590 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

Here is the deal with fanbases......

 

They ignore flaws when they like it, and make up flaws when they don't.

 

Case in point, ME2 is the former and ME3 is the latter.

[Vazgen]

I should also point out that I think Casey is cool. He's a Jack fan, after all. I just can't help but see this in a cynical light.

I didn't know that! Smart man

[congokong]

Here is the deal with fanbases......

 

They ignore flaws when they like it, and make up flaws when they don't.

 

Case in point, ME2 is the former and ME3 is the latter.

Hmmm. True enough. I've heard far, far more criticism about ME3's ending than ME2's beginning; the latter being something, barring few exceptions, should never be done IMO. ...I'm referring to Shepard dying and being revived for the slow.

 

As for ME3's ending, when I've asked people to give me reasons why they were so displeased (after the extended cut) besides "It sucked," it largely comes down to an expectation without clarity. Bioware deserved some backlash with declarations about your decisions mattering, but did people actually expect a long sequence change based on something like sparing the rachni in ME1? Perhaps I was too much of a realist to be disappointed by ME3 meeting my limited expectations. I remembered though that ME3 had a budget, and many diverse, lengthy sequences spawning from cumulative decisions would be very costly/laborous. Or maybe people just wanted the ending to not be a choice at all, but something like "Spare rachni in ME1 + destroy genophage data in ME2 + keep collector base in ME2 + etc. =  ending 8." Would a different cut-scene and/or slideshow based on that premise satisfy these people?

[Iakus]

Hmmm. True enough. From my experience I've heard far, far more criticism about ME3's ending than ME2's beginning; the latter being something, barring few exceptions, should never be done IMO. ...I'm referring to Shepard dying and being revived for the slow.

 

You'll find I'm not to fond of ME2's beginning either.  In fact, the Lazarus Project is one of my "favorite" objects of ridicule in the series.

 

 But the thing is, the beginning of ME2 is, well, the beginning.  It can be moved past.  The ending for ME3 is the destination.  There's no more road after it, so you're stuck wherever it leads you.

 

 

As for ME3's ending, when I've asked people to give me reasons why they were so displeased (after the extended cut) besides "It sucked," it largely comes down to an expectation without clarity. Bioware deserved some backlash with declarations about your decisions mattering, but did people actually expect a long sequence change based on something like sparing the rachni in ME1? Perhaps I was too much of a realist to be disappointed by ME3 meeting my limited expectations. I remembered though that ME3 had a budget, and many diverse, lengthy sequences spawning from cumulative decisions would be very costly. Or maybe people just wanted the ending to not be a choice at all, but something like "Spare rachni in ME1 + destroy genophage data in ME2 + keep collector base in ME2 + etc. =  ending 8." Would a different slideshow based on that premise satisfy these people?

 

There's a lot of reasons to hate the endings, which just shows how full of fail they are.  Me, it's because every "option" is basically forcing Shepard to do something horrible to the galaxy.  Forcing Shepad to burn in the process was an additional "screw you" to the audience, but  yeah, I didn't play through a hundred hours of choice-driven rpg narrative to watch my Shepard get Walter White-ed

[fraggle]

Well said!

 

Would a different cut-scene and/or slideshow based on that premise satisfy these people?

 

The only ending most wanted I guess was a (happy) end with closure. So unless it leads to this they would still not be satisfied

[congokong]

There's a lot of reasons to hate the endings, which just shows how full of fail they are.  Me, it's because every "option" is basically forcing Shepard to do something horrible to the galaxy.  Forcing Shepad to burn in the process was an additional "screw you" to the audience, but  yeah, I didn't play through a hundred hours of choice-driven rpg narrative to watch my Shepard get Walter White-ed

I've heard this before, and it just comes off to me as childish. Fans are upset because they couldn't have a happy ending. That's something I liked about Mass Effect though. It sometimes forced bad situations on you regardless of choice; reflective of real life. Ex: Not being able to save Ashley and Kaidan. You know if there was the option to save both almost no one would choose to lose them. Most people don't want realism in their playthroughs it seems; they want to save everyone whenever possible. This was also reflective on a thread I once read that showed how almost no one intentionally let anyone die on the suicide mission.

 

Considering the threat of the reapers I'd call myself lucky to get the options Shepard had. If people want true happy endings, there are plenty of Nintendo games that cater to this.

[Iakus]

I've heard this before, and it just comes off to me as childish. Fans are upset because they couldn't have a happy ending. That's something I liked about Mass Effect though. It sometimes forced bad situations on you regardless of choice; reflective of real life. Ex: Not being able to save Ashley and Kaidan. You know if there was the option to save both almost no one would choose to lose them. Most people don't want realism in their playthroughs it seems; they want to save everyone whenever possible. This was also reflective on a thread I once read that showed how almost no one intentionally let anyone die on the suicide mission.

 

Considering the threat of the reapers I'd call myself lucky to get the options Shepard had. If people want true happy endings, there are plenty of Nintendo games that cater to this.

I'd say fans are not unhappy because they don't get a happy ending, but because they don't get a satisfactory ending.  They don't truly reflect the choices and sacrifices already made or what their Shepard fought for.

 

Heck even people I've talked to who do like the endings admit Bioware handled that very poorly, and understand why people are upset.

[TheIdiocyWizard2.0]

I believe a "happy" ending should have been possible, but while that is disappointing that's not my biggest gripe with the endings. Without going too far in depth (since writing something even remotely complex on a phone is a pain) I honestly feel like the endings didn't fit thematically. I don't mind having endings that all lead to sacrifices, but I do have issue with the game telling me that the main theme of the story, the thing that needed to be resolved at the end, was the "organics vs synthetics" conflict which I felt was already resolved in the Rannoch ark. I always felt like the theme of the story was overcoming impossible odds, and living to talk about it afterwards. Besides that, I don't like that they felt the need to explain the Reapers. I feel that they worked as a much better villain when a complete mystery.

These are all just my opinion, and I can respect that this is their work of art and they can do whatever with it, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with the direction they took. I don't mind not having a "happy" ending, but the current endings just don't fit with the narrative IMO

[wolfhowwl]

I've heard this before, and it just comes off to me as childish. Fans are upset because they couldn't have a happy ending. That's something I liked about Mass Effect though. It sometimes forced bad situations on you regardless of choice; reflective of real life. Ex: Not being able to save Ashley and Kaidan. You know if there was the option to save both almost no one would choose to lose them. Most people don't want realism in their playthroughs it seems; they want to save everyone whenever possible. This was also reflective on a thread I once read that showed how almost no one intentionally let anyone die on the suicide mission.

 

Considering the threat of the reapers I'd call myself lucky to get the options Shepard had. If people want true happy endings, there are plenty of Nintendo games that cater to this.

 

When I see people hold up DA:O, a game that chickened out on hard choices every step of the way, as some sort of ideal then yes I do think that they wanted a happy ending and would have been upset no matter what if they didn't get one.

[Ashii6]

I've heard this before, and it just comes off to me as childish. Fans are upset because they couldn't have a happy ending. That's something I liked about Mass Effect though. It sometimes forced bad situations on you regardless of choice; reflective of real life. Ex: Not being able to save Ashley and Kaidan. You know if there was the option to save both almost no one would choose to lose them. Most people don't want realism in their playthroughs it seems; they want to save everyone whenever possible. This was also reflective on a thread I once read that showed how almost no one intentionally let anyone die on the suicide mission.

 

Considering the threat of the reapers I'd call myself lucky to get the options Shepard had. If people want true happy endings, there are plenty of Nintendo games that cater to this.

Right, because happy endings are too video gamey? That was one of my issues with endings. There was no happy ending. Yes, I wanted one and I still do. BioWare could gave us at least an option. Some people like ultimate sacrifice at the end of the game, I'm cool with that. But I like to see my when character is alive at the end.
This is a game, not a real life. I want to enjoy the game and its ending. I don't care if happy ending would be " too unrealistic ". When I sit and play I want to relax and smile. And ME3 made me actually sad. I have this enough in real life, don't need this in games, too. And no, I won't go and play some Nintendo crap. And saying to others: "Don't like the endings? Go play something else." is pretty rude.

My other issue was the Catalyst or AI, whatever it was called. The idea itself was interesting, but why on earth it had to be some little brat? I literally skipped everything he said when I played the second time. I also didn't like what BioWare have done with the Reapers. I totally loved the idea of them in ME1 and 2, but at the end of ME3 it was just... destroyed somehow.

[fraggle]

Right, because happy endings are too video gamey? That was one of my issues with endings. There was no happy ending. Yes, I wanted one and I still do. BioWare could gave us at least an option. Some people like ultimate sacrifice at the end of the game, I'm cool with that. But I like to see my when character is alive at the end.

 

See, and some like sad endings. Now, of course Bioware could have made it possible to show both things, but here we are talking about 1 game, 1... out of a dozen that do have happy endings. People always want different endings, but why can't there be just 1 game where not everything is rainbows-sunshine-herosavesthedayandlives? I think it was brave they went with this ending.

Plus, it even is possible for Shepard to live, does it really have to be explicitly shown?

Well, I know the answer to that already, but at least there's the possibility of Shepard being alive. What about games that have only happy endings? What if players wanted their hero to be sacrificed? They also have to deal with it.

I get that people want happy endings, and I like them too, but people can't always get what they want, and this needs to be accepted.

At least we got more ending options in ME3 than in DA2/DAI

[congokong]

Right, because happy endings are too video gamey? That was one of my issues with endings. There was no happy ending. Yes, I wanted one and I still do. BioWare could gave us at least an option. Some people like ultimate sacrifice at the end of the game, I'm cool with that. But I like to see my when character is alive at the end.
This is a game, not a real life. I want to enjoy the game and its ending. I don't care if happy ending would be " too unrealistic ". When I sit and play I want to relax and smile. And ME3 made me actually sad. I have this enough in real life, don't need this in games, too. And no, I won't go and play some Nintendo crap. And saying to others: "Don't like the endings? Go play something else." is pretty rude.

Unless we played a different game, I'm pretty sure ME3 had a relatively happy ending option where the ultimate goal is achieved. The reapers get destroyed against all odds, and despite their perfect track record for millions of years, the hero can effectively stop them. Oh, but there are casualties. That's a no-no, right? Suggesting playing Nintendo games and the like that are known for their simplistic hero-defeats-the-villain endings sounds like good advice for someone complaining that the ending was too realistic with it not being perfect/near-perfect for the good guys. I happen to like stories where everything isn't happily ever after. Mass Effect is rated M where such realism is expected. The "I don't want the hero to die crowd" should stick with E rated games if they don't want to be disappointed. If that fact is rude, too bad.

[congokong]

See, and some like sad endings. Now, of course Bioware could have made it possible to show both things, but here we are talking about 1 game, 1... out of a dozen that do have happy endings. People always want different endings, but why can't there be just 1 game where not everything is rainbows-sunshine-herosavesthedayandlives? I think it was brave they went with this ending.

Plus, it even is possible for Shepard to live, does it really have to be explicitly shown?

Well, I know the answer to that already, but at least there's the possibility of Shepard being alive. What about games that have only happy endings? What if players wanted their hero to be sacrificed? They also have to deal with it.

I get that people want happy endings, and I like them too, but people can't always get what they want, and this needs to be accepted.

At least we got more ending options in ME3 than in DA2/DAI

This.

 

Saying "But I wanted a happy ending" is a purely emotional argument, and shouldn't be valid in a debate on why an ending is "bad." Even saying it sounds naive and childish to me. This is a M rated game, people. I liked how there was no way around making a tough choice. And come on, people complain as if all endings lead to the reapers winning the war as usual. No, the galaxy is saved and people still aren't satisfied. I can respect an argument where people wanted their decisions to effect the result more (even though I already addressed my issues with this expectation), but don't bash the ending for not being "happy" enough.

[congokong]

When I see people hold up DA:O, a game that chickened out on hard choices every step of the way, as some sort of ideal then yes I do think that they wanted a happy ending and would have been upset no matter what if they didn't get one.

Considering most people play Dragon Age/Mass Effect as "paragon" it is evident people want that "happily ever after" atmosphere. I actually prefer the realism of renegade. Such decisions are generally made without the meta-gaming knowledge that:

1. This is only a game

2. You don't know that the idealistic option would work out; letting you be able to stick to your principles and still succeed.

 

Ex: I'd say most people free the rachni, sacrifice resources to save the council, save Maelon's data, rewrite the geth, destroy the Collector base, save the queen again, etc. even though in real-life without meta-gaming knowledge many of these decisions are idiotic. So I agree that players are less inclined towards realism.

[Kurt M.]

Bah, what's with all the drama about the endings? We Vanguards have it easy....

 

[Iakus]

When I see people hold up DA:O, a game that chickened out on hard choices every step of the way, as some sort of ideal then yes I do think that they wanted a happy ending and would have been upset no matter what if they didn't get one.

I'll never understand why people say DAO "chickened out"

 

I never saw the DR as an I Win" button.  I ended up staring at the screen for a couple minutes when Morrigan offered that choice, and I never took it a second time.

[Iakus]

This.

 

Saying "But I wanted a happy ending" is a purely emotional argument, and shouldn't be valid in a debate on why an ending is "bad." Even saying it sounds naive and childish to me. This is a M rated game, people. I liked how there was no way around making a tough choice. And come on, people complain as if all endings lead to the reapers winning the war as usual. No, the galaxy is saved and people still aren't satisfied. I can respect an argument where people wanted their decisions to effect the result more (even though I already addressed my issues with this expectation), but don't bash the ending for not being "happy" enough.

If a game touts having over a thousand choices over three games, and the ending is where it all comes together, the assumption is going to be that there is a wide variety of endings.  

 

And that includes the fate of the protagonist.  Not just "pick the color scheme of Shepard's Viking funeral."

[Iakus]

Unless we played a different game, I'm pretty sure ME3 had a relatively happy ending option where the ultimate goal is achieved. The reapers get destroyed against all odds, and despite their perfect track record for millions of years, the hero can effectively stop them. Oh, but there are casualties. That's a no-no, right? Suggesting playing Nintendo games and the like that are known for their simplistic hero-defeats-the-villain endings sounds like good advice for someone complaining that the ending was too realistic with it not being perfect/near-perfect for the good guys. I happen to like stories where everything isn't happily ever after. Mass Effect is rated M where such realism is expected. The "I don't want the hero to die crowd" should stick with E rated games if they don't want to be disappointed. If that fact is rude, too bad.

Serious oversimplification. 

 

It's not that there are casualties, it's that Shepard personally kills his/her own allies.  An entire form of life, even.

 

It's Ash's bear and the dog analogy on a galactic level.  Doing that makes me think Shepard is worse than Saren.  And finding out that's the best possible outcome that I could hope for?  I want my five years back!

 

I'm not opposed to a sacrifice ending.  I'm not opposed to Mordin's end.  Even Thane's, poorly handled though it was.  Heck my Aeducan in DAO got an awesome funeral (not my first choice for an ending, but certainly better than Shepard's fate in ME3)  

 

Now I'm not saying Shepard dying wasn't a powerful force behind the backlash.  HEck if there was a definitive "Shepard lives" ending that was more than a faceless torso you needed MP to access, EC might not have been needed.  But it's not the only aspect of the ending.  And for me, it's not even the worst aspect.

[congokong]

If a game touts having over a thousand choices over three games, and the ending is where it all comes together, the assumption is going to be that there is a wide variety of endings.  

 

And that includes the fate of the protagonist.  Not just "pick the color scheme of Shepard's Viking funeral."

 

I already explained the financial/labor difficult of actually having different sequences play out based on some formula (ex: save rachi, cure genophage, destroy collector base = ending 1), unless you're content on just another cut-scene/slide-show. Even then I don't think people would be satisfied because of potentially unrealistic expectations that Bioware couldn't practically hope to meet. Note: I'm not absolving them of blame for actually claiming previous choices would matter when this proved to mostly be false besides choices' small influence on war assets.

 

Serious oversimplification. 

 

It's not that there are casualties, it's that Shepard personally kills his/her own allies.  An entire form of life, even.

 

It's Ash's bear and the dog analogy on a galactic level.  Doing that makes me think Shepard is worse than Saren.  And finding out that's the best possible outcome that I could hope for?  I want my five years back!

 

I'm not opposed to a sacrifice ending.  I'm not opposed to Mordin's end.  Even Thane's, poorly handled though it was.  Heck my Aeducan in DAO got an awesome funeral (not my first choice for an ending, but certainly better than Shepard's fate in ME3)  

 

Now I'm not saying Shepard dying wasn't a powerful force behind the backlash.  HEck if there was a definitive "Shepard lives" ending that was more than a faceless torso you needed MP to access, EC might not have been needed.  But it's not the only aspect of the ending.  And for me, it's not even the worst aspect.

So you're complaining that the situation wasn't fair/morally preserving for Shepard? That's doesn't really stray from complaining that you can't have a happy ending. People just don't like being forced into a gaming situation where they can't overcome it with paragon = instant win.

 

"Why should Shepard have to besmirch their honor to save the galaxy? He/she should be able to do it without having to hit that red button themselves resulting in all those deaths."

 

You could always refuse, and we know how that goes. Shepard being forced to do it themselves adds emphasis to the difficulty of the decision, and reflects the difficulty real world leaders have when forced to make choices that will cost lives either way. ME3 did it on a fictitious, galactic scale. I like that it follows a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" concept where you just have to choose the lesser evil as you see it.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

It's more the case of you wanting the game to make it obvious it was Shepard.

 

The N7 logo was enough for me. His armor looks like it was shot by a Reaper laser. There's a flipped mako in the background near where you were knocked out earlier. There is a male and female version of the scene. Put it all together and you get Shepard.

 

 

The Extended Cut does cover some of those choices (rachni, genophage, squadmates from ME2, etc), however, people still thought their choices didn't mean much, because it was just a slideshow. It was 2 GB of content. Mass Effect 3 was originally 15 GB as I recall, and 30 hours+ of content.

 

When reading the statements they expected *huge* and *wildly* different endings. Which was just legal puffery, but they didn't take it this way.

 

If Mass Effect had 20 choices spanning 3 games it would be possible to do this. However, with thousands of decisions, you might get a different line of dialogue here, a codex change there, a war asset number value higher than others. Not something that will completely change the narrative that is unique to you.

 

So anyways, slideshow isn't enough. A cutscene with galaxy changing consequences which affect absolutely everything is what people perceived they were supposed to get. Based on the ending supposedly being "wildly" different.

 

People just had unreasonable expectations, misinterpreted statements, twisted those statements to suit their interpretations, getting upset when what their interpretations of those statements didn't happen.

 

Cut scenes use more bits of disk space, and about 1 GB of the EC was part of Leviathan DLC. Let's not go overboard on worship here.

 

Many people replayed the first two games a number of times. I had about 1400 hrs invested prior to ME3 and got the Original Ending. I'm supposed to be satisfied and think. "Wow, that was an epic work of art." It was a piece of crap. My expectation was unreasonable? Day one DLC + an ending a child could have written?

 

All the endings were virtually identical except for the colors of the explosions on your screen: you died, the relays were destroyed, and the Normandy crashed. The  end.

 

"Did all that really happen?"

"Yes, but many of the details have been lost with time. It all happened so long ago."

 

And the last two quotes seem to reflect what is happening with regard to the ME3 ending fiasco. When you install ME3, the EC automatically downloads. To see the original ending you have to uninstall the EC. But if you've played the EC, the original ending doesn't have the same impact it would if you hadn't played the EC.

[Iakus]

I already explained the financial/labor difficult of actually having different sequences play out based on some formula (ex: save rachi, cure genophage, destroy collector base = ending 1), unless you're content on just another cut-scene/slide-show. Even then I don't think people would be satisfied because of potentially unrealistic expectations that Bioware couldn't practically hope to meet. Note: I'm not absolving them of blame for actually claiming previous choices would matter when this proved to mostly be false besides choices' small influence on war assets.

 

Well the "differences" never required more than hitting an arbitrary number anyway.  There's no reason they could decided "hit this number:  Shepard limps up to the rescue party with a goofy grin"

 

No it wouldn't satisfy everyone.  It sure wouldn't satisfy me.  But I am certain it would have satisfied a lot of other people.  I'm certain that one of the "unrealistic expectations" was getting to see Shepard live.

 

 

 

So you're complaining that the situation wasn't fair/morally preserving for Shepard? That's doesn't really stray from complaining that you can't have a happy ending. People just don't like being forced into a gaming situation where they can't overcome it with paragon = instant win.

"Why should Shepard have to besmirch their honor to save the galaxy? He/she should be able to do it without having to hit that red button themselves resulting in all those deaths."

Depends on whether you consider that a "happy" ending.  

 

Is it a happy ending if Shepard doesn't have to kill all synthetics, but instead destroys the relay network, pluning the galaxy into a new dark Age?

 

Is it a happy ending if the geth are still wiped out, but defending the Crucible rather than at Shepard's hand?

 

What if the damage in the Destroy wave is less, but everyone knows it was Shepard who did it, and such an action hangs like a cloud over Shepard, making him/her a controversial historical figure forever afterwards?

 

Keeping your honor doesn't necessarilly mean "happy ending"  It's about saying "It's a victory worth achieving"

 

Heck The Walking Dead 's Lee Everett was less "my character" than Shepard.  And his death was touching and totally worth it.

 

 

You could always refuse, and we know how that goes. Shepard being forced to do it themselves adds emphasis to the difficulty of the decision, and reflects the difficulty real world leaders have when forced to make choices that will cost lives either way. ME3 did it on a fictitious, galactic scale. I like that it follows a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" concept where you just have to choose the lesser evil as you see it.

 

Refuse is nothing more than Bioware trolling unhappy fans:  "Don't like our endings?  Rocks fall, everyone dies!"

[GalacticWolf5]

All the endings were virtually identical except for the colors of the explosions on your screen: you died, the relays were destroyed, and the Normandy crashed. The end.

The endings are not identical at all. Maybe when you first saw the pre-EC endings you could've believed that, but if you thought about it for a minute right after playing them you would've known that they're all different. Now with EC, they literally put the differences in your face (even though they were there pre-EC, but not as much as EC)

Pre-EC:
Destroy:
-Shown: Beam+energy wave. Relays explode. Normandy crash. All Reapers die.
-Not shown, but said before choosing: All other Synthetics die.

Control:
-Shown: Energy wave. Relays explode. Normandy crash. Shepard takes control of the Reapers.
-Not shown: X

Synthesis:
-Shown: Beam+energy wave. Relays explode. Normandy crash. All life is synthesised.
-Not shown: X

The only things you didnt see were the outcomes of each ending. EC shows them to you and it even shows the results of your previous choices (Genopaghe cure, Quarian/Geth war, Rachni, etc). It fixes the whole "the Relays blew up, we should all be dead" problem. It also gives another ending for those who "don't believe the Catalyst and the choices it explains".

I really don't understand how anyone can say or even believe that the endings are all the same.

[congokong]

Well the "differences" never required more than hitting an arbitrary number anyway.  There's no reason they could decided "hit this number:  Shepard limps up to the rescue party with a goofy grin"

 

No it wouldn't satisfy everyone.  It sure wouldn't satisfy me.  But I am certain it would have satisfied a lot of other people.  I'm certain that one of the "unrealistic expectations" was getting to see Shepard live.

 

Depends on whether you consider that a "happy" ending.  

 

Is it a happy ending if Shepard doesn't have to kill all synthetics, but instead destroys the relay network, pluning the galaxy into a new dark Age?

 

Is it a happy ending if the geth are still wiped out, but defending the Crucible rather than at Shepard's hand?

 

What if the damage in the Destroy wave is less, but everyone knows it was Shepard who did it, and such an action hangs like a cloud over Shepard, making him/her a controversial historical figure forever afterwards?

 

Keeping your honor doesn't necessarilly mean "happy ending"  It's about saying "It's a victory worth achieving"

 

Heck The Walking Dead 's Lee Everett was less "my character" than Shepard.  And his death was touching and totally worth it.

 

I didn't correlate Shepard keeping their honor with "happy ending" generically. I'm citing it in your case since you complained that Shepard had to do something that inevitably besmirched their potential honor no matter what.

 

To me a happy ending is beating the reapers; even with a steep price. That's a victory worth achieving for the protagonist IMO.

 

 

Refuse is nothing more than Bioware trolling unhappy fans:  "Don't like our endings?  Rocks fall, everyone dies!"

I think there was more incentive than agitating their customers. They weren't going to completely revamp the ending because people didn't like it. Rather, I suspect they were trying to placate people like you who didn't want Shepard to be forced into one of those three gray choices. It wasn't enough for people who didn't want Shepard to be put in that position to begin with, and my rebuttal to that outlook has already been given.