Nineteen wrote...
Let me preface this by saying that the idea of the endings make sense. The execution of the endings was horrible.
-”creating” a mixture of synthetic and organic life via a magical near-instant shockwave is stupefyingly silly. What exactly did this wave bring with it? Apparently it was like the Radioshack God Wave – and pressed circuit patterns into all life. What, exactly, does that accomplish? It was meaningless, pointless, arbitrary and left me dumbstruck at how utterly creatively bankrupt this story somehow ran.
Greed1914 wrote...
For which, there is no answer. The only real answer is that this is coming from the same people that thought different colored lights counted as a totally different ending. Sure, the implications might be different, but when I'm shown nothing more than a color swap, it's hard to take it seriously.
Cutter10 wrote...
-the idea that there is some inevitable, cyclical destiny that life will create murderously rebellious synthetics is silly. The Quarians and the Geth can actually come to peace in this very story.
-while we're at it - “solving” the problem of inevitable organic/synthetic conflict by killing everyone isn't really a solution, is it?
-significant time is spent in Mass Effect demonstrating that synthetic life is still life (and, really, at some level the cellular and molecular phenomena in all of us is weirdly machine-like.) The strange insistence of separating organic/synthetic right at the end as some sort of irreconcilable set of characteristics is already nonsensical by the time it happens in the story.
-there is no such thing as “Evolutionary Destiny.” I weep that I have to explain such basic science to a team of creators that put such thought into every other small detail of the physics behind the science fiction here – but here goes. Evolution is not a process that has a start or end point. It is not anything that can be predicted, because the forces that drive it are chaotic and require constant adaptation. There is no strait line – life explodes in every direction, and the most successful lines go on. Only looking back does it seem like an intentional direction.
-”creating” a mixture of synthetic and organic life via a magical near-instant shockwave is stupefyingly silly. What exactly did this wave bring with it? Apparently it was like the Radioshack God Wave – and pressed circuit patterns into all life. What, exactly, does that accomplish? It was meaningless, pointless, arbitrary and left me dumbstruck at how utterly creatively bankrupt this story somehow ran.
HKR148 wrote...
More likely reason why ending makes sense to you because you think more about it merely means that you are trying to rationalize the thing to minimize the emotional damage you've just sustained. It's like a divorce. Even though I am absolutely obsessed over the problems with the ending, I won't try to rationalize what it is and how it was presented.
Cutter10 wrote...
No, the endings don't make sense at all. Here are some huge discrepancies and inconsistencies that were utterly ignored:
-the idea that there is some inevitable, cyclical destiny that life will create murderously rebellious synthetics is silly. The Quarians and the Geth can actually come to peace in this very story.
-while we're at it - “solving” the problem of inevitable organic/synthetic conflict by killing everyone isn't really a solution, is it?
-significant time is spent in Mass Effect demonstrating that synthetic life is still life (and, really, at some level the cellular and molecular phenomena in all of us is weirdly machine-like.) The strange insistence of separating organic/synthetic right at the end as some sort of irreconcilable set of characteristics is already nonsensical by the time it happens in the story.
-there is no such thing as “Evolutionary Destiny.” I weep that I have to explain such basic science to a team of creators that put such thought into every other small detail of the physics behind the science fiction here – but here goes. Evolution is not a process that has a start or end point. It is not anything that can be predicted, because the forces that drive it are chaotic and require constant adaptation. There is no strait line – life explodes in every direction, and the most successful lines go on. Only looking back does it seem like an intentional direction.
-”creating” a mixture of synthetic and organic life via a magical near-instant shockwave is stupefyingly silly. What exactly did this wave bring with it? Apparently it was like the Radioshack God Wave – and pressed circuit patterns into all life. What, exactly, does that accomplish? It was meaningless, pointless, arbitrary and left me dumbstruck at how utterly creatively bankrupt this story somehow ran.
Axelstall wrote...
-”creating” a mixture of synthetic and organic life via a magical near-instant shockwave is stupefyingly silly. What exactly did this wave bring with it? Apparently it was like the Radioshack God Wave – and pressed circuit patterns into all life. What, exactly, does that accomplish? It was meaningless, pointless, arbitrary and left me dumbstruck at how utterly creatively bankrupt this story somehow ran.
This paragraph made me laugh.
thats something i couldn't het either. How does one go about simultaniously turning everyone half robot?
kramerfan86 wrote...
I disagree that the relays needed to be destroyed because civilization wasnt ready. IMO that should depend on how your shepard goes. If you are a paragon shepard who unified the galaxy and even managed to bury old grudges like geth v quarians or turians/salarians v krogan then you sort of proved that the galaxy was now in fact ready for that level of technology. If you went the more brutal route where you dont resolve these conflicts sure, destroy them because civilization proves at that point it isnt ready. To me, having end results actually depend on your path to the end would feel much more rewarding.
Militarized wrote...
If the Catalyst leaves them on "auto pilot" then why do they talk? They spoke of being a nation and independent of each other but they all seem to think basically the same way. That removes the concept, to me, that the kid is truly preserving us in Reaper form. He is simply putting our genetic code into a giant sarcophagus with lasers then having a VI run it around killing organics.
Which begs the question again.. why do you trust the kid that CONTROLS the REAPERS? Why would you do ANYTHING he says? He is THE ENEMY. THE CAKE IS A LIE SHEPARD.
Nineteen wrote...
Let me preface this by saying that the idea of the endings make sense. The execution of the endings was horrible. Also note that most of this is conjecture or wishful thinking.
Let's ignore the Reapers' and the Catalyst's logic for a second, and dissect the ending.
Destroy
Okay, this is what Shepard has been fighting for this entire time. Destroy the Reapers. However, Shepard learns that in order to destroy the Reapers with the Crucible, it would wipe out all synthetic life, including the Geth, presumably EDI, and possibly himself. This is appropriately the Red, or Renegade ending, because he's taking a calculated risk by destroying all synthetic life. Results at all costs, which is what Renegade is.
Control
An alternative to Destroy, but accomplishing essentially the same thing as Destroy: the Reapers are gone. But instead of the ruthless calculated risk, Shepard opts to "save" the Reapers along with synthetic life. Very Paragon. Very blue. It might also be assumed that Shepard either "melds" with the Catalyst in order for the Reapers to obey his orders, or that he replaces the Catalyst entirely. This is a somewhat disturbing notion, because Shepard might eventually change his mind about the Cycle, and continue it by ordering the Reapers to attack the galaxy again. IIRC, the Citadel remains intact if you choose this ending, so it's possible Shepard-Catalyst survives.
Synthesis
"The final stage of evolution." Not much to say here, but if Shepard agrees with this statement, he ushers in a new age of synthetic/organic life forms. This ending fits much better with the Stargazer scene. After all, someone who changed the genetic makeup of all life in the galaxy is sure to be some kind of savior-figure in the future.
Mass Relays
I totally agree with "destroying" the relays. If you remember, Mordin says that giving a civilization technology they're not ready for is an extrememly bad idea, as seen with the Krogan. Now, the Reapers/Catalyst gave every civilization the mass relay technology, before they were ready. This leads to AI developments and the "rebellions" that the Catalyst spoke of. By destroying the mass relays, you're forcing civilization to develop them on their own. They will only get them when they are ready. Granted, the Catalyst and the Reapers made a self-fulfilling prophecy here, but that's not what this game is about. This game is about fixing the mistakes of the Reapers and Catalyst. As for the premise put forth in Arrival (that a destroyed relay would wipe out a system) I like to think that the "destruction energy" was converted into the red/blue/green energy that makes their respective changes happen. Instead of destroying everything, the energy is focused to a specific task.
Normandy
Quick rationalization: Normandy (or Cortez) picked up the survivors from the Hammer run (including squad-mates). Shepard was on the Citadel for a reasonable amount of time. Enough for a rescue mission, for sure. Ground forces distract Harbinger, and Cortez goes in for the rescue. Then, when the Citadel began exploding Joker exclaims, "EDI, get us out of here!" as he likes to do, and boom. Crash land on a wierd planet.
---
Well, there you go. My rationalization for the end of Mass Effect. Let me know what you think.
Also, I'd like to say that the ending, if anything, is enjoyable because it's making me think. It didn't hand me all the answers on a silver platter and a glass of wine. It reminds me a lot of Donnie Darko, in that respect.
Modifié par dkear1, 11 mars 2012 - 02:41 .
Militarized wrote...
If the Catalyst leaves them on "auto pilot" then why do they talk? They spoke of being a nation and independent of each other but they all seem to think basically the same way. That removes the concept, to me, that the kid is truly preserving us in Reaper form. He is simply putting our genetic code into a giant sarcophagus with lasers then having a VI run it around killing organics.
Which begs the question again.. why do you trust the kid that CONTROLS the REAPERS? Why would you do ANYTHING he says? He is THE ENEMY. THE CAKE IS A LIE SHEPARD.
AtreiyaN7 wrote...
Militarized wrote...
If the Catalyst leaves them on "auto pilot" then why do they talk? They spoke of being a nation and independent of each other but they all seem to think basically the same way. That removes the concept, to me, that the kid is truly preserving us in Reaper form. He is simply putting our genetic code into a giant sarcophagus with lasers then having a VI run it around killing organics.
Which begs the question again.. why do you trust the kid that CONTROLS the REAPERS? Why would you do ANYTHING he says? He is THE ENEMY. THE CAKE IS A LIE SHEPARD.
As was pointed out in the game, the Reapers were the Catalyst's "solution" to preserve what were ostensibly the worthiest (I suppose) races from each cycle while preventing them from starting destructive organic-AI wars that probably went beyond the scope of something relatively piddling like the Morning War between the Quarians and the Geth. The Reapers do seem to think/function independently, but they have their directives/base programming/whatever from the Catalyst, along with their "mission" for each cycle - that's my guess at least. I think the Reapers are very much removed from what they once were, so much so that they're too alien to relate to organics any longer. Perhaps once they "ascend," they naturally gravitate towards the Catalyst's beliefs (or are indoctrinated in their own way - no idea what really happens once a new Reaper is completed).
Militarized wrote...
To be fair to the poster that replied before I can see the idea that Shepard is indoctrinated and the catalyst forces him to choose with that... but is that really the ending to Mass Effect? That Shepard is ****ing indoctrinated and is given a final illusion of choice to let the Reapers win? Because make no mistake about it they do seem to win no matter which ending you choose.
Nineteen wrote...
Militarized wrote...
To be fair to the poster that replied before I can see the idea that Shepard is indoctrinated and the catalyst forces him to choose with that... but is that really the ending to Mass Effect? That Shepard is ****ing indoctrinated and is given a final illusion of choice to let the Reapers win? Because make no mistake about it they do seem to win no matter which ending you choose.
Again, this falls a bit under "Reaper/Catalyst" logic, but I'll give you my opinion anyway.
Perhaps the Reapers aren't evil. Misguided mabye, corrupted programming possibly. But they say they're trying to protect organic life by preserving it. By completing the Crucible the current civilizations have proven the galaxy doesn't need the Reapers anymore. All three choices end the cycle. The Reapers don't "lose" necessarily, but they certainly aren't a threat anymore.
True. There isn't much closure, but maybe that's what Bioware was going for.
We wouldn’t do it any other way. How could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t say any more than that…" - Mike Gamblehttp://www.gamezone.com/products/mass-effect-3/news/mass-effect-3-boasts-many-different-endings
"As Mass Effect 3 is the end of the planned trilogy, the developers are not constrained by the necessity of allowing the story to diverge, yet also continue into the next chapter. This will result in a story that diverges into wildly different conclusions based on the player's actions in the first two chapters." - Casey Hudson
Yeah but even that is kind of open as to exactly what happened there. Obviously, Mass Effect 3 will reveal all; that's the point of Mass Effect 3, we tie up a lot of those loose ends. But I think it's safe to say The Illusive Man is still very much "himself" throughout the course of what people have been playing. We wouldn't ever want you to feel like "oh this guy I worked for was really an enemy all along." But that doesn't mean there weren't influences in his life.
http://www.newsarama...iew-110726.html
Modifié par Dreogan, 11 mars 2012 - 03:04 .
Militarized wrote...
Nineteen wrote...
Militarized wrote...
To be fair to the poster that replied before I can see the idea that Shepard is indoctrinated and the catalyst forces him to choose with that... but is that really the ending to Mass Effect? That Shepard is ****ing indoctrinated and is given a final illusion of choice to let the Reapers win? Because make no mistake about it they do seem to win no matter which ending you choose.
Again, this falls a bit under "Reaper/Catalyst" logic, but I'll give you my opinion anyway.
Perhaps the Reapers aren't evil. Misguided mabye, corrupted programming possibly. But they say they're trying to protect organic life by preserving it. By completing the Crucible the current civilizations have proven the galaxy doesn't need the Reapers anymore. All three choices end the cycle. The Reapers don't "lose" necessarily, but they certainly aren't a threat anymore.
They're not supposed to be evil... they're supposed to be unfathomable. See you're making sense out of the logic of just the last 10 minutes, putting it in the context of ONLY that last 10 minutes I'd say you could find some way to justify it. What everyone else is doing is putting it into the context of the entire trilogy... this singularity **** is just dumped into our game at the very last moment. I would totally get the ending and be fine with it if we were playing a new version of the Matrix... but we're not, we're playing Mass Effect where the philosophy did not seem to be about a singularity but a mix of cossmicism and free will.
That's what I got out of the GETH - Quarian conflict... nothing about the Geth being AI which will always attack us. The Quarians strike first! It was a lesson that putting down another sentient beings free will will ALWAYS cause a major backlash against you... as with the resistance against the Reapers who represent the cossmicism, we will fight anyway for our free will and determination.
Then they flip it on it's head for a Matrix Revolutions endings and force a blue/green/red pill down our throats. There is no justifying it when you put it into the proper CONTEXT.
nitefyre410 wrote...
Cutter10 wrote...
No, the endings don't make sense at all. Here are some huge discrepancies and inconsistencies that were utterly ignored:
-the idea that there is some inevitable, cyclical destiny that life will create murderously rebellious synthetics is silly. The Quarians and the Geth can actually come to peace in this very story.
-while we're at it - “solving” the problem of inevitable organic/synthetic conflict by killing everyone isn't really a solution, is it?
-significant time is spent in Mass Effect demonstrating that synthetic life is still life (and, really, at some level the cellular and molecular phenomena in all of us is weirdly machine-like.) The strange insistence of separating organic/synthetic right at the end as some sort of irreconcilable set of characteristics is already nonsensical by the time it happens in the story.
-there is no such thing as “Evolutionary Destiny.” I weep that I have to explain such basic science to a team of creators that put such thought into every other small detail of the physics behind the science fiction here – but here goes. Evolution is not a process that has a start or end point. It is not anything that can be predicted, because the forces that drive it are chaotic and require constant adaptation. There is no strait line – life explodes in every direction, and the most successful lines go on. Only looking back does it seem like an intentional direction.
-”creating” a mixture of synthetic and organic life via a magical near-instant shockwave is stupefyingly silly. What exactly did this wave bring with it? Apparently it was like the Radioshack God Wave – and pressed circuit patterns into all life. What, exactly, does that accomplish? It was meaningless, pointless, arbitrary and left me dumbstruck at how utterly creatively bankrupt this story somehow ran.
^ we have a winner..
Especailly after rest game is damn good... really good. To get the rug yanked out in the last 15 minutes and complete tone shift is just bad writing. that falls in to a Diablos Ex Machina, Jump the Shark and Failure is the Only Option.
Becasue the only way to save Civilation is destroy it utterly and start from scrath.. If Mass Effect was Neon Gensis Evangelion i would accept... problem..its not.
Nineteen wrote...
True, the first two games were very lovecraftian. But in ME3, we learn that the Reapers are, in fact, not unknowable, and that all living beings have more hope, choice, and control than we previously thought. It's not that the Reapers are truly god-beings, it's that they are powerful, have learned that they are the most powerful things in the galaxy, and then project that knowledge as fear. We percieved them as lovecraftian because we didn't understand them. After ME3, we now understand them.
Was that a bad writing choice? I don't know. Maybe. But I'm just trying to peice together what we were given, and not hash out what could have been.
Modifié par Militarized, 11 mars 2012 - 03:26 .
LeVaughnX wrote...
I had three endings to choose from; but I heard there is a fourth ending if you play New Game + with an ME3 character?..
Also - how the hell do you save Anderson? I picked all Paragon things to get TIM to bugger off - but he still got shot in the stomach...My Shepard did survive at the end though (Destroyed the Reapers) - or at least I think so because I saw him take a breath....
Thoughts?
lasertank wrote...
No. Your rationalization is flawed. Basically your rationalization totally base on one assumption : "Whatever the kid AI says is the truth. Shepard must obey these rules to choose." But it plainly contradicts Shepard's own characteristic and personality. Especially in the synthesis ending everything seems ill-contrived and cheap. The plot didn't give enough reason about why Shepard has to dissolve himself. Is Shepard's DNA special? If systhesis is the ultimate solution why had not it been done before? What roles do human play in this action? Without explanation these plots are actually bad stories an we don't buy it.
Militarized wrote...
So.... if you agree the first two fit into my analysis of what the Mass Effect universe represented, why bother defending them tearing the entire universe down in such a way at the very end with a shoehorned in philosophy that doesn't fit the rest of it? I completely understand you wanting to be optimistic... I love Mass Effect, I really do.. I've never liked a science fiction universe so much and never got what all the hype about Star Wars or Star Trek was. I liked both... but Mass Effect I could get behind.
We only understand them still because of that HORRIBLE ending... you don't learn anything about them until that point in the game. Even if it is lovecraftian I see no reason we could not beat them, I put up a post in a previous thread about how it was quite obvious that we COULD have beaten them at Earth if you really thought about it, with conventional weapons... albeit they'd have to do something with the crucible cause it's to integral to the story now.
I just don't see the point in defending a 10 minute bit of the end... I'm going to defend the 200+ hours the rest of spent in the rest of the game, fighting to get a proper ending.
*edit* Of course... maybe that's just me trying to get my true lovecraftian ending [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/w00t.png[/smilie]
Retour en haut