the developers decided to impose their control and deny the illusion of choice that had sucked in so many people.  The people dissatisfied with that decision have found a mod that gives them some peace of mind.  More power to them.  I hope they enjoy it.  They deserve it.

 

But no, I don't think Bioware needs or even should reach out to Mr. Fob or any modder for any reason.  No matter how much you hate it, no matter how much it pisses you off, Mass Effect is not, and never was, the player's story.  Shepard was never yours.  Go ahead and boycott the next game, because they're not going to change the ending.  Period.

 

Deal with it however you can, but you need to deal with it.  If that requires a mod and washing your hands of everything that comes next, so be it.  But this discussion can have no resolution that will satisfy even a simple majority of the players.  It really is long past time to move on and go in peace with whatever solution is palpable to you.

Ever notice how often "Deal with it" sounds an awful lot like "Shut up and take it"?

 

Anyway, the bolded goes directly against what tehy have claimed for five years.  If nothing else, they deserve a chewing out for deceiving the audience.

 

And while a video game can't truly emulate a proper roleplaying game, they can at least make the attempt as they did in past games.  But  Mass Effect in the end made no more than a token effort.  There are uncomfortable similarities between it and, say the Bureau, which is a "proper shooter".

 

Options are vital to an rpg.

[q5tyhj]

Ever notice how often "Deal with it" sounds an awful lot like "Shut up and take it"?

 

Anyway, the bolded goes directly against what tehy have claimed for five years.  If nothing else, they deserve a chewing out for deceiving the audience.

 

And while a video game can't truly emulate a proper roleplaying game, they can at least make the attempt as they did in past games.  But  Mass Effect in the end made no more than a token effort.  There are uncomfortable similarities between it and, say the Bureau, which is a "proper shooter".

 

Options are vital to an rpg.

 

Bioware probably should get flak for making it sound like all the various decisions you made throughout the series would have some sort of notable impact on the ending. Clearly that didn't happen. But once again, the endings of ME3 are no different from any other segment of the series in terms of player control- you have options. You just don't like them. And the sense in which it is your story, or your Shepard, isn't in having some sort of total control over everything that happens, but rather in choosing between the pre-ordained choices time and time again so that the particular combination of choices or path through the series that you take is "your" story or "your" Shepard. But once again, nothing about the endings changes that either. 

 

Besides, its somewhat disingenuous to make it sound like the primary complaint against the endings is about player control. If that were true, then MEHEM isn't an improvement at all- there's even less control or choice in MEHEM than in the real endings. So let's just be honest- its not so much about a lack of player control or choice as it is about people being unhappy that cherished characters died, and that is why some people prefer a fake ending.

[Iakus]

Bioware probably should get flak for making it sound like all the various decisions you made throughout the series would have some sort of notable impact on the ending. Clearly that didn't happen. But once again, the endings of ME3 are no different from any other segment of the series in terms of player control- you have options. You just don't like them. And the sense in which it is your story, or your Shepard, isn't in having some sort of total control over everything that happens, but rather in choosing between the pre-ordained choices time and time again so that the particular combination of choices or path through the series that you take is "your" story or "your" Shepard. But once again, nothing about the endings changes that either. 

 

 

With over a thousands choices over three games, they can darn well come up with a wider spread of outcomes, whus greatly increasing the odds of players finding something they'd like.  Sadly, they railroaded their own version of "bittersweet" and forced sacrifice on everyone.  And they deserve flak for that. 

 

It's not a matter of total control, it's a matter of any control.  Shocking as it may sound, not everyone wants their Shepard to burn in a polychromatic pyre at the end of the game.  Not everyone wants to doom an entire form of life for a hint of Shepard's survival.  And certainly not everyone wants to bow to the Catalyst's demand for another "solution" tha the game was laughably inept in even portraying existed.

 

My Shepard is not Walter White.

 

 

Besides, its somewhat disingenuous to make it sound like the primary complaint against the endings is about player control. If that were true, then MEHEM isn't an improvement at all- there's even less control or choice in MEHEM than in the real endings. So let's just be honest- its not so much about a lack of player control or choice as it is about people being unhappy that cherished characters died, and that is why some people prefer a fake ending.

 

 

There is choice:  The choice to install it. I can use it, or the original endings.  It's one more option.  One I find superior to the 3 (now 4) Bioware gave me. 

[q5tyhj]

 

It's not a matter of total control, it's a matter of any control.  

 

Then there's no complaint at all. You have some control. 

 

 

There is choice:  The choice to install it. 

 

In other words, even less choice than the actual endings. Clearly this nonsense about lack of choice is a red herring, if the preferred alternative has even less choice. 

[dreamgazer]

Mass Effect was about choice, fighting incredible odds and overcoming them. ME3 was basically a big f*ck you to those ideas, 'we want a deep, pseudo intellectual ending that no one expected' (and made no sense). No matter what you do in ME3, you're screwed.
That's what the Mehem mod rectifies and that's why it's awesome.

Funny, because MEHEM actually removed one of those pillars you mentioned (choice), while the actual canonical ending---flawed as it may be---incorporates all three of them.

[dreamgazer]

Anyway, the bolded goes directly against what tehy have claimed for five years.  If nothing else, they deserve a chewing out for deceiving the audience.

Nope. It's your Shepard, not your Commander. There has always been canon limitations. Always.

[Gkonone]

Funny, because MEHEM actually removed one of those pillars you mentioned (choice), while the actual canonical ending---flawed as it may be---incorporates all three of them.

The Mehem mod gives you a choice actually. Fight to save the universe and be rewarded for the effort. 

 

Whatever you do in ME3 or did in the previous games, save the council, cure the genophage, help the Quarians and Geth cooexist or form the biggest fleet in the galaxy, it doesn't matter really. It makes no sense that whatever you do doesn't make a difference. You always end up with the same ridiculous choices, one of them being debunked by the game itself. Not to mention the deus ex machina atrocity.

I don't mind losing a game, but ME3 never gave me a chance to win it.

[dreamgazer]

The Mehem mod gives you a choice actually. Fight to save the universe and be rewarded for the effort. 

 

Whatever you do in ME3 or did in the previous games, save the council, cure the genophage, help the Quarians and Geth cooexist or form the biggest fleet in the galaxy, it doesn't matter really. It makes no sense that whatever you do doesn't make a difference. You always end up with the same ridiculous choices, one of them being debunked by the game itself. Not to mention the deus ex machina atrocity.

I don't mind losing a game, but ME3 never gave me a chance to win it.

 

That's simply not accurate, since the EMS you build actually does affect your options.  But yes, there isn't a magic curb-stomping number, since that was never in the cards against the Reapers.  There wasn't a magic number of missions that'd save the tens of thousands of either human soldiers or those in the Destiny Ascension in ME1, either.

 

Well, I take that back: it's accurate to a degree, but that's the case with every single game in the trilogy.  Loyalty mission and recruited members in ME2? Yeah, none of it really matters, since you defeat the Collectors under any and all circumstances. And there isn't a mechanic like that whatsoever in ME1, which really doesn't give a damn about your choices in any fashion at the end.  

 

The only true DEM in the series is actually in ME1, in the form of Vigil's necessary datafile. 

[Farangbaa]

This thread is pure gold.

[Iakus]

 

 

In other words, even less choice than the actual endings. Clearly this nonsense about lack of choice is a red herring, if the preferred alternative has even less choice. 

 

No, I meant what I said.  I can install MEHEM, or I can not (or even uninstall it) and play the original endings.  

 

That's more choice, not less.

[Iakus]

 

The only true DEM in the series is actually in ME1, in the form of Vigil's necessary datafile. 

And the Lazarus Project.

 

And the Crucible.

 

And the Catalyst (though that's more a Diabolus ex Machina of a more literal variety)

 

But those are for other threads.

[Iakus]

Nope. It's your Shepard, not your Commander. There has always been canon limitations. Always.

 

Except their claim was that with ME3 being the end of the trilogy, they can go nuts with choices and divergence.

 

Turns, out, not so much, when it comes to Commander or Shepard.

[dreamgazer]

And the Lazarus Project.

Nope. Cybernetics, gene therapy, and nanotechnology were already established in the universe. Stretching the application of that technology for the unlikely resurrection of a character at the beginning of the second game =/= DEM.  And you know how I feel about Lazarus and the two-year jump. 
 

And the Crucible.

Nope. Mentioned early in the third game and built across its entire length, and, technically, the idea of a super-weapon involving the Reapers within the Prothean databanks was mentioned very early in the trilogy. It's also no surprise that the galaxy somewhat blindly adopted Prothean technology. Not a DEM.
 

And the Catalyst (though that's more a Diabolus ex Machina of a more literal variety)

Nope. The Catalyst (also mentioned across over half the game) is no more of a DEM than the Vigil VI, actually. Both were surprises, sure, but both were also passive participants who dumped info and pointed Shepard in the right direction.

The only completely-unforeshadowed, last-minute, purely plot-resolving device in all the trilogy's endings was the datafile Vigil gave to Shepard that allowed regained control of the Citadel's functions. 
 

Except their claim was that with ME3 being the end of the trilogy, they can go nuts with choices and divergence.
 
Turns, out, not so much, when it comes to Commander or Shepard.

The entire game is full of choice and divergence, and that divergence actually informs the decision you make at the end.

[q5tyhj]

No, I meant what I said.  I can install MEHEM, or I can not (or even uninstall it) and play the original endings.  

 

That's more choice, not less.

 

I get that you're trying to be clever, or amusing, or something, but one way or another, this isn't a serious comment. Obviously, MEHEM involves less choice than the real endings since, after all, none<some. Case closed. The complaint about lack of choice is clearly a red herring, at least for those people who use MEHEM. 

[q5tyhj]

Funny, because MEHEM actually removed one of those pillars you mentioned (choice), while the actual canonical ending---flawed as it may be---incorporates all three of them.

Exactly. Its just funny that "choice", "control", "variety", and so on, are mentioned as reasons for using MEHEM, when MEHEM completely eliminates ANY choice or control over the ending whatsoever. A choice "to fight and be rewarded"? A choice with only one option isn't a choice. A choice to install MEHEM? Ok, that's cute but not really. Seriously, just be honest- the issue is that you want a cheesy, cookie-cutter happy ending. That's the only thing that MEHEM provides that the real endings don't. If that's what you want, and you don't mind penciling in your own ending at the back of the book, then go wild. But this nonsense about MEHEM somehow being superior or something is just silly. 

[Gkonone]

That's simply not accurate, since the EMS you build actually does affect your options.  But yes, there isn't a magic curb-stomping number, since that was never in the cards against the Reapers.  There wasn't a magic number of missions that'd save the tens of thousands of either human soldiers or those in the Destiny Ascension in ME1, either.

 

Well, I take that back: it's accurate to a degree, but that's the case with every single game in the trilogy.  Loyalty mission and recruited members in ME2? Yeah, none of it really matters, since you defeat the Collectors under any and all circumstances. And there isn't a mechanic like that whatsoever in ME1, which really doesn't give a damn about your choices in any fashion at the end.  

 

The only true DEM in the series is actually in ME1, in the form of Vigil's necessary datafile. 

EMS affects what you can choose among choices that make no sense and are just horrible. The effort you make to save the universe isn't reflected in any choice. The writers wanted those silly endings regardless of what you did in ME3 and that's that. Shepard could have done nothing and run straight for the beam and it would not be any different, the universe is f*cked. Very high EMS and the Mehem mod, that would have made sense.

In regards to ME2, you can beat it without doing any loyalty or upgrade probably, but I see that more as a metaphor for giving your all to save the day.

 

Exactly. Its just funny that "choice", "control", "variety", and so on, are mentioned as reasons for using MEHEM, when MEHEM completely eliminates ANY choice or control over the ending whatsoever. A choice "to fight and be rewarded"? A choice with only one option isn't a choice. A choice to install MEHEM? Ok, that's cute but not really. Seriously, just be honest- the issue is that you want a cheesy, cookie-cutter happy ending. That's the only thing that MEHEM provides that the real endings don't. If that's what you want, and you don't mind penciling in your own ending at the back of the book, then go wild. But this nonsense about MEHEM somehow being superior or something is just silly. 

It has nothing to do with wanting a cheesy ending, although, what's wrong with that anyway? I'd say an ending where the hero dies is almost as cheesy or cliche.

It has to do with making sense, the Mehem mod with very high EMS that would have made sense.

 

'A choice with only one option isn't a choice' , that is correct, but that's not what this is about. This is about the fact that that choice was never an option, while it should have been. The whole of Mass Effect 3 revolves around that choice being there if you put in the effort and in the end you get a 'thanks for trying but we want a deep ending that's based on horrible story telling and ridiculous notions, so deal with it'. 

The series gave you at least the impression that choice was important to some degree, but in the end you didn't really have any choice.

[q5tyhj]

 

It has nothing to do with wanting a cheesy ending, although, what's wrong with that anyway? I'd say an ending where the hero dies is almost as cheesy or cliche.

It has to do with making sense, the Mehem mod with very high EMS that would have made sense.

 

If that's what it is about, then there's nothing wrong with that, its just a personal preference. I'm simply pointing out that justifying use of MEHEM on the grounds that the real endings don't give you enough control or choice makes literally no sense, since MEHEM has even less choice than the real endings. If your motivation is shoring up the plotholes introduced by the whole Citadel/starchild sequence, that's a different story, and at least makes sense.

 

'A choice with only one option isn't a choice' , that is correct, but that's not what this is about. This is about the fact that that choice was never an option, while it should have been. The whole of Mass Effect 3 revolves around that choice being there if you put in the effort and in the end you get a 'thanks for trying but we want a deep ending that's based on horrible story telling and ridiculous notions, so deal with it'. 

The series gave you at least the impression that choice was important to some degree, but in the end you didn't really have any choice.

 

Ok, but clearly you do have choice. The three ending choices are fairly different, and the difference between the high EMS and low EMS endings reflects the choices you've made throughout the trilogy (even more so in the EC where you see baby krogan if you've cured the genophage, geth and quarians working together if you resolved the conflict, etc etc) is fairly significant as well- given that Shepard can live or die, your teammates can live or die, Earth can be preserved or destroyed, and the Reapers can be preserved or destroyed, it just isn't credible to claim that you have no choice. Maybe you don't think its enough, but clearly you have a fair amount of control. The only thing missing is the "happy ever after" sort of ending- on that count, you're right, it isn't even really an option (although the high-EMS Destroy ending comes fairly close). But this seems narrow minded to say that the endings didn't give you any choice, when all you mean is that one very specific set of outcomes wasn't among the choices you do have.

 

And, as I've said already on this thread, not having a perfect happy ending among the options is both realistic and plausible, and consistent with the rest of the series, where it is a recurring theme that victory requires sacrifice and loss. So maybe you are personally disappointed because you wanted everyone to live happily ever after, but I don't see how you can objectively criticize the game simply because the writers didn't include a cookie-cutter perfect ending among the choices you have at the end. 

[Farangbaa]

Then, as I said, if BioWare no longer intended for the player to have any say in how the narrative played out ... they should stop telling us this game is an RPG, even an action RPG. When you us the term RPG, it implies there is choice and control for the player within the framework.

 

ME3 violated this agreement. Had it not, there would not have been the backlash.

 

*insert any edition of Final Fantasy*

 

Yeah, lots of control over the narrative defines an RPG.