Results 1,021 to 1,050 of 1456
-
2012-04-22, 01:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
-
2012-04-22, 01:14 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Yeah I agree. I'm just weirded out because the conversation hasn't actually been about Starkid for the last few pages. Instead it's been about how many people die after the ending and whether it's fair to require Shephard to die.
I guess I'm just annoyed that the fact that one part was bad is causing people to reject every single aspect of the endings.
-
2012-04-22, 01:26 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Except it was never properly explained why, if the Starkid wanted Synthesis, it didn't try to build a Crucible itself instead of embarking on endless cycles of galactic genocide to stop evil synthetics from creating robot nirvana.
While I'd have still hated the ending, having Shepard saying "Screw you Starkid, we'd rather die free than submit to your arbitrary choices" would have been far more in character than immeditately committing Reaper-sanctioned suicide (in your choice of three flavours).
In retrospect, it doesn't make much sense they decided to throw everything on the Crucible gamble when the game shows that Reapers aren't quite as indestructible as their reputation suggests. If the galaxy had enough industrial capacity to create the equivalent of their own Death Star in a month (or however long ME3 takes), they could have instead decided to build a fleet of dedicated anti-Reaper ships instead. It's plausible; hit 'em with enough power in the face and they go down.
Edit:
Even without the Starkid, I really don't like the whole concept of Synthesis. It doesn't fit into the game at all in my view. It is the option I picked in my playthrough, but that's partly because the game was obviously marketing it as the "best" choice and partly because, if the game was going to deny me proper choice and be this stupid, I'm going to force the game to go full stupid.Last edited by Trazoi; 2012-04-22 at 01:29 AM.
-
2012-04-22, 01:27 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Gender
-
2012-04-22, 01:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Location
- Deep in the Black
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Well, with the whole war assets business, which is pretty analogous to Loyalty in ME2, then an obvious possibility would be tiers of endings. At the bottom is the bad ending--you lose, the cycle continues. Next up, you fling a light into the future, and the next cycle is the one to defeat the Reapers. Do a bit better, and it's mutually assured destruction--Reapers die, so does everyone else, but the cycle is broken; good luck to our inheritors. Do good, and the Reaper's are down for the count thanks to Shepard's heroic sacrifice, but the galaxy has a lot of rebuilding to do, just how much being dependent on your choices and war assets--various allies and squad members could also live or die depending on your military readiness and specific choices in the final battle, here. And, of course, in the top tier, Shepard crawls out of certain death alive one more time, retiring to Rannoch with Tali/raising bouncing blue babies with Liara/running a bar with Garrus/etc.
'Defeating the Reapers at great cost' is where we are no matter how we beat them--no matter what happens, the Reapers will have killed billions, set countries on fire, and devastated galactic infrastructure and military. The loss of the Mass Relays is one nightmare scenario following directly on the heels of another. The problem isn't that we're not prepared for survival to come at a cost. It's that seeing the Mass Relays go feels, on an unshakeable, intuitive level, like doubling down on that cost, while telling us that the consequences are not really that much greater than what we were already imagining for a lower level of cost.Take my love, take my land
Take me where I cannot stand.
I don't care, I'm still free,
You can't take the sky from me.
Defender of
Don't make me trot out Smite Moron!
Thanks to Sneak for the Avatar.
-
2012-04-22, 01:32 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2008
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
No, you're doing it to solve your problem. Specifically, the Reapers killing you. You can either destroy them, take control of them, or eliminate their reason for wanting to kill you. In any case, problem solved.
The Catalyst's idea of what the problem the Reapers are trying to prevent is is stupid, but it's ultimately irrelevant, save insofar as it can be exploited to end the Reaper threat in the case of the Synthesis ending.
ZevoxLast edited by Zevox; 2012-04-22 at 01:32 AM.
Toph Pony avatar by Dirtytabs. Thanks!
"When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty, I read them openly. When I became a man, I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -C.S. Lewis
-
2012-04-22, 02:29 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
No, it wouldn't have. You got onto the Citadel to destroy the reapers and it gives you that option. No amount of dialogue or recasting of meaning or any other BS would possibly stop Shepard from taking that option and destroying the reapers because he doesn't want to be part of Starkid's schemes. That's wasting billions of lives just to be willfully defiant. If the other options weren't in place, Shephard would sacrifice the Geth to save everyone else in a second, just like he sacrified 300,000 Batarians. And if you don't like all those other options, then destroy is right there, it does exactly what you've wanted all along and the loss of the Geth is a small price to pay to end the reaper threat permanently.
The only reason there's even a conversation is you have other options, but letting Earth burn because you're too proud to take destroy was never one of them.
That's the type of game you wanted? Count me out of that one. I would have been disgusted with this kind of tiered ending. It's boring, unoriginal, and it makes the entire reaper threat feel worthless: just play enough multiplayer and everything turns out happily ever after.
-
2012-04-22, 05:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Location
- Carlisle, Englund
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
"Three blokes walk into a pub. One of them is a little bit stupid, and the whole scene unfolds with a tedious inevitability." - Bill Bailey
Androgeus' 3 step guide to Doctor Who speculation:
Spoiler- Pick a random character
- State that person is The Rani
- goto 1
-
2012-04-22, 05:22 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
But that's not how the ending presents it. Shepard isn't given the option to Renegade interrupt and destroy the Reapers the moment it's revealed how. You've got to sit and listen to the Starkid and accept the premise that you've got to take one of the three options the Starkid allows you to, accept death, and like it. It's all on the Starkid's terms.
It's these elements of presentation that really kills it. It would still be bad providing those options right at the end without proper foreshadowing, but the way it's presented as forcing them down the throat of Shepard makes it so much worse.
-
2012-04-22, 05:26 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
True, they may be now, but there are posters asking "why do people think the galaxy is in a dark age / wasteland?" - I'm posting quotes to show that regardless of what the devs are saying now, or what an individual may draw themselves, the original intent of the writers was for the galaxy to be put into a "galactic dark age" and would be a "wasteland".
So yeah, when I say "the galaxy's probably in terrible shape and won't recover easily, if at all", I've got the (unfortunate) support of the guys who wrote the ending in the first place.
I think that's pretty strong evidence or reasoning to explain why people are upset at the endings, and think the way they do.
As is regardless of how happy Shepard is (ie blue babies), the war has already had a great cost, both on a galactic scale and a personal one. Earth is in ruins, as is Palaven, and who knows if Thessia will recover. Billions have died, and an unknown number of worlds and colonies are gone forever.
Shepard has seen close friends die, and may even have had to kill them herself. She's been beaten down for the entire ordeal since ME1, and I think it would be cold comfort that everyone finally started listening and playing nice only when the end was in sight.
So yeah, given the horrors and loss that Shepard has to go through even in a 'perfect' playthrough, I think a 'disney/happy/icecream' ending fulfils the dev's own plan of a "victorious and uplifting" end yet would, if scripted right, still be properly bittersweet.
And what harm is there in having the choice for that ending? Or the others? People played ME1 and 2 over and over again to get certain combinations in the promise that choices matter - seeing that reflected would only make the game better, even if you (or others) don't agree with every option.
(side note: the game completely ignores if you never recruited Garrus in ME1 - he still talks about fighting Saren and whatnot)
And the 'tiered' ending already exists in the game - low EMS and you can only get destroy and it will vapourise everything on the surface of the Earth, higher unlocks control, higher still unlocks synthesis. If your level isn't high enough your crew won't survive the crash. The catalyst's dialogue changes the higher your EMS is as well, with low scores being treated scornfully.
Play enough multiplayer and you can even get an ending where Shepard survives...Princess in the streets.
Princess in the sheets.
Don't touch me I'm royalty.
-
2012-04-22, 06:41 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Derby, UK
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Completely missed your point at the time. *skullpalm*
A thought on the ending occurred to me duringthat half-awake time between the waking and meditating world. (So treat this with that in mind...!) (Whatever you say about the ending, you cannot say it was not thought-provoking in a literal sense (i.e. it provokes thought), even if 95% of that thought is dedicated to undoing/explaining it...!)
What if Bioware's intention with the three endings (excrebly executed as it was) was in fact supposed to be instead of a choice between how the endings played out (which is what we got), an actually universe changing choice that changed the reality?
Bare with me second.
Cut off all the cutscenes at the end, as assume that instead of a 95% recycled thing, they eash had their own unique long, proper ending scene that explained everything, which would give them all, y'know, VALUE.
The first assumption is, that as this is the end of the game, after the last fight, and this is the payer's "reward", making the ultimate choice on what the ending should be. I.e. Shepard cannot make the wrong choice, and whatever you choose was the "right" choice.
So, if you choose the Synethesis or Control endings, Shepard dies yadda yadda yadda, (interestingly, in the latter, a close examination of the six at once shows the relay network does not have the full explosion on Control, indicating damage but not total destruction), and all that actually happened.
Ditto with the destroy ending... except perhaps the "easter egg" should have been that in the case of Shepard living - and ONLY that case, the indoctrination theory was true and Shepard wakes up back on Earth (and then does somesuch and wins etc.)
Thus the choice at the end of the game would actually be reality defining (and would mean that not all endings would be essentially the same weight, but would be pretty close - and it would give them as spent them time getting everything - and grinding the multiplayer, thank you for that Bioware - would potentially get something closer (if perhaps not actually) a "perfect" ending.)
Just a thought, probably untrue, but I thought I should raise the thought, as it was sort of interesting. (If not, it's probably something they sHOULD have done.)
I also second the motion that the galaxy - and you as a character - had already sacrifiied ENOUGH, for crying out loud (even with a perfect run, you still lost plenty of friends along the way) - and that further sacrfifices inflicted by the ending seemed frankly overblown, mean-spirited and/or smacked of Bioware taking their ball home with them.
Out of interest, why couldn't they have DLC set post-ME 3, but centering on the surviving squadmates (if Shep is dead) as protagonists, as they try to rebuild? Show of hands - who'd play that? I'd certainly go for playing as Garrus or Liara or Tali for a bit... (Someone has to pick up where Shep left off, seeing as Anderson is dead...)
Speaking of Anderson - way to check his pulse Shepard, and not try resuscitating him, or putting medigel on or something on him...
(Headcanon, Garrus and whoever shows up about a minute after you leave with a trauma team.)
Yes, I absolutely AM going to continue to subvert/destroy/retcon/override every single part of the ending that Bioware didn't explictly show (and that's show, not tell) until I twist it to my liking...Last edited by Aotrs Commander; 2012-04-22 at 06:42 AM.
-
2012-04-22, 08:59 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
I'm curious. How does it make the Reaper threat worthless? They already pretty much nuked the entire galaxy. Only by your efforts that they are stopped. Who are we to deny those that put in more effort so that they can have their happy ending?
Cliche endings =/= bad endings. Similarly, !art ending =/= good.
-
2012-04-22, 09:28 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
I'm actually pretty fine with tiered endings, but if they do it then it needs to be removed from dependency on multiplayer, so that personal choices actually matter. It should be possible (just hard) for both Renegades and Paragons to reach the best ending within the game and not have to fiddle around in multiplayer or make one super special playthrough that gets maximum points without putting any thought in your own decisions.
The one problem with it as I see is that there is no ending choice, which is particularly odd since choice is one of the defining aspects of the game.
There are aspects of the ending choice that I actually like (I know blasphemous), the idea that destroying Reaper tech would destroy all Reaper tech (including Geth and Mass Relays) I think is actually clever. If it was explained in a reasonable way, which it most definitely wasn't. There needed to be some closure on that big decision so that we see we're not dooming the galaxy, and having a creator say on Twitter "no everyone's alright guys honestly" does not count. Now that synthesis or control destroys the Mass Relays makes less sense and isn't explained at all, and that is utter crap.
Personally what I think would be interesting is: 1) Giving the Reaper's a decent purpose that makes sense and isn't countered by events in the game. The giant space wedgie of dark matter could work, but honestly I think it's a bit cliched. 2) Have the options be "destroy Reaper tech" which would put the galaxy back a good deal, but it will be shown that the races survive, just struggle, and that the Reaper's mission is a failure with Shepard hoping that the current races will come up with their own solution, and the other option be send the Reapers back to essentially skip a cycle. This leaves the galaxy much better off, and makes rebuilding after the war much easier. But the Reaper threat exists with the knowledge that if the current races do not solve the big problem the Reapers will be back to do their job.
Now mind you, this is just me putting about 10 minutes thought into it, so it would probably has some fundamental flaw I'm not noticing.
-
2012-04-22, 10:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Location
- Arizona
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
This is pretty much what I went into the game looking for, something like ME2 where, if you did well enough, you could accomplish the impossible. Now obviously you couldn't do this with the current EMS linked to multiplayer system, but that's a design issue, not one with the idea of tiered endings.
-
2012-04-22, 10:53 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
You're going to let the fact that you were injured and therefore not fast enough to shoot the thing without listening to a whiny brat influence your choice to save the galaxy?
You both make good points. Unlinking a tiered structure from multiplayer would improve it greatly. I think it would be especially terrible if the ending ended up as: "play our multiplayer and you'll get a Disney ending, otherwise everything is horrible!" It would also require nearly a wholesale re-write, which would probably please most everyone anyway.
I still think that a cliche ending might have been boring. If that's available then why give the players a choice at all? Everyone is going to pick the one where you shoot the giant laser, destroy all the reapers, and ascend triumphantly over the rubble.
You're also all going to shoot me for this, but I don't think that a purely triumphant ending with Shephard alive and happy was the story the writers wanted to tell. If we want to crucify the writing staff for cheap, shoddy execution, go right ahead. But if you want to crucify them for not writing the victorious ending that you wanted, my response is too bad, go write a fanfiction or make your own game.
-
2012-04-22, 11:10 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
That Shep dies doesn't bother me. Hell, from the not so subtle hints that the teams were saying leading up to the release of the game I knew that my Shepard would probably wind up dead (This will be the definitive end to the Shepard story, indeed).
I'm actually 100% fine that Shepard died. I would also be 100% fine if there was more direct chaos leading up to the conclusion of the Reaper threat actually. I would have been ok watching the Normandy be shot down in a desperate distraction maneuver, or seeing Wrex (or Wreav) obliterated as the krogan swarm downs a Reaper. Hell one of the best moments of the game was listening to Mordin sing for the last time. Seeing that the Reaper invasion is a terrible and deadly thing is actually totally fine for me. I know some people would be disappointed, but this was the Reaper invasion for goodness sake.
But the actual handling of the ending comes out of nowhere, makes no sense, and instead of being a reasonable downer ending that at least makes you feel as though something was accomplished, just left me confused and puzzled at what the hell just happened.
-
2012-04-22, 11:13 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
-
2012-04-22, 11:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Actually I had an idea that I thought was cool. Mostly that the last mission takes huge notes from the Suicide mission and Virmire.
What if on the last mission you travel through the different areas and you are confronted with several obstacles such as done in the Suicide mission where you have to pick the right squad mate for the job, and while a couple are on this small scale a few more are much larger. Such as: there's a Reaper in the way and you need a distraction, will you send: the Krogan ground forces, call a Turian bombing run, or send the Salarian Spec Ops. The Salarians would fail that direct assault while the Turians or Krogans would succeed. But if the Turians go on the strafe run they have to take ships away from the main fight meaning a large amount of Alliance casualties, while if you send the Krogan Wrex dies as he tears the thing apart. And at another point, like Virmire you have to send one of your crew knowingly to their death to complete the mission. They say their sad fairwells depending on who you picked and go down in a blaze of glory.
Anyway, I just thought that would have been cool.
-
2012-04-22, 11:33 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
You're assuming he new how, or even that it was a possibility. He's pretty clearly a shackled AI.
This is pure visceral emotion. You the player might feel better not having to listen to the rest of it, but what does Shepard gain by not hearing the thing out?
There's no functional difference between shooting the pipe before he tells you about Synthesis or after. You're still following his instructions. Which you have to do, because you have no idea how to activate the Crucible.
Because every Mass Effect so far has ended with a choice, and you wouldn't find out which choice was the "good" choice until the following game. You know which one FEELS better (e.g. making Anderson councilor, or destroying the Collector Base,) but there was always the chance that doing the other might actually have been better. (Udina has more political skill, TIM has the technical expertise to extract something of real value for the galaxy from the intact base.) It's shades of gray like these that made ME great. So the mere fact that ALL of us had one goal in our head for the first 95% of the game - destroy the Reapers - then we get to the end and realize that might actually be the worst option, is a testament to how nuanced this game can actually be.Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2012-04-22, 11:45 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Location
- Deep in the Black
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Well, no, because if I was in charge, the multiplayer probably wouldn't even exist, let alone have any influence on the ending. Things turn out happily ever after (for a value of happily ever after which includes 'years of rebuilding from the deaths of billions upon billions throughout the galaxy, the outright loss of several worlds and colonies, and mass devastation the infrastructure and military forces of the galaxy') because Shepard and the player put in lots of hard work to unite the galaxy, making hard choices and yes, sacrifices over the whole course of the game and the last two before it.
Again: the 'great cost' is already there. The threat has already ****ed up the galaxy. Even the most unambiguously happy ending wouldn't change that (bar 'space magic brings everyone back', of course). Getting a happily ever after doesn't make the threat worthless, any more than the suicide mission was devalued because everyone could come back alive, or Virmire was cheapened because Wrex could be talked down.Take my love, take my land
Take me where I cannot stand.
I don't care, I'm still free,
You can't take the sky from me.
Defender of
Don't make me trot out Smite Moron!
Thanks to Sneak for the Avatar.
-
2012-04-22, 12:09 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Location
- Rhode Island
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Which just goes to show how he stands out as a flawed element. He walks and talks as if he is infallible, and Shepard's reaction treats him as such. If he cannot access new ideas or possible solutions then his world view is myopic. Thus his assertions are flawed meaning his proposed solutions Synthesis and reaper cycle are just as flawed.
This is pure visceral emotion. You the player might feel better not having to listen to the rest of it, but what does Shepard gain by not hearing the thing out?
There's no functional difference between shooting the pipe before he tells you about Synthesis or after. You're still following his instructions. Which you have to do, because you have no idea how to activate the Crucible.
This goes back to player/PC identity. They have Shepard comeplete the mission as if Shepard has to choice or power at that point, where up until this point there was no hope or choice in the fight. Fight or Die was the mantra and what you adhered to. And then we get up there and its 3 crappy choices for the sake of having choices and a death because death=meaningful end.
Because every Mass Effect so far has ended with a choice, and you wouldn't find out which choice was the "good" choice until the following game. You know which one FEELS better (e.g. making Anderson councilor, or destroying the Collector Base,) but there was always the chance that doing the other might actually have been better. (Udina has more political skill, TIM has the technical expertise to extract something of real value for the galaxy from the intact base.) It's shades of gray like these that made ME great. So the mere fact that ALL of us had one goal in our head for the first 95% of the game - destroy the Reapers - then we get to the end and realize that might actually be the worst option, is a testament to how nuanced this game can actually be.
The fact that they threw a twist at the end is not the problem. The Twist of who Darth Revan is, Master Li's master plan, and the true fate of the Grey Wardens all are twists from their own games and they all work infinitely better than this one. Most of those twists occur before the final moments of the game allowing the player to react and adapt, they also had some subtle hints and foreshadowing to them. This one does not. In fact it is the exact opposite of a nuanced ending. The Catalyst has all the subtlety of a sledge hammer to the gut. And yes it colors everything that occurs after it.
Finally there is no next game to figure out what the true impact is. This is the finale, the conclusion of this story. Shepard was done after this no matter what. If there is an ME4 it shouldn't have to explain what happened in ME3 that just further proves the lack of conclusion and resolution presented in what was meant to be the final chapter of a trilogy.I'm not bad, I just aim that way ~my own comment on my Call of Duty abilities.
-
2012-04-22, 12:29 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
"The galaxy" is an amorphous blob that no player connects directly with. All those millions dead on Palaven and even Earth are meaningless statistics. That is no sacrifice.
As for your examples - Tuchanka would've been cheapened if you could save Mordin and Wrex though. All that meaningful sacrifice on Mordin's part would have been worthless because it would have been degraded from "someone else might have gotten it wrong" to "Shepard messed up somewhere." And getting off Rannoch with Legion stowed away in the AI core would have been just as cheap.
He may not be able to enact them, but he still understands/is aware of them. You walked into the Citadel thinking Destroy was the only option. And if he hadn't popped up to warn you, you'd have gone through with it and wiped out the Geth without realizing what you've done. Why are you mad at him for warning you?
Catharsis is irrational and more to the point, shortsighted when dealing with a device whose power can potentially reshape the entire galaxy. I say again that you lose nothing by learning what your options are and what they do. (Though I would have welcomed more elaboration on that second point.)
The crappiness of the choices is subjective. Properly explained, they could be anything but crappy.
Unless you value Shepard's life above saving the galaxy, in which case we probably won't see eye to eye.
No they aren't, not in the slightest. Where is the option to appoint Hackett as the human councilor? Where is the option to give the Collector Base to the Alliance instead of TIM?
The ending was rushed, I definitely agree. Which is why I hope the EC will alleviate that.
You can't know that for sure. Halo 3 was supposed to be the "last game in the trilogy" too.Last edited by Psyren; 2012-04-22 at 12:31 PM.
Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2012-04-22, 12:46 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2010
- Location
- United States
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
-
2012-04-22, 12:50 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Last edited by Psyren; 2012-04-22 at 01:02 PM.
Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2012-04-22, 01:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
I think I'm going to take a break from this thread for a while. The back and forth is wearing, and I can't tell what people are even arguing about anymore.
-
2012-04-22, 01:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2012-04-22, 01:25 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Location
- Deep in the Black
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Ashley/Kaidan dead on Virmire is not a meaningless statistic. Mordin dead on Tuchanka is not a meaningless statistic. Thane or Kirrahae dead to stop Kai Leng is not a meaningless statistic. Legion giving his life for his people is not a meaningless statistic. Finding Char's body and his last message to the Blue Rose of Illium is not a meaningless statistic. Shepard has been making great sacrifices throughout three games, and ME3 gives you plenty of ways to connect to the devastation and widespread death the Reapers have wrought. We are invested in the big picture, because we have seen countless little pictures that make it all up, and yes, we have seen the Reapers screwing with many of those little pictures, and expunging some of them. Besides, I think the reaction to the super-big-picture badness that is the destruction of the mass relays shows that we can very well connect to to the fate of the galaxy.
Narratively speaking, it does make sense for Shepard to perform a heroic sacrifice to ensure final victory. But it makes no less sense for him to survive and live happily ever after. And in a game series that has thrived on choice, and institutes a system for tracking how ready you are to take on the final battle, I don't see why players should be denied the chance to earn their happy ending.Take my love, take my land
Take me where I cannot stand.
I don't care, I'm still free,
You can't take the sky from me.
Defender of
Don't make me trot out Smite Moron!
Thanks to Sneak for the Avatar.
-
2012-04-22, 02:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- Poland
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
I feel that ME3 did a good job on making it feel like all the death and destruction brought to the galaxy by the Reapers isn't just a statistic. Apart from the death of Shepard's friends, which was mentioned, there's also all the refugees on the Citadel and their stories.
My FFRP characters. Avatar by Ashen Lilies. Sigatars by Ashen Lilies, Gullara and Purple Eagle.
Interested in the Nexus FFRP setting? See our Discord server.
-
2012-04-22, 02:54 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
I do - if there were a "golden" ending, all the others would be demoted to merely being failures, rather than difficult choices. It's like the suicide mission - sure you CAN get a bunch of squadmates killed, but doing so becomes attributed to incompetence on Shepard's part rather than any true impossibility of the mission itself. It's even become a joke among the players: "Jacob cheated on me?? Guess who's going in the vents" etc.
The Collectors and their base of operations went from being the scariest aliens in the galaxy to bumbling henchmen in the span of one game. I can't blame Bioware for wanting the Reapers, the cosmic horror big bads of the whole trilogy, to be afforded a bit more gravity than that.Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2012-04-22, 03:00 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2010
- Location
- United States
- Gender
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
But the other choices aren't necessarily not golden in that situation. What's being suggested is having a tiering of failure for each ending, not having one be innately better than the rest.
That was one of the flaws of the endings. They locked certain solutions to points, implying that they were more favorable. How is that not demoting non-synthesis endings to a failure?