45 réponses à ce sujet

[A Great Biotic Wind]

Eterna5 wrote...

AlphaJarmel wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

 Honestly, I'd rather have the endings we have now instead of "WE ARE REAPERS AND WE LIKE TO DO GENOCIDE!!  btw, we're also the good guys!" 

Honestly it would tie much more into the necessary evil than the current endings do.  The current endings talk about Singularity which is a well known and well discussed topic.  Singularity is easily avoidable and shown in the series while Dark Energy ripping apart the galaxy is a much more complicated and harder issue to solve.

 But then all of Mass Effect one doesn't make sense, why the Hell would Sovereign attack the Citadel? How does that stop the Dark matter? How does detroying all sentient life stop the dark matter? It leaves a lot of plot holes. I'd say even more than the current endings do. 

It could be that he was planning on reactivating the Citadel Relay.

[Carmen_Willow]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

This was the initial ending for ME3:

Can I just go on record saying that the original plan for ME3 was pretty much identical to this? Except instead of working to reposition galaxies, the Reapers' goal was to find a way to stop the spread of Dark Energy which would eventually consume everything. That's why there was so much foreshadowing about Dark Energy on Haestom in ME2.

The Reapers as a whole were 'nations' of people who had fused together in the most horrific way possible to help find a way to stop the spread of the Dark Energy. The real reason for the Human Reaper was supposed to be the Reapers saving throw because they had run out of time. Humanity in Mass Effect is supposedly unique because of it's genetic diversity (I know, I know) and represented the universe's best chance at stopping Dark Energy's spread.

The original final choice was going to be "Kill the Reapers and put your faith in the races of the galaxy in finding another way to stop the spread with what little time is left" or "Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."

It's completely different now, though. All the Dark Energy foreshadowing in ME2 doesn't really go anywhere anymore if I remember right.

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

Much better than the current rendition.

This would have been so much better. It would have taken the Reapers from a bwa-ha-ha villain into a whole different level.  It would have made Shepard's sacrifice much more important.  It would have been more like Arthur C. Clark's "Childhood's End," a book that made me cry, but in a good way. Why didn't they write this game?  Did they think we were too stupid to get it?  That's really too bad!  Now I'm even more bummed out.

[SaltyWaffles-PD]

Eterna5 wrote...

Nobody would complain about the endings if the Mass relays didn't blow up.

Completely wrong, but that particular detail was the most severe of the endings--but mainly in how it affects everything else, not just itself.

[Eterna]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

 But then all of Mass Effect one doesn't make sense, why the Hell would Sovereign attack the Citadel? How does that stop the Dark matter? How does detroying all sentient life stop the dark matter? It leaves a lot of plot holes. I'd say even more than the current endings do. 

It seems like the Reapers would have been slowing the speed of the dark energy.  In ME2 it's implied that they have some sort of control over it.  Sovereign would have attacked the Citadel in order to let the Reapers in so they could create a new 'special' human Reaper that could stop the Dark Energy spread.  As for why they destroy sentient life, it's explained that they create Reapers out of past species that help with the Dark Energy issue.

 But then why waste so many on husks? Why attack the citadel instead of earth?

[Someone With Mass]

I'd really like someone from BW step up and tell us how they thought the current ending was better than this, beyond the thought that it'd make the Reapers seem like a necessary evil, because the current endings are doing that too, only in a much, MUCH worse way.

[MandatoryDenial1]

Eterna5 wrote...


 But then why waste so many on husks? Why attack the citadel instead of earth?

My guess is that such a massive force needs smaller footsoldiers for the same reason that modern generals contend that air power alone can never win a war.

[Mr. Big Pimpin]

MandatoryDenial1 wrote...

I was told that this ending wasn't used because essentially they didn't want to turn the reapers into what was essentially good guys.  They wanted to keep them "bad."

Moral greyness. Can't have that.

Much as I don't like Cerberus, I don't like how they were portrayed in ME3 either. Cartoonishly evil when they shouldn't have been.

[hismastersvoice]

Eterna5 wrote...

 But then why waste so many on husks? Why attack the citadel instead of earth?

Becasue the Reapers wanted to start the invasion through the Citadel relay and they would have swept the galaxy clean of advanced life anyway in preperation for the next cycle. I do believe the first game made it pretty clear.

[bpzrn]

Who ever wrote and approved this ending screwed an excelent game, its too bad. We really should be able to have a Dark "bad" / sad ending and a somewhat happy one too, this one STINKS and puts a black mark on this game BW and EA as a last impression.

I know I wont order another BW game with out reading forums first, had I known this was the end I would have been happy stopping at ME2

[tangalin]

Eterna5 wrote...

AlphaJarmel wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

 Honestly, I'd rather have the endings we have now instead of "WE ARE REAPERS AND WE LIKE TO DO GENOCIDE!!  btw, we're also the good guys!" 

Honestly it would tie much more into the necessary evil than the current endings do.  The current endings talk about Singularity which is a well known and well discussed topic.  Singularity is easily avoidable and shown in the series while Dark Energy ripping apart the galaxy is a much more complicated and harder issue to solve.

 But then all of Mass Effect one doesn't make sense, why the Hell would Sovereign attack the Citadel? How does that stop the Dark matter? How does detroying all sentient life stop the dark matter? It leaves a lot of plot holes. I'd say even more than the current endings do. 

Sovereign attacked the citadel to control its relay and let the other reapers through, not to destroy it. It makes perfect sense. Let other reapers through, continue on path to create new reapers to help solve dark energy problem.

[MandatoryDenial1]

Mr. Big Pimpin wrote...

Moral greyness. Can't have that.

Much as I don't like Cerberus, I don't like how they were portrayed in ME3 either. Cartoonishly evil when they shouldn't have been.

When I read the quote the former Bioware guy stated that they were being cricitized as redeeming too many of the enemies and evidentally someone thought it was a legit criticism.  In ME1 it was the rachni and korgan and in two it was cerebrus and the geth.  I don't buy it but that was what was stated.


There were other problems with the theory as I understood it.  Some other arguements against it that I read was:

1.  The reapers who got their intelligence by absorbing other races would somehow need the help of a race that wasn't by any means anything more than a new comer to galactic interstellar travel?  This would be too far fetched and had too many leaps of logic.

2.  The best way to halt the spread of "dark energy" was to reap the races after they discovered space flight and created much more dark energy didn't seem like a logical plan of action on behalf of the reapers.  ( I don't understand this one either but that is what was advanced according to the poster).

Modifié par MandatoryDenial1, 09 mars 2012 - 12:59 .

[Mx_CN3]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

 But then all of Mass Effect one doesn't make sense, why the Hell would Sovereign attack the Citadel? How does that stop the Dark matter? How does detroying all sentient life stop the dark matter? It leaves a lot of plot holes. I'd say even more than the current endings do. 

It seems like the Reapers would have been slowing the speed of the dark energy.  In ME2 it's implied that they have some sort of control over it.  Sovereign would have attacked the Citadel in order to let the Reapers in so they could create a new 'special' human Reaper that could stop the Dark Energy spread.  As for why they destroy sentient life, it's explained that they create Reapers out of past species that help with the Dark Energy issue.

Heck I could explain that it's so desperate this cycle is mainly because they couldn't create Reapers with the Protheans, thus the Collectors, and so the expansion rate wasn't reduced as much as it should have been.

The ending ties in so much better with ME2 it's not even a joke.

Hell they foreshadow this in ME3 with the conversation with Garrus about the cold calculus of lives.

Alternately, you could just slightly alter the dark energy arc and say that it's the secret to Reaper technology, and how they are so powerful.  They come back every 50,000 years because they need to harvest more, and wipe out organic races on the way so that they can never be beaten.

Now we have a military explanation for what has, to me, always been a military-oriented storyline.  Not any of this "higher purpose" crap that we got, and the Reapers are still bad guys.

Modifié par Mx_CN3, 09 mars 2012 - 01:00 .

[IndelibleJester]

Eterna5 wrote...

AlphaJarmel wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

 But then all of Mass Effect one doesn't make sense, why the Hell would Sovereign attack the Citadel? How does that stop the Dark matter? How does detroying all sentient life stop the dark matter? It leaves a lot of plot holes. I'd say even more than the current endings do. 

It seems like the Reapers would have been slowing the speed of the dark energy.  In ME2 it's implied that they have some sort of control over it.  Sovereign would have attacked the Citadel in order to let the Reapers in so they could create a new 'special' human Reaper that could stop the Dark Energy spread.  As for why they destroy sentient life, it's explained that they create Reapers out of past species that help with the Dark Energy issue.

 But then why waste so many on husks? Why attack the citadel instead of earth?

Desperation drives one to many things to meet their ends.

[ZzOoRrGg]

Eterna5 wrote...

 Personally I think it's boring. But whatever.  It also doesn't make sense as to why the Reapers are commiting genocide. 

I'd prefer that it doesn't make sense to us ("you would not comprehend our reasons") than it being outright stupid ("We destroy you so you can't destroy yourselves durr hurr")

[ticklefist]

My theory is that the writing team fell victim to some corporate knee-capping.

[Faraborne]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

This was the initial ending for ME3:

Can I just go on record saying that the original plan for ME3 was pretty much identical to this? Except instead of working to reposition galaxies, the Reapers' goal was to find a way to stop the spread of Dark Energy which would eventually consume everything. That's why there was so much foreshadowing about Dark Energy on Haestom in ME2.

The Reapers as a whole were 'nations' of people who had fused together in the most horrific way possible to help find a way to stop the spread of the Dark Energy. The real reason for the Human Reaper was supposed to be the Reapers saving throw because they had run out of time. Humanity in Mass Effect is supposedly unique because of it's genetic diversity (I know, I know) and represented the universe's best chance at stopping Dark Energy's spread.

The original final choice was going to be "Kill the Reapers and put your faith in the races of the galaxy in finding another way to stop the spread with what little time is left" or "Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."

It's completely different now, though. All the Dark Energy foreshadowing in ME2 doesn't really go anywhere anymore if I remember right.

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

Much better than the current rendition.

This would have been awesome!  Yes, it would change the perspective on the Reapers--but that is the exact type of material I would expect from Bioware (not the unconsistent tripe that was given to us).  Real moral dilemna here

Oh, and new thought.  Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock could have defeated the Guardian with a paradox...guaranteed.

Modifié par Faraborne, 09 mars 2012 - 05:13 .

[jb1983]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

This was the initial ending for ME3:

Can I just go on record saying that the original plan for ME3 was pretty much identical to this? Except instead of working to reposition galaxies, the Reapers' goal was to find a way to stop the spread of Dark Energy which would eventually consume everything. That's why there was so much foreshadowing about Dark Energy on Haestom in ME2.

The Reapers as a whole were 'nations' of people who had fused together in the most horrific way possible to help find a way to stop the spread of the Dark Energy. The real reason for the Human Reaper was supposed to be the Reapers saving throw because they had run out of time. Humanity in Mass Effect is supposedly unique because of it's genetic diversity (I know, I know) and represented the universe's best chance at stopping Dark Energy's spread.

The original final choice was going to be "Kill the Reapers and put your faith in the races of the galaxy in finding another way to stop the spread with what little time is left" or "Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."

It's completely different now, though. All the Dark Energy foreshadowing in ME2 doesn't really go anywhere anymore if I remember right.

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

Much better than the current rendition.

With some tweaking, this would have been a vastly superior ending. I don't know why they ditched it - it doesn't make the Reapers look like the "good guys" at all, unless we're all a bunch of Jeremy Bentham's playing the game. Most people aren't Utlitiarian or consequentialist. They'll look at an action and say, "Yeah, I see the end you're trying to get to, but the means suck, so stop it." 

It would have complicated our view of the Reapers of course, to see that they weren't just killing to maintain order against chaos (really?), but instead that there was a direction behind all of this. Not to mention it would have allowed for some great DLC, not to mention that the universe continues for a different hero to come about in Mass Effect 4 to solve the dark energy problem. 

I'd like to see them bring this back, and truth be told they could do so in theory. It would require them to bring back some voice actors and completely rewire the entire ending; from the moment you're taken up to the top of the Citadel, what the boy says would have to change, as would your options. 

In other words, because of how disconnected the ending is to the entirety of the story, they could change back to this (allegedly) original ending, have a few choices and new endings (one where Reapers win and Shepard is assymilated, one where they win and he lives independently of them, one where Reapers lose, but Shepard has to die to accomplish this, and one where Reaper's lose and Shepard now has to tell the council, "Hey brahs, totally fixed the Reaper problem, but 'cha might wanna look into Dark Energy."), and future players who used this ending would never know the difference. 

So far I've come across like 7 different ideas on how the game should have ended, and of those 7, about 4 or 5 can actually be put into action from the moment the boy starts talking. In other words, nothing changes before the death of the Illusive Man. 

[Notho]

I was wondering earlier today what happened to the dark energy thing that was talked about so much in ME2 and not even mentioned in ME3.

[jb1983]

Eterna5 wrote...

AlphaJarmel wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

 But then all of Mass Effect one doesn't make sense, why the Hell would Sovereign attack the Citadel? How does that stop the Dark matter? How does detroying all sentient life stop the dark matter? It leaves a lot of plot holes. I'd say even more than the current endings do. 

It seems like the Reapers would have been slowing the speed of the dark energy.  In ME2 it's implied that they have some sort of control over it.  Sovereign would have attacked the Citadel in order to let the Reapers in so they could create a new 'special' human Reaper that could stop the Dark Energy spread.  As for why they destroy sentient life, it's explained that they create Reapers out of past species that help with the Dark Energy issue.

 But then why waste so many on husks? Why attack the citadel instead of earth?

Because not everyone is intelligent and can contribute to the intelligence of the species. 

The Reapers would be the ultimate utilitarians, turning idiots into Husks and assymilating those who held potential for fixing the problem. This would also fit with people who were controled by the Reapers, but weren't turned into Husks (such as Saren or the Illusive Man). In other words, it'd be perfectly consistent. 

The Husks, therefore, are simply means to an end; they serve no purpose in terms of "group-think," but serve quite a bit of purpose in clearing out those who won't be indoctrinated. Is it perfect? No, but it's the most optimal way of achieving the end-goal, which is how a machine would think (it would also explain the multiple life-cycles). 

As for the Citadel, again, means to an end. Attack the Citadel in order to bring in thousands of Reapers. 

I mean, really, while there are flaws with this ending, it still fits better with the overall story and just makes sense. 

As I pointed out in my last post, the current ending is so unfit for where it is, that you could take it out, replace it with something else, and it wouldn't do a thing to the game. 

[Almostfaceman]

AlphaJarmel wrote...

This was the initial ending for ME3:

Can I just go on record saying that the original plan for ME3 was pretty much identical to this? Except instead of working to reposition galaxies, the Reapers' goal was to find a way to stop the spread of Dark Energy which would eventually consume everything. That's why there was so much foreshadowing about Dark Energy on Haestom in ME2.

The Reapers as a whole were 'nations' of people who had fused together in the most horrific way possible to help find a way to stop the spread of the Dark Energy. The real reason for the Human Reaper was supposed to be the Reapers saving throw because they had run out of time. Humanity in Mass Effect is supposedly unique because of it's genetic diversity (I know, I know) and represented the universe's best chance at stopping Dark Energy's spread.

The original final choice was going to be "Kill the Reapers and put your faith in the races of the galaxy in finding another way to stop the spread with what little time is left" or "Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."

It's completely different now, though. All the Dark Energy foreshadowing in ME2 doesn't really go anywhere anymore if I remember right.

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

Much better than the current rendition.

This story and endings give us the Shepard we have come to know, because he gets the choice to do things on his terms, instead of terms dictated by the creator of the Reapers. Of course I would have picked "Kill the Reapers" and have built up my military strength via alliances accordingly. And this would give meaning to that build-up. 

And yes, I was wondering what happened to the Dark Energy foreshadowing.

*sigh*

[Thomas Abram]

There are already multiple mega threads discussing the endings, their implications and those behind them.

Closing this thread in hopes that people will be diverted to those threads as our development team cannot read every thread posted (but I can guarantee they will read the mega threads).

End of the line.

Modifié par Thomas Abram, 09 mars 2012 - 06:49 .