148 réponses à ce sujet

[Vazgen]

Oh please. Shepard being forced to die at the end is as contfived as anything else in the endings. It's on,y there for "feelz". To enforce some arbitrary requirement for bittersweetness.

And you seriously think being able to talk to Joker about EDI's death woulldn' be worthwhile? How about flying around seeing how people react to now having to calculate pinall day because you plugged in the Overlord? Or how everyone responds to sudey being green?

As to your question, I am a staunch MEHEM player. Without it, ME3 does not exist as far as I am concerned. If youare talking aboutsome bizarre rl hypothetical, I'd probably chicken outand shoot the tube

Though Iwould also hope to ie in the blast because I seriously doubt I could livewith myself afterwards

Yes, I seriously think it will not be worthwhile. The ending is what it is - the end of the trilogy. Continuing story of the Shepard afterwards is useless. He did what he had to do, he stopped the Reapers. And I couldn't care less about what Joker would say afterwards about me choosing to sacrifice EDI to save trillions of lives. If he chastises me, I'll just go all renegade on him and tell him to shut the hell up. If he goes around "you did the right thing. I just can't imagine myself without her" with Shepard comforting him afterwards... Bleh, no, I don't want this at all.

I'm content with this final decision - end the Reaper threat once and for all, whatever the cost. My Shepard sacrificed 300.000 Batarians to just delay the Reapers, he sure as hell can live with destroying the synthetics - geth (who die only because of the Reaper code) and EDI (who is based on the Reaper tech). 

I always choose Destroy.

 

And for the record, I'd hate ME trilogy having a happy ending with sunshine and rainbows. It just doesn't fit

[Farangbaa]

And for the record, I'd hate ME trilogy having a happy ending with sunshine and rainbows. It just doesn't fit

 

Truer words have yet to be spoken

[Iakus]

Yes, I seriously think it will not be worthwhile. The ending is what it is - the end of the trilogy. Continuing story of the Shepard afterwards is useless. He did what he had to do, he stopped the Reapers. And I couldn't care less about what Joker would say afterwards about me choosing to sacrifice EDI to save trillions of lives. If he chastises me, I'll just go all renegade on him and tell him to shut the hell up. If he goes around "you did the right thing. I just can't imagine myself without her" with Shepard comforting him afterwards... Bleh, no, I don't want this at all.

 

News flash:

 

Not everyone plays renegade.

 

 

 

I'm content with this final decision - end the Reaper threat once and for all, whatever the cost. My Shepard sacrificed 300.000 Batarians to just delay the Reapers, he sure as hell can live with destroying the synthetics - geth (who die only because of the Reaper code) and EDI (who is based on the Reaper tech).
I always choose Destroy.

And for the record, I'd hate ME trilogy having a happy ending with sunshine and rainbows. It just doesn't fit

So, how many billions have to die before an ending is no longer "sunshine and rainbows"?

[Vazgen]

News flash:

 

Not everyone plays renegade.

I didn't claim otherwise. I just told my opinion on continuation after the ending. 

Have you seen Dead Space 3 ending? 

Spoiler

Awakened DLC is a continuation

Spoiler

Not something I wish to see in Mass Effect

 

So, how many billions have to die before an ending is no longer "sunshine and rainbows"?

 

Everything relying on the Reapers to live is enough.

[Darks1d3]

I suppose in a way Bioware set themselves up for some of the fan backlash regarding the endings. Throughout the trilogy, they fed the self-righteous power fantasy. Hardly any of the Paragon options had a costly outcome. And then at the end, they finally don't give an "upper-left blue insta-win" option.

 

I hope they don't make the same mistake in ME:N

[Farangbaa]

I suppose in a way Bioware set themselves up for some of the fan backlash regarding the endings. Throughout the trilogy, they fed the self-righteous power fantasy. Hardly any of the Paragon options had a costly outcome. And then at the end, they finally don't give an "upper-left blue insta-win" option.

 

This is the best part of the ending. You can't save everybody unless you sacrifice yourself. Beautiful.

[Iakus]

I suppose in a way Bioware set themselves up for some of the fan backlash regarding the endings. Throughout the trilogy, they fed the self-righteous power fantasy. Hardly any of the Paragon options had a costly outcome. And then at the end, they finally don't give an "upper-left blue insta-win" option.

 

I hope they don't make the same mistake in ME:N

No upper left, no lower right.  There was no ending worth living or dying over.  Not even refusing to choose.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

I've got a great idea for a fourth ending, but Shepard has to survive.

 

Bioware does a Broken Steel, but of course the war doesn't leave the galaxy all sunshine and bunnies like the slides show. We know that War... War never changes.

 

1) Shepard survives control because only a copy of Shepard's mind gets uploaded. So Shepard's mind controls the Reapers.

 

2) Shepard survives synthesis because adding Shepard's essence doesn't necessitate the flying leap. All that is needed is a blood sample.

 

3) Shepard survives destroy because the Crucible targets and destroys the reapers.

 

But after the ending, Shepard knows how to dance. And femShep knows how to walk in heels, and sit while wearing a dress! -- new animations unlocked!!!!! and you get them for your next playthroughs!!!! well the last one anyway.

[Jado589]

As far as I remember nothing in the Stargazer epilogue clearly indicates that is was the following cycle that defeated the Reapers just that it was a following cycle.

Is it just me or do I hear an asari-like voice speaking to the child in the future after the Refuse ending?

[Farangbaa]

Is it just me or do I hear an asari-like voice speaking to the child in the future after the Refuse ending?

 

That's just you. The Asari have human voices.

[Sir DeLoria]

Choose Quarians on Rannoch + High EMS Destroy = moderately happy ending

Where's the problem here exactly?

[Iakus]

Choose Quarians on Rannoch + High EMS Destroy = moderately happy ending

Where's the problem here exactly?

1) Still stabbing EDI in the back

2)  I shouldn't be punished for actually managing to break a cycle of destruction.

[Sir DeLoria]

1) Still stabbing EDI in the back
2)  I shouldn't be punished for actually managing to break a cycle of destruction.

I agree about 2 but I don't really care about EDI, so that's just personal opinion.

[Coyotebay]

Yeah if you already killed off the Geth and don't care about EDI, there's no real downside to high EMS destroy.

[themikefest]

edi is a machine and machines can be broken. Getting rid of the thing has no side effects

[AlanC9]

Pre EC didn't allow you to shoot it. The game didn't respond to your shots. You had to choose RGB.

Not exactly. You also could just stand there and not pick RGB. Eventually the Reapers would blow up the Crucible. So the EC didn't change anything except that now you get to see how Liara saved the galaxy after Shepard failed.

[Iakus]

Yeah if you already killed off the Geth and don't care about EDI, there's no real downside to high EMS destroy.

 

And if I believe in transhumanism by any means necessary, there's no downside to Synthesis.

[AlanC9]

And if I believe in transhumanism by any means necessary, there's no downside to Synthesis.

Sure, but I don't know what this proves. For any decision that's supposed to be hard, there's going to be some set of psychological attributes and beliefs that trivializes that decision. (Or makes that decision intolerable, but I hardly need to tell you about that part.)

[Iakus]

Sure, but I don't know what this proves. For any decision that's supposed to be hard, there's going to be some set of psychological attributes and beliefs that trivializes that decision. (Or makes that decision intolerable, but I hardly need to tell you about that part.)

 

It demonstrates that "As long as you don't care about the consequences, the act is justified"

 

The corollary is that if you find the act monstrous, then you can't justify it.  And if I find slaughtering EDI and the geth monstrous, I can't justify Destroy.  SImply saying "Well if I let the geth die on Rannoch and don't care about EDI, there's no downside to Destroy.  

 

Well, yeah, except for letting the geth die and caring about EDI.  It's just not that simple

[KaiserShep]

I've got a great idea for a fourth ending, but Shepard has to survive.

 

Bioware does a Broken Steel, but of course the war doesn't leave the galaxy all sunshine and bunnies like the slides show. We know that War... War never changes.

 

1) Shepard survives control because only a copy of Shepard's mind gets uploaded. So Shepard's mind controls the Reapers.

 

2) Shepard survives synthesis because adding Shepard's essence doesn't necessitate the flying leap. All that is needed is a blood sample.

 

3) Shepard survives destroy because the Crucible targets and destroys the reapers.

 

But after the ending, Shepard knows how to dance. And femShep knows how to walk in heels, and sit while wearing a dress! -- new animations unlocked!!!!! and you get them for your next playthroughs!!!! well the last one anyway.

 

It's a Festivus miracle!

[Vazgen]

Strange game.

 

The only winning move is not to play.

 

Certainly it'd be cheaper - if it's impossible to win then why on earth would a sane person spend money on this title, any addon, offshoot or spinoff ever again?

Impossible to win? The point of all three games was stopping the Reapers and you stop them. If the cost is too high for you and you can't deal with it, fine, but don't tell that it's not a win. 

It was never stated that the war will end on your or my terms, Shepard was chosen because he/she had the stomach to make hard decisions for the greater good, regardless of how these decisions contradict his/her character or personal preferences. 

[Iakus]

Impossible to win? The point of all three games was stopping the Reapers and you stop them. If the cost is too high for you and you can't deal with it, fine, but don't tell that it's not a win. 

It was never stated that the war will end on your or my terms, Shepard was chosen because he/she had the stomach to make hard decisions for the greater good, regardless of how these decisions contradict his/her character or personal preferences. 

 

And here I thought Shepard was chosen because people bought and played the game.

 

If you can't win without becoming a monster, did you really win?

[Bfler]

Impossible to win? The point of all three games was stopping the Reapers and you stop them. If the cost is too high for you and you can't deal with it, fine, but don't tell that it's not a win. 

 

The Rannoch storyline with peace at the end would be a good way to create an ending without unnecessary casualties, because it would show, that the logic of the catalyst (synthetics exterminate organics) is flawed. With peace between Geth and Quarians, Refuse could and should be the ending, where Shepard persuades the Catalyst to end the cycle. The Reapers return to the place, where they come from and the Catalyst does disable itself.

[RatThing]

The Rannoch storyline with peace at the end would be a good way to create an ending without unnecessary casualties, because it would show, that the logic of the catalyst (synthetics exterminate organics) is flawed. With peace between Geth and Quarians, Refuse could and should be the ending, where Shepard persuades the Catalyst to end the cycle. The Reapers return to the place, where they come from and the Catalyst does disable itself.

 

The Rannoch storyline is one big mess, especially with peace at the end. 300 years of war, then one side decides to break off an attack and suddenly it's peace and everybody loves each other? That's ridiculous. I'm glad there isn't such an option in the game ending. It's fine as it is.