What can I say? You have a similar rudely dismissive attitude
*butting in again*
I'm the one with a new account if you want to accuse anyone. 
I know QMR has been here for some time though.. and seperate from Mass/God. And if I recall, QMR is a she.
Just saying.
What can I say? You have a similar rudely dismissive attitude
Indeed, we've had fundamental disagrements on a number of things, so I don't get the comparison apart from both not being in the QQ about the ending camp.Massively would never be a champ of the Quarians.
So, I miss Shepard, yeah. But just because I miss Shep and would like to really know how it all ended up beyond the base hints doesn't mean I want a whole new set of games to play that ending out.
This set of games is its own thing and a new protag is just fine with me.
Making a clean break from the old trilogy is also fine and makes sense.
And a fair number of pro-ending people behaved poorly too (I've got an ignore list to prove it too). Do all of them get their opinion invalidated because "guilt by association"?
It may not be subjective that this Patcher guy called people whiny. But his opinion is. And if he's stooping to name-calling, I'd put him in the "behaving badly" category too.
And if your opinion is that my opinion is "wrong" then, well, your opinion is wrong.
Thats some weird socratic argument there...
I never said that their opinions on the ending were wrong; they truthfully can't be because that is still subjective.
I am saying their behavior was wrong. If the pro-ending crowd did that too, they are in the same boat. Does that dismiss their criticisms? Id say yes in the same sense of broad-strokes of behavior. Like I said earlier; I don't agree with Patchers comments, but I can analyze them and find his point in what he said, and its still a valid point, just masked by a bunch of BS.
Just like I don't always agree with you, but I get your point, and they are just as valid as anyone elses on this board.
Simple as that really, makes all of the fanbase look bad. That part doesn't change. That part is simply a fact that people act like asses, and shouldn't over something kind of trivial and subjective.
Wait.. first it was choosing the path, now it's destroying the Reapers. You really should pick one goal and stick with it.No, my goal was stated on Rannoch: "I have a better idea: We destroy you, and live our lives in peace"
But Bioware decided that goal wasn't "artistic" enough
I'll miss Conrad more than Thessia
Wait.. first it was choosing the path, now it's destroying the Reapers. You really should pick one goal and stick with it.
You achieved this one too, though. (I suppose you couldn't do both simultaneously.) I'm still looking for something your Shepards failed at.
*sigh*
I wanted the Reapers to leave the galaxy in peace. I wanted everyone: human, asari, turian, kroga, quarian, geth, etc to be free to find their own way in the galaxy.
"I fight for freedom. Mine, and everybody's. I fight for the right to choose our own path.
Sadly, the closest I could get to that (Destroy) means committing genocide on the geth, EDI, and any other AI in the galaxy with the bad luck to be an AI in the Milky Way.
But wait It Would Be Rude to say "Genocide" 
But I've explained this to you so many times, I'm sure by now you're just yanking my chain.
Sadly, the closest I could get to that (Destroy) means committing genocide on the geth, EDI, and any other AI in the galaxy with the bad luck to be an AI in the Milky Way.
Not just AIs or synthetic life either. Even some organic species were wiped out by the Destroy Ending, like the Virtual Aliens who uploaded themselves into a virtual world built into a ship.
Thirteen pages of this thread can essentially be summed up as such:
Bioware: "Be open-minded when it comes to Mass Effect Andromeda."
Fan A: "Sounds reasonable."
Fan B: "Screw that. Here's why I will remain close-minded."
Stay classy BSN.
Don't care about Shepard, I care about not playing in the great universe they created. So much wasted potential.
Thirteen pages of this thread can essentially be summed as such:
Bioware: "Be open-minded when it comes to Mass Effect Andromeda."
Fan A: "Sounds reasonable."
Fan B: "Screw that. Here's why I will remain close-minded."
Stay classy BSN.
Relatively few people even care about Shepard, he came, had his time, stayed his welcome, and got an ending. Some dislike his ending while others don't care. But this Bioware comment is more to obfuscate why many fans are still cautious about the idea of a new ME.
Relatively few people even care about Shepard, he came, had his time, stayed his welcome, and got an ending. Some dislike his ending while others don't care. But this Bioware comment is more to obfuscate why many fans are still cautious about the idea of a new ME.
If you're cautious, you're still open-minded about things and I count that. Blind faith and an open mind are not one and the same, nor should an accusation of one imply the other. Still, I've seen more than enough people in this thread purely reject the idea of no Shepard.
Don't care about Shepard, I care about not playing in the great universe they created. So much wasted potential.
But isn't the time to mourn that potential past? How could they possibly reconcile the various possible endings in a game set in the Milky Way after ME3?
They couldn't - but they could have chosen the most popular and run with that.
Or choose a different ending that's not blue, red or green
They just need to canonise death by snu-snu and everything will be fine.
The moment people predicted that Mass Effect would take place in another galaxy (before the leak), was when I have accepted that there might not be a Shepard. And you know what? I am just fine with that. Time for a new protagonist to get their shine. Time to have new heroes, new foes, new people to hate, and new people to love.
Why are people afraid of change?
Well, I just have to say it then...
I'm actually glad, someone, opened an astronomy book released after 1923 and thus discovered that the milkyway is not the entire universe.
So we will either bump into the reapers in andromeda and the repercussions of the 3 endings: Destroy, control or synthesis... Which will validate the me3 endings... Or we will not, which will prove the crucible unreliable (as we allready assume, since it ignores 99,999999999 percent of the universe) and invalidate the endings.
I'll cross my fingers for the fresh start and being proven right. 
Or choose a different ending that's not blue, red or green
Is that actually a better option than picking one of the existing endings? It's got the same costs as canonization -- invalidating almost any particular Shepard's history since a particular Shepard created the world-state in the sequel-- except it's even more costly since now not only have those characters' choices been erased, but the world they lived in has been rewritten. Esssentially, all possible Shepards are now irrelevant. They never could have existed because their setting is gone. If you don't care about that cost it doesn't matter, of course, but then I don't see the advantage of coming up with a new ending.
Or am I wrong about the cost of canonization?
Canonizing anything has costs. But canonizing a "none of the above" has the benefit of not favoring any particular group's canon.
Canonizing Destroy would leave any non-Red ending out in the cold, for example, while charging Destroy is the "correct" ending. Same with COntrol or Synthesis for Blue and Green.
But if you canonize something that can't happen no matter how you play the game, then everybody's in the same boat. No ending is any more "correct" or "incorrect" it's the other side of the "there is no canon" coin. One one side there's don't canonize anything, and on the other there's canonize the impossible. So in a sense, the lack of outright favoritism would lessen the cost of canonizing an ending.
And both to nip it in the bud and to be fair, if they went this route, they'd also have to go with a non-MEHEM ending as well to canonize, given its popularity.
Is that actually a better option than picking one of the existing endings?
Do you believe it is? Would you have a problem if they didn't pick red, green or blue to be canon?
It's got the same costs as canonization
Wouldn't that depend on what Bioware chooses to do instead of picking red, green or blue?
invalidating almost any particular Shepard's history since a particular Shepard created the world-state in the sequel-- except it's even more costly since now not only have those characters' choices been erased, but the world they lived in has been rewritten.
What world state has been rewritten? I'm not talking about any decision made before the ending. I'm just talking about the ending itself
Esssentially, all possible Shepards are now irrelevant.
Why would they be irrelevant? Can't the same be said if red was made canon? Or blue? Or green?
They never could have existed because their setting is gone.
Nothing about what was done up to the ending would be gone. Only the ending would be different
If you don't care about that cost it doesn't matter, of course, but then I don't see the advantage of coming up with a new ending.
Even if Bioware comes up with an ending that's better then choosing red, green or blue?
Or am I wrong about the cost of canonization?
Do you believe you're wrong?
Retour en haut
