71 réponses à ce sujet

[Isac23]

At the moment where Shepard and Anderson are having that conversation, and they're both looking out the window and Shepard mentions they've got the best seats in the house. I was expecting them to see a massive explosion that destroyed the reapers and ultimately consumed them as well, and the game ending right there. That, at least for me personally, would have been a very satisfying end, albeit maybe a little cliche.

 

I was very surprised to see they didn't take that route, especially considering how nonsensical the 20 minutes after that turned out to be and how many plot-holes it introduced. Not to say I completely hated the ending, but I would have been a lot more satisfied had the game just ended after the shepard x anderson dialogue. It would have made a lot more SENSE.

 

Would YOU have been satisfied if the game just ended there? Why or why not?

 

 

 

EDIT: Just to clarify, I don't mean roll credits directly after this scene. A nice epilogue offering some closure after this, then yes, roll credits.

[KaiserShep]

I'd be OK with it I guess. I would miss out on all the arguments and the superhappy funtimes with how destroyers were genocidal sickos, controllers were mad dictator types and synthesizers were jolly green space hippies or something.

 

However, I consider an epilogue to be something of a necessity. The fact that the game simply ends suddenly is one of the things I absolutely loathe about the original ending. Even if this alternate ending lacked the insufferable dialogue and silly decision chamber, having it end without any view of what becomes of the characters would irk me to no end.

[Excella Gionne]

I hate cliffhangers, especially when the game was being hyped up to the very moment of defeating the Reapers. I'd rather be disappointed than being annoyed by a poor cliffhanger. I never hated ME3 EC Endings, 'cause I wasn't there when the original endings were the only endings. 

[CronoDragoon]

You mean roll credits after the Anderson scene? That probably would have gotten nearly as much flak.

[Isac23]

I'd be OK with it I guess. I would miss out on all the arguments and the superhappy funtimes with how destroyers were genocidal sickos, controllers were mad dictator types and synthesizers were jolly green space hippies or something.

 

However, I consider an epilogue to be something of a necessity. The fact that the game simply ends suddenly is one of the things I absolutely loathe about the original ending. Even if this alternate ending lacked the insufferable dialogue and silly decision chamber, having it end without any view of what becomes of the characters would irk me to no end.

 

I probably should have mentioned this in my original post, but I do not mean that I'd have liked for them to have rolled credits directly after this scene (as CronoDragoon also mentioned) but rather presented this final scene as the end of the battle, and then of course offered us some epilogue as closure. 

[Isac23]

I hate cliffhangers, especially when the game was being hyped up to the very moment of defeating the Reapers. I'd rather be disappointed than being annoyed by a poor cliffhanger. I never hated ME3 EC Endings, 'cause I wasn't there when the original endings were the only endings. 

 

Shepard's dead. Anderson's dead. Reapers are dead. No cliffhanging about it lol.

I don't necessarily hate the endings, it's just.. the entire dialogue with star child is so ridiculous. It seems like they really wanted to end with something deep, philosophical and intelligent, but didn't have the writing prowess for it.

 

The ending I mentioned, and was honestly expecting, would have been just that.. expected. No real shock value. But at least it would have been coherent.

[KaiserShep]

I guess my reading comprehension takes a hit as the hour gets later, but if it means a forced death for the protagonist, then I can't really go along with it. No doubt the replay value of the game would drop to zero, and as one who weighs the worth of a game by how many times I can play it, that would be a pretty bad thing. I typically butt against forced PC deaths in a game like this, because it kind of makes the whole journey seem like a massive waste of time unless there's something meaningful that can be added to it, but I set the bar extremely high for this, because forced death is just a bitter pill with little value in and of itself.

[CronoDragoon]

I probably should have mentioned this in my original post, but I do not mean that I'd have liked for them to have rolled credits directly after this scene (as CronoDragoon also mentioned) but rather presented this final scene as the end of the battle, and then of course offered us some epilogue as closure. 

 

As Kaiser mentioned, does Shepard die? Or is there a finding Shepard in the rubble scene?

 

If he lives, then as you said it would have been the standard Hollywood ending, but it also would have been accepted. Hell ME1's ending is cornball cheese and people loved it.

[Isac23]

I guess my reading comprehension takes a hit as the hour gets later, but if it means a forced death for the protagonist, then I can't really go along with it. No doubt the replay value of the game would drop to zero, and as one who weighs the worth of a game by how many times I can play it, that would be a pretty bad thing. I typically butt against forced PC deaths in a game like this, because it kind of makes the whole journey seem like a massive waste of time unless there's something meaningful that can be added to it, but I set the bar extremely high for this, because forced death is just a bitter pill with little value in and of itself.

 

 

As Kaiser mentioned, does Shepard die? Or is there a finding Shepard in the rubble scene?

 

If he lives, then as you said it would have been the standard Hollywood ending, but it also would have been accepted. Hell ME1's ending is cornball cheese and people loved it.

 

I certainly wouldn't mind if he were found in the rubble just as in the good ending of the destroyer option. Although I personally would have preferred if Shepard died. It would have been much more fitting, and again it would just have made more sense. You can't expect to fall from outer space onto earth and live, that's just.. 100% impossible.

 

It would have been fitting that Shepard would have given his life for the ones he loved and to see the destruction of the Reapers. That is a good death. The best death he could have possibly had.

[Steelcan]

 

If he lives, then as you said it would have been the standard Hollywood ending, but it also would have been accepted. Hell ME1's ending is cornball cheese and people loved it.

I don't have issues with it because ME has always been a standard hero story, it never really delved into deeper territory than that, that is until the ME3 ending

[themikefest]

I wouldn't want that. I don't like the conversation or Anderson. I usually have TIM kill the guy.

[KaiserShep]

The problem with simply making sense is that while being logical is great, it's not so great if it's still an underwhelming, unsatisfying conclusion. Like, imagine if Shepard simply died no matter what at the beam run, and basically you were watching Shepard's final moments? That would also make sense, but it would suck sweaty quads.

 

In any case, if we're going to make sense, the Crucible might as well just fire and make the reapers keel over and have their recycled monsters drop dead. That would make just as much sense, without the pointless impact of having the entire chamber explode because of reasons.

 

You can't expect to fall from outer space onto earth and live, that's just.. 100% impossible.

 

Hold on. Shepard doesn't fall from orbit to Earth. Shepard is still on the Citadel in the debris left behind by the destroyed power conduit.

[Isac23]

I wouldn't want that. I don't like the conversation or Anderson. I usually have TIM kill the guy.

 

Lol I thought the conversation was fairly cliche movie hero right before he dies stuff.

Not that big a fan of Anderson either, but the last scene being beside him is a small price to pay for not having to go through the catalyst bs imo.

[themikefest]

Lol I thought the conversation was fairly cliche movie hero right before he dies stuff.

Not that big a fan of Anderson either, but the last scene being beside him is a small price to pay for not having to go through the catalyst bs imo.

 Have two scenes. One with and one without Anderson..

 

 

[Isac23]

The problem with simply making sense is that while being logical is great, it's not so great if it's still an underwhelming, unsatisfying conclusion. Like, imagine if Shepard simply died no matter what at the beam run, and basically you were watching Shepard's final moments? That would also make sense, but it would suck sweaty quads.

 

In any case, if we're going to make sense, the Crucible might as well just fire and make the reapers keel over and have their recycled monsters drop dead. That would make just as much sense, without the pointless impact of having the entire chamber explode because of reasons.

 

Yeah but dying at the beam run would have meant he failed his mission. That truly would have been underwhelming and unsatisfying. Dying beside Anderson though, would have meant that entering the conduit worked and made it so they were able to launch the crucible. His mission was completed. The world is saved. Sure, it can be considered unsatisfying in the sense that it's generic or cliche. His death certainly wouldn't have been meaningless though.

 

 

Hold on. Shepard doesn't fall from orbit to Earth. Shepard is still on the Citadel in the debris left behind by the destroyed power conduit.

 

Wait what? I always assumed the conduit teleported him to somewhere else.

I mean look out the window, Shepard's clearly in space... unless I'm missing something here?

[Isac23]

 

 Have two scenes. One with and one without Anderson..

 

 

 

 

To be honest I never really understood how Anderson got the hell in there in the first place anyway. Radio chatter says "EVERYONE is down" then Anderson is just all casually "Oh yeah, I came in after you, Shepard" ... it made so little sense that I swore something was up with that, that Shepard was in a dream state or something.

[AlanC9]

Honestly, the first thing that would have popped into my head would have been that Bio had finally just thrown up their hands and admitted that they couldn't figure out an explanation for the Reapers. Maybe not the lamest copout in gaming history, but a solid contender for the top ten. Though I would have been amused that all of the foreshadowing of the Crucible being something other than a magic Reaper off switch had just fizzled. Plus Vendetta's bit about the "pattern" being meaningless, as well as Harbinger's "salvation through destruction" line, and so forth.

[AlanC9]

I mean look out the window, Shepard's clearly in space... unless I'm missing something here?

Yep. Space. He never left the Citadel.

Even if the Citadel blew up, he'd still be in space. This isn't Star Trek. Things in orbit stay in orbit.

[KaiserShep]

Wait what? I always assumed the conduit teleported him to somewhere else.

I mean look out the window, Shepard's clearly in space... unless I'm missing something here?

 

With the trilogy establishing that atmospheres can be kept in place with mass effect fields, a simple explanation is that one is still present here even after the Crucible fires. Heck, look at Menae. The turian moon only has an atmosphere because the turians have mass effect field generators keeping it there, and why the oculus drone can fly in and out of the Normandy's cargo bay without having the air evacuate with it in ME2.

[Isac23]

Honestly, the first thing that would have popped into my head would have been that Bio had finally just thrown up their hands and admitted that they couldn't figure out an explanation for the Reapers. Maybe not the lamest copout in gaming history, but a solid contender for the top ten. Though I would have been amused that all of the foreshadowing of the Crucible being something other than a magic Reaper off switch had just fizzled. Plus Vendetta's bit about the "pattern" being meaningless, as well as Harbinger's "salvation through destruction" line, and so forth.

 

Yeah but the explanation for the Reapers is given by Leviathan.

He tells you exactly who the Reapers are, what their purpose is, why they were created, who created them and why they started harvesting lifeforms. Given this knowledge, the catalyst adds nothing new.

[Isac23]

Yep. Space. He never left the Citadel.

Even if the Citadel blew up, he'd still be in space. This isn't Star Trek. Things in orbit stay in orbit.

 

With the trilogy establishing that atmospheres can be kept in place with mass effect fields, a simple explanation is that one is still present here even after the Crucible fires. Heck, look at Menae. The turian moon only has an atmosphere because the turians have mass effect field generators keeping it there, and why the oculus drone can fly in and out of the Normandy's cargo bay without having the air evacuate with it in ME2.

 

 

For some reason I just assumed the debris Shepard was getting up from was on Earth, but you guys are right.

Taking that into consideration, it's not that much of a far stretch to consider he could still be alive after all.

[ImaginaryMatter]

There's a fan edit of that exact thing; it's abrupt and I wouldn't call it good. But it does avoid the Catalyst and all of his accompanying frustrations, so I guess that's something.

 

I guess I would still be complaining but I wouldn't have as much to complain about. I don't know if that's a win or a loss, because I do so love complaining.

[Original182]

It might be better in the sense that it opens up possibility that Shepard may have survived.

 

But the only ending you would get would be the Reapers destroyed?

[Jorji Costava]

I guess my reading comprehension takes a hit as the hour gets later, but if it means a forced death for the protagonist, then I can't really go along with it. No doubt the replay value of the game would drop to zero, and as one who weighs the worth of a game by how many times I can play it, that would be a pretty bad thing. I typically butt against forced PC deaths in a game like this, because it kind of makes the whole journey seem like a massive waste of time unless there's something meaningful that can be added to it, but I set the bar extremely high for this, because forced death is just a bitter pill with little value in and of itself.

 

I guess I don't 'immerse' as much as a lot of players do, but I actually don't have much investment one way or the other in whether or not Shepard lives or dies, as long as either living or dying has some kind of storytelling significance. Way back when, I had an idea as to how Shepard's auto-death could have been done in a somewhat more interesting way: For instance, maybe you could play up the idea that after Lazarus, Shepard is somehow on 'borrowed time' (something like Captain Sheridan after Z'ha'dum in Babylon 5, for anyone who's seen that show). Perhaps the Lazarus implants are breaking down. Shepard's dreams could then be explained as a side-effect of this, so that their function of foreshadowing Shepard's eventual fate makes more sense, story-wise.

 

With this scenario, you'd have more of a story justification for forcing Shepard's death that ties in with an already existing plot development, a way to add thematic heft to Lazarus, and an explanation of why the Lazarus project doesn't actually constitute a Khan's blood-style cure for death. I know no one's going to like this idea, because it involves Shepard dying no matter what; I'm just saying that if you had to make the death of Shepard an inevitability, this would have been a more interesting way to handle it IMO.

 

RE: The OP's question.

 

I don't know if the existing ending minus the Catalyst would constitute a good ending per se (too abrupt, perhaps?), but I think it would definitely be preferable to what we got. Maybe I'm just more used to stories where key mysteries are left unsolved, but I didn't really need much of an explanation of the harvest (something like simple self-interest would have sufficed for me). In fact, I was dreading it: The harvest is just kinda dumb if you think about it: What rational justification could there be for wanting to kill all intelligent life on a 50,000 year basis?

 

It was plainly obvious to me from the beginning that the basic setup of the harvest wasn't constructed with some great scifi concept in mind but more as a way to move the story along: The Reapers wait 50,000 years because otherwise the setting wouldn't be possible, they want to destroy all organic life because that gives Shepard a reason to oppose them no matter how sociopathic he/she is, etc. Within these constraints, I was extremely pessimistic that you could construct an interesting after-the-fact rationalization for why the harvest actually kinda-sorta makes sense, and the whole Catalyst sequence confirmed all of those fears for me.

[SporkFu]

I would have preferred the reapers are destroyed, but their destruction causes massive collateral damage everywhere. When shep and Anderson see what they've done, they both slink guiltily out of the room, fade to black, then as the credits roll, Mordin appears and sings Always Look On The Bright Side of Life instead. 

 

In all honesty, starkid aside, I didn't mind the endings so much. If, instead, starkid had been a constantly morphing figure representing all the people shep connected with in the trilogy who died -- Ash/Kaidan, Thane, Mordin, Legion, Jenkins -- I'd have been okay with that.