1106 réponses à ce sujet

[Chealec]

Well lol... if I'm deciphering this correctly...

 

That wasn't a "reaper god." I think it was more like a program that was triggered because Shepard was able to get as far as s/he did. No one else had been able to do that in any other cycle. It was probably a contingency plan of sorts. Again: The "Star Child" is not an actual being (I don't believe) but more of a sophisticated VI (even if it claims otherwise). (At least this is what I gather)

 

AIUI it was there anyway, it was the program created by Leviathan to preserve organic life in the galaxy, the Reapers are its "solution".

 

All the Crucible did was provide a sort of manual override for a fleshy organic to use - at which point the Catalyst goes "well, ok then smartarse, let's see you do better - here are your choices!"

 

And yes, I agree that it's not smart enough to be an AI; it's unable to alter the frame of its program, even if you get the Geth and Quarians to work together it's unable to see that there might be a possibility for peaceful co-existence ... that it might result in a sort of naturally evolved Synthesis (which it seems to think is the ultimate, best outcome).

 

It also has no sense of self-preservation. It relinquishes all control to Shepard and allows him to do whatever he likes even if that results in its own destruction.

[Mathias]

You died to stop the Reapers.
 

 

I don't believe in Destroy, Control and Synthesis. All horrible choices. That's why I died for something I didn't believe in and it made Shepard's death feel all the worse. Yes the Reapers were stoppped/destroyed, but the means to achieve that made for pretty bad storytelling. 

[Sylvius the Mad]

Not doing them results in the playthrough that isn't finished. I guess you can always leave game unfinished, but that doesn't mean that ending is optional in games.

It's not unfinished. It's finished differently.

The story is done once there's nothing else for your character to do. If no remaining content is compatible with your character, then that playthrough is finished.

Yes, if you define "finished" such that there's only one ending, then there's only going to be one ending. But why do that?

[Panda]

It's not unfinished. It's finished differently.

The story is done once there's nothing else for your character to do. If no remaining content is compatible with your character, then that playthrough is finished.

Yes, if you define "finished" such that there's only one ending, then there's only going to be one ending. But why do that?

 

How can you finish DAO differently than beating Arch demon? There is only story path in that game.

[FKA_Servo]

How can you finish DAO differently than beating Arch demon? There is only story path in that game.

 

Comes down to the perspective from which you're approaching the game, I think. The first time I played the Dragon Age tabletop game, I somehow didn't even stumble upon the main story path. It's harder, though possible, to do that in a CRPG.

 

In any case, I believe what Sylvius means is that you can close the book on a particular character at any point, if you so choose. I believe he treats certain TPKs as definitive, and regards those playthroughs over as well.

[BatarianBob]

With ME3 they tried to write smarter than they were. They wanted the ending to seem smart and artsy, but they didn't really understand how to do it, and it shows.

They should stick with what they understand. Kill the bad guy and save the day. Better yet, arrest and imprison the bad guy. Revenge fantasies are overdone.

They want a smarter story, hire smarter writers first.

[Panda]

Comes down to the perspective from which you're approaching the game, I think. The first time I played the Dragon Age tabletop game, I somehow didn't even stumble upon the main story path. It's harder, though possible, to do that in a CRPG.

 

In any case, I believe what Sylvius means is that you can close the book on a particular character at any point, if you so choose. I believe he treats certain TPKs as definitive, and regards those playthroughs over as well.

 

I get that you can do that from play perspective by headcanoning a lot (sandbox games being easiest to headcanon, linear one's being hardest like ME and DA), but I don't think that means that you can call ending optional. That would mean that ending of everything is optional, you can shut the tv middle of movie as well and headcanon that the movie ended there ^^;

[FKA_Servo]

I get that you can do that from play perspective by headcanoning a lot (sandbox games being easiest to headcanon, linear one's being hardest like ME and DA), but I don't think that means that you can call ending optional. That would mean that ending of everything is optional, you can shut the tv middle of movie as well and headcanon that the movie ended there ^^;

 

I did that with Garden State. It should have ended on the plane, dammit.

 

Also, what a bad movie.

[Chealec]

Comes down to the perspective from which you're approaching the game, I think. The first time I played the Dragon Age tabletop game, I somehow didn't even stumble upon the main story path. It's harder, though possible, to do that in a CRPG.

 

In any case, I believe what Sylvius means is that you can close the book on a particular character at any point, if you so choose. I believe he treats certain TPKs as definitive, and regards those playthroughs over as well.

 

Hmmm ME:A Ironman mode ...

[Iakus]

Still, not sure that's quite the same thing. DA:I's additional problem is that the ending just hits you out of nowhere. There's no real build up to it.

 

ME3's plethora off issues don't really stem from pacing. Gonna take a shot and say we all knew at the beam run that we were heading towards the climax of the game. It's what came after that's the problem.

 

Also too, while the climactic battle was bland, the whole reasoning behind Corypheus was that he's insane/has a God complex. That doesn't work so well with the Catalyst.

Yeah, but in the end, The Inquisitor gets to punch the Big Bad in the face, go home, and throw a party.  Shepard, best case, is a charred torso taking a breath.

 

Could you honestly tell me that, if ME3, with all its problems, allowed Shep to reformat Starbrat's hard drive and send all the Reapers running off with their tails between their legs.  Then wrap up the game with the Council showering Shepard with praise as Shep and the LI stand on a balcony basking in adulation.  Would there would have been nearly as much outrage?

 

I mean, yeah ME3 is riddled with problems.  Problems not even a "safe" ending could cover up.  But a satisfactory (not even good) ending can cover a multitude of sins.  "Any landing you can walk away from" and all that.

[fraggle]

I like dark, bittersweet endings, or even completely hopeless endings, so I was very satiesfied with ME3.

Ideally we could get both, so people who want their happy ending can have one.

 

I loved Inquisition too, but the ending was a bit bland. Would take the ME3 ending over it any day.

[AlanC9]

Could you honestly tell me that, if ME3, with all its problems, allowed Shep to reformat Starbrat's hard drive and send all the Reapers running off with their tails between their legs.  Then wrap up the game with the Council showering Shepard with praise as Shep and the LI stand on a balcony basking in adulation.  Would there would have been nearly as much outrage?
 

Sure. Doesn't everyone agree that the lack of a happy ending was the real problem?

[themikefest]

Yeah, but in the end, The Inquisitor gets to punch the Big Bad in the face, go home, and throw a party.  Shepard, best case, is a charred torso taking a breath.

By the time the Inquisitor faces Corypheus at the end, he was defeated having all his minions gone and failures that happened in the game. He had nothing left. Once his pet was defeated, he realized he failed and calling to Dumat wasn't going to help.

The party was ok I suppose. Not my thing. For me, I would just go to my quarters and relax

Shepard is alive. Having a charred torso is up to the player how charred. Though I have to laugh at why Shepard had to shoot at the tube while walking towards it. I'd be curious to hear the answer from Bioware if I gave them a pistol to shoot at an explosive device while walking towards it instead of shooting at it from a distance.
 

Could you honestly tell me that, if ME3, with all its problems, allowed Shep to reformat Starbrat's hard drive and send all the Reapers running off with their tails between their legs.  Then wrap up the game with the Council showering Shepard with praise as Shep and the LI stand on a balcony basking in adulation.  Would there would have been nearly as much outrage?

I don't know if there would've been the same outrage, but I do know my Shepard would avoid the council especially the asari councilor after turning over the information about what happened on Thessia to the Salarian and Turian councilors.

With the LI thing, Shepard and Samantha will be in Vancouver having drinks
 

I mean, yeah ME3 is riddled with problems.  Problems not even a "safe" ending could cover up.  But a satisfactory (not even good) ending can cover a multitude of sins.  "Any landing you can walk away from" and all that.

Maybe.

[9TailsFox]

Make it like Witcher 3, choices through all game affect ending you get, and different ending's not one 3 colour explosion. And don't be afraid make "bad" ending. If you send Jacob to do Tali/Legion job reapers deserve to win.

[MrFob]

Well, I like to think that I learned from past mistakes. So I'll go in with as little expectations for the ending as possible. I had a lot of ideas on how I wanted the trilogy to end and that ... well, it didn't end well, haha. So no preconceptions this time, que sera, sera.

 

There are two points I'd really like to see but they are more general in nature and are not really related to any specific story:

 

1) Ideally, I'd like for any developer, not only BW, to write at least a rough outline of the ending first, maybe even before thinking of the beginning of the story. I find it helps immensely to know from the beginning where the story should go and it helps to create a cohesive and coherent plot. It would even be great if they would create the ending fairly early and really polish it's development in terms of level design and art. I find that very often, game endings are rushed and slapped on at the very end of the development cycle, which is why so often they are disconnected and anticlimactic. This often retroactively sours my impression of the entire game. IMO, the ending of a game has to be it's shining moment. I get that there are statistics that show that a lot of players never get that far but I guess I expect of developers who want to call themselves artists that they have enough respect for their own product to make that effort regardless. Again, this is not specific to BW or Mass Effect but a general expectation - or maybe rather an idealistic wish - of mine.

 

2) If there are multiple endings, they should organically flow from the entire plot and not be separated by one specific final choice. Mass Effect 3 was not very good at this and another really bad example is the Deus Ex series (especially human revolution). Both series have you make countless decisions throughout the game but the endings are purely defined by one very specific 3-4 way choice at the end (in DX:HR, it's even friggin' buttons). This inevitably poses the question what all that previous stuff was actually all about (granted, ME was much more in depth with it's plot decisions throughout the game). One might look at The Witcher 3 here for inspiration. Here was one of the rare games that didn't tie the ending to one particular decisions but took a couple of carefully chosen variables from throughout the entire game and used those to determine the outcome. While more complicated to script properly, this makes an ending feel much more naturally emerging from the entirety of the story and really gives the player the illusion of choice and consequence because - just like in real life - many factors can impact on the defining final event that then can serve as a cathartic moment that nicely wraps the entire plot into one coherent picture. Books and movies do it all the time and I think the interactive nature of games offers a lot of potential here that so far is only rarely tapped.

[9TailsFox]

Yeah, but in the end, The Inquisitor gets to punch the Big Bad in the face, go home, and throw a party.  Shepard, best case, is a charred torso taking a breath.

 

Could you honestly tell me that, if ME3, with all its problems, allowed Shep to reformat Starbrat's hard drive and send all the Reapers running off with their tails between their legs.  Then wrap up the game with the Council showering Shepard with praise as Shep and the LI stand on a balcony basking in adulation.  Would there would have been nearly as much outrage?

 

I mean, yeah ME3 is riddled with problems.  Problems not even a "safe" ending could cover up.  But a satisfactory (not even good) ending can cover a multitude of sins.  "Any landing you can walk away from" and all that.

As much as hard to agree you absolutely right, I wouldn't be as mad for stupid ending full of plot holes. If it was "happy" ending. Look at DA:I it's verry bad an rushed ending but it's safe, you beat bad guy you win party, say good by to companions,moment with LI, The END. Perfect don't matter ending is stupid because my last fought is my character win and he is happy.

[Iakus]

Sure. Doesn't everyone agree that the lack of a happy ending was the real problem?

I don't agree.  Not entirely, at least.  I am however entirely cogent of the fact that it was one of the major issues.

[9TailsFox]

Sure. Doesn't everyone agree that the lack of a happy ending was the real problem?

No happy ending is not even in top 10 ending problems list.

[Panda]

Well on the topic of happy endings and tragic one's, both can be done good or bad and both are fine for me. I actually prefer my Shepard to die in the end of ME3. However hero dying in the end isn't enough to save what is bad about ME3's ending which still to me are too big plottwist too late in the game and contradictions.

[CuriousArtemis]

With ME3 they tried to write smarter than they were. They wanted the ending to seem smart and artsy, but they didn't really understand how to do it, and it shows.

 

I think it's more that their fan base is a bit... simpler... than they are lol and thus refers to the storytelling as "artsy" and "smart."

 

Could you honestly tell me that, if ME3, with all its problems, allowed Shep to reformat Starbrat's hard drive and send all the Reapers running off with their tails between their legs.  Then wrap up the game with the Council showering Shepard with praise as Shep and the LI stand on a balcony basking in adulation.  Would there would have been nearly as much outrage?

 

That would be so cheesy and awful. Kind of like that mod where everything works out in the end... but hey, different strokes.

 

I like dark, bittersweet endings, or even completely hopeless endings, so I was very satiesfied with ME3.

Ideally we could get both, so people who want their happy ending can have one.

 

I loved Inquisition too, but the ending was a bit bland. Would take the ME3 ending over it any day.

 

Agreeeee, the DAI ending was a massive let down, shades of DAO and it's happy "shake everyone's hand" at the banquet type ending, complete with cheesy slide show. 

 

Well, I like to think that I learned from past mistakes. So I'll go in with as little expectations for the ending as possible. I had a lot of ideas on how I wanted the trilogy to end and that ... well, it didn't end well, haha. So no preconceptions this time, que sera, sera.

 

Hmm I wonder if it mostly comes down to expectation. Because I played ME3 knowing nothing about the trilogy, just played it cold and loved it. Went back and played the whole trilogy, still loved it. But with DAI I had been waiting since the end of DA2, and I'd built up so many possibilities in my head, it's like I was destined to be disappointed.

[Ahglock]

I don't agree.  Not entirely, at least.  I am however entirely cogent of the fact that it was one of the major issues.

 

Was it even a major issue?  Or I guess I mean wouldn't almost as many people ****** if the ending was too happy, win the day style?

 

I really do think the core issue was the entire core concept of the super magic gun.  It basically made ME1 and 2 irrelevant to the core concept of defeating the reapers, even more than ME2 was unrelated to the reaper plot. It wouldn't matter what happened in any of those games outside the abstract you were buying time.  You could literally have the same story starting at ME3 with a brand new character as if ME1 and ME2 never happened, and the story is the same.  If the events of ME1 and ME2 had tangible effects on the Reapers so they were a force that could be defeated by conventional means and the whole gather a alliance thing would actually have meaning, then whether happy or sad I don't think people would have had too large of an issue with the endings. 

 

I mean why the eff does your EMS score have any effect on the outcome if its just a magic wave of pure love that solves everything.  Wouldn't the only thing that matter is getting a work force built and scientists together to build it faster?  Seriously who thought, having ME1 and Me2 be about delaying the reapers and then think oh well I guess we will just take the scenic route works as a intro into ME3 where all it did was slow them down by like 6 months. Have those delays have a tangible result on the war not some hey we got 6 more months to find Excalibur.  Have the reaper fleet show up vastly diminished as they solved the discharge problem by discharging into their smaller ships sacrificing a large chunk or their forces, have the discharge system be something where they are self cooking and show up totally jacked up, make it years and the story is about building the forces and stealing existing reaper tech before they show up so you have a fighting chance, have a final delay them one last time story where this time it stopped them permanently.

 

I think pretty much anything but hey here is a magic gun spin the revolver and decide which magic bullet you want to use to solve all your problems would have been greeted more positively whether it was a happy or sad ending.

[Guitar-Hero]

Purple, yellow and orange endings and i wanna be called the Pathfinder until i get lost, then i wanna be called the ****** 

[Cheviot]

I'll tell you why that is. It's because not only did we die, but we died for something we didn't believe in. 

You didn't believe in stopping the Reaper threat?  Wow, no wonder you didn't like the endings (until Refuse was added, I guess).

 

Sure. Doesn't everyone agree that the lack of a happy ending was the real problem?

Agreeing and admitting are two different things.  Luckily, it's easy enough to infer.

[Sylvius the Mad]

How can you finish DAO differently than beating Arch demon? There is only story path in that game.

I don't think the story for any playthrough is visible until after you've completed that playthrough.

What is ME3's story, do you think? The time I played it, it was about Shepard working within the Alliance to implement TIM's reaper control plan.

I never reached "the end" of DA2 while playing it, because I didn't have a character who could get that far. I tried three times, and I couldn't make it.

[9TailsFox]

You didn't believe in stopping the Reaper threat?  Wow, no wonder you didn't like the endings (until Refuse was added, I guess).

 

Agreeing and admitting are two different things.  Luckily, it's easy enough to infer.

I didn't believe in reapers. We didn't win or defeated reapers. Reapers surrender the war they already won. This is biggest nonsense in ME3 ending. You blindly trust word of your enemy who can mind control.

 

Just watch newest flash episode. Jay Garrett walks in and say I came to help earth is in danger, do they blindly believe him, no you draw gun and lock him up and do test to find if he is not lying and he is not even enemy. Everyone who blindly trust enemy is idiot.