202 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

I have no problems with the existence of MEHEM. It's an option that provides options. If people like that mod, by all means, use it. It doesn't mean that this mod should be made canon or at least be referenced in new Mass Effect. People like Falskaar mod for Skyrim too, it doesn't mean that new TES game will reference events of Falskaar. Modding is just that, customizing the game to our liking. But modding is an overlay on the top of the core game that all the players experience. It doesn't make sense to reference content that is only available to the section of the fanbase.

 

You I like.

 

And yeah, I think it is too much to seriosuly expect MEHEM references to future games.  (Though I believe dialogue does exist in ME3 for Kaidan/Shepard romance in ME1, even though that could only be accomplished via mods)  However, I do think Bioware should be mindful of MEHEM's popularity going forward.  And MENExt should, if at all possible, allow players to keep it as a personal canon. Skirt around details of teh Reaper war so that perhaps MEHEM could have happened.  

A table-top RPG is a collaborative story told by a combination of the GM and the players. The GM lays out the world, story, plays the NPCs, etc. and the players can do and react to things however they see fit. It's entirely possible, and likely probably, that they will do something that the GM never even thought of and end up with a wholly unexpected result. 

 

A video game RPG is not the same thing. The framework of the game is set by the devs, and the player is given a character. They can make choices that will affect things, but if the story as written doesn't allow for them to do something, then they simply can't do it. There are no real unexpected results, and if there are then they are bugs that are normally squished. There may be 1000 options for you to chose from, but there are not 1001, for example. In a table top game there could be 10,000. 

 

How is modding the ending of Mass Effect any different than writing your own pages for a choose your own adventure story and stapling them into the book? Or saying that you don't like the ending to a novel and just writing your own? 

 

And, for the record, I'm not against the idea of mods for a game. I'm just against the idea of mods that change the story.

 

But for decades cRPGs have been trying to emulate the tabletop function.  Particularly these narrative based games which encourage player agency.  That's what made the save import function so novel, it recorded choices already made and alters the next game accordingly.  Player input is what separates Mass Effect from Call of Duty.  And a lot of players thought their input was ignored, marginalized, and even mocked at the very end.  MEHEM gives that voice back.

[Chashan]

[...]

 

How is modding the ending of Mass Effect any different than writing your own pages for a choose your own adventure story and stapling them into the book? Or saying that you don't like the ending to a novel and just writing your own? 

 

And, for the record, I'm not against the idea of mods for a game. I'm just against the idea of mods that change the story.

 

And if it is, what of it? It is hardly a secret that most, if not all, literary work takes its cue from existing ones, and not just due to the fact that we've arrived at a dead end as far as narrative structure, topics and/or themes go. Whether an amateur does so due to as simplistic a reason as you stated, mere dislike, or a professional does so for exercise is hardly of any consequence, is it. In neither case can a single such-minded person go and recall every last copy of a certain novel in existence due to this - nor will they want to. At best, an author may or may not release a new edition of such a work, or just move on to write another with the feedback to the former in mind if they so choose.

 

As things are, I'd regard the usage of the mod in question here as one form of such feedback. Hoping that the developers take this into consideration for their next project is hardly too much to ask, is it.

 

 

You I like.

 

And yeah, I think it is too much to seriosuly expect MEHEM references to future games.  (Though I believe dialogue does exist in ME3 for Kaidan/Shepard romance in ME1, even though that could only be accomplished via mods)  However, I do think Bioware should be mindful of MEHEM's popularity going forward.  And MENExt should, if at all possible, allow players to keep it as a personal canon. Skirt around details of teh Reaper war so that perhaps MEHEM could have happened.  

 

But for decades cRPGs have been trying to emulate the tabletop function.  Particularly these narrative based games which encourage player agency.  That's what made the save import function so novel, it recorded choices already made and alters the next game accordingly.  Player input is what separates Mass Effect from Call of Duty.  And a lot of players thought their input was ignored, marginalized, and even mocked at the very end.  MEHEM gives that voice back.

 

The thing about this is that, even focusing on the several final choices provided by BW, this may be the most prudent choice: providing lee-way for the various interpretations that individual players come up with for each scenario.

That means that fan-made retellings can fit in somewhere in between too? Can't say that wouldn't be a bonus.

[Vazgen]

You I like.

 

And yeah, I think it is too much to seriosuly expect MEHEM references to future games.  (Though I believe dialogue does exist in ME3 for Kaidan/Shepard romance in ME1, even though that could only be accomplished via mods)  However, I do think Bioware should be mindful of MEHEM's popularity going forward.  And MENExt should, if at all possible, allow players to keep it as a personal canon. Skirt around details of teh Reaper war so that perhaps MEHEM could have happened.  

I actually think that this is exactly what's going to happen. What are the biggest changes MEHEM offers - removes starbrat, Shepard's lives. Not referencing starbrat is very easy, after all it was only Shepard who talked to him. And Shepard being alive can already be coded as a result for high EMS Destroy. So if ME:Next is a sequel, I think it should be pretty easy to make it to suit both the original endings and MEHEM.

[Iakus]

I actually think that this is exactly what's going to happen. What are the biggest changes MEHEM offers - removes starbrat, Shepard's lives. Not referencing starbrat is very easy, after all it was only Shepard who talked to him. And Shepard being alive can already be coded as a result for high EMS Destroy. So if ME:Next is a sequel, I think it should be pretty easy to make it to suit both the original endings and MEHEM.

It also confirms EDI and the geth surviving.  EDI is present at the memorial scene and there are ending slides for the geth if they survived the Rannoch arc.

 

I actually consider these details to be more important than Shepard at the memorial scene.  With these in place, the breath scene would have been enough for me.

[Vazgen]

It also confirms EDI and the geth surviving.  EDI is present at the memorial scene and there are ending slides for the geth if they survived the Rannoch arc.

 

I actually consider these details to be more important than Shepard at the memorial scene.  With these in place, the breath scene would have been enough for me.

Well, they can put references to EDI as in "nods to previous games" and it won't contradict the original endings. And the geth situation will have to be dealt with either way due to the Rannoch arc. Some mentions of the geth, single quarians here and there... I'm pretty sure they can write themselves out of this mess. Might require a bit cheesiness but I'll take that, if it means more adventures in my favorite game universe

[ZipZap2000]

I really should've brought popcorn for this.

[Iakus]

It is amusing to watch the occassional hater stumble in here, raging and blatantly misrepresenting what the mod offers, doesn't it?

[BaladasDemnevanni]

 

1. If you don't want an escape hatch, don't take the escape hatch.  DAO doesn't force you into using it, why not Mass Effect?

 

2. And you call it "escaping consequence" I call it "overcoming obstacles"  Heck one of the catch-phrases to Mass Effect was "There's always another way"

 

1. Better yet: don't include the escape hatch at all. Scenarios like Virmire lack dramatic impact if the player obviously knows the solution to the problem, which Bioware is in the habit of telegraphing. 

 

But at least DA:O's dark ritual, if very flawed, does acknowledge "hey, this can go very much wrong for you". In that sense, even if it functions as an escape hatch (and a bad one), the developers may not have intended it as such. 

 

Scenarios like Redcliffe's solution via the Circle of Magi are essentially everything wrong with thought experiments. 

 

2. I recall ME1's launch trailer tossing around the tagline "Many choices, none of them easy". 

[Iakus]

1. Better yet: don't include the escape hatch at all. Scenarios like Virmire lack dramatic impact if the player obviously knows the solution to the problem, which Bioware is in the habit of telegraphing. 

 

But at least DA:O's dark ritual, if very flawed, does acknowledge "hey, this can go very much wrong for you". In that sense, even if it functions as an escape hatch (and a bad one), the developers may not have intended it as such. 

 

Scenarios like Redcliffe's solution via the Circle of Magi are essentially everything wrong with thought experiments. 

 

2. I recall ME1's launch trailer tossing around the tagline "Many choices, none of them easy". 

1) Gee and here I thought "The chaos will come back" already had the "this could go very wrong covered

 

And fyi, i don't consider the Dark Ritual the best outcome.  So much for that escape hatch.

 

2) So what?  Does taking choice away really help?

[BaladasDemnevanni]

1) Gee and here I thought "The chaos will come back" already had the "this could go very wrong covered

 

And fyi, i don't consider the Dark Ritual the best outcome.  So much for that escape hatch.

 

2) So what?  Does taking choice away really help?

 

1. I'd consider it one. Or rather, an unintended escape hatch. If the consequences of my actions are never going to manifest into anything significant, well, it's the same boat as the those unsatisfied with Shepard's breath scene. It's all headcanon, while watching the player drink, celebrate, and revel in success. 

 

The "chaos will come back" is just insane Catalyst speak that relies on the player accepting much of his nonsensical logic (which I don't). 

 

2. It's pretty straightforward. If you want your players to deal with the morality of their choices, tossing in magic solutions runs contrary to that. 

 

"Would you rather save Kaidan or Ashley? Or press that magic button in the corner and everyone goes home alive?"

 

"Would you rather kill Connor, kill Isolde, or have the Mages of Redcliffe get everyone out alive, safe and sound?"

 

"Would you rather kill the heretic Geth, rewrite them, or press the magic button to free them while watching Shepard deliver a magic speech to make everyone get along?"

 

So yeah, taking choice away can help (but not always) if it runs contrary to the scenario you are attempting to orchestrate. 

[Iakus]

1. I'd consider it one. Or rather, an unintended escape hatch. If the consequences of my actions are never going to manifest into anything significant, well, it's the same boat as the those unsatisfied with Shepard's breath scene. It's all headcanon, while watching the player drink, celebrate, and revel in success. 

 

The "chaos will come back" is just insane Catalyst speak that relies on the player accepting much of his nonsensical logic (which I don't). 

 

2. It's pretty straightforward. If you want your players to deal with the morality of their choices, tossing in magic solutions runs contrary to that. 

 

"Would you rather save Kaidan or Ashley? Or press that magic button in the corner and everyone goes home alive?"

 

"Would you rather kill Connor, kill Isolde, or have the Mages of Redcliffe get everyone out alive, safe and sound?"

 

"Would you rather kill the heretic Geth, rewrite them, or press the magic button to free them while watching Shepard deliver a magic speech to make everyone get along?"

 

So yeah, taking choice away can help (but not always) if it runs contrary to the scenario you are attempting to orchestrate. 

1) I don't believe the Catalyst either.  Therefore, I reject the entire situation having to follow its logic.  Those consequences are made quite clear (the death of all synthetics), while anything good (like Shepard's survival) are left to headcanon

 

2)  Given an opportunity, I'd press the magic button.

 

But if I can't, at least they are both willing to die and know what they are dying for.  Unlike EDI and the geth, whom Shepard has to essentially shootin the back to destroy the Reapers

 

With Redcliffe, sure I'd like to save them both.  But if I can't, well, Isolde is willing to take one for the team, and knows why it's necessary.  Unlike EDI and the geth.

 

So I don't know what kind of scenario Bioware was trying to orchestrate, but I reject it.

[themikefest]

Since the Geth are destroyed before I use the microphone, I have no problem picking destroy

[PsyrenY]

If you don't want an escape hatch, don't take the escape hatch.  DAO doesn't force you into using it, why not Mass Effect?

 

And you call it "escaping consequence" I call it "overcoming obstacles"  Heck one of the catch-phrases to Mass Effect was "There's always another way"

 

 

Where was the "other way" when it came to Virmire? You can't save both Ashley and Kaidan and nobody complained then.

 

Or in ME2, where was the "other way" when it came to brainwashing the heretics or destroying them?

 

The series has always been a desperate struggle for survival against long odds. ME3 merely brought that concept home.

[Iakus]

Where was the "other way" when it came to Virmire? You can't save both Ashley and Kaidan and nobody complained then.

 

Or in ME2, where was the "other way" when it came to brainwashing the heretics or destroying them?

 

The series has always been a desperate struggle for survival against long odds. ME3 merely brought that concept home.

...and then burned that home down.

 

I don't particularly like those choices.  I always played SHepard as trying to save both, but failed and blames himself ("Kaidan's death is on me")  And I headcanon that Sovereign 'indocrinated" the Heretics with a similar virus and what Shepard is doing is resetting them to their original state. 

However, there is no getting around that if I want to get rid of the Reapers, I'm forced to genocide an entire form of life and walk into an explosion.  There's no wiggle room.

 

You say "no one complained" I say, no one complained as loudly.  But when you start frakking with changes to the entire galaxy, not just the lives of one person, or even one world, it gets to be too much.

[PsyrenY]

Whether you like them or not, they are still things that happened in ME1 and ME2. So saying that ME3 somehow deviated from this paradigm of "The Do-Everything, Never-Fail Shepard" is disingenuous. At best you can say that the scale/scope was larger - which is to be expected for the end of a trilogy.

[Iakus]

Whether you like them or not, they are still things that happened in ME1 and ME2. So saying that ME3 somehow deviated from this paradigm of "The Do-Everything, Never-Fail Shepard" is disingenuous. At best you can say that the scale/scope was larger - which is to be expected for the end of a trilogy.

Yes, the scope is larger.  In the way that decapitation is larger than a paper cut.

 

I may not have an option between destroying or rewriting the geth, but I could get everyone alive through the Suicide Mission.

[PsyrenY]

Yes, the scope is larger.  In the way that decapitation is larger than a paper cut.

 

Is that what Bioware did? Decapitated you? Can you show us on the doll where they touched you too?

 

Tell you what - MEHEM worked for you and that's great. As far as mods go, it does a better job of rearranging assets other people created than most, and it undoubtedly fills some story need for many that the real game didn't. So you can feel free to be satisfied with it and not pick up any more games in the franchise since you now have what you consider a happy ending. Folks like you and the OP can even feel free to set up your booth on the street corner of the forum and hawk its virtues, so long as you do it without likening anyone who chose to stick with the real story to be Twilight-loving teenagers like he did.

 

Just don't be so surprised when others say "nah, I consider the actual endings to be satisfying enough," and walk right past you two. I for one considered my Shepard to have a happy ending, so I don't need a "happy ending mod" to "fix" my experience, and I consider repeated attempts to convince me that I didn't actually have fun or experience actual closure just because I didn't have blue babies to be pretty insulting.

[Khemikael]

Yes, the scope is larger.  In the way that decapitation is larger than a paper cut.

 

I may not have an option between destroying or rewriting the geth, but I could get everyone alive through the Suicide Mission.

 

So how did you save Lilith ?

[BaladasDemnevanni]

1) I don't believe the Catalyst either.  Therefore, I reject the entire situation having to follow its logic.  Those consequences are made quite clear (the death of all synthetics), while anything good (like Shepard's survival) are left to headcanon

 

2)  Given an opportunity, I'd press the magic button.

 

But if I can't, at least they are both willing to die and know what they are dying for.  Unlike EDI and the geth, whom Shepard has to essentially shootin the back to destroy the Reapers

 

With Redcliffe, sure I'd like to save them both.  But if I can't, well, Isolde is willing to take one for the team, and knows why it's necessary.  Unlike EDI and the geth.

 

So I don't know what kind of scenario Bioware was trying to orchestrate, but I reject it.

 

2. And that's exactly my point. Given the opportunity, anyone would press the magic button. So we're clear, I don't think every choice presented in a game needs to be a thought experiment, nor do I think all right vs wrong situations are worthless.

 

But if the summation of counter-arguments are going to be "Well, just choose the bad option and we'll choose the good option!", then I have to disagree . If Bioware wants to be taken seriously on the morally ambiguous front (and their morality systems in ME1 and DA:O at least indicate it is their intent compared to previous games), they're going to have to do a better job than giving every moral conundrum an escape hatch. ME3's ending is not a great solution, but neither are always present escape hatches. 

[Iakus]

2. And that's exactly my point. Given the opportunity, anyone would press the magic button. So we're clear, I don't think every choice presented in a game needs to be a thought experiment, nor do I think all right vs wrong situations are worthless.

 

But if the summation of counter-arguments are going to be "Well, just choose the bad option and we'll choose the good option!", then I have to disagree . If Bioware wants to be taken seriously on the morally ambiguous front (and their morality systems in ME1 and DA:O at least indicate it is their intent compared to previous games), they're going to have to do a better job than giving every moral conundrum an escape hatch. ME3's ending is not a great solution, but neither are always present escape hatches. 

I'm only speaking for myself.  If you look at Mass Effect 2, you will see plenty of people who played with the Suicide mission so that different combinations of characters survived, just to see what happens, and what kind of story that will make.  Heck I have a minimalist run myself.  Not that I ever ended up importing it.  Because what's the point?

 

In addition, if you look at DAO, you don't have to have a good ending be an "escape hatch" anyway. Like I said, the Dark Ritual is not the optimal ending for me.  All you need are several different flavors of "good" rather than several different flavors of "bad", which is what we got.

[crashsuit]

Regardless of branding with terms like cinematic experience vs RPG vs novel, Mass Effect is most like an elaborately-written Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book. No matter how immersive it is, and no matter how one might wish otherwise, all the choices and endings were pre-written.

[Chashan]

2. And that's exactly my point. Given the opportunity, anyone would press the magic button. So we're clear, I don't think every choice presented in a game needs to be a thought experiment, nor do I think all right vs wrong situations are worthless.

 

But if the summation of counter-arguments are going to be "Well, just choose the bad option and we'll choose the good option!", then I have to disagree . If Bioware wants to be taken seriously on the morally ambiguous front (and their morality systems in ME1 and DA:O at least indicate it is their intent compared to previous games), they're going to have to do a better job than giving every moral conundrum an escape hatch. ME3's ending is not a great solution, but neither are always present escape hatches. 

 

I'll have to disagree on that one.

 

I'd argue, and hope, that BW themselves do not view ME3's ending-model as an example-"solution" at all going forward, not merely owed to the backlash over it.

 

Not even due to questionable morality which Iakus has a problem with - then again, how "questionable" is it really when all's supposedly well looking at the EC-epilogue and concrete adverse results of the decisions on hand are either glossed over or ignored outright? -, but due to it lacking proper context with the prior game.

You mentioned the ways to deal with Connor's possession from DA:O. Regarding that, I have got to say that I found that the "non-magic" solutions right there on hand are very much palatable, as they got proper context. Context that's prone to change depending not just on the individual player, but, in my opinion, on the order of treaties invoked too. Last time I played DA:O, for example, I cleaned up the Circle prior to Redcliffe, and since that did not exactly give the impression of the mages being capable of expending resources and personnel to deal with Connor I proceeded to slay him. On the execution-side of things, the grand VO-work for Isolde with this option only helps (execution being another issue often cited with ME3's finale, to be had).

 

So, unlike others who expressed such here I don't particularly care about the "magic button's" presence if there is sufficient context to support other options on offer. Yet, if the developers were to include another Virmire-type situation, I would not mind that too much either, as the situation is actually plausible and its immediate results quite clear, as opposed ME3's end.
 

[fyz306903]

1. I'd consider it one. Or rather, an unintended escape hatch. If the consequences of my actions are never going to manifest into anything significant, well, it's the same boat as the those unsatisfied with Shepard's breath scene. It's all headcanon, while watching the player drink, celebrate, and revel in success. 

 

The "chaos will come back" is just insane Catalyst speak that relies on the player accepting much of his nonsensical logic (which I don't). 

 

2. It's pretty straightforward. If you want your players to deal with the morality of their choices, tossing in magic solutions runs contrary to that. 

 

"Would you rather save Kaidan or Ashley? Or press that magic button in the corner and everyone goes home alive?"

 

"Would you rather kill Connor, kill Isolde, or have the Mages of Redcliffe get everyone out alive, safe and sound?"

 

"Would you rather kill the heretic Geth, rewrite them, or press the magic button to free them while watching Shepard deliver a magic speech to make everyone get along?"

 

So yeah, taking choice away can help (but not always) if it runs contrary to the scenario you are attempting to orchestrate. 

 

I know where your getting at, but I always 'press the magic button' to resolve the quarian-geth conflict in ME3, and I'd never choose anything else. Do you think that option shouldn't be there? 

[Gkonone]

 

Er...I think we have a fundamental difference in opinion about how video game storytelling works. It wasn't my story, it was Bioware's story. We're given a lot of agency within the series to make the choices we would like our Shepard to make, but we don't control the narrative structure of the game or, really, anything other than our Shepard. Shepard was set up as the central figure, and thus a lot of things hinged on what choice Shepard made. But there are some things in the story that have to happen no matter what the main character does or says. Either Ashley or Kaidan WILL die, no matter what you do. You can save one of them, but no matter what you do you can't save both. Shepard's death is exactly like that. You can have the known universe be as prepared as possible, but Shepard DOES NOT survive the final encounter. Shepard wins the final encounter, but does not survive it. Which isn't to say all the preparing you do is meaningless, because the better prepared you are the less damage the Reapers do to the galaxy at large. And I don't consider Shepard's death to be at all the same as DAO's Ultimate Sacrifice, because the Warden goes into the final battle knowing, without a doubt, that s/he is going to die if they don't do the Dark Ritual. Shepard is given no such assurance, or way out. Because one does not exist for Shepard. 
 
As a writer, I find the existence of a "Happy Ending" mod to be, frankly, offensive. Did I love the ending to the Mass Effect series? No, not really. I didn't hate it, but the fact that Shepard (and possibly others) dies has never been an issue with me. That was the ending to Shepard's story, just as it was always meant to be.  

Why is it offensive? When choice isn't really there and you're railroaded into what the writers feel is the best way to end it, when it's not consistent at all with what the series is about? The Mehem mod isn't the only outcome but an outcome that makes sense as an option.
The original ending is not consistent, it introduces a horrible Deus ex machina and it does not reflect at all what has happened in the past games.