214 réponses à ce sujet

[AngryFrozenWater]

I have the similar concern even though I like the ending very much. After the first promo video I thought ME universe is finished, but the recent video gives me some hope. I really want to know what are they trying to do with the original story in MEA. And I really hope they will not turn MEA into some childish adventure like Star Wars. In other words, I expect to see instructive sci-fi story, not a space opera.

After KOTOR Bioware wanted something similar of their own. That became ME. So space opera is in its genes.

[Shechinah]

After KOTOR Bioware wanted something similar of their own. That became ME. So space opera is in its genes.

 
Yeah, Mass Effect does seem to fit the definition and I think it is even genred as such on some sites.
 
"Space opera is a subgenre of science fiction set mainly or entirely in outer space, that emphasizes space warfare and melodramatic adventure, and often risk-taking as well as chivalric romance; usually involving conflict between opponents possessing advanced abilities, futuristic weapons and other sophisticated technology."
 
Seeing as I love space operas, I'm keeping on hoping that the Mass Effect series will keep on being one.

[In Exile]

Hopefully they will learn the real lesson of the ME3 ending fiasco. The solution is not to "play it safe."

The real solution is to spend the money and commit to a really meaningful and satisfying ending with divergent consequences that reflect the choices the player made throughout the entire game.

ME3's ending was cheap and rushed. The story was bad and the consequences were bad. We don't need a safe disney ending, we need an expensive ending that is thorough and substantial and carefully planned months in advance. No more rushing the endings and pinching the pennies at the end of the pipeline. You're owned by a billion dollar company, start developing like it.

They had plenty of divergence - that was clearly their problem. They spent a lot of time trying to manage it. Every single main quest tried to be reactive and address the past. Beyond that, even assuming Bioware is not a subsidiary of EA but actually just a development studio, that doesn't make an unlimited design but midget logical.

But let's try it this way: what would this ideal ending look like? How would you fix the idiocy started by the ending of ME1 and ME2?

[In Exile]

After KOTOR Bioware wanted something similar of their own. That became ME. So space opera is in its genes.

It was heavily marketed as the spiritual successor of KotOR. This is why we see e.g., Ebon Hawk = Normandy, Biotics = Force, etc.

[Reorte]

It's a tricky one to get right. Unfortunately I think sometimes that the reaction to "play it safe" is to take risks for the sake of risks and be different for the sake of being different, rather than thinking about whether anything actually works. There's more to not playing it safe than flinging any old idea at the wall and hoping it sticks.

 

So there is a risk of it being a bit too bland and dull and predictable. I'm certainly not one for being dark and edgy, someone must die for the sake of it etc. (which is also rather predictable rather than new these days), but at the very least please give me the chance to really, really screw things up. Having characters die (for example) becaue you messed up is much more effective than having them die because the plot demands it, although handled well that can work (don't hear many people complaining about  Virmire for example).

[Dr. Rush]

They had plenty of divergence - that was clearly their problem. They spent a lot of time trying to manage it. Every single main quest tried to be reactive and address the past. Beyond that, even assuming Bioware is not a subsidiary of EA but actually just a development studio, that doesn't make an unlimited design but midget logical.

But let's try it this way: what would this ideal ending look like? How would you fix the idiocy started by the ending of ME1 and ME2?

To be fair, this isn't even a question relevant to ME:A because ME:A is not a trilogy of games. Not to sound condescending to you at all, I just mean, the problems with the vast expectations of an entire trilogy ending are not going to be the same as Andromeda ending by itself.

 

Now, how do you say they had "plenty of divergence" ??

 

There was virtually no divergence in ANY content in any of the ME trilogy. Divergence means something like if a player chooses to commit genocide against the Rachni, the Rachni won't magically still exist despite genocide. Meaningful, radical divergence is what the ME3 ending seriously lacked. Frankly, the entire trilogy lacked it.

 

And yeah, Bioware doesn't have access to all of EA's wealth, but I more than most people have a firm understanding of how budgets and development works, and I'm just done being patient with cheapness. Bioware either wants to be a best-in-the-world caliber studio or they don't. But they've proven, under EA's ownership, to take too many financial shortcuts in the development of ME3, DA2 and more recently DA:I.

 

Bioware needs to commit whatever financial resources are necessary to return to making games that are more than just treading water. DA:I's significant lack of meaningful divergence isn't going to cut it either. Its time for Bioware to step up and embrace the meaningful consequences they've been advertising and failing to deliver for years.

[AlanC9]

There was virtually no divergence in ANY content in any of the ME trilogy. Divergence means something like if a player chooses to commit genocide against the Rachni, the Rachni won't magically still exist despite genocide. Meaningful, radical divergence is what the ME3 ending seriously lacked. Frankly, the entire trilogy lacked it.

I get the feeling you two are using different criteria to judge divergence. I think everyone's willing to stipulate that Bio's never shown all that much interest in branching paths or gameplay consequences; DAI is actually on the high side for Bio with the Mage/Templar path split.

But the world-states are often quite divergent even when the gameplay isn't. Even though Shepard fights rachni-derived creatures in ME3 regardless of what happened in ME1, the rachni, as a species, are still exterminated if Shepard pulled the plug on them; saying that the things Shepard finds in ME3 with the queen dead are rachni is like saying that Collectors are Protheans

Bioware needs to commit whatever financial resources are necessary to return to making games that are more than just treading water. DA:I's significant lack of meaningful divergence isn't going to cut it either. Its time for Bioware to step up and embrace the meaningful consequences they've been advertising and failing to deliver for years.

Why do they need to do that? Are you predicting that throwing more money into divergent paths would result in greater profitability? If EA believed that, they would have done it.

[Il Divo]

^I'm still trying to figure out which Bioware games actually had genuine divergent pathways. Not a one comes to mind. 

[Dr. Rush]

Why do they need to do that? Are you predicting that throwing more money into divergent paths would result in greater profitability? If EA believed that, they would have done it.

 

I'm predicting that it would make for a much better game and a much more satisfying ending than ME3. ME3's final ending was mostly a philosophical choice with a few slideshow images, but the real disappointment was everything on Priority : Earth. There was no reason for Earth to be such a limited on-rails experience, without any meaningful divergence between how the choices you've made and allies you've recruited actually work together. You get tiny bits of audio clips overlayed all the noisy gunfire and explosions. Thats scraps and breadcrumbs. Bioware can do better, they clearly have the talent, they need to stop pinching their pennies when it comes time to deliver a meaningful and satisfying ending. And that starts with meaningful consequences and divergence that reflects the player's choices throughout the game. 
 

"boo hoo those consequences cost money" oh well Bioware, its time to pay up. 

[straykat]

I'm predicting that it would make for a much better game and a much more satisfying ending than ME3. ME3's final ending was mostly a philosophical choice with a few slideshow images, but the real disappointment was everything on Priority : Earth. There was no reason for Earth to be such a limited on-rails experience, without any meaningful divergence between how the choices you've made and allies you've recruited actually work together. You get tiny bits of audio clips overlayed all the noisy gunfire and explosions. Thats scraps and breadcrumbs. Bioware can do better, they clearly have the talent, they need to stop pinching their pennies when it comes time to deliver a meaningful and satisfying ending. And that starts with meaningful consequences and divergence that reflects the player's choices throughout the game. 
 

"boo hoo those consequences cost money" oh well Bioware, its time to pay up. 

 

I can't make sense of this, other than that they were rushed. It comes off like a Beta/Test level. I think they can do better too... and have.

[fdrty]

I'm predicting that it would make for a much better game and a much more satisfying ending than ME3. ME3's final ending was mostly a philosophical choice with a few slideshow images, but the real disappointment was everything on Priority : Earth. There was no reason for Earth to be such a limited on-rails experience, without any meaningful divergence between how the choices you've made and allies you've recruited actually work together. You get tiny bits of audio clips overlayed all the noisy gunfire and explosions. Thats scraps and breadcrumbs. Bioware can do better, they clearly have the talent, they need to stop pinching their pennies when it comes time to deliver a meaningful and satisfying ending. And that starts with meaningful consequences and divergence that reflects the player's choices throughout the game. 
 

"boo hoo those consequences cost money" oh well Bioware, its time to pay up. 

 

Were there divergent pathways in ME1? Nope, you had to fight Saren and destroy sovereign. In ME2, the choice to destroy or preserve the collector base has laughably few consequences - Cerberus still upgrade their soliders in ME3. In Dragon Age Inquisition there is no choice. Kill Corypheus. Yet nobody complains about those endings. The endings didn't need to be 3 huge universe-altering choices, it needed to reflect the choices we'd already made. But ME3's didn't, not narratively, not visually, and not in the gameplay.

 

The thing with ME2 was that it had an ending that made sense, that the entire game built towards. A climactic mission where your preparation and decisions directly affected who lived and died. ME is a game about your squad, who become your friends. Then why was shep alone during the climax? Why was there an exposition AI which ruined the pacing of the mission? Why did your actions not matter up to this point? Why couldn't we see/fight alongside the forces we'd worked so hard to recruit, like you can in the final battle of Dragon Age Origins? Why was the R/B/G choice not foreshadowed, so that its inclusion felt natural? Why was the Illusive man even there? How did he get there? Why did the reaper's motivation make no sense, completely ruining their mystique and making them look stupid?

 

ME3 shouldn't have given players a choice at all. Clearly, destroy is the best choice, destroy is also the most likely canon choice.

[Lucca_de_Neon]

They should add purple.

[WardenBlue]

They should add purple.

What about gold? 

[Lucca_de_Neon]

What about gold? 

If there's a rainbow in the end of MEA, i'm going to die laughing.

[straykat]

In Dragon Age Inquisition there is no choice. Kill Corypheus. Yet nobody complains about those endings.

 

Nobody complains? I don't like the game as a whole. Hope that helps

 

I would preferred no Corypheus at all and continued where DA2/Asunder left off. A bigger political game and mage/temp war. A game of complicated villains like Loghain or Arishok and not big baddies and epic plots, that force everyone to unite and fight against.

[WardenBlue]

If there's a rainbow in the end of MEA, i'm going to die laughing.

The LTGB Community will be all over that 

[Lucca_de_Neon]

The LTGB Community will be all over that 

As a member, i approve! besides, the reference to the 3 endings in ME3 would be amazing xd

[wright1978]

I'll be the first to admit that the ending to ME3 was very bad. But I worry that the lesson BW will take from the outcry is to make the next game as safe and uncontroversial as possible. I like my stories to have a little bite and something to chew over. There were interesting ideas in the ending, and I actually liked that there was no way to successfully end the war without giving up something significant. I also consider DA2 my favorite of the modern BW games, even if it's deeply flawed from a level design standpoint. Again, it tried to do something we don't see very often in videogames, with a hero who is not larger than the events surrounding her and is just trying to hold on.

By contrast, I don't like DAI very much at all. Oh, I like the LGBT content well enough, but the game as a whole felt bland and soulless. I felt like I couldn't make a meaningful choice and that Corypheus was never in danger of winning. Even the Fade choice had very little impact because the Inquisitor has only the faintest idea who these people are. The worst thing they could possibly happen is getting dumped by your boyfriend, and that's just not world shaking. I hated Citadel with the burning passion of a thousand suns. So yes, I worry that the writers have overreacted and MEA will be a nice, safe, story that takes no risks. I'd rather have the interesting failures back.

 

I agree that pulling too safe in the ending is a worry but also is being edgy for the sake of being edgy. Nothing will make me want to endure a horrendous trainwreck like ME3's ending again.

[rashie]

They already did with DA:I.

 

In ME2 you can botch the final mission so bad everyone but joker ends up dead, and even if you do absolutely everything in the game 4-6 people will still end up dead with bad specialist choices. Can also have your warden sacrifice himself at the end in Origins.

 

Compare that to DA:I, where you just get dropped in front of the antagonist straight from the war table, defeat him, and that's that, no matter your previous choices.

[straykat]

They already did with DA:I.

 

In ME2 you can botch the final mission so bad everyone but joker ends up dead, and even if you do absolutely everything in the game 4-6 people will still end up dead with bad specialist choices. Can also have your warden sacrifice himself at the end in Origins.

 

Compare that to DA:I, where you just get dropped in front of the antagonist straight from the war table, defeat him, and that's that, no matter your previous choices.

 

The Warden isn't a bad thing necessarily.

[AlanC9]

The endings didn't need to be 3 huge universe-altering choices, it needed to reflect the choices we'd already made. But ME3's didn't, not narratively, not visually, and not in the gameplay.

Hadn't ME3 already crossed the "universe-altering choices" line well before the ending?

Why did the reaper's motivation make no sense, completely ruining their mystique and making them look stupid?

Because there weren't any sensible options left that were consistent with established Reaper behavior.

[AlanC9]

I'm predicting that it would make for a much better game and a much more satisfying ending than ME3. ME3's final ending was mostly a philosophical choice with a few slideshow images, but the real disappointment was everything on Priority : Earth. There was no reason for Earth to be such a limited on-rails experience, without any meaningful divergence between how the choices you've made and allies you've recruited actually work together. You get tiny bits of audio clips overlayed all the noisy gunfire and explosions. Thats scraps and breadcrumbs. Bioware can do better, they clearly have the talent, they need to stop pinching their pennies when it comes time to deliver a meaningful and satisfying ending. And that starts with meaningful consequences and divergence that reflects the player's choices throughout the game. 
 
"boo hoo those consequences cost money" oh well Bioware, its time to pay up.

OK. Now, sell that expanded budget to EA. Or you can get there by cutting other stuff, if you like.

[Iakus]

Hadn't ME3 already crossed the "universe-altering choices" line well before the ending?
 

Didn't need those either.

 

 

Because there weren't any sensible options left that were consistent with established Reaper behavior.

And yet people wanted/demanded a motivation.  No matter how nonsensical.

[Iakus]

OK. Now, sell that expanded budget to EA. Or you can get there by cutting other stuff, if you like.

Funny, given how much praise the Suicide Mission got, you'd think they'd have found the money somewhere for a repeat.

 

I mean, the y found the money to shoehorn in MP

[mopotter]

The Warden isn't a bad thing necessarily.

I love the Warden.  DAO gave me every ending I could possibly want.  Sacrifice to Royal weddings with death and happiness depending on my mood at the time.  

 

One thing ME3 did, I stopped hating the DR.