Poll: Is Bastion's ending better than Mass Effect 3's?

[gibboss28]

What kind of crazy question is that?

"Hey, which did you enjoy more, sensual sex with a gorgeous young lady or being repeatedly kicked in the ballsack by a rabid mule?"

Which did you go for?

Because while that kicked in the ballsack may have been painful, the chick probably had crabs, just sayin' shes a bit easy.

 

[Frission]

I think what's he trying to say was: Which was the better ending, while still using the same mechanics. Both games ended with the ending-o-mastic. Why then did Bastion then have a better ending. How did Bastion use the dreaded ending-o-matic in a way everyone loved.

What the ****.... What the ACTUAL ****.... Wow.

Okay. Normally people try to compare games that are at least vaguely similar. But an indie hack-n-slash with a cel-shaded art style being pressed up against a realistic and logical science fiction cover shooter RPG? Are you THAT bitter over ME3's ending you need to compare it to BASTION? What's next? We're going to compare it with the ending to Metroid Prime because we could choose how much we compl... Actually, that one works as far as the GR is concerned. While that was accidental, this is like comparing the ending of Super Mario Bros with Mass Effect 3.

Why? Because it wasn't JUST the choice. Bastion didn't have choices throughout the game, let alone ones that affected the entire story. Mass Effect had an ENTIRE SERIES to close on. It's not the same. At all.

I know you're new, but stick to comparing games that are similar. Like, if you wanted to compare The Witcher 2 (still not really...) to Mass Effect 3, I'd engage.

Also, should make the poll equate to the question your thread is asking.

I would agree with you if he was comparing say Dragon Age endings with those of Bastion. Dragon age's ending is text based and has a separate text for each choice or location.

There's one snag though. The problem is both games, used the same ending mechanic. You chose between separate choices which were ambiguous in the way they would play out, each of which was backed by an ideology. In essence it's the same thing. Even superficially, they resemble each other somewhat.

Those important choices Mass Effect touted didn't matter either way. The developers of Mass Effect chose to ignore the choices the player may have made so it can't be protected by "but all these choices!". Bastion could have chosen to limit the choices by which pets survived or collected or whether you saved Zulf or not. ME could have chosen to make whether the geth or quarians made a treaty matter. It didn't.


Even by ignoring the choices ME's ending ending could still have been great. The second reason ME ending was bad was that they poorly implemented the ending-o-matic. It's a confused mess because a new conflict or "question" is introduced, when the player already had one. Bastion understood it's own themes perfectly, whereas Mass Effect chose at the last second to change the conflict.

That's my own personal take on it.

Edit: Simplified non rambling version:

The reason ME sucked while Bastion did not was that Bastion used the pick your ending correctly, while ME did not. In that respect they resemble a bit. The game play or location of the game themselves don't matter.

 

[Frission]

Yes, but an ending comes from the whole product. You can't compare the endings of entirely different games because they're entirely different games with different stories and goals. An ending is only as good as the goal it's trying to achieve.

Yes, because I feel different senses of accomplishment. Mass Effect 3, you feel achieved (or rather were supposed to, if you didn't like the ending) because you finished your life as Commander Shepard. Which is the EXACT polar opposite of Super Mario Bros which makes you feel achieved because you survived (or rather survived the war of attrition) and saved the princess.

Doesn't matter. You made a new person move with the poll sir Experience teaches. I can watch people speak a different language all day, doesn't mean I'm going to pick it up.

Thank you.

But surely the goal, or at least the main goal, of any good ending is to provide a satisfactory conclusion to what has come before?

Or to leave ambiguity or a meaningful message. And again, what makes the ending satisfactory is the whole product before. You can't compare one without including the other.

That's a good point in the way that it perfectly explains what went wrong. How are you going to make ME any good with the way you're ending it? You can't rip off the ending from one game to another and expect it to mesh.

You could if you really wanted do the same with Bastion, nothings stopping you from saving and choosing the 'other' ending. That said what I think separates Bastion from Deus Ex in that regard is the way in which the game built up to that moment. In Deus Ex, as you point out, it just sorta ends and these endings are thrown at you. It's not terrible, I really did like the new Deus Ex game, but it was pretty abrupt and a bit disappointing if not soul-crushingly so. In Bastion however you knew the entire game that things were building up to something and towards the end when everything started to escalate there was a real sense of impending... something. Anticipation I suppose. There was a great sense of anticipation towards this moment you'd realized was coming.

The choices given also made a lot of sense in the context of the story and setting. Neither of them left me scratching my head, I knew immediately what was being presented to me and both options were logical within the story. That both options also packed one hell of an emotional punch was just added gravy.

Hell just talking about it has made me start playing the Bastion credits theme. So good! My favourite song from gaming in years.

Bastion built up for the ending, while ME did not. Bastion was always very vague about details. It could be applied to many situations, so the player could provide the context where there was holes.

 

[The_Lost_King]

So without putting spoilers I guess for the people who haven't beat bastion is it like a good/evil choice or more like a both aren't necessarily "good" or "evil" just 2 different choices

The latter; two different choices.

though to me it is kinda selfish and selfless. You really can't compare the 2. The only similarity is the choice. It doesn't make sense to compare them.

 

[Loop Stricken]

Bastion's ending was massively, massively massively, MASSIVELY superior to that of ME3.

 

[ultrachicken]

What the ****.... What the ACTUAL ****.... Wow.

Okay. Normally people try to compare games that are at least vaguely similar. But an indie hack-n-slash with a cel-shaded art style being pressed up against a realistic and logical science fiction cover shooter RPG? Are you THAT bitter over ME3's ending you need to compare it to BASTION? What's next? We're going to compare it with the ending to Metroid Prime because we could choose how much we compl... Actually, that one works as far as the GR is concerned. While that was accidental, this is like comparing the ending of Super Mario Bros with Mass Effect 3.

Why? Because it wasn't JUST the choice. Bastion didn't have choices throughout the game, let alone ones that affected the entire story. Mass Effect had an ENTIRE SERIES to close on. It's not the same. At all.

I know you're new, but stick to comparing games that are similar. Like, if you wanted to compare The Witcher 2 (still not really...) to Mass Effect 3, I'd engage.

Also, should make the poll equate to the question your thread is asking.

I agree with this fully. However, I will indulge a bit in discussion.

Mass Effect has been discussed to death and I'm not going to say anything here that hasn't already been said. So I'm going to talk about Bastion.

Spoiler: Bastion Spoilers

The problem with Bastion's choice is that one if them is no choice at all. The first option has you go explore the remainder of the world, which comes across as pretty depressing, but it's a valid option. The "rewind the clock" option just sets time back to before the apocalypse, but changes none of the circumstances leading up to it. Because nothing has changed, there is no reason for things to turn out any differently, so the "rewind the clock" option just causes another apocalypse and sends you right back to that decision point. Why is that a good idea?

I'm not going to compare the endings, but Bastion's was no paragon of writing.

 

[Sexy Devil]

I feel like you just threw ME3 in the title just to get some anger clicks. Judging by me being in here, it worked. Anyway yes, Bastion has a way better ending which is thematically consistent with the rest of the game.

 

[Easton Dark]

No doubt people would like Bastion's more. The real question is:

Spoiler: Bastion spoiler

Who saved Zulf?

I couldn't not. Double negative woo. And then the ending cutscene with him and the squirt made me squee in the adorableness. That alone made the ending better.

 

[Tornik]

I feel like you just threw ME3 in the title just to get some anger clicks. Judging by me being in here, it worked. Anyway yes, Bastion has a way better ending which is thematically consistent with the rest of the game.

No, it was and is a genuine question. Perhaps I could have implemented it a bit better, but it's a genuine question. Few people have been as big a fan as I have of the Mass Effect series and the fact that I enjoyed Bastion's ending significantly more was something of a shock to me, and I wanted to get some other opinions.

 

[Doom-Slayer]

though to me it is kinda selfish and selfless. You really can't compare the 2. The only similarity is the choice. It doesn't make sense to compare them.

Id kind of disagree. It was basically take a risk and potentially save everyone, BUT potentially make everyone go through the same process all over again(and the NPCS had fairly miserable lives..). Or leave with all the people you have and go somewhere else.

The way the first option was worded made it sound like there was almost absolutely no chance of things changing, so I picked the second ending where there was an actual chance for change.

No doubt people would like Bastion's more. The real question is:

Spoiler: Bastion spoiler

Who saved Zulf?

I couldn't not. Double negative woo. And then the ending cutscene with him and the squirt made me squee in the adorableness. That alone made the ending better.

Ya I did as well, he was such an awesome character. Despite being a dick you could totally understand him so I forgave him.

 

[Aprilgold]

No doubt people would like Bastion's more. The real question is:

Spoiler: Bastion spoiler

Who saved Zulf?

I couldn't not. Double negative woo. And then the ending cutscene with him and the squirt made me squee in the adorableness. That alone made the ending better.

I did, that poor fucking sob was beat into the looney bin by one of his closest people dying, and as such wanted only to hurt those who hurt him so very much. I saved that poor sob because theres no way I could leave him to bleed out after trying so hard to achieve a happy end.

-------- -------------- --------------- -------------- ------------ ------------ -------- ---------- ------------------ ----------------- -------------- ------------ ---------- --------

Bastion's choices are not two dimensial and fit with the whole game. None of the choices you make are inherently good or bad and as such you are not scarred for being a ruthless killer nor inhibited by being a kind soul, you are only you. Mass Effect is like choosing between saving the earth or nuking the planet full of babies and kittens while Bastion is like choosing a burger from McDonalds or from Burger King, your not punished or inherently bad for choosing Burger King.

What I'm saying is that the choices in Mass Effect are straight and point blank with X is good Y is bad, in Bastion X and Y are not bad nor good, just choices.

 

[Hagi]

What the ****.... What the ACTUAL ****.... Wow.

Okay. Normally people try to compare games that are at least vaguely similar. But an indie hack-n-slash with a cel-shaded art style being pressed up against a realistic and logical science fiction cover shooter RPG? Are you THAT bitter over ME3's ending you need to compare it to BASTION? What's next? We're going to compare it with the ending to Metroid Prime because we could choose how much we compl... Actually, that one works as far as the GR is concerned. While that was accidental, this is like comparing the ending of Super Mario Bros with Mass Effect 3.

Why? Because it wasn't JUST the choice. Bastion didn't have choices throughout the game, let alone ones that affected the entire story. Mass Effect had an ENTIRE SERIES to close on. It's not the same. At all.

I know you're new, but stick to comparing games that are similar. Like, if you wanted to compare The Witcher 2 (still not really...) to Mass Effect 3, I'd engage.

Also, should make the poll equate to the question your thread is asking.

Of course you can compare the two. It's easy as can be.

You take the feeling you had after being done with one game and compare it to the feeling you had after being done with another game.

It's a totally subjective comparison, but guess what the OP is asking for?

If that's not scientific enough for you then I direct you to the economic concept of opportunity cost [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost]. Using that we can even compare Mass Effect 3's ending to eating at a restaurant!

You can literally compare almost anything to almost everything else! And guess what our brains are constantly doing? With every choice we make we're comparing all kinds of crazy shit!

 

[Chairman Miaow]

Spoiler: Bastion Spoilers

The problem with Bastion's choice is that one if them is no choice at all. The first option has you go explore the remainder of the world, which comes across as pretty depressing, but it's a valid option. The "rewind the clock" option just sets time back to before the apocalypse, but changes none of the circumstances leading up to it. Because nothing has changed, there is no reason for things to turn out any differently, so the "rewind the clock" option just causes another apocalypse and sends you right back to that decision point. Why is that a good idea?

I'm not going to compare the endings, but Bastion's was no paragon of writing.

Spoiler: more spoilers

It was supposed to be unclear whether or not it would actually change anything until after you did it. The chance of fixing everything vs. starting anew.

 

[ultrachicken]

Spoiler: Bastion Spoilers

The problem with Bastion's choice is that one if them is no choice at all. The first option has you go explore the remainder of the world, which comes across as pretty depressing, but it's a valid option. The "rewind the clock" option just sets time back to before the apocalypse, but changes none of the circumstances leading up to it. Because nothing has changed, there is no reason for things to turn out any differently, so the "rewind the clock" option just causes another apocalypse and sends you right back to that decision point. Why is that a good idea?

I'm not going to compare the endings, but Bastion's was no paragon of writing.

Spoiler: more spoilers

It was supposed to be unclear whether or not it would actually change anything until after you did it. The chance of fixing everything vs. starting anew.

Spoiler

I definitely got that vibe, but to me, there wasn't really a question that it would happen again. The set of circumstances are guaranteed to be the same, so there's no reason for things to work out any differently. But, let's say there is even the possibility that the calamity won't occur when it did; it's still just been postponed. Caelondia is completely isolated and extremely paranoid about what the Ura are up to. Because Caelondia is a state under very efficient martial law and has been for a while, social movements are totally suppressed, destroying any hope of necessary, profound change occurring before some fear-ridden idiot causes the calamity.

 

[Chairman Miaow]

Spoiler: Bastion Spoilers

The problem with Bastion's choice is that one if them is no choice at all. The first option has you go explore the remainder of the world, which comes across as pretty depressing, but it's a valid option. The "rewind the clock" option just sets time back to before the apocalypse, but changes none of the circumstances leading up to it. Because nothing has changed, there is no reason for things to turn out any differently, so the "rewind the clock" option just causes another apocalypse and sends you right back to that decision point. Why is that a good idea?

I'm not going to compare the endings, but Bastion's was no paragon of writing.

Spoiler: more spoilers

It was supposed to be unclear whether or not it would actually change anything until after you did it. The chance of fixing everything vs. starting anew.

Spoiler

I definitely got that vibe, but to me, there wasn't really a question that it would happen again. The set of circumstances are guaranteed to be the same, so there's no reason for things to work out any differently. But, let's say there is even the possibility that the calamity won't occur when it did; it's still just been postponed. Caelondia is completely isolated and extremely paranoid about what the Ura are up to. Because Caelondia is a state under very efficient martial law and has been for a while, social movements are totally suppressed, destroying any hope of necessary, profound change occurring before some fear-ridden idiot causes the calamity.

Spoiler

Huh. This is actually quite funny. You are basically making the same decision as the catalyst. Dooming humanity to stop it from dooming itself. I mean, I get what you are saying, but if you don't take that chance, you know that you are it, the end of the line, after you, there is nobody else. The Bastion was meant to change things, it just hadn't been tested.

 

[ultrachicken]

Spoiler: Bastion Spoilers

The problem with Bastion's choice is that one if them is no choice at all. The first option has you go explore the remainder of the world, which comes across as pretty depressing, but it's a valid option. The "rewind the clock" option just sets time back to before the apocalypse, but changes none of the circumstances leading up to it. Because nothing has changed, there is no reason for things to turn out any differently, so the "rewind the clock" option just causes another apocalypse and sends you right back to that decision point. Why is that a good idea?

I'm not going to compare the endings, but Bastion's was no paragon of writing.

Spoiler: more spoilers

It was supposed to be unclear whether or not it would actually change anything until after you did it. The chance of fixing everything vs. starting anew.

Spoiler

I definitely got that vibe, but to me, there wasn't really a question that it would happen again. The set of circumstances are guaranteed to be the same, so there's no reason for things to work out any differently. But, let's say there is even the possibility that the calamity won't occur when it did; it's still just been postponed. Caelondia is completely isolated and extremely paranoid about what the Ura are up to. Because Caelondia is a state under very efficient martial law and has been for a while, social movements are totally suppressed, destroying any hope of necessary, profound change occurring before some fear-ridden idiot causes the calamity.

Spoiler

Huh. This is actually quite funny. You are basically making the same decision as the catalyst. Dooming humanity to stop it from dooming itself. I mean, I get what you are saying, but if you don't take that chance, you know that you are it, the end of the line, after you, there is nobody else. The Bastion was meant to change things, it just hadn't been tested.

Spoiler

I understand why you'd see it that way, and I guess in a way I'd be stopping humanity from dooming itself, but that's not really the point. The point is that Caelondia is guaranteed to cause the calamity again, so the choice boils down to:

1) Wander the post apocalyptic world
2) Return to decision point

But, let's say there is a chance that rewinding time will allow a chance for Caelondia to stop being such massive dicks and not use the catalyst. What is the point of the first choice? The in-game justification for it is that the girl (I forget her name) seems to think she wants to just wander the flying landscape forever with the same two people, but the old man (I forget his name) doesn't. But, the proposed existence seems pretty miserable. Even if you REALLY like your companions, all there is to do is look at the floating rocks and perhaps go on a murder-spree. I would think all those involved would get sick of that at some point. But, regardless, the happiness of three people does not take precedent over humanity's, and everything else's, survival.
So, assuming it's possible the calamity won't happen again, the choice boils down to:

1) Wander the post apocalyptic world with company who will probably be sick of it very quickly
2) Allow opportunity for humanity to survive

Either way, not much of a decision, in my mind.

 

[Chairman Miaow]

Spoiler: Bastion Spoilers

The problem with Bastion's choice is that one if them is no choice at all. The first option has you go explore the remainder of the world, which comes across as pretty depressing, but it's a valid option. The "rewind the clock" option just sets time back to before the apocalypse, but changes none of the circumstances leading up to it. Because nothing has changed, there is no reason for things to turn out any differently, so the "rewind the clock" option just causes another apocalypse and sends you right back to that decision point. Why is that a good idea?

I'm not going to compare the endings, but Bastion's was no paragon of writing.

Spoiler: more spoilers

It was supposed to be unclear whether or not it would actually change anything until after you did it. The chance of fixing everything vs. starting anew.

Spoiler

I definitely got that vibe, but to me, there wasn't really a question that it would happen again. The set of circumstances are guaranteed to be the same, so there's no reason for things to work out any differently. But, let's say there is even the possibility that the calamity won't occur when it did; it's still just been postponed. Caelondia is completely isolated and extremely paranoid about what the Ura are up to. Because Caelondia is a state under very efficient martial law and has been for a while, social movements are totally suppressed, destroying any hope of necessary, profound change occurring before some fear-ridden idiot causes the calamity.

Spoiler

Huh. This is actually quite funny. You are basically making the same decision as the catalyst. Dooming humanity to stop it from dooming itself. I mean, I get what you are saying, but if you don't take that chance, you know that you are it, the end of the line, after you, there is nobody else. The Bastion was meant to change things, it just hadn't been tested.

Spoiler

I understand why you'd see it that way, and I guess in a way I'd be stopping humanity from dooming itself, but that's not really the point. The point is that Caelondia is guaranteed to cause the calamity again, so the choice boils down to:

1) Wander the post apocalyptic world
2) Return to decision point

But, let's say there is a chance that rewinding time will allow a chance for Caelondia to stop being such massive dicks and not use the catalyst. What is the point of the first choice? The in-game justification for it is that the girl (I forget her name) seems to think she wants to just wander the flying landscape forever with the same two people, but the old man (I forget his name) doesn't. But, the proposed existence seems pretty miserable. Even if you REALLY like your companions, all there is to do is look at the floating rocks and perhaps go on a murder-spree. I would think all those involved would get sick of that at some point. But, regardless, the happiness of three people does not take precedent over humanity's, and everything else's, survival.
So, assuming it's possible the calamity won't happen again, the choice boils down to:

1) Wander the post apocalyptic world with company who will probably be sick of it very quickly
2) Allow opportunity for humanity to survive

Either way, not much of a decision, in my mind.

Spoiler

It isn't supposed to just be wandering the world though is it? The Bastion is meant to take you to a new land. At least, that's what I remember.