35 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

The accusation that your choices didn't matter in ME3 is completely false. Your choices will destroy or preserve complete species. How much more can they matter? People only complain because prior choices didn't allow them to wriggle out of a conclusion to the main plot that they didn't like.

 

If you compare ME3 with DAO, both had three major outcomes. ME3: the well-known RGB choice. DAO: Warden dead. Warden alive with no DR, Warden alive with DR. In both games, everything else is a consquence of decisions irrelevant to the conclusion of the main plot.

 

I suspect that DAI will be quite the same. You will close the Veil tears and end the Elder One's plot against Thedas, but important decisions you make during the game will affect how the world looks after the end rather than affect the end itself.

 

The problem with ME3's endings was their thematic slant and their implementation. A mechanically similar setup can be used rather more satisfactorily with better writing and more careful consideration of the different outlooks of players. Here's an example: Not having to take your cues for your choices from the antagonist will already help a great deal. I don't think a Bioware story will use that kind of setup again any time soon.

[Iakus]

ME3's endings are why, for the first time for a Bioware game, I will be actively hunting down ending spoilers before I play. 

 

I have no interest in playing a game where the protaginist is forced to die/do something monstrous/both in order to "win"

[elrofrost]

It wasn't the endings themselves that pissed everyone off. It was how they were presented. The EC fixed much of that. Especially not forcing you into the MP game to get a decent EMS score. But the EC wasn't something BW or EA wanted to release. They were forced too. The uproar even made the NYT - that's how badly handled it was. And now of course, it's urban legend.

 

ME3 was a railroad shooter. Plain and simple. And the replay - PLEASE - if DAI has any dreams - PLEASE let me ESC out of them on my 4th play though. I'm begging you BW!

[RollaChief]

I tend not to compare games in this way that aren't even written by the same people.

This.  Like the ME3 endings, neutral about them, or still raging after two years...well, different team.  I do wonder, though, if the DAI dev team considered long and hard about all the Sturm und Drang regarding ME3's endings, and decided, "Let's not go down that road."

 

So my guess is DAI will have a conclusive, satisfying, unambiguous conclusion, aka DAO instead of ME3 or DAII.

[Kel Eligor]

I don't think Mass Effect was even taken in consideration during the development of DA: I. In fact, Dragon Age is (from what I understand) slated to be a continuing series, so to me that would limit the amount of freedom we have in our decisions as a player at the end of the story. I don't see this as a weakness per say; I believe the ending of the game could be stronger for it since the writers could dictate in which direction the universe goes for better or for worse. A lot of people may take issue with the lack of choices, but if it ensures a solid narrative... why the hell not?

[Lord of Mortlan]

The difference between ME3's endings and DA3's endings, Is that instead of Red, Blue and Green, it'll be Purple, Orange and Teal.

Blame EA

[Decepticon Leader Sully]

Blame EA

Blame the writers thaght were braught in last second who knew nothing of the story... and EA. 

[SovietCyborg]

The flaw of Mass Effect 3 was that the ending did not develop naturally from the events of the story. ME3 "side stories" (Krogan, Geth-Quarian etc.) are good because they have solid foundations. By contrast, the Crucible-Catalyst cant be justified without a significant infodump or heavy handwave. The first sign that something is wrong is the way you are introduced to concept of the Crucible on Mars. The Crucible should have been the the result of what happened in ME2. Perhaps with Cerberus building the Crucible in ME3 based on some element foreshadowed back then (Black Energy or whatever). ME3 didn't earn its ending. This is why the ending of ME3 feels so contrived and pretentious.

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

After the ME3 fallout I think it is safe to assume that the ending will probably be the best ever.

Probably written FIRST this time

[SomeoneStoleMyName]

The flaw of Mass Effect 3 was that the ending did not develop naturally from the events of the story. ME3 "side stories" (Krogan, Geth-Quarian etc.) are good because they have solid foundations. By contrast, the Crucible-Catalyst cant be justified without a significant infodump or heavy handwave. The first sign that something is wrong is the way you are introduced to concept of the Crucible on Mars. The Crucible should have been the the result of what happened in ME2. Perhaps with Cerberus building the Crucible in ME3 based on some element foreshadowed back then (Black Energy or whatever). ME3 didn't earn its ending. This is why the ending of ME3 feels so contrived and pretentious.

I always considered the main flaw lack of closure. There were none. Only a billion questions.

[Kierro Ren]

Personally I thought ME3 ended fine. If that makes me like sh-- and a get called a fanboy. So be it. Honestly, what more did you expect? The whole idea from ME-ME3, was to control or destroy the Reapers. And we got just that. The rest can be argued, the same as LOTRs Eagle scene, about just fly to Mordor. OR. How about, it's not about that, but the journey.

 

Shep dies T_T. So? It's more believable, because outside of fantasy, the hero doesn't always live. I honestly can't see Shep sitting at a beach, with sunglasses, under an umbrella sipping a drink from a coconut. If he dies, I'm assuming you mean the control choice, it was as a hero. You can also destroy, and live. It's just like DAO's ending. You're suppose to die killing Archy, or cheat and do the DR. Even Sten says, a living hero would be too arrogant.