140 réponses à ce sujet

[DuffyMJ]

marshalleck wrote...

For people whose jobs in the real world involve dealing with all sorts of human misery, a happy ending where everyone survives for once can be emotionally fulfilling.

Perspective.

True.  Nothing sucks more in my job then when I hear about someone on parole who genuinely seemed to be rehabilitated end up back on drugs and in county lockup.

.... I still think the coffin ending is better though! lmao.

Modifié par DuffyMJ, 13 février 2010 - 01:03 .

[Chuck_Vu]

Coffin Ending - more emotional, I agree. But I personally (if I were actually Commander Shepperd, and not some nerd sitting on his couch eating pizza, with a controller in his hand) would count my success as a leader in not only completing the mission goal, but also bringing the same number of people back as i brought into. I would never use my subordinates as cannon fodder. Except maybe Legion (crunch all you want... We'll make more)

[Wild Still]

I hate the coffin endings, not because the "no deaths" ending is better but because there is no way on sweet Jebus' green earth I would go back for Samara and Jack. Both of whom I deliberately killed. Their coffin's would look and awful lot like collector station debris.

[tmp7704]

I think the possible problem with "no one died" ending is, it really doesn't take much to accomplish. You just have to actually play the game rather than skip through half of it, and then in the end you have to make a couple easy choices with correct options being rather obvious.

When the "zomg, suicidal mission" only ends with deaths if you pretty much intentionally screw it up... well. What is there really to be proud of if you pull it off?

Modifié par tmp7704, 13 février 2010 - 02:10 .

[ZaDonKilluminati]

The ending where everybody survives is the best possible ending for me. Until the very last second i hoped that all my upgrading, doing loyalty missions and trying to make the right decisions at the time would assure everybody's survival and a real big weight fell from my shoulders when i was back in the normandy, saw that everybody was alright and just talked to to me crew. I knew i did it and i was happy as can be.



No other ending could come close to that.

[Ghrelt]

I had one single coffin at the end of my playthrough. I am now absolutely terrified that even if I do everything right, someone may die in subsequent playthroughs. The death of Jack has made every ending as nerve-wracking as the first.

[notphrog]

It feels wrong for everyone to walk away. Even if I worked real hard to have everyone survive. It makes it feel more meaningful for someone to have made a sacrifice for the mission.



Of course, I'm biased. I am rather partial to sad endings. For instance, the renegade ending of Miranda's loyalty mission felt right but the paragon version felt cheap.

[Bigdoser]

ZaDonKilluminati wrote...

The ending where everybody survives is the best possible ending for me. Until the very last second i hoped that all my upgrading, doing loyalty missions and trying to make the right decisions at the time would assure everybody's survival and a real big weight fell from my shoulders when i was back in the normandy, saw that everybody was alright and just talked to to me crew. I knew i did it and i was happy as can be.

No other ending could come close to that.

These are my exact feelings as well as someone said leave no one behind. Am I the only one who likes all the paragon endings for the loyalty missions? I felt that the characters are better off with the paragon ending maybe its just me.

Modifié par Bigdoser, 13 février 2010 - 02:24 .

[tmp7704]

For the people with the "no one left behind" mindset, what would you do if there was part in the mission where there's say, a bunker laying down steady fire and someone *had* to go in first to eat the bullets so the rest can make it through? Or any sort of barrier/obstacle which would require sacrifice from one or more team members to allow the others pass to continue? A fairly regular situation where it comes to warfare... and yet, how conveniently absent.

[Count Viceroy]

Nightwriter wrote...

Have to disagree. I can't stand any of the endings with coffins.

I'm just one of those people who HAS TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE LIVES!!

I can live without a few characters but I usually bring everyone home. Even as renegade. Just because I know they're all expendable doesn't mean I'm not going to try my best to keep everyone alive until there's no other option to do so.

It's funny, I had Tali die on my first run and as I was a fool and didn't save properly I was unable to prevent her death. I deleted the game and remade a new char. Tali has to survive
though now that I know which combinations to run to keep everyone alive the tension is lost somewhat.

Modifié par Count Viceroy, 13 février 2010 - 02:32 .

[ZaDonKilluminati]

tmp7704 wrote...

For the people with the "no one left behind" mindset, what would you do if there was part in the mission where there's say, a bunker laying down steady fire and someone *had* to go in first to eat the bullets so the rest can make it through? Or any sort of barrier/obstacle which would require sacrifice from one or more team members to allow the others pass to continue? A fairly regular situation where it comes to warfare... and yet, how conveniently absent.

If you ever come to a situation like that, where somebody HAS to die, you pretty much failed as the leader.

[Ulicus]

The whole "team" survived my first playthrough... but the entire crew, barring Chakwas, died. It was... an interesting note to end the game on: especially for a paragon "leave no man behind" kind of guy. Didn't have any coffins, though, which was a shame. Some sort of service for the dead would have been nice.



The Normandy is very empty, now.

[LadyLuminary]

Nightwriter wrote...

Have to disagree. I can't stand any of the endings with coffins.

I'm just one of those people who HAS TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE LIVES!!

You and me both. I get so attached to my crew.

[tmp7704]

ZaDonKilluminati wrote...

If you ever come to a situation like that, where somebody HAS to die, you pretty much failed as the leader.

Sounds nonsensical especially in situation like the one in game where you're pretty much forced to go into the situation completely blind and with no clue what to expect ahead.

Just consider that looking from the defender's standpoint, if you ever allow the enemy to come and overcome you without any casualties, that'd also be excused in this manner, "oh it's failure of leadership". Yet these two conditions are mutually exclusive. So what happens when there's two competent leaders?

[Kolaris8472]

ZaDonKilluminati wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

For the people with the "no one left behind" mindset, what would you do if there was part in the mission where there's say, a bunker laying down steady fire and someone *had* to go in first to eat the bullets so the rest can make it through? Or any sort of barrier/obstacle which would require sacrifice from one or more team members to allow the others pass to continue? A fairly regular situation where it comes to warfare... and yet, how conveniently absent.

If you ever come to a situation like that, where somebody HAS to die, you pretty much failed as the leader.

But that was the whole premise of the Suicide Mission. Get someone who's already been dead, a dying Assassin, an exiled Quarian, a renegade/crippled Turian, a tank-bred Krogan, a psycopathic prisoner, and a mercenary with no grudges left to fill and have them all kick a lot of ass before they die. 

[MarginalBeast]

Adon 9 wrote...

I'm of the opposite view to the OP -- to me, bringing back everyone alive is just as poignant, as it means you went the extra mile and defied the odds with the belief that nobody was expendible. To each their own I suppose, but I don't see a greater value in having some of them die.

This. Especially for an Akuze survivor like my Shepard.

[Chuck_Vu]

tmp7704 wrote...

I think the possible problem with "no one died" ending is, it really doesn't take much to accomplish. You just have to actually play the game rather than skip through half of it, and then in the end you have to make a couple easy choices with correct options being rather obvious.

When the "zomg, suicidal mission" only ends with deaths if you pretty much intentionally screw it up... well. What is there really to be proud of if you pull it off?

When used as a story telling tool, I agree.  It is a powerfull tool, but you'll probably change your tune if you ever have a close friend die on you, the person on holding the game controller,  not Commander Sheppard.  i doubt anyone in real life would say "I'm glad so and so died, otherwise this would be an easy victory."

I hate it when people die on me.

[A Blind Bandit]

tmp7704 wrote...

For the people with the "no one left behind" mindset, what would you do if there was part in the mission where there's say, a bunker laying down steady fire and someone *had* to go in first to eat the bullets so the rest can make it through? Or any sort of barrier/obstacle which would require sacrifice from one or more team members to allow the others pass to continue? A fairly regular situation where it comes to warfare... and yet, how conveniently absent.

That woud be a compromise in my character. I would find a way to get everyone out. I would do it myself before putting the squad in harms way.

[Gill Kaiser]

Well, for my first playthrough all my squadmates survived but my entire crew died except Dr. Chakwas, so I figured that Shepard was thinking of them.

[notphrog]

ZaDonKilluminati wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

For the people with the "no one left behind" mindset, what would you do if there was part in the mission where there's say, a bunker laying down steady fire and someone *had* to go in first to eat the bullets so the rest can make it through? Or any sort of barrier/obstacle which would require sacrifice from one or more team members to allow the others pass to continue? A fairly regular situation where it comes to warfare... and yet, how conveniently absent.

If you ever come to a situation like that, where somebody HAS to die, you pretty much failed as the leader.

So, Kaiden or Ashley dying on Virmire is a failure on Shepard's part? On the player's part?

If the enemy have something that could not be predicted is a failure of leadership?

[Gill Kaiser]

tmp7704 wrote...

For the people with the "no one left behind" mindset, what would you do if there was part in the mission where there's say, a bunker laying down steady fire and someone *had* to go in first to eat the bullets so the rest can make it through? Or any sort of barrier/obstacle which would require sacrifice from one or more team members to allow the others pass to continue? A fairly regular situation where it comes to warfare... and yet, how conveniently absent.

I'd look for alternatives, and if there literally were none, I'd simply choose the best person for the job, which would be Grunt.

[tmp7704]

Chuck_Vu wrote...

When used as a story telling tool, I agree.  It is a powerfull tool, but you'll probably change your tune if you ever have a close friend die on you, the person on holding the game controller,  not Commander Sheppard.  i doubt anyone in real life would say "I'm glad so and so died, otherwise this would be an easy victory."

I hate it when people die on me.

That really doesn't address my point though. It wasn't so much "i'm glad someone died otherwise it'd be an easy victory" but rather "the game makes it easy for no one to die". Which makes the actual victory in such manner well, easy.

[Ulicus]

"Everybody lives" is great, so long as it's rare. I'm really glad it's there for ME2, but I not sure I want the possibility in ME3.

[Looper128]

My shepard would feel awful knowing he got one of his squad mates killed.

[tango jack]

I ,m with the OP on this one as I lost legion, miranda and zaeed and that made the ending seem more apropriate with the coffins lined up and that look on shepards face but I suppose i,m partial to a.....

" I,M GOING TO GET SOME PAYBACK FOR THIS "

type of ending to the story which will make the transition to ME3 better for me as I,ll be out for blood and besides it was supposed to be a suicide mission with none of us returning.

Modifié par tango jack, 13 février 2010 - 02:54 .