I prefer one that just ends when Shepard reaches for the console to trigger the crucible. Thats actually a bittersweet ending, and one where the protagonist dies at the end. Apart from the LOL worthy absurdity of Harbinger nuking Shepard (a realistic moment in an unrealistic game that's a total inconsistent tone shift) that moment works, and follows on the poignant Anderson scene.
I'm glad I'm not the only person who has ended ME3 this way. I used to think I was crazy/alone.
I'm glad I'm not the only person who has ended ME3 this way. I used to think I was crazy/alone.
You're definitely not alone.
... ah, but the premise clearly presented in ME Trilogy is Tennyson's "Ulysses"... which is a representation of Odysseus reflecting upon his life not an actual retelling of the voyage of Odysseus. There are other literary references, of course... some of them only mentioned in some cases. For example, Tennyson's "Charge of the Light Brigade" ("Boldly they rode and well, into the Jaws of Death, into the mouth of Hell") comes into the game only if you romanced Ashley and talk with her in London. This encounter, however, would perhaps foreshadow an inability to "win" without at least significant losses to your own side. The inability to "win" outright is, however, mentioned very clearly near the very beginning of the Trilogy by Barla Von. "But no matter how long you play, no matter how many secrets you buy, you can never win."
Clearly, with a videogame, most people expect that there should be a definitive win. At odds with this is that Bioware seems to like to write tragedies. Reflective tragedies like Tennyson's "Ulysses" do tend to make people feel like the Abyss is staring back at them.
And in that same meeting, Shepard repeats her earlier call to "get it done and go home". Which interestingly, is what Mordin says to Shepard in ME2 in contrast to Kirahe's "Hold the line" speeches.
Besides which Ulysses is supposed to be about the king as an old man "made weak by time and fate" but still restless for one last adventure. That is not Shepard. Adventure is thrust upon the commander, who is still quite spry.
Plus she quotes Invictus. The final verse:
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
Flies in the face of the ending. Your fate is not yours. You have to take what the Catalyst chooses to dole out to you. And if you defy them, SO BE IT!!!
And in that same meeting, Shepard repeats her earlier call to "get it done and go home". Which interestingly, is what Mordin says to Shepard in ME2 in contrast to Kirahe's "Hold the line" speeches.
Besides which Ulysses is supposed to be about the king as an old man "made weak by time and fate" but still restless for one last adventure. That is not Shepard. Adventure is thrust upon the commander, who is still quite spry.
Plus she quotes Invictus. The final verse:
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
Flies in the face of the ending. Your fate is not yours. You have to take what the Catalyst chooses to dole out to you. And if you defy them, SO BE IT!!!
I won't deny that there is a lot of dichotomy expressed throughout the game... Inevitable since the whole thing was designed to present some diametrically opposing choices to the player. The before or after death debate about the meaning of Tennyson's "Ulysses" rages on even to this day... and, honestly, I don't want to get into here. There are references in the game that can be validly taken by players "either way"... and that's the whole point. People keep looking for a definitive, direct from Bioware "win" scenario, but they spent the entire trilogy trying to avoid giving the player just that.
For me, the interpretation that best fits is that whatever happens with the Reaper threat happens AFTER Shepard dies. His death prevents him from completing his mission (regardless of however he would have liked to complete that mission). The endings reflect whatever that desire of his was (based on however the player wanted to (and had) developed his character). What actually happened is unknown... even to Shepard... because he died reaching for that console.
Because I also interpret Tennyson's poem to be reflective (Ulysses deciding whether he had done any "work of noble note" just as he's dying), this fits perfect (again, for me) with my interpretation of MEs endings (all of them). The Catalyst is just a theatrical tool Bioware used to recap what sort leanings (particularly regarding forms of "governing") Shepard might have. I change my ending (Shep's desire about what he wanted to do) depending on how a build my Shepard's character (HIS Soul). I can now happily just leave it up to Bioware to decide if or how my companions resolved the Reaper threat. In all instances, my choices mattered to my Shepard at the moment he died... He WAS the captain of HIS soul.
PS: Shep doesn't have to choose what the Catalyst doles out... he can refuse to choose.
I won't deny that there is a lot of dichotomy expressed throughout the game... Inevitable since the whole thing was designed to present some diametrically opposing choices to the player. The before or after death debate about the meaning of Tennyson's "Ulysses" rages on even to this day... and, honestly, I don't want to get into here. There are references in the game that can be validly taken by players "either way"... and that's the whole point. People keep looking for a definitive, direct from Bioware "win" scenario, but they spent the entire trilogy trying to avoid giving the player just that.
For me, the interpretation that best fits is that whatever happens with the Reaper threat happens AFTER Shepard dies. His death prevents him from completing his mission (regardless of however he would have liked to complete that mission). The endings reflect whatever that desire of his was (based on however the player wanted to (and had) developed his character). What actually happened is unknown... even to Shepard... because he died reaching for that console.
Because I also interpret Tennyson's poem to be reflective (Ulysses deciding whether he had done any "work of noble note" just as he's dying), this fits perfect (again, for me) with my interpretation of MEs endings (all of them). The Catalyst is just a theatrical tool Bioware used to recap what sort leanings (particularly regarding forms of "governing") Shepard might have. I change my ending (Shep's desire about what he wanted to do) depending on how a build my Shepard's character (HIS Soul). I can now happily just leave it up to Bioware to decide if or how my companions resolved the Reaper threat. In all instances, my choices mattered to my Shepard at the moment he died... He WAS the captain of HIS soul.
PS: Shep doesn't have to choose what the Catalyst doles out... he can refuse to choose.
The dichotomy is part of the problem. Many people played Shepard many different ways. And Bioware decided that unless you played your Shepard their way, you did it wrong. To illustrate my point, look at how "default Shepard" plays out, and the outcomes seem much more fitting than that of anyone who actually had a "good"import. And yet, no matter how much of a difference Shepard makes, it's never enough. Hope and optimism dangles before Shep's eyes only to be snatched away by "Art"
There should have been "good" outcomes. There should have been "bad" outcomes. There should have been "bittersweet" outcomes, all based on the narrative woven throughout the game. But Bioware instead chose to weave a single theme into all endings, and blamed the player for not going along with this BS.
Shepard's death, or apparent death, or whatever should never have been a requirement for the ending. Certainly as a possible outcome. Or several outcomes, even. Not everyone wants Shepard to be Ulysses. Just someone who gets the job done and goes home.
Home is behind, the world ahead,
And there are many paths to tread
Through shadows to the edge of night,
Until the stars are all alight.
The world behind and home ahead,
We'll wander back to home and bed.
Mist and twilight, cloud and shade,
Away shall fade! Away shall fade!
Fire and lamp, and meat and bread,
And then to bed! And then to bed!
And as far as I'm concerned, every choice the Catalyst graciously allows Shepard to make is a different way to damn his soul, if you'll excuse the expression. So I'm not to sure what Shepard is captaining, save a sinking ship. Yes, Shepard can "choose" to refuse. But Bioware extends an enormous middle finger to anyone foolish enough to go THAT route.
The dichotomy is part of the problem. Many people played Shepard many different ways. And Bioware decided that unless you played your Shepard their way, you did it wrong. To illustrate my point, look at how "default Shepard" plays out, and the outcomes seem much more fitting than that of anyone who actually had a "good"import. And yet, no matter how much of a difference Shepard makes, it's never enough. Hope and optimism dangles before Shep's eyes only to be snatched away by "Art"
There should have been "good" outcomes. There should have been "bad" outcomes. There should have been "bittersweet" outcomes, all based on the narrative woven throughout the game. But Bioware instead chose to weave a single theme into all endings, and blamed the player for not going along with this BS.
Shepard's death, or apparent death, or whatever should never have been a requirement for the ending. Certainly as a possible outcome. Or several outcomes, even. Not everyone wants Shepard to be Ulysses. Just someone who gets the job done and goes home.
Home is behind, the world ahead,
And there are many paths to tread
Through shadows to the edge of night,
Until the stars are all alight.
The world behind and home ahead,
We'll wander back to home and bed.
Mist and twilight, cloud and shade,
Away shall fade! Away shall fade!
Fire and lamp, and meat and bread,
And then to bed! And then to bed!
And as far as I'm concerned, every choice the Catalyst graciously allows Shepard to make is a different way to damn his soul, if you'll excuse the expression. So I'm not to sure what Shepard is captaining, save a sinking ship. Yes, Shepard can "choose" to refuse. But Bioware extends an enormous middle finger to anyone foolish enough to go THAT route.
I positively don't disagree with you. My interpretation is what has helped me reconcile it.
Other players have to navigate their own souls through the abyss that stares back at them at the end of the game. As I mentioned, people are still debating what Tennyson was going on about in his poetry.
It's certainly within your rights to remain forever unsettled and disgruntled about the ME endings... You are the captain of your own soul. In the end, reflection is the only thing any of us can do about all the decisions we make throughout our lives regardless of whether we are given the time to resolve all the dilemmas for all our companions and then go "Home" or whether our time is cut shorter than we'd like.
Like it or lump it, Bioware did insert the imagery (Shep looking at his/her bleeding side, passing out as he/she reached for the console, "ascending" on the platform bathed in light, etc.) that enables me to interpret a point at which I can believe he/she died. They also inserted the imagery that enables you to interpret the ending your way. In both cases, we both control individually how we ourselves ultimately feel about those ending sequences. I'm OK with mine and I can now just happily allow Bioware to write their next game.
PS: ... an apology to FemSheps for my persistent use of the male POV... I tend to play pretty much exclusively as a male Shep and find it difficult to remember to include the female (... raised in a time back when nobody thought it mattered).
This is my son, mine own Telemachus,
I prefer one that just ends when Shepard reaches for the console to trigger the crucible. Thats actually a bittersweet ending, and one where the protagonist dies at the end. Apart from the LOL worthy absurdity of Harbinger nuking Shepard (a realistic moment in an unrealistic game that's a total inconsistent tone shift) that moment works, and follows on the poignant Anderson scene.
Yes so much. The poignancy of Anderson's death was diluted by moving on and then facing the star child. I think seeing him die, Shepard rising on the platform, then reaching for the controls would have been an amazing ending. Add in the montage of faces of people who had died, and the LI, done.
Like it or lump it, Bioware did insert the imagery (Shep looking at his/her bleeding side, passing out as he/she reached for the console, "ascending" on the platform bathed in light, etc.) that enables me to interpret a point at which I can believe he/she died. They also inserted the imagery that enables you to interpret the ending your way. In both cases, we both control individually how we ourselves ultimately feel about those ending sequences. I'm OK with mine and I can now just happily allow Bioware to write their next game.
That's just it though. No matter how you played the game, no matter who lives or dies, no matter the choices you made, the "imagery" is all the same. No matter how much of a difference you made, it didn't make any difference. This isn't just about interpreting the ending, it's about defining the character you have been shaping for five years. And finding it's not yours.
It's like Tennyson discovering Ulysses has been hijcked by Byron in the last few lines of the poem.
That's just it though. No matter how you played the game, no matter who lives or dies, no matter the choices you made, the "imagery" is all the same. No matter how much of a difference you made, it didn't make any difference. This isn't just about interpreting the ending, it's about defining the character you have been shaping for five years. And finding it's not yours.
It's like Tennyson discovering Ulysses has been hijcked by Byron in the last few lines of the poem.
Because you're choosing to allow it to become "not yours." Tennyson wouldn't care whether his poem was hijacked by Byron now... Tennyson is dead. The only thing that probably mattered to Tennyson himself about it was whether or not writing it helped him process the death of a good friend.
In death, anyone passes the torch onto those they leave behind... they can't hold onto it. Tennyson himself recognized that: "He works his work, I mine." (That's a line from Ulysses, not Byron). As I've said repeatedly, Tennyson's "Ulysses" is still debated over... do you really think Tennyson should care about it? Shepard doesn't resolve the Reaper threat... he/she dies before he/she has the chance... but does that mean he/she had any less impact on, say, whether Joker loved EDI before Shep died or, say, whether Wrex lived and got the chance to lead his people or died on Virmire? I've seen threads here asking for less sweeping and more personal choices, but then denying that the choices that did matter in the ME Trilogy did not have to do with saving the Galaxy... but rather merely involved Shep's personal relationships with his/her companions. Mostly, people seem "disappointed" that their important choices didn't involve saving the galaxy.
You're allowing an ending that was written beyond the point where it should have been stopped (i.e. as Shep reached for that console) to rob you of all the choices you made throughout that game... You.... not Bioware. You are the one that remains unsettled and disturbed and angry about a bunch of "imaginings" because they don't appear to you to be different enough. You have the the power to let it go. You also have the option not to. You are the captain of YOUR soul.
Because you're choosing to allow it to become "not yours." Tennyson wouldn't care whether his poem was hijacked by Byron now... Tennyson is dead. The only thing that probably mattered to Tennyson himself about it was whether or not writing it helped him process the death of a good friend.
In death, anyone passes the torch onto those they leave behind... they can't hold onto it. Tennyson himself recognized that: "He works his work, I mine." (That's a line from Ulysses, not Byron). As I've said repeatedly, Tennyson's "Ulysses" is still debated over... do you really think Tennyson should care about it? Shepard doesn't resolve the Reaper threat... he/she dies before he/she has the chance... but does that mean he/she had any less impact on, say, whether Joker loved EDI before Shep died or, say, whether Wrex lived and got the chance to lead his people or died on Virmire? I've seen threads here asking for less sweeping and more personal choices, but then denying that the choices that did matter in the ME Trilogy did not have to do with saving the Galaxy... but rather merely involved Shep's personal relationships with his/her companions. Mostly, people seem "disappointed" that their important choices didn't involve saving the galaxy.
You're allowing an ending that was written beyond the point where it should have been stopped (i.e. as Shep reached for that console) to rob you of all the choices you made throughout that game... You.... not Bioware. You are the one that remains unsettled and disturbed and angry about a bunch of "imaginings" because they don't appear to you to be different enough. You have the the power to let it go. You also have the option not to. You are the captain of YOUR soul.
And its this obsession with death that really bugs me. Why should Shepard die? Because it's the end of the story? That's BS, there's plenty of stories that end with the protagonist still alive, for better or for worse. Even the Odyssey.
And I even question whether Shepard actually "saved" the galaxy in any of the endings. Genocide, Slavery or Eugenics (or "Rocks fall, everyone dies"). Sure they're different in the specific evil performed, but really, that's a choice? How is it "saving" anyone? What kind of a galaxy am I leaving behind with one of those as the foundation? More so, what kind of a galaxy is it that celebrates these vile acts?
So that ending did rob me of the choices made throughout the game Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world... but for Wales? Shepard's death is actually the lesser evil of the ending. Still terrible, but pales in comparison to what else is involved.
And its this obsession with death that really bugs me. Why should Shepard die? Because it's the end of the story? That's BS, there's plenty of stories that end with the protagonist still alive, for better or for worse. Even the Odyssey.
And I even question whether Shepard actually "saved" the galaxy in any of the endings. Genocide, Slavery or Eugenics (or "Rocks fall, everyone dies"). Sure they're different in the specific evil performed, but really, that's a choice? How is it "saving" anyone? What kind of a galaxy am I leaving behind with one of those as the foundation? More so, what kind of a galaxy is it that celebrates these vile acts?
So that ending did rob me of the choices made throughout the game Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world... but for Wales? Shepard's death is actually the lesser evil of the ending. Still terrible, but pales in comparison to what else is involved.
Your apparent obsession with trying to convince me to be unhappy with my interpretation of the ending is starting to really bug me. Go... be unhappy with your entire game because you got ending images that didn't vary enough for you. Just because, you're unhappy, doesn't mean I should have to be, too. I'm not unhappy, I'm certainly not going to become unhappy now, and I'm ready to play and have fun with ME:A regardless of how, when or even if Bioware "connects it" to the ME Trilogy.
BTW, should we purge the library shelves of "Macbeth," "King Lear," and "Hamlet" while we're at it just because they're tragedies? If you want absolute control over every aspect of your player character to include all possible choices and outcomes of those choices, perhaps you should just write all your own games from scratch.
Your apparent obsession with trying to convince me to be unhappy with my interpretation of the ending is starting to really bug me. Go... be unhappy with your entire game because you got ending images that didn't vary enough for you. IJust because, you're unhappy, doesn't mean I should have to be, too.
I'm not trying to make you unhappy, I'm trying to explain why I'm unhappy.
Holy wall of text Batman!1. So do you understand what is meant by organics and synthetics combine? Did it mean they combine its organics and synthetics like what reapers are made out of? Like what Shepard is what biotic implants? The catalyst mentions restructuring the matrix of organic life into a new DNA. Maybe they will be like the cylons in the new battlestar galactica. Completely synthetic, right down to their DNA but so close to organics, the humans required a cylon detector to tell them apart. It blurred the line between organics and synthetics. As EDI said, synthetics are alive also in the ending DLC. So it implies that organics and syntheics are not just physically integrated but perhaps more like the cylon model in BSG. If so, there will not seem to be a great difference unless someone actually states it in ME:A.
2. if someone picked the fourth ending, there would be no ME:A at all in the first place. They did not have the technology to get to Andromeda before this. That's how they get wiped out by the reapers. ME:A is a continuation of a story if you pick one of the other three endings. If you picked the fourth, the story ends there.
3. Was wrex a scientist like mordin? That was Wrexs opinion not an actual fact shown in game. He was referring to the fact that the krogan were not doing anything about the genophage but fighting and killing each other. The krogen live hundreds of years, so no they wouldn't be wiped out by this time even if the genophage continued. The Rachni were recreated by the reapers. It only takes a few thousand people to provide enough genetic diversity to restart a species. At one time, only 5,000 humans existed in the world many tens of thousands of years ago, so how do you know? That's just your opinion again that all the quarians were wiped out. We don't know.
Yes, because your choices have mattered since, ME1...Any choice you made in ME1 lead to the same story in ME2. In ME2, if you destroyed the collector base or gave it to cereberus, did that drastically alter the fact that cereberus were the antogonists of ME3 and have access to reaper tech? No it didn't. So now after 6 years of ME using the same choice mechanic, only now fans decry a lack of choice between ME3 and ME4? Thaat doesn't make sense. It is an illusionary choice mechanic, demonstrated in KOTOR and now in use in many games such as telltale's the walking dead, the wold among is, life is strange etc...
How do you explain the fact that the races were not united until the final battle with the reapers in ME3. Did they really build a ship to suddenly accommodate all species even if they had not entered into an alliance with shepard yet? If you go far enough into the future, the endings may not be so disparate. The glowing was only a metaphor for the change throughout the galaxy, its not actually going to be in the game lol. The Krogen would not be extinct anyway in 500 years because they live so long, the geth may have escaped as explained above and so too the quarians. Nothing is set in stone. Maybe not all races get to go to Andromeda, who knows? Do you really think the Krogan had enough people to go on a big colony ship when they needed every soldier to fight the reapers. Does tucking tail and running seem like something the krogen would do in the middle of a war?
A demonstration of just hating anything no matter what happened with the ME ending. So its pretty much inevitable that there will be people to hate an ending no matter what it is. No matter how different from the three endings it was.
Its 500 years later. The krogan would not be extinct anyway as they live hundreds of years. And for these other possibilities, the rachni were recreated by the reapers through genetic engineering and whether Wrex, Eve or Wreav were in charge is not relevant. For one, these possibilities were needed in ME3 story and they handled it very well for only one game. You could say the same about any choice you made in ME1-ME3 but somehow, the franchise worked.
Another 'no matter what the ending is, I hate it'
Another 'no matter what the ending is, I hate it'.
Yes, I agree the ending was not handled very well but it doesn't negate the possibility of seeing the future of the MW which is what I propose.
Any choice you make in ME is an illusion. Just as the choices you made in ME1-ME3. Did your choices in ME1 create a different ME2 from other people? Did the choices in ME2 create a completely different ME3 from other players or was it the same basic structure? What empowers mass effect is that it creates complex characters that YOU, the player care about and then it creates choices that will affect them and will also having the illusion that they are also galaxy-wide affairs that alter the course of history (but they don't).
I wouldn't say ME3 ending were inconsistent as much as they just really, really sucked.
I'm not trying to make you unhappy, I'm trying to explain why I'm unhappy.
You don't need to continue to explain to me why you're unhappy... as I said many times before, it's your option to remain unhappy. This is the first post where you've even come close to acknowledging that I have a similar right to be happy with the endings. So, how about we just agree to leave each other be in our current state of mind and end this, eh?
You don't need to continue to explain to me why you're unhappy... as I said many times before, it's your option to remain unhappy. This is the first post where you've even come close to acknowledging that I have a similar right to be happy with the endings. So, how about we just agree to leave each other be in our current state of mind and end this, eh?
My apologies that my unhappiness is more infectious than your happiness
My apologies that my unhappiness is more infectious than your happiness
"I'll take whatever I can get from you, Jack." (ME2)
I think this "Ark" left around halfway through ME3 as a safeguard against galactic extinction if the Catalyst failed to work. This would negate most if not all of the choices you made in ME3 and add a lot of writing freedom for MEAs writers. Maybe the Genophage wasn't cured. Maybe a cure was made of during the journey. Who knows? Did you pick ending Blue, Green, or the correct choice, Red. Doesn't matter. The Ark was well on its way by the time that happened and wasn't affected by any of it. No need for trying to explain away how this happened or that. I don't see anything else makes much logical sense.
Pretty sure Jon Warner said that this game will be a new starting point, and there's no need to carry over your saves
It's like I said earlier the choices Shepard made in the MW don't affect Andromeda. Same deal here. The new protagonist will make choices which will affect the game, but it's not like Shepard's choices will have any effect on that, because Shepard's story and his choices are finished.
You already saw the results of your choices anyways.
I think had Bioware ended the game right then, with the console destroying the Reapers and Shepard dying with his/her hand on the console, there wouldn't have been an ending controversy. Some people would have griped about Shepard dying of course, but it wouldn't have been a majority. The biggest mistake Bioware made with their endings was in not knowing where to end the game. They had an ending and wrote past it.
I certainly would have been satisfied with it. Add snippets with the future of companions and the fate of the various races, determined by your choices and EMS, and that ends the series on a bittersweet yet high note.
To me, Shepard dying isn't a problem even had it been inevitable. The game certainly builds up to it. The problem is the sheer amount of nonsensical absurdities that happen as soon as the platform goes up. The final confrontation with TIM and Anderson's last speech were more than adequate an ending, even giving the player a final choice of sorts. But when starbrat shows up and tells us that he must kill organics so that synthetics don't kill organics and that the ways out of it are genocide, dictatorship or mass molestation, I kinda throw my hands up in the air and ask why in the blazes was that nonsense necessary in the first place. Why end the trilogy by throwing this kind of shitty choice at the player's face in the very last leg of the journey completely out of nowhere?
Andromeda will not deal with the endings. That much is an absolute given. Not only have they already said that saves don't carry over, but the entire point of going to Andromeda is to run away from the ending as far as possible. They will never admit it, but to me it's crystal clear.
I wouldn't say ME3 ending were inconsistent as much as they just really, really sucked.
No they were inconsistent by the lot, you can easily create something that is better than the actual ending.
Bioware should've put a fight in the end their that represented the Reapers trying to Indocrinate Shepard and winning Shepard presses the big red button to activate the Cruicible, there would be an epic win scene of course but can't describe that as good as the losing scene lol. Game Over screen, losing would show a scene with Shepard betraying the fleet with that scene ending with Reaper success as it shows our Shepard has become just another husk over the many years after Reaper victory.
And that my friend is just one example of fans being able to write better endings for ME3.
I think this "Ark" left around halfway through ME3 as a safeguard against galactic extinction if the Catalyst failed to work. This would negate most if not all of the choices you made in ME3 and add a lot of writing freedom for MEAs writers. Maybe the Genophage wasn't cured. Maybe a cure was made of during the journey. Who knows? Did you pick ending Blue, Green, or the correct choice, Red. Doesn't matter. The Ark was well on its way by the time that happened and wasn't affected by any of it. No need for trying to explain away how this happened or that. I don't see anything else makes much logical sense.
It could have left halfway through ME or, I think, it could even leave the day the game is released (i.e. in the 21st century - our time)... with Shepard's speech being "just a symbolic nod." Or maybe he/she made the speech to his/her N-7 graduating class (as valedictorian) on Earth just before being assigned to the Normandy SR-1. (He/she did have a carreer before we met up with him/her in ME1). Heck, maybe Pathfinder is a classmate of Shepard who lives into ME:A because of cryostasis.
Speculation is just pure speculation on that anyways. The purpose of moving the setting is obvious... to skirt the ending issues of ME3 (don't need intergalactic rocket science to figure that one out).
Retour en haut
