353 réponses à ce sujet

[Stormy]

Why were so many people upset about Shepherd dying?  Shepherd's heroic sacrifice is the most narratively appropriate thing ever.  The one person who saw the threat coming from the beginning, gives their life to save the galaxy.  That's an awesome way to end Shepherd's story.

 

I don't even understand the selfish objections to this.  Whether or not Shepherd lives, you will never get to play that character again. So why be mad that he dies?

 

The most spot on response to the whole ME3 thing that I have seen, to date.  Couldn't have said it better myself!

[Felya87]

Of course. But my point is that Shepherd giving her life to save the Galaxy IS a win. Just like Mordin giving his life to cure the genophage was a win for that character as well. Some of the most poignant victories come with heroic sacrifices.

 

Not really. Mordin was somehow making penance for what he had done in the past. It was atonemant for making the Genophage stronger. For giving his help to continue the death of children. Dieing curing the genophage was a way to free himself of the guilt that ha had for years. Shepard? we never had really any remind of what she have to be guilt for. Or for what she have to die for. She only have reasons to live. Her friends, her crew, her lover. She have reasons to live, not to die.

[78stonewobble]

The most spot on response to the whole ME3 thing that I have seen, to date.  Couldn't have said it better myself!

 

*groooooans* ... 

 

Yeeeees, if your reply to; "Do you know what DNA is?" is: "Yeees DNA is chemicals no? Is good for body no? I eat many dna a day?" 

 

*lol*... Sorry, but that is just ... either deliberate ignorance or natural born ignorance. 

[Stormy]

*groooooans* ... 

 

Yeeeees, if your reply to; "Do you know what DNA is?" is: "Yeees DNA is chemicals no? Is good for body no? I eat many dna a day?" 

 

I think you mistake recognizing what self-sacrifice is; and seeing how a person could, as a proud "Marine", think of the greater good for ignorance or stupidity.  One of the Marine codes, I believe, is selflessness.  Few stories have opportunity to truly portray that.  This one did.  Now, you can take that Neaderthal statement and, possibly, rethink it in that light.

 

I go eat DNA a day now. DNA good!

[Mathias]

I find it interesting that people think Happy Endings are cliche, yet so many people expected Shepard to sacrifice himself in the end. So what does that tell you?

[Mathias]

Not really. Mordin was somehow making penance for what he had done in the past. It was atonemant for making the Genophage stronger. For giving his help to continue the death of children. Dieing curing the genophage was a way to free himself of the guilt that ha had for years. Shepard? we never had really any remind of what she have to be guilt for. Or for what she have to die for. She only have reasons to live. Her friends, her crew, her lover. She have reasons to live, not to die.

 

Exactly.

[dreamgazer]

I find it interesting that people think Happy Endings are cliche, yet so many people expected Shepard to sacrifice himself in the end. So what does that tell you?

That happy endings are cliche and people expected Shepard to sacrifice himself in the end.

[Mathias]

That happy endings are cliche and people expected Shepard to sacrifice himself in the end.

 

That Heroic Sacrifices have been done so many times that people saw it coming.

[AlanC9]

A: Be a douche and sacrifice the world to survive with your loved ones? 
B: Kill off the people important to shep to varying degrees of player performance. 
C: The option to sacrifice shep to save more teammembers / worlds. 

Aren't A and C Destroy and Control/Synth? B is OK, but it's an outright rerun of the SM.

[dreamgazer]

That Heroic Sacrifices have been done so many times that people saw it coming.

Sure. It makes for a fitting end to a trilogy that began with this:

[Mathias]

Sure. It makes for a fitting end to a trilogy that began with this:
 

 

 

Uh, not if you butcher the execution of it.

[Swordfishtrombone]

No problem with Shepard dying. If it is done well, a heroic sacrifice can be a great ending to an epic story. 

 

The problem all that took place just before. That the player is forced to play a Shepard who's ALL conversation options are out of character, and express no skepticism at all that this apparition lifted from Shepard's dreams might not be exactly truthful and forthright. ESPECIALLY as it lays out the limping, insultingly bad logic behind the Reapers' actions. 

 

The little arguing Shepard can do to question this logic receives silly answers that could be knocked down easily by anyone who actually thought about it a little. 

 

Of course, the very existence of the catalyst as a cognitive agent behind the Reapers, located in the Citadel, invalidates ME1's whole premise. Why would the catalyst need someone to enter the Citadel to manually press a button to let the Reapers through, if the catalyst was in control of the Citadel? And why wouldn't it be? What sort of design leaves to most important function of the Citadel out of the hands of the one who is leading the whole thing, and observing from within the Citadel?

 

To add insult to injury to cap off the aggravating discussion with the catalyst, you get three (or four) options. The refuse option makes your Shepard refuse for silly reasons, instead of the reasonable reasons that are just screaming out to be voiced: that the catalyst's offers cannot be reasonably believed. The Synthesis option is a departure from the genre of Science Fiction, into pure fantasy - there isn't even a techno-babble way of explaining a beam of instantaneously-turning-things-into-half-synthetics-half-organics. The control option is an utterly absurd one for the catalyst to even offer, as is the destroy option; if the reapers were consistently written to the end, their only target should have been to try and indoctrinate Shepard, so it makes no sense that the offered options are actually genuine and truthful offers. 

 

Finally, the ending bizarrely tries to cast the villain behind all villains of three games as a sort of a good guy after all. In the last few minutes of the game. 

 

For these reasons the endings are so legendarily bad, that they still come up almost four years after the game came out. I don't expect Bioware to fully live them down in the foreseeable future. 

 

Now why do I still care? Because I like the series. I was invested in the story. Put a lot of hours into it. And I still would like to see the series salvaged, difficult though it may be. And I hope that the poo-storm that ensued, and will not completely die down but inevitably re-emerges when me3 is discussed, will keep the writers from ever repeating the same mistakes, from ever signing off on a crucial part of a story, that is so poorly thought out.

[AlanC9]

Not really. Mordin was somehow making penance for what he had done in the past. It was atonemant for making the Genophage stronger. For giving his help to continue the death of children. Dieing curing the genophage was a way to free himself of the guilt that ha had for years. Shepard? we never had really any remind of what she have to be guilt for. Or for what she have to die for. She only have reasons to live. Her friends, her crew, her lover. She have reasons to live, not to die.

What does guilt have to do with anything? Mordin doesn't particularly want to die either; that's just the way it played out.

[dreamgazer]

Uh, not if you butcher the execution of it.

Meh. Easily could've been worse.

[78stonewobble]

I think you mistake recognizing what self-sacrifice is; and seeing how a person could, as a proud "Marine", think of the greater good for ignorance or stupidity.  One of the Marine codes, I believe, is selflessness.  Few stories have opportunity to truly portray that.  This one did.  Now, you can take that Neaderthal statement and, possibly, rethink it in that light.

 

I go eat DNA a day now. DNA good!

 

No, but you have apparently not understood much of the critique of the ending: 

 

A: Catalyst logic and plot problems. 

 

It's a bad ending, because the logic of the catalyst doesn't make sense if you have a rudimentary understanding of...well that the universe is big. 

 

B: Lack of consequences from earlier games. 

 

Personally I think it was hard to incorporate all of it... and war assets was pretty much the best they could do, but there could have been more acknowledgement of what happened in earlier games. Krogan cure fail ...Not having to go to rannoch at all. 

 

C: The various war assets not shown off, making the gathering feel superflous. 

 

If the war assets was the best they could do, they really should have made more of an effort, to show em off badassedly. 

 

D: Not emotionally engaging enough. 

 

Yes, we all knew shep was a soldier and sacrifice is so completely expected... That it's no surprise. We've seen it a 100 times before and if it needs to be there, it should have been done in such a way that it left us in tears. Genuine quality!

 

Or, as I've said it everytime I've critiqued the ending, put the squadmates and npc's that people felt just as attached to, or even more so, in peril. They should have sacrificed those or have shepard sacrifice her/himself to save those... rather than faceless trillions. 

 

E: Not emotionally diverse enough. 

 

The endings are emotionally grey, grey, grey... As I've said many times in my critique. A good dark ending needs to leave you in tears, a grey ending needs to leave you in tears and happy at the same time. A happy ending needs to leave you happy... For maximum impact and variety, have all 3. This is one of the points where shepard and squaddies surviving comes in. As reward for doing everything right on maximum difficulty or something. As a necessary contrast... 

 

F: Lack of choice in the endings. 

 

Can't be a douchebag and sacrifice the world, squadmates or just the squadmates you don't like to survive. Can't be good at fighting, diplomacy and strategy and survive. You have to allmost deliberately sabotage yourself to make it so the characters you care about die... Which is where, it feels like the real sacrifice is... 

 

... The problem ain't selfsacrifice... it's a question of quality... 

 

And we know that bioware can write emotionally impacting stories. Mordins sacrifice and tali dying. 

 

EDIT and PS: I don't think the mass effect series and me3 sucks... I like them alot and I highly recommend them to people. I just think the ending wasn't up to standard and the series deserved a better ending. 

[Mathias]

Meh. Easily could've been worse.

 

I would love to see how much worse that could've gotten, because Bioware had a Category 5 S***storm on their hands. 

[dreamgazer]

Finally, the ending bizarrely tries to cast the villain behind all villains of three games as a sort of a good guy after all. In the last few minutes of the game.

"We impose order over the chaos of organic evolution". The seeds for the Reapers having a "good guy" motive were planted from the beginning, and Karpyshyn clearly always had that idea in mind based on his ending concepts. At least the Reapers' motivations were debatable in the shipped ending, retaining some of their villainy. They came very close to being the literal saviors of the galaxy instead of heavy-handed sentinels overseeing the development of self-destructive technology.

[Mathias]

No problem with Shepard dying. If it is done well, a heroic sacrifice can be a great ending to an epic story. 

 

Agreed, but at the same time if there was a way to save the galaxy and come out alright at the end, I would've done everything I could to achieve that ending. I've always resented the notion that if it's a Happy Ending, then it's cliche and boring. Because that's always been a narrow minded way of thinking. A Happy Ending, Sad Ending, or Bittersweet Ending can all be equally awful or equally great. It's all about execution. 

[dreamgazer]

I would love to see how much worse that could've gotten, because Bioware had a Category 5 S***storm on their hands.

Imagine the Reapers being inarguable good guys and the plot holes being double the size. We almost ended up with that.

[Mathias]

Imagine the Reapers being inarguable good guys and the plot holes being double the size. We almost ended up with that.

 

I can't really comment on the Dark Energy ending, because we really only know the basic facts about it. We've never seen Karpyshyn's vision fully fleshed out and if Drew had stayed on board, for all we know his vision may have altered.

[Sanunes]

I can't really comment on the Dark Energy ending, because we really only know the basic facts about it. We've never seen Karpyshyn's vision fully fleshed out and if Drew had stayed on board, for all we know his vision may have altered.

 

It still fits into the "how can another ending be worse then the one we got" for the basic premise seems to be a really bad one.

[Killdren88]

Bioware has learned I'm sure. Play it safe and profitable. I will bet that they will have at least one Disney ending.

[dreamgazer]

I can't really comment on the Dark Energy ending, because we really only know the basic facts about it. We've never seen Karpyshyn's vision fully fleshed out and if Drew had stayed on board, for all we know his vision may have altered.

We know about the pillars of his thinking about the Reapers' noble motivations and forced sacrifices, though, which transcend how fundamentally broken and circular the dark energy concept was. That's where he was headed, which isn't surprising considering how liberally Karpyshyn cribbed from Revelation Space. Amusingly enough, if he were to have stayed on and continued borrowing from that source, we'd probably be headed out of a doomed Milky Way anyway. 

[Mathias]

It still fits into the "how can another ending be worse then the one we got" for the basic premise seems to be a really bad one.

 

On paper sure, but again it never came to light. The fully fleshed out and perhaps altered version of it may not have been as bad as it sounded. Even if it's worse than what we got, I'd say that's quite an accomplishment considering how f-ing bad the actual ending is.

[Felya87]

What does guilt have to do with anything? Mordin doesn't particularly want to die either; that's just the way it played out.

 

No. His phrase itself is explenatory. "Had to be me". His logic mind may haven't thought about becaming a martyr, but his guilt? oh yes. He even became somehow religious because of his guilt. It was the ultimate way to get rid of it, to repay the suffering of so many female krogan. Is easy to see in his character. Is very conflicted between his logic and his emotions. Is one of the motivation he is such an appreciated character.

 

But Shepard? for some players maybe their Shepard may have some guilty guilt for something she/he did. But is only one way to play Shepard. Mine for example have some regrets, but no guilt inside themselves. They have always done the best they could, and accepted sometimes you can't save everyone, but have no choice they would have done different (maybe beside bedding Kaidan/Ashley, with how winey they were in ME3, but everyone make some error in love) and have no martyr ambitions.

 

Being forced by the game to have my character feel in a way, a character that is mostly a blank state so I can develop her as I wish, I can't really see it as a good work. Of course the forced/stupid death is not the only problem of the endings, but surely is a big point for many players, that felt their character have suddently became another without their consent.

For me to stay in character my Shepard would have gone with the refuse ending, if it wasn't a game over. Because no way she would have killed herself coming to terms with a crazy AI. She would have fought till her last breath, because she have much to loose, and she have already died once, and it wasn't fun.