Mass Effect 3 *SPOILERS THREAD* Page 37

  • Page

    of 41 First / Last

  • nickthegun 6 Jun 2012 19:33:00 58,777 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Like the game, it would seem you have two choices:

    Accept it at face value and agree they wrote a terrible final three minutes.

    Infer your own ending in a style of storytelling that was not present through the entirety of the trilogy.


    Fwiw, I absolutely do not agree that if you take it literally it makes them bad story tellers. It means they failed to tie it a neat bow and wrote a bad final section. 99% of the rest of the series was excellently told and it's a real shame that the last section has overshadowed that.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • SomaticSense 6 Jun 2012 19:41:11 7,897 posts
    Seen 20 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    ecureuil wrote:
    Them writing an indoctrination ending so they could then sell us the real ending as DLC seems more plausible.
    I've not lost any respect for them despite the slack ending, as the preceding narrative events of the game were of such high quality I feel there must be some reason (publisher pressure possibly) that they spacked it at the last minute. But I will lose all respect from them if they write in a fan developed Indocrination Theory and try and pass it off as something they intended all along.

    Then they can get fucked. I find the whole prospect of that insulting.

    Edited by SomaticSense at 19:41:46 06-06-2012
  • ecureuil 6 Jun 2012 19:44:14 76,465 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I would gladly accept that they wrote a terrible final three minutes if it was just bad. But it's not just bad, it so bad, so incoherent, that you cannot conceive anybody writing a story this way unless they did it deliberately.
  • SomaticSense 6 Jun 2012 19:49:07 7,897 posts
    Seen 20 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    In which case they can get fucked then. As come to think of it, intentionally doing it just to sell some DLC is far, far worse.

    Worse even than the shit Capcom try to pull at every opportunity.

    [edit - Actually, have they said whether it's going to be free or not yet?

    Edited by SomaticSense at 19:53:37 06-06-2012
  • ecureuil 6 Jun 2012 19:53:15 76,465 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    SomaticSense wrote:
    ecureuil wrote:
    Them writing an indoctrination ending so they could then sell us the real ending as DLC seems more plausible.
    I've not lost any respect for them despite the slack ending, as the preceding narrative events of the game were of such high quality I feel there must be some reason (publisher pressure possibly) that they spacked it at the last minute. But I will lose all respect from them if they write in a fan developed Indocrination Theory and try and pass it off as something they intended all along.

    Then they can get fucked. I find the whole prospect of that insulting.
    It's not a fan developed theory, Bioware admitted they included indoctrination on Shepard but they scrapped it.

    From The Final Hours app:

    "And even in November (2011) the gameplay team was still experimenting with an endgame sequence where players would suddenly lose control of Shepard's movements and fall under full Reaper control. (This sequence was ultimately dropped because the gameplay mechanic proved too troublesome to implement alongside dialogue choices.)"
    It's not just some convenient theory fans have made up because the normal ending sucks, Bioware have admitted this stuff was in the game and the evidence is clear to see. There's tons of it.

    What we're seeing may just be stuff they forgot to remove, or it may be that they never removed it at all.

    Edited by ecureuil at 19:54:04 06-06-2012
  • SomaticSense 6 Jun 2012 19:59:17 7,897 posts
    Seen 20 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    ecureuil wrote:It's not a fan developed theory, Bioware admitted they included indoctrination on Shepard but they scrapped it.

    From The Final Hours app:

    "And even in November (2011) the gameplay team was still experimenting with an endgame sequence where players would suddenly lose control of Shepard's movements and fall under full Reaper control. (This sequence was ultimately dropped because the gameplay mechanic proved too troublesome to implement alongside dialogue choices.)"
    It's not just some convenient theory fans have made up because the normal ending sucks, Bioware have admitted this stuff was in the game and the evidence is clear to see. There's tons of it.

    What we're seeing may just be stuff they forgot to remove, or it may be that they never removed it at all.
    Ah right. I'd completely forgotten about that.

    Didn't the writers say that they were pissed because had an ending already written that was ultimately vetoed? If that was the indoctrinatation ending that they wrote out, then it all ties together.

    Either way though, it could've or perhaps should've been dealt with far more elegantly than it was.
  • ecureuil 6 Jun 2012 20:04:05 76,465 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Nah, that was dark energy.
  • TOOTR 6 Jun 2012 20:24:49 9,493 posts
    Seen 17 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    TOOTR wrote:
    I don't see how people can take the ending at face value - it breaks the story's internal logic in too many places.
    The problem is that you kind of have to take it at face value as, until the final three minutes, the previous 70 hours of gamplay have presented themselves quite earnestly and have done absolutely nothing to suggest otherwise.


    heh we're in strong danger of a circular debate here because that is the exact reason why I didn't take it at face value. :)


    I mean, while I was experiencing the end yes I was taking it literally. I was moved by shepard's last sit down and chat and was thinking yeah I'm cool with shep dying and saving the universe.

    And though part of me secretly wanted her to have a last minute resurrection cos I love me a happy ending I do - better to have a poignant ending as it gives it more meaning.

    And some fairly off the wall cutscenes, which didn't really hang together well, culminating in some of my favourite chars ending up on some paradise planet - hey they are safe in some kind of Eden - a new beginning, full of promise. Ok. Thematically that kind of works.


    That was me taking it at face value. For about 5 minutes. And if I turned off the Xbox and loaded in the next game waiting in the wings and never thought about it again that would be that for me I guess.


    But it was bugging me at the time why the hell did the reapers leave a teleportation beam directly to the main control panels without it being massively guarded?

    It jarred massively with how well written the last 70 hours were and, as I sat back watching the credits and reflecting, I realized that it made no sense that the same team that seemed to be wiped out on earth were safe at the end.

    And the more I thought about it, and as other things didn't stack up, the more I couldn't take it at face value because it does not make sense to me, that after 70 hours, the last 3 minutes would not only have loose ends (which of itself is no bad thing) but such crazily internal-story-logic breaking ones.

    I don't wish to cause offense to anyone, but if after 70 hours of playing , people take those last 3 mins at face value and don't spend time reflecting on it and thinking there is more to it then that then that seems really weird to me :)

    But as you say - the other option is that it is a complete storytelling failure and I'm a delusional optimist. Which is also highly possible :)

    Edited by TOOTR at 20:32:17 06-06-2012

    Everybody should just calm down a little bit and have a nice cup of tea.

  • nickthegun 6 Jun 2012 20:34:32 58,777 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    ecureuil wrote:
    I would gladly accept that they wrote a terrible final three minutes if it was just bad. But it's not just bad, it so bad, so incoherent, that you cannot conceive anybody writing a story this way unless they did it deliberately.
    This is the problem. You, like the rest of the Internet, have overreacted to the ending so spectacularly you would rather believe that bioware have laid a trail of breadcrumbs unfeasably cryptic breadcrumbs rather than simply arse up the final chapter.

    Like some of the screen grabs in the blog you linked to. Is the bloom where Shepard wakes up from a dream and wakes up from being hit by a reaper laser being the same a huge clue or did the designers of a massively expensive game reuse an asset?

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • King_Edward 6 Jun 2012 20:39:14 11,454 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Just started this today. (i know this is the spoiler thread but I want be arsed to find the proper one)

    Shit so far, hope it gets better.
  • ecureuil 6 Jun 2012 20:50:04 76,465 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    ecureuil wrote:
    I would gladly accept that they wrote a terrible final three minutes if it was just bad. But it's not just bad, it so bad, so incoherent, that you cannot conceive anybody writing a story this way unless they did it deliberately.
    This is the problem. You, like the rest of the Internet, have overreacted to the ending so spectacularly you would rather believe that bioware have laid a trail of breadcrumbs unfeasably cryptic breadcrumbs rather than simply arse up the final chapter.

    Like some of the screen grabs in the blog you linked to. Is the bloom where Shepard wakes up from a dream and wakes up from being hit by a reaper laser being the same a huge clue or did the designers of a massively expensive game reuse an asset?
    Surely you must admit there's some very strong evidence for this. Especially since Bioware themselves claim to have removed this exact gameplay element from the game. If you take all the evidence together it makes a very compelling case.
  • nickthegun 6 Jun 2012 21:02:41 58,777 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Most of the stuff on that site can be explained as coincidence or bad game design as can most of the indoctrination theory.

    But, yes, it does make sense and there is circumstantial evidence to support it, it's just that to buy into it you have to disregard the previous 70 hours of straight storytelling. Not only that but you have to reach to get the answers and I dont mean going deeper into the story, I mean hacking out game assets and going by what some dude who works for bioware said, which is bullshit.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • JetSetWilly 6 Jun 2012 22:01:38 5,721 posts
    Seen 1 month ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Does anyone think that the Shepard rubble scene plus the storytelling star-gazer responding to the child's request for more about "The Shepard" with "OK, time for one more story" points rather heavily to a fourth game?
  • ecureuil 7 Jun 2012 00:35:47 76,465 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    Most of the stuff on that site can be explained as coincidence or bad game design as can most of the indoctrination theory.

    But, yes, it does make sense and there is circumstantial evidence to support it, it's just that to buy into it you have to disregard the previous 70 hours of straight storytelling. Not only that but you have to reach to get the answers and I dont mean going deeper into the story, I mean hacking out game assets and going by what some dude who works for bioware said, which is bullshit.
    Ok we're not going to agree here. I see your point but I'm giving Bioware the benefit of the doubt. I think the evidence is pretty solid when you take it all in to account, even without hacking the game files. And that dude who works for Bioware is Casey Hudson, the guy who wrote the story for the game. When he says they had an indoctrination storyline in the game as late as November 2011 we should take that as fact. The only discussion here should be whether they left the indoctrination story in the game in some form, or whether they removed it but left in the evidence.

    And you say it's straight storytelling, but indoctrination is a running theme of both games. The antagonist of the first game is indoctrinated, so is the Illusive Man in this game. It's happened to several characters throughout all three games, such as Matriarch Benezia from the first game and even the Rachnii. We find out in Mass Effect 3 that the Protheans failed because the Reapers indoctrinated several high ranking Prothean officials. And don't forget the third game did have three dream sequences.

    If Bioware decided to do a Shepard indoctrination storyline, how would they go about doing it? The whole point of indoctrination is that you don't know it's happening. I really think this theory is totally plausible.

    Since you're blaming bad design, what do you think the extended cut will contain?
  • anon_ 7 Jun 2012 04:19:54 211 posts
    Seen 3 weeks ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    ecureuil wrote:
    nickthegun wrote:
    to buy into it [indoctrination theory] you have to disregard the previous 70 hours of straight storytelling.
    you say it's straight storytelling, but indoctrination is a running theme of both games. The antagonist of the first game is indoctrinated, so is the Illusive Man in this game. It's happened to several characters throughout all three games, such as Matriarch Benezia from the first game and even the Rachnii. We find out in Mass Effect 3 that the Protheans failed because the Reapers indoctrinated several high ranking Prothean officials. And don't forget the third game did have three dream sequences.

    If Bioware decided to do a Shepard indoctrination storyline, how would they go about doing it? The whole point of indoctrination is that you don't know it's happening. I really think this theory is totally plausible.
    Exactly.

    And also, IF the indoctrination theory is correct (and I haven't necessarily bought into it 100%, just think it makes more sense than not at this point), then it was clearly part of the games' storytelling from the minute Shepherd sighted the kid playing with his toy right at the beginning of the game!

    The most important point, as Ecu said, is that the whole point of indoctrination is that you're not aware it's happening...until it's happened!
  • MadCaddy13 7 Jun 2012 07:56:02 1,856 posts
    Seen 1 week ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Isn't it a shame that this WHOLE thread is all about the ending?
  • PenguinJim 7 Jun 2012 12:48:34 5,754 posts
    Seen 14 minutes ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Well, it IS the Spoilers thread, and the ending would qualify as the most significant spoiler. :p

    I had JC Denton merge with Helios again, same as last century.
  • Zizoo 7 Jun 2012 12:57:50 8,092 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    The article that ecureuil linked is full of really interesting stuff that many people just didn't notice. Stuff like this is not coincidence:

    Before Shepard is hit


    After Shepard "woke up" from being hit by Harbinger's laser


    That's just one example of many that did not require looking at game files.
  • Petrarch 7 Jun 2012 13:10:06 3,425 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    While there is stuff that appears after the beam hits, Shepard is buggered up quite badly at this point so you could have an argument that he/she isn't indocrinated at all and is simply hallucinating.

    I find it rather difficult to believe not one person at Bioware looked at that ending and thought "Wait, this is a bit shit really isn't it?" and I'm leaning more towards the thought that they intended to sell the real ending via DLC all along but they've been caught out and are scrambling for damage control.

    Edited by Petrarch at 13:12:12 07-06-2012
  • Zizoo 7 Jun 2012 13:18:57 8,092 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    But it isn't just any old stuff... It's trees similar to those that appear in his dreams/visions. As I said, that's just one example.

    I'm not claiming to know exactly what is going on, just that it's interesting. I could be wrong. I lean towards leaving it open to interpretation rather than overanalyzing, but the author of the article just went into great detail and it's pretty cool to see what could possibly be Bioware's intention, rather than it just being them fucking up the ending.
  • King_Edward 19 Jun 2012 19:34:33 11,454 posts
    Seen 3 months ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    So on Tuchanka, why can't I cure the genophage, then just lie to the Salarians?
  • nickthegun 19 Jun 2012 19:40:51 58,777 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Uh.... yeah i didnt cure it... honest

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    He totally called it

  • Kanjin 20 Jun 2012 08:36:00 1,051 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Presumably you wouldn't be able to prove it - they did invent it. Whereas the krogan can be suckered.
  • Widge Moderator 20 Jun 2012 20:28:41 13,241 posts
    Seen 11 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    One thing I was reading was disappointment that the paths converge on one ending, pretty much, although I don't have a problem with that... I feel like there were many paths taken to get to a certain point.

    _ _ _

    www.unpaused.co.uk - electronic noise adjective salad

  • Petrarch 26 Jun 2012 13:27:38 3,425 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Ok, so now we've got the extended cut and I just took a look at the new destroy ending - I'm convinced at this point they intended to try and sell this one to us as it somewhat changes the outcome of things. I'm going to spoiler these into separate paras even though we're in the spoiler thread.

    The Normandy's relay jump is explained by Hackett ordering all ships to withdraw and retreat before the crucible is fired. It does not however completely answer why the Normandy went through the relay as a cutscene later shows a number of surviving ships returning to Earth passing the Charon relay which is cracked in half.

    The voice over by Hackett sets a far more optimistic tone for the future and he mentions that while it will take some time, all that was lost can be rebuilt, with it strongly implied that this includes both the mass relays (which Hackett says are heavily damaged) and the Citadel itself. Several scenes are shown of other races picking up the pieces and starting the road to recovery.

    The fate of the Normandy (and the crew) is completely different. The ship is damaged during the jump but not as extensively and still crashes on the unknown planet and a memorial scene takes place as everyone believes Shepard is dead - but the game changer is the fact that the crew repairs the Normandy and it's seen afterwards lifting off and returning to orbit, which gives the implication that it will/did eventually make it back to Alliance forces or Earth itself.

    The scene with the Stargazer is unchanged.

    The extended cut makes things feel and look a lot more sensible from the ending I've seen so far and overlooking what I said at first, Bioware really dropped the ball and could have saved themselves a hell of a lot of trouble by just including this from the very beginning.

    Edited by Petrarch at 13:31:05 26-06-2012
  • Latin 26 Jun 2012 13:58:11 3,590 posts
    Seen 12 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Just seen the control ending and will spoiler as Petrarch has:

    As with the destroy ending, everything is much more optimistic, there's the same reason why Joker and the Normandy fly off, you get to see the different races celebrating as the reapers stop attacking, there's extended footage of the battles. The normandy crashes but again, you see it taking off and flying away from the planet. There's a scene with the crew remembering shepard and Anderson. Additionally, instead of a Hacket voiceover, you get one from Shepard as the reaper overlord/new strachild or whatever, talking about remebering the sacrifices and protecting the future of those remaining. There are scenes of reapers pulling the mass relays together and helping rebuilding cities. Basically shepard guaranteeing the peace because he still remembers the sacrfices of his mates etc.
  • Nanocrystal 26 Jun 2012 14:03:32 991 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    Sounds like an improvement I guess. Are the rumors that you get a fourth (bad) ending if you shoot the star child bullshit?
  • Yossarian 26 Jun 2012 14:15:37 8,401 posts
    Seen 9 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Doesn't sound like they address the underlying problems with the plot and ending at all, but at least the ending cutscenes make more sense now.
  • Latin 26 Jun 2012 14:20:43 3,590 posts
    Seen 12 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    @nanocrystal Don't remember an option for that

    @Yossarian, I think they've said that the plot etc would always stay the same... There's still the same conversation with the illusive man and the same nonsensical schlock with starchild... It's just the cut scenes that have been fleshed out (a lot)
  • Petrarch 26 Jun 2012 14:27:35 3,425 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Quite true, everything that was there before is still intact, but there's a lot more meat to the ending now with the expanded scenes so it doesn't come across as such a disjointed mess and gives a peak at what happens to the galaxy at large rather than just leaving things at a dead end.
  • Page

    of 41 First / Last

Log in or register to reply