It was one of the aspects that failed with ME3. Sure, we may have saved the overall galaxy, but the resolution for the characters was pretty crappy.
Well I'm forced to agree with you there. lol It could have been handled better.
BTW my bad for getting off topic with the ME talk. Back to DA discussions yes?
You grew attached and then people died. And your rightfully upset by it, but that's life. Sometimes I think games need that to remind people of the realities of war and life.
ME3 had already so many death...why I have to be reminded by this even in the ending? (and on my character?) and I think a game was made to have fun. I already know war and what brings. (REAL war, not crazy alien holocaust) I just need to see the news. I play to escape reality, at least for a few hours. I don't need to be constantly reminded how cruel is life. 
by the way, It would be refreshing to see at least one romance ending happily. between NPC and protagonist (disappearance no matter what), there isn't any happy couple around, and the few who are, end up dead. 
I understand your point of view and agree to a extent. I just feel like loss, the chance to fail, and real danger makes it more realistic.
It's kinda like what Peter, of all people lol, said in family guy when they were talking about star wars main characters being in danger. "Look, we got four or [/size]five[/size] of the [/size]main characters[/size] on this [/size]ship. I think we[/size]'[/size]ll be fine[/size]."[/size]
The danger should be real or there is no point in being scared of death for your PC or his/her companions.
And that's why I think there should be multiple types of endings. I don't want or need to be told that life sucks and people die, I know that. I want an escape from that. I want to beat the game and be elated, pumping my fist in the air and cheering. I don't want an ending that makes me throw my controller across the room and scream "wtf is this?!" (My ME3 reaction). However I don't feel the need to force my tastes on people who like depressing and tragic endings. It seems as though tragedy fans will often say they don't even want an option for a happy ending, they think everyone should be forced (or "reminded") into having to experience something many of us find extremely disappointing and unappealing.You grew attached and then people died. And your rightfully upset by it, but that's life. Sometimes I think games need that to remind people of the realities of war and life.
When people bring up realism, they don't always mean literally. For me, the realism in fantasy is a literary device that helps me connect with the world. Tolkien is far, far away. Too far. When fantasy deals in the same currency I'm familiar with, I can relate. So that means some problematic relations with NPCs. Some messy romances. Because that's the reality I know.
When people bring up realism, they don't always mean literally. For me, the realism in fantasy is a literary device that helps me connect with the world. Tolkien is far, far away. Too far. When fantasy deals in the same currency I'm familiar with, I can relate. So that means some problematic relations with NPCs. Some messy romances. Because that's the reality I know.
Which is fine if the whole story is like that and then the ending matches. It becomes a problem when the game is one way and the ending is another and suddenly at the last second "realism" is of utmost importance when it was thrown out the window before. I can understand if someone wants the game as a whole to be darker, more hopeless, and more tragic overall (like the walking dead) but tacking a forced tragic ending on a story about friendship, triumph over adversity, and overcoming the odds because people need to "realize that life sucks and people die" just doesn't fit.
Mass Effect 3 needed a bittersweet ending. It was the only tone appropriate for a game where the setting is the most destructive and deadly war the current civilizations of the galaxy have ever seen. You can't have an ending that's all sunshine and rainbows with a backdrop where billions have died. The losses also had to be close to Shepard. It couldn't just be random citizen #3214758 being snuffed out all the time.
The problem with ME3's endings wasn't that they aimed for a bittersweet ending, it's just that it was so poorly executed. Also I'd argue that with the endings they overshot a bit and landed at grimdark, at least before the Extended Cut.
Mass Effect 3 needed a bittersweet ending. It was the only tone appropriate for a game where the setting is the most destructive and deadly war the current civilizations of the galaxy have ever seen. You can't have an ending that's all sunshine and rainbows with a backdrop where billions have died. The losses also had to be close to Shepard. It couldn't just be random citizen #3214758 being snuffed out all the time.
The problem with ME3's endings wasn't that they aimed for a bittersweet ending, it's just that it was so poorly executed. Also I'd argue that with the endings they overshot a bit and landed at grimdark, at least before the Extended Cut.
I feel like 90% of ME3 was poorly executed, the ending especially so. In the previous games we learned certain facts and weaknesses about the reapers that Shepard never tells anyone and are never utilized by the allied forces. To me ME3 was to Mass Effect what Star Wars episode 1-3 were to the Star Wars franchise.
If I were to have written ME3 I would have had the gathered forces come up with actual strategies and not rely on some magical McGuffin that may or may not be a weapon and may or may not work. For example rebuild and reproduce a weapon that has been proven to work: the Klendagon weapon, have suicide squads of mechs or biotics boarding reapers and disabling their shields from the inside as we did with the derelict reaper in ME2. There would be no small scale running around to help gather krogan women or muck around with Cerberus. There should have been politicians convincing the other races to join the fight, not Shepard doing errands.
I'd want to have large scale choices to show that this *is* a galactic war and not just more of the same random fights (something like choosing to sacrifice a planet to kill the enemy) and when it came to the end, a sacrifice should have been a choice, it's not a sacrifice if it's not a choice. If they were going to have one it should have been an old fashioned suicide bomb where either Shepard or Anderson has to fly a shuttle decked out like a Christmas tree in explosives up Harbinger's pie hole (after a satisfying boss battle which weakens your squad). As Harbinger controls the reapers the rest would be stunned with their shields down as Sovereign was in ME1 and they would have taken heavy losses. The rest could have fled or been wiped out. The end should have been more than a voiceover and a slideshow, this is the end of a years long journey, I want to see everything not just speculate. The one who sacrificed themselves (Shepard or Anderson) should have gotten a hero's funeral with a speech, we should have seen the effects of our choices not only in the battle but in the aftermath with some planets being devastated, others hopeful, etc...
When people bring up realism, they don't always mean literally. For me, the realism in fantasy is a literary device that helps me connect with the world. Tolkien is far, far away. Too far. When fantasy deals in the same currency I'm familiar with, I can relate. So that means some problematic relations with NPCs. Some messy romances. Because that's the reality I know.
Which is fair enough but consistency to me triumphs said realism. If the setting is going a certain way it should follow that way. And the problemetic relations with NPCs are fine to me...as long as they're consistent in the setting.
For instance a male member of the Chantry saying my female can't lead cause she's female would be completely inconsistent with the setting as is. So either that character is a moron or he's not aware of the setting he's in. My character being belittled by a majority of people for being female would be inconsistent with the DA setting as shown. No matter how realistic some would find that to be. On the other hand some hick in the country being sexist wouldn't be surprising or inconsistent. Just different.
Though really if anything's consistent with DA it's drama laden romances that are dangerously codependent =/ I just want that shoved onto all the platters that are not f/m. I think f/m mancers have gotten far more than our fair share of that.
Mass Effect 3's ending was not a problem because of sadness, realism, or darkness. It was a problem because the ending was mismatched with the series. It felt like it was trying to be a high-minded, pretentious science fiction novel instead of the third installment to the Mass Effect series. It did not do justice to the characters or to the setting. It treated homogenization as the highest ideal in a series that was previously about the precious beauty of diversity--which was imperiled by the Reapers, pitting diversity against destruction of diversity. Much like the Garrus romance in ME2, the ending of ME3 misidentified the signals it had sent, and what the end user wanted.
No, we did not romance Garrus for the hawt alien hookup. We romanced him because of the voice actor and the character's adorable sweetness, the latter of which was very important, but became nothing more than weird random awkwardness after a whole lot of calibration. It felt more like a sleazy afterthought and was totally unbecoming of either character, making most of us feel they didn't get FemShep.
And no, we did not play ME3 because we wanted the Prometheus of video games. We wanted something that would do justice to the other two beloved titles. For whatever reason--I won't speculate--it was not delivered. But it came over as a harsh slap in the face to anyone who values diversity and the friendships between species.
That is the real reason it was not well received, not because we "needed more time to say goodbye to our stories". And deep down, I think even a lot of players who desperately tried to convince themselves otherwise still felt unsatisfied and unfulfilled in the end (albeit less so due to the DLC).
Personally, though, I can't imagine going back to Mass Effect as a series now. I know it was a tall order... but damn. If they'd not held so hard to the party line and had admitted they made some mistakes among their triumphs, just said "there was a tremendous amount of pressure for a blockbuster ending to a beloved series. While we feel we reached that goal, and would say that most agree, we're sorry to hear that our most passionate science fiction fans felt we didn't quite fill the very tall order of fulfilling all their hopes for a fully thematically appropriate closure. We would like to do some data-gathering... what were you hoping for that you didn't feel was delivered?" I could have at least kept my goodwill. Opening an honest dialogue like that, really thinking about how to stick with their vision while still satisfying the deepest concerns of their most loyal and longtime fans would've let me readily forgive them.
Their consistent and stubborn refusal to appropriately represent and address the unfulfilled desires of their customer base, however, broke my faith in that team completely. My opinion is that they essentially bullied us through the media in a highly passive-aggressive fashion and made anyone who leveled legitimate complaints out to be a screaming, hair-tearing fringe lunatic. I don't know what happened--I only know that it was not at all handled in a way that puts out fires and increases brand loyalty.
The whole situation reminded me of the managers I've worked under who resolutely turned a blind eye to important issues for which they were later fired for ignoring. Tunnel vision work processes and a lack of respect for those under you do end up being noticeable to the customer, however long it may take to occur. They will bite you where it counts. Making the loyal consumer feel betrayed is seldom, if ever, a wise decision. Speaking for myself, no more of my dollars will go to Mass Effect products unless my concerns are--however belatedly--addressed, which I do not in any way expect to happen and would never hold my breath for. It's just about my personal integrity; acting in a way that allows me to respect myself. Even if Obama and all my relatives buy the next Mass Effect game, I will hold to my principles--and it will not be hard after what I experienced.
However, Dragon Age is still good in my eyes. I know they tried with DA2, I am personally convinced they were rushed, and I think they learned some important things from the feedback they got. At least the DA series has never betrayed its own themes or universe plotwise, whatever mistakes they might've made under duress. At least I have always felt the team was enthusiastic, delighted about being able to do their jobs, and interested in delivering an amazing experience. I believe the intentions were always positive--that the series fell once is not a dealbreaker for me.
We can learn a lot from our missteps. The result of that learning can be incredible, which DAI certainly looks to be. I was going to be cautious and not preorder, but my gut tells me I don't have to be after all. I still trust this team.
Wynne, I completely agree. I can't even play ME1 or ME2 anymore and I loved those games. ME3 as a whole ruined the series for me and I have no interest in future installments. If DA:I does that to Dragon Age then I don't think BioWare has anything to offer me anymore. I'm hopeful that wont happen though, I agree with what you said about DA2 and I think with the extra time given DA:I will be much better.
We can learn a lot from our missteps. The result of that learning can be incredible, which DAI certainly looks to be. I was going to be cautious and not preorder, but my gut tells me I don't have to be after all. I still trust this team.
I heard this bit in Wynne's voice.
There are no happy endings in Dragon Age. DA is like a Game of Thrones in videogame form - happiness is fleeting, and no-one is safe.
Hell no The second David Gaider turns into George R.R. Martin is the second I stop buying Dragon Age games.
There are no happy endings in Dragon Age. DA is like a Game of Thrones in videogame form - happiness is fleeting, and no-one is safe.
However I don't feel the need to force my tastes on people who like depressing and tragic endings. It seems as though tragedy fans will often say they don't even want an option for a happy ending, they think everyone should be forced (or "reminded") into having to experience something many of us find extremely disappointing and unappealing.
As for realism...DA is sooooo far from realistic that particular logic doesn't even apply. Even keeping within the rules of their world, any random battle should severely wound or cripple the heroes and boss battles should kill them. No one can get mauled by a dragon, set on fire, stabbed multiple times, and live. Realistically the women would not all be beautiful and would have body hair. Realistically poor people without access to magic healing would be diseased and covered in sores, opposite sex romances would result in pregnancy, etc... Why does the very end suddenly have to adhere to one person's definition of "realism?"
1st section. Please don't assume I don't want the option for happy endings. I'm all for them and proper closure. I also acknowledge that ME3's ending could have been better.... lol a lot better. I'm just saying that sad endings don't equal bad endings and that real danger and loss can add to the experience if done right.
2nd section. 
You've no idea how much this irks my nerves. lol I actually think they should bring it back a bit. I'd love to see a combat system, not necessarily in DA, that implements fatal hits. One stab, at the least, is all it should take to incapacitate a person. Instead smacking someone with your sword 20 times to kill them how about they block 20 of your attempts and when u take down they're stamina then u can deliver the fatal blow. Just a thought.
Retour en haut