83 réponses à ce sujet

[Killdren88]

And much like the Rachni, we'll get to encounter the Reapers again, and then get the exact same choices in how to deal with them, with the exact same payoff!

Harbinger did nothing wrong.

[PhroXenGold]

You know the thing that people do, when they attack the person istead of the argument?

 

I know here everyone calls criticism that they don't like "whining", but it still doesn't justify simply ignoring the criticism itself.

 

Refuse makes very little sense because it makes Shepard look like a whiny child throwing a tantrum.

Yeah, the other options are crap and the ending in general is even shittier, but where is the logic in not choosing any kind

of lesser evil and allowing everything to die just out of sheer spite?

 

To be fair, given that everything in the games up to that point has been Shep basically doing everything her way, regardless of what other people told her, and that doing things her way had worked, a Shep who had come to believe that she was capable to telling the creepy kid where he could shove his colours and still winning isn't that much of a stretch.

[AlanC9]

It was in fact not an Ending since players who started fresh without previous completions after EC and selected refuse on the first go round and did not get the mission complete achievement/trophy, it was not recognized as an ending.

I agree, but this is a problem with the achievement, not Refuse itself. Failure endings should be treated as legitimate endings too. (Anyone else remember the Wing Commander 3 losing path? )

Actually, I'd have given Refuse its own achievement. How about "Liara was the real hero"?

[AlanC9]

To be fair, given that everything in the games up to that point has been Shep basically doing everything her way, regardless of what other people told her, and that doing things her way had worked, a Shep who had come to believe that she was capable to telling the creepy kid where he could shove his colours and still winning isn't that much of a stretch.

Yeah, this is the most credible way to make the "thematic inconsistency" charge stick. OTOH, since the idea of Refuse working is so inherently ludicrous in terms of the actual game-world situation --as opposed to the power-fantasy that the series has been training the player in -- having it work out would be even worse.

[Laughing_Man]

To be fair, given that everything in the games up to that point has been Shep basically doing everything her way, regardless of what other people told her, and that doing things her way had worked, a Shep who had come to believe that she was capable to telling the creepy kid where he could shove his colours and still winning isn't that much of a stretch.

 

So basically your explanation is that "The Shepard" is essentially the worst Soldier, Spectre and Leader possible, and that in addition he is a delusional

idiot that does not let reality confuse him even when he stares at an infinite armada of unkillable abominations that is busy destroying everything.

 

Suddenly it occures to me that the idea that this ending actually might be a middle finger from someone in Bioware, is not so far fetched.

I mean they did it in the original game by making Conrad Verner the straw man for the "Thermal Sinks are a technological leap backwards" argument,

so why not with this?

 

"Here, have another ending that lets you vent your frustration at the Catalyst, only if you choose this option you are going to look like an irresponsible, unreasonable, idiot."

[AlanC9]

You know the thing that people do, when they attack the person istead of the argument?

Well, that's the thing. "Refuse is a slap in the face" isn't an argument in the first place.
 

Refuse makes very little sense because it makes Shepard look like a whiny child throwing a tantrum.
Yeah, the other options are crap and the ending in general is even shittier, but where is the logic in not choosing any kind of lesser evil and allowing everything to die just out of sheer spite?

It's an RP thing. There are ethical theories under which Shepard would not only be permitted to Refuse, he would actually be required to. (I think those theories are crap, myself, but you can still find the odd Kantian or two kicking around; I occasionally play one myself.) Shepard may also completely distrust the Catalyst and refuse to do anything it suggests. Not all that rational, but an understandable response.

We had these debates here before the EC. Virtually nobody was against the idea of Shepard being able to Refuse. (Don't take my word for this -- those threads are still on this board.) However, Refuse being anything but an Epic Fail button was highly unpopular. Bio implemented the popular part of the proposal and dumped the unpopular part.

I was serious when I said that this was a bad decision. The problem is that the people who were the most emotionally invested in Refusing were the ones who didn't just think of Refuse as a fun RP option for a FailShep. They were the ones who wanted a total rewrite of the endings; Refuse itself wasn't really what they wanted, but that's what they were asking for, and that's what they got.

[Oldren Shepard]

Its a good proposal but i like as many i imagine, to see or at least know something to how my decision affected the milky way's civilization and i have hopes for thinking that could be the way they took.

 

https://twitter.com/...74505576222720 

[Former_Fiend]

The Reapers and the Geth shouldn't be returning. I mean you didn't see another Archdemon and Blight in DA2 & DAI so rehashing the Reapers & Geth once again would be abysmal. Now if they want to bring back the Collectors/Protheans as a minor or major nuisance that would be tolerable.

 

That is your opinion, and one that I both adamantly and only partially disagree with. Personally I absolutely want the geth to return. Not as a major threat, or even a major plot point, but just as part of the ensemble that is the Milky Way's species.

 

As for the Reapers/Archdemon analogy; no, we didn't see another Archdemon in DA2 or DAI, and we probably won't see one in DA4. But we might just see one in DA5 or DA6. Do I want the Reapers in MEA? Of course not. I'm just as fatigued on that story as anyone else. But if they return, whether in MEA, ME5, ME6, or ME17, I would prefer the way they come back to not be a terribly convoluted mess. None of the endings are immutable laws of the universe that are going to force or prevent Bioware from doing anything. So I'd prefer the one that leaves them the most options so if they decide to use something they should be done with, they don't have to do something insane to bring it back.

 

In any event, I'm still firmly of the believe that the best option for them is to have the ARK leave prior to the ME3 endings, and I'm still firmly of the opinion that those who consider that to be too "lore breaking" are either lacking in imagination to conceive of ways it could work, or obstinately holding on to details that no one else cares about.

 

But if you insist that they need to canonize an ending, Refusal is the way to go. Does it leave the Reapers alive? Yes. Was it a middle finger to all of us? Yes. Both of those are true, and both are completely irrelevant. 

[Former_Fiend]

It was in fact not an Ending since players who started fresh without previous completions after EC and selected refuse on the first go round and did not get the mission complete achievement/trophy, it was not recognized as an ending.

 

A downer ending is still an ending. You don't get a "mission complete" trophy because the mission was "defeat the reapers" and in Refusal, you fail that mission. That doesn't mean it isn't an ending.