989 réponses à ce sujet

[Vazgen]

Why didn't the sniper shoot the husks and Marauder for Shepard? Coates I believe says fallback, the sniper would leave his/her post

I'm not saying that this sniper was sitting there and watching the beam. Just a brief glance, notice and barely enough time to look through the scope and notice someone going up the beam. I believe fall back order was directed at forces storming the beam.

 

That's the problem though isn't it; it relies on headcanon. Why do it for as an important issue as that?

Because different people might want different end for their Shepard. Not everyone is willing to see their Shepard live after killing the geth and Joker's girlfriend, but they also want to see the Reapers destroyed. Headcanon allows for both possibilities to be true. 

[Iakus]

 

 

Because different people might want different end for their Shepard. Not everyone is willing to see their Shepard live after killing the geth and Joker's girlfriend, but they also want to see the Reapers destroyed. Headcanon allows for both possibilities to be true. 

 

How about those who wanted Shepard to survive Control or Synthesis, to be able to live without slaughtering EDI and the geth?  Why are they left out?

 

Why is Separd burning shown in excruciating detail, but not Shepard surviving?

 

The more I think about it, the more I think cutting to credits after "best seats in the house" would have been a much easier and more cost-effective EC,

 

"Ending Cut"

[Vazgen]

How about those who wanted Shepard to survive Control or Synthesis, to be able to live without slaughtering EDI and the geth?  Why are they left out?

 

Why is Separd burning shown in excruciating detail, but not Shepard surviving?

 

The more I think about it, the more I think cutting to credits after "best seats in the house" would have been a much easier and more cost-effective EC,

 

"Ending Cut"

Because it's explicitly said and warned that your character will die in those endings and it is required for your character to die for them to work?

[themikefest]

How about those who wanted Shepard to survive Control or Synthesis, to be able to live without slaughtering EDI and the geth?  Why are they left out?

 

Slaughtering geth and edi ? Pick the Quarians and let the edi  fry. No big deal

[Iakus]

Because it's explicitly said and warned that your character will die in those endings and it is required for your character to die for them to work?

As Dreamgazer seems to like to say,

 

But why?

[Dabrikishaw]

That examination on the Walking Dead's choices posted a while back sums up my opinions on choices in Mass Effect 3 perfectly.

[dreamgazer]

That's the problem though isn't it; it relies on headcanon. Why do it for as an important issue as that?

 
Pretty rudimentary headcanon, though. They gave you X and Y. and placed faith in the audience to come up with Z.
 

I watched Shepard walk into a fireball as he slaughtered an entire form of life.
 
You bet I'm despondant.  The whole scene feels artificial and slapped together.

So does Virmire, the Ascension choice, the heretic geth, the Collector base choice.

Tacked on for "teh dramaz", or whatever.
 

Such "hope and determination" clearly didn't exist the last time Shepard died.

Shepard's become just a tad more important since then, and has less witnesses to his death.
 

If they wanted to evoke such feelings, they should go with something more concrete.  As concrete as seeing Shepard's flesh burnt from his bones.

Guess they really should have shown every ounce of galactic life getting extinguished in the refuse ending.
 

You know, you’ve been given free choice to make all these decisions with this character, with the fates of millions of people, and then, you don’t get to choose your own fate.  Mac Walters

Right, you can't have your cake and eat it, too. You have to give to get. You don't have complete control, and never did.
 

In the end, I think a lot of the fan-reaction - and this doesn't mean it's unjustified, at all - is just grief. It's some of the most raw responses I've gotten, have been people who are grieving, because a character that was really important to them died and, you know, died for a worthy cause -- but died, and that sucks!" Patrick Weekes

Right, because Shepard can die in two of the three endings, and has to if you want to avoid blowback.
 

It's an easter egg.  a "ray of hope"  If they wanted to illustrate Shepard being alive they could just as easily have done so on more certain terms.  But they chose not to.

Why would they include a "ray of hope" that was actually a depiction of death? That's a pretty irrational thought.

[dreamgazer]

That examination on the Walking Dead's choices posted a while back sums up my opinions on choices in Mass Effect 3 perfectly.

Happens a lot in ME2, too.

[Vazgen]

 

As Dreamgazer seems to like to say,

 

But why?

What do you mean "why"? Why is the sacrifice required for the endings to work? I can write a detailed headcanon about it but it's merely that - headcanon. All we have is the Catalyst's words and the cutscenes that show Shepard dying and only then Crucible firing.

Why Shepard's death is shown in detail? Because you've chosen to see him die. You are told that if you pick this he'll die. You proceed with the choice. Thus you want your Shepard to die. They show it to you. That's not the case in Destroy because there is a chance you didn't want Shepard to die. Thus - the breath scene.

[rohanks]

For me OP, it's two years on and it seems the penny has still yet to drop. Even for my favourite Bioware writer for ME.

Let's give it a couple more years and see if that delightful realisation occurs as to one of the main reasons that ME3's ending was so poorly received and nearly extinguished the franchise IMO.

 

(deep breath) Ok, ......here goes.....(clears throat)...I...had...no...choice.

[Daemul]

The only time I felt grief about the ending was when a year ago, I read the lore behind the Citadel and how gravity on it works, and I realised that the very moment Shepard opened it up like a blooming flower, any one who was left alive on it was dead.

The poster on Reddit who took the time to count how many people Shepard has killed over the course of the trilogy has to go back and add the population of the Citadel to his final number lol

[fhs33721]

For me OP, it's two years on and it seems the penny has still yet to drop. Even for my favourite Bioware writer for ME.

Let's give it a couple more years and see if that delightful realisation occurs as to one of the main reasons that ME3's ending was so poorly received and nearly extinguished the franchise IMO.

 

(deep breath) Ok, ......here goes.....(clears throat)...I...had...no...choice.

Or we could just stop to pretend that people who were upset about the ending actually all have one common big complaint about it even though in reality there were many different groups of which each had their own major issue with the ending. These major issues include but are not limited to: Shepard died, My choices didn't matter, The starbrat made no sense and there was no closure;

 

The only time I felt grief about the ending was when a year ago, I read the lore behind the Citadel and how gravity on it works, and I realised that the very moment Shepard opened it up like a blooming flower, any one who was left alive on it was dead.

The poster on Reddit who took the time to count how many people Shepard has killed over the course of the trilogy has to go back and add the population of the Citadel to his final number lol

No need to grief. Evidence suggests is nobody left alive on it anyways. Shepard might have spilled some Reaper-slushie at worst.

 

Furthermore why are we disputing Weekes statement? I's not like he said everyone who was upset about the ending was upset because Shepard died. All he said is that a lot of the fan reaction came from people that griefed for Shepard, which is  entirely possioble.

Can't we go back to arguing over actual plot-holes or even the extremely nitpicked barely noticeable plotholes again. I think that was more productive than this.

[Iakus]

 
 Shepard's become just a tad more important since then, and has less witnesses to his death.
 

What does Shepard's importance have to do with  this?  Are the characters somehow aware of the concept of plot armor?

 

 

Guess they really should have shown every ounce of galactic life getting extinguished in the refuse ending.
 

Why not?  Refuse is pure trolling anyway.

 

 

Right, you can't have your cake and eat it, too. You have to give to get. You don't have complete control, and never did.

 

Funny, I've played plenty of games wehre the main character isn't required to immolate him/herself to complete a game.

 

Guess they were doing it wrong.

 

 

Right, because Shepard can die in two of the three endings, and has to if you want to avoid blowback.

 

Shepard dies in 6.5 out of seven endings.  There is not a single ending where it is confirmed Shepard lives to see the Normandy again.

 

 

Why would they include a "ray of hope" that was actually a depiction of death? That's a pretty irrational thought.

It's a Schrodinger-situation where Shepard is perpetually alive yet dying, with no definitive answer.  Is it a vase, or is it two faces?  None of the other endings have that level of ambiguity.  And that p*sses people off.  I would have thought that by now you would understand this.

[Iakus]

 

 

What do you mean "why"? Why is the sacrifice required for the endings to work? I can write a detailed headcanon about it but it's merely that - headcanon. All we have is the Catalyst's words and the cutscenes that show Shepard dying and only then Crucible firing.

Why Shepard's death is shown in detail? Because you've chosen to see him die. You are told that if you pick this he'll die. You proceed with the choice. Thus you want your Shepard to die. They show it to you. That's not the case in Destroy because there is a chance you didn't want Shepard to die. Thus - the breath scene.

 

 

And if you are going to require a player to kill his.her character, it should be for concrete, understandable reasons.  "For the feelz" simply doesn't cut it.  Nor does "Because the Catalyst says so"

 

And in the case of Destroy, those who want Shepard to live get...a faceless torso taking a breath.  That's nowhere near equal to watching SHepard die.  It's a bone tossed at players, done on the cheap.  Players who don't want their SHepard to die don't get to see their Shepard live

[dreamgazer]

What does Shepard's importance have to do with  this?  Are the characters somehow aware of the concept of plot armor?

I thought you were complaining about ME2's death in relation to searching for Shepard in ME3.

And if they're aware of the cut-to-black in ME1, then yeah, they know plenty about Shepard's plot armor.
 

Why not?  Refuse is pure trolling anyway.

Pure trolling to verify what the game has been telling you from the beginning. Uh-huh.
 

Funny, I've played plenty of games wehre the main character isn't required to immolate him/herself to complete a game.
 
Guess they were doing it wrong.

Strawman. Try again.
 

Shepard dies in 6.5 out of seven endings.  There is not a single ending where it is confirmed Shepard lives to see the Normandy again.

If you want to get literal, you actually don't see Shepard die in any of the Destroy endings. You just get to see the breath scene with a high-enough EMS. And folks will definitely be hitting the Citadel debris shortly after, especially with knowledge that Shepard made it up there
 

It's a Schrodinger-situation where Shepard is perpetually alive yet dying, with no definitive answer.  Is it a vase, or is it two faces?  None of the other endings have that level of ambiguity.  And that p*sses people off.  I would have thought that by now you would understand this.

I understand the viewpoint. That doesn't mean I think it isn't irrational. If they wanted Shepard dead, they would have left the scene out completely.

[Iakus]

I thought you were complaining about ME2's death in relation to searching for Shepard in ME3.
 

Shepard is no more or less important than the first time he died.  And still doesn't answer the question of why the LI is suddenly psychic.

 

Why did Ash give up hope the first time, and not now?  Why Joker, who has witnesssed this stuff before?

 

 

Pure trolling to verify what the game has been telling you from the beginning. Uh-huh.

 

ME1 told me the rachni were extinct

ME2 told me it was suicide to go through the Omega IV relay.

 

"The game" tells you a lot of things that aren't accurate

 

 

Strawman. Try again.

Don't have to.  I answered your question "Where does Word of God even suggest that death should be considered?" I showed you.

 

 

If you want to get literal, you actually don't see Shepard die in any of the Destroy endings. You just get to see the breath scene with a high-enough EMS. And folks will definitely be hitting the Citadel debris shortly after, especially with knowledge that Shepard made it up there

I understand the viewpoint. That doesn't mean I think it isn't irrational. If they wanted Shepard dead, they would have left the scene out completely.

 

"Definitely"?  Are we allowing dreams headcanon into evidence now?

 

If they wanted Shepard alive they could have done far more.  That's the problem.

[Andres Hendrix]

Of course, Weeks will say that, he has to sell games. His role makes him limited in what he can say. The best thing for him to say about the fan reaction to the ME3 endings, is that the fans were just having an irrational or ‘emotional reaction’ (in this case grief) to his game. It makes the game look better (people reacted emotionally to a video game!) and it strawmans the criticism of the endings.

People who think those three endings were cogent are fooling themselves. Take for instance, when Star-Jar came out of the machine and called the green ending "evolution", I said to myself, "You have got to be ****** kidding me, where is, the RANDOM MUTATION BY NATURAL SELECTION?"  The writing behind those endings (I guess Walters and Hudson, skipped over Darwin, Dawkins and Gould when they were gathering source material) perturbed me. Fiction is about filling in those gaps in knowledge (where facts should be) with one’s imagination. Eventually the fiction will no longer work in those gaps, because new facts will replace the ficiton.
 

Ex: At present, we do not have FTL space travel; we do not know how to do it, we do not have the means. Therefore, in ME the writers said, ‘here is an interesting way to depict FTL space travel in our story (ezo, and the Mass Effect etc). If we had FTL travel in real life, there would be no reason to use fiction (ezo, the Mass Effect). It would be something as mundane as someone driving a car.

Evolution itself is not fiction it is scientific fact. You can use your imagination (as Bioware did) to create a new species etc, but to liken evolution to some sort of fantastical adaption, is absurd.

Something illogical happened in the writing of the ME3 endings (red blue and green, but especially the green). For instance, Star-Jar starts going on about messing with DNA, and having the next step in evolution. Yet implied in that ‘next step’, is that Star-Brat does not know what evolution is. This kills the player's immersion; Star-Brat is supposed to be an uber-intelligent AI, yet it does not understand something as simple and eloquent as, ‘random mutation by natural selection.’ Thus, it is only logical to say that the writers screwed up. I will add, that I do not think a nonsensical cause, can be deemed  a "worthy cause."

The ME3 endings have problems, the writers and people at Bioware know this, they just can’t say it. Instead, they put on a front (read Goffman’s “The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life”) to save (corporate) face. That is what Weeks is doing.

It’s incredible that it has been two years after the fiasco, and Bioware is still trying to mitigate the damage of the ME3 endings (they know why). If I were to guess, years from now, Bioware will still be acting as though their fans were the emotional devils, rightfully tossed headlong (into greif striken 'bottomless perdition') because...‘artistic integrity!’

[Reorte]

If they wanted Shepard alive they could have done far more.  That's the problem.

They didn't seem to know what they wanted. I can't read the intent as anything other than "Shepard lives" - it runs counter to all the other definite deaths, it's just hugely unsatisfactory for that.

Headcanon doesn't cut it for me, it means accepting wishful thinking for an uncertainty.

[dreamgazer]

Shepard is no more or less important than the first time he died.

Uh, yeah, actually. S/he is.
 

And still doesn't answer the question of why the LI is suddenly psychic.

The LI isn't "psychic". You're not really that dense, are you?
 

Why did Ash give up hope the first time, and not now?  Why Joker, who has witnesssed this stuff before?

You mean besides the fact that Joker actually saw Shepard get spaced in ME2, and nobody knows squat of what happened in the chamber in ME3?
 

ME1 told me the rachni were extinct

So?
 

ME2 told me it was suicide to go through the Omega IV relay.

A little more relevant, but it also instilled the expectation that it wasn't really a suicide mission.
 

"The game" tells you a lot of things that aren't accurate

Military prowess against billion-year-old space Cthulhu is a vastly different beast, and the game never, not once, made you think that it was possible to beat the without the Crucible. They were always a stalling pattern for the device's construction.
 

Don't have to.  I answered your question "Where does Word of God even suggest that death should be considered?" I showed you.

No, you showed me where Word of God said that we didn't have complete control of Shepard's fate. Which we don't.
 

"Definitely"?  Are we allowing dreams headcanon into evidence now?

When it's common sense like that, sure. What group of morons wouldn't go poking around the Citadel afterwards, especially with knowledge that Shepard made it up?
 

If they wanted Shepard alive they could have done far more.  That's the problem.

If they wanted Shepard dead, they could have done literally nothing. In BioWare plot-twist fashion, they did something.

[dreamgazer]

It’s incredible that it has been two years after the fiasco, and Bioware is still trying to mitigate the damage of the ME3 endings (they know why). If I were to guess, years from now, Bioware will still be acting as though their fans were the emotional devils, rightfully tossed headlong (into greif striken 'bottomless perdition') because...‘artistic integrity!’[/font][/size]

The video was posted in summer 2013. And they're not even trying to mitigate damage anymore.

Their writing team, and most of the rational members of this fandom, have moved on until the next shiny game gets pressed.

[SporkFu]

I think I might be the only one who actually likes the turret mini-game. It's fun to explode husks and cannibals. *shrug*

[Andres Hendrix]

The video was posted in summer 2013. And they're not even trying to mitigate damage anymore.

Their writing team, and most of the rational members of this fandom, have moved on until the next shiny game gets pressed.

You are cherry picking. Anyway, as long as Mass Effect 3 stays the way it is, if Bioware wants the game to keep selling, and if they want to maintain their corporate face, then they have to keep up their front.  If not, they obviously lose face, which could result in blowback in the form of a loss in sales etc. Weeks, cannot publicly admit that the writing in ME3's ending have problems. He will just go the route of ‘hide the ball’.

[KaiserShep]

I think I might be the only one who actually likes the turret mini-game. It's fun to explode husks and cannibals. *shrug*

I've always been pretty neutral on this sequence. It was obviously nothing special, but nothing I'd care to criticize. I was more preoccupied with the fact that Shepard's weapons will appear and then disappear once the sequence was over.

[SporkFu]

I've always been pretty neutral on this sequence. It was obviously nothing special, but nothing I'd care to criticize. I was more preoccupied with the fact that Shepard's weapons will appear and then disappear once the sequence was over.

This is true... also why couldn't we use the one in the shuttle more often?

[Valmar]

I think I might be the only one who actually likes the turret mini-game. It's fun to explode husks and cannibals. *shrug*

I definitely agree that its fun but the timing of it in the end is just... lol.

 

It felt so out of place. I mean, I get we're in the middle of a warzone and everything but it felt odd to break away from the heart-to-heart talks with squadies just to kill some random husks. Especially when there are other soldiers there, some of which seem to be sniping at reaper ships and buildings instead of anything useful.

 

You are cherry picking. Anyway, as long as Mass Effect 3 stays the way it is, if Bioware wants the game to keep selling, and if they want to maintain their corporate face, then they have to keep up their front.  If not, they obviously lose face, which could result in blowback in the form of a loss in sales etc. Weeks, cannot publicly admit that the writing in ME3's ending have problems. He will just go the route of ‘hide the ball’.

 

While I certainly cannot speak for everyone I will say that if they actually came out and admitted to what fans actually thought was wrong with the ending (they don't have to say they agree, just acknowledge it) they would definitely earn my cash for the next title and some respect back. Their constant side-stepping of the issue does not instil faith in me. They lose more face to me by not addressing the issue honestly. 

 

 

This is true... also why couldn't we use the one in the shuttle more often?

 

I honestly forgot all about that. Yeah, we need more of that. Not too much, mind you, but a little bit here and there to add some variety to the game would be nice. Wasn't the optional rannoch mission the save Korris the only time we got to use that or am I mistaken? I seem to recall shooting husks from it once, which definitely wasn't rannoch... hmm.

 

It could be fun to blast some ravengers out of the sky during the Leviathan mission. That one planet was swarming with them. Could had been pretty intense.