Aller au contenu

Photo

People who are criticizing the endings: A couple of things to note


325 réponses à ce sujet

#126
lasertank

lasertank
  • Members
  • 630 messages

Biotic Sage wrote...

No, no.  I don't think we have to buy the Catalyst's premise is my point.  That's why the endings are beautiful to me.  

Destruction - Implies you reject the Catalyst's premise because organic society is going to rebuild and eventually create synthetics/AI again.  This means that if the Catalyst is correct, you are dooming future generations to extinction.  But that's why I chose it, because I don't think the Catalyst is correct, and I am giving organics a chance to treat AI with dignity and respect and trusting AI to value all forms of life as well.  My experiences with the Quarians and the Geth shaped my Shepard's thinking here.

If you think what Catalyst said is incorrect, why would you destroy the Geth and EDI. You believed that there will be peace between organics and synthetics but you choose a way to destory the synthetics? That's a contradiction here.

 
Control - Implies that you don't know what to think about the Catalyst's premise.  The Reapers will be around anyway, just in case some Reaping needs to be done, so it's the "safe" option if you aren't sure.  I considered it "unsafe" because I don't want Reapers around anymore, period.

 
I agree with the idea that it is unsafe, but for a different reason. You don't know what to think about the Catalyst's premise and you dissolve yourself? What if the device is used to indoctrinate someone? Just like the implant that Sovereign gave Saren? Even if the Catalyst gives the truth, I simply would argue with him with the following arguemnt before I took this option.

"If you, the Catalyst, controls the reaper, just call off your fleet and back off. Leave everything as it was. The current situation of galaxy is devatating not because the INEVITABLE CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ORGANICS AND THE SYNTHETICS, but you. So just leave with your reapers. BTW, if you are so mighty and cares about organics begin destoryed by synthetics, just come back and control the synthetics when the war begins, if there would ever be one."

  
Synthesis - Implies that you accept the Catalyst's premise and that in order to get out of the fatalistic doom of synthetics rising up we need to create a new paradigm for life in the Milky Way Galaxy.

Consider the following questions before jumping.
1. Why does this require me to dissolve?
2. Is there anything special in my DNA
3. If this is the ultimate solution why had it not been done before? 
4. What roles do humans play in this solution?
Before these questions got answered, any normal person would never jump into the stupid beam.

#127
thoaloa

thoaloa
  • Members
  • 97 messages
Should have just thrown some hair and his/her omnitool into the beam. Wonder what would happen if you threw random stuff into the magic blender of reality.

#128
Baronesa

Baronesa
  • Members
  • 1 934 messages

Biotic Sage wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

1. "Obviously the Catalyst is wrong in thinking that synthetics will always destroy organics because look at what's happening with the Quarians and the Geth!  They are getting along!"

This does not disprove the Catalyst's assertion.  Just because they happen to be working together at the moment doesn't mean that an organic genocide at the hands of synthetics isn't an inevitable eventuality.  Hell, they could get along for hundreds of years, thousands of years, but if they eventually end up destroying organics then the Catalyst assertion holds.  No obviously, the Quarian/Geth situation doesn't prove anything either, it doesn't prove the Catalyst right.  But don't use it as emprical evidence that the synthetic uprising eventuality scenario is false, because that is illogical.  Another thing on this argument that people say: "The Quarians started it!"  It doesn't matter who "starts it."  I'm sure that if the inevitability is true, then it can play out in a number of different ways.  The point is that the ultimate result is the same: organics dead at the hands of synthetics.  Now I personally reject this, which is why I chose the destruction ending, but there is nothing to prove or disprove the assertion other than my own beliefs and way of thinking.


How is that believe and assertion different than the one presented by the Dalatras? Did you also faked the cure for the genophage because the Krogan MAY become a danger later? or the Rachni?

Anyway... the point is, if we cannot buy this premise, that is the foundation for the Catalyst's reasons and the options given, how can we pick any of those options? I'm glad that for you those reasons work, but that is the main problem I have with it. If I cannot be convinced/accepts the singularity explanation, how can I consider the 3 options valid, if all 3 depend on you accepting this explanation?


No, no.  I don't think we have to buy the Catalyst's premise is my point.  That's why the endings are beautiful to me.  

Destruction - Implies you reject the Catalyst's premise because organic society is going to rebuild and eventually create synthetics/AI again.  This means that if the Catalyst is correct, you are dooming future generations to extinction.  But that's why I chose it, because I don't think the Catalyst is correct, and I am giving organics a chance to treat AI with dignity and respect and trusting AI to value all forms of life as well.  My experiences with the Quarians and the Geth shaped my Shepard's thinking here.

Control - Implies that you don't know what to think about the Catalyst's premise.  The Reapers will be around anyway, just in case some Reaping needs to be done, so it's the "safe" option if you aren't sure.  I considered it "unsafe" because I don't want Reapers around anymore, period.

Synthesis - Implies that you accept the Catalyst's premise and that in order to get out of the fatalistic doom of synthetics rising up we need to create a new paradigm for life in the Milky Way Galaxy.


I like the way you framed Destruction.. but those reasons are why I reject that ending, because you destroy current AI, you commit genocide. Makes you no better than genocidal god-child

Then why not another option? Reject all 3? Refuse to choose and let your decisions/alliances determine the outcome of the battle. Too low EMS? Reapers win. And then add degrees of success. That will make the whole building of alliance worthwile in the end, not just during the campaing. You would get to see how your preparations play a role.

And even then, I would put special markers on this option. You need to achieve peace between Quarians and Geth, oherwise this 4th option SHOULD NOT be present at all.

Then, In my opinion the current endings would need a little retouch. Mass Relays going boom on Control and  Merge, as well as the Citadel blowing up on Merge, don't really make sense to me. Yes there are massive waves of energy, but that at best should "shortcircuit" the relays, turning them off, not making them blow up. Also on merge... Shepard dying on that ending also seem a little forced.

And finally... uhh a little explanation on why Joker was playing around the Relays? or maybe instead of that show a Reaper shooting Normandy down and they crashing on earth? At least that would make more sense. Yes I don't liek that they are lost on Gilligan's planet... but if they at least gave us a reason why they were escaping.

EDIT: Also, agree with lasertank, up there.

Modifié par Baronesa, 11 mars 2012 - 12:32 .


#129
Biotic Sage

Biotic Sage
  • Members
  • 2 842 messages

lasertank wrote...

If you think what Catalyst said is incorrect, why would you destroy the Geth and EDI. You believed that there will be peace between organics and synthetics but you choose a way to destory the synthetics? That's a contradiction here.

Consider the following questions before jumping.
1. Why does this require me to dissolve?
2. Is there anything special in my DNA
3. If this is the ultimate solution why had it not been done before? 
4. What roles do humans play in this solution?
Before these questions got answered, any normal person would never jump into the stupid beam.



For your first point, see my above post a couple back.  I don't want to destroy the Geth and EDI.  I'd rather not.  But with the options presented that was the most acceptable sacrifice to me.

For your second point, these are all good questions.  And Shepard should have been able to ask more of them via the investigate option to the Catalyst.  This is where the ending isn't "flawless."  However, with what we are presented with: an inflexible immediate decision to be made, it all comes down to how the Crucible actually works, which I guess we just have to accept these are the rules of the science in the science fiction.

#130
Harbinger of Hope

Harbinger of Hope
  • Members
  • 793 messages

thoaloa wrote...

Should have just thrown some hair and his/her omnitool into the beam. Wonder what would happen if you threw random stuff into the magic blender of reality.


My DNA and omni-tool...

Will it blend? That is the question.

#131
HKR148

HKR148
  • Members
  • 734 messages

Biotic Sage wrote...

2. "Nothing mattered!"

You may as well extend this logic to real life.  If everything ends, including life itself, and infinite continuation is necessary for you to feel something "matters," then nothing you do in your real life matters either.  None of the relationships you have, none of the decisions you make, nothing.  Everything mattered in Mass Effect; Shepard touched the lives of thousands of individuals, and some on a very personal level i.e. Love Interest and squad/crew. 

As for our choices in the game resulting in direct consequences, we saw these consequences throughout the game.  Throughout the entire game we saw the consequences of our actions over the past 2 games.  We saw the result of the relationships we've nurtured, we saw the result of saving the council, saving Wrex, or keeping our crew alive in ME2.  Granted, the Collector Base choice from ME2 could have been integrated better, but we saw a great deal of direct consequences.  Now, the end game, that's a huge decision.  All 3 decisions may look the same with a wave of energy, but just think of the ramifications for the future of the galaxy.  I like that Bioware left that part, the part after Shepard's story, up to us.  And yes, the ripples of your decisions are still going on even though you don't get to personally witness them.  The Krogan are either cured of the genophage or doomed to extinction.  The Quarians could be alive to rebuild or dead since the middle of the game.  This is huge, and I scoff at anyone who says "nothing mattered."  Just because you'd like to see more direct evidence of what you do (which is a fair criticism) doesn't mean that "nothing mattered."


If this was a game that was only about the good of the entire society, then your argument can be backed by that. But the central theme of the game is not and the last 15 minute was a clear abandonment of the type of genre the Mass Effect was supposed to be. Do you ever read a literature that spends 4/5 of its portion on Romance than suddenly 1/5 it's turning into a non-sensical murder mystery? I would call that a garbage literature. That's what I find the ending unacceptable.

I've been copy/pasting my argument on several thread tealking about the basically the same argument. Really don't want to spam this,

[Here]

What I absolutely am not tolerating is the traumatic betrayal of the central philosophy that Bioware was trying to build up in ME3. Take Paragon path for an example. The definition of 'hope' was not only that the rest of the galaxy will survive, but 'hope' that he/she will be able to get through the ordeal along with people he/she cherishes (love interest, squad members, friends etc.) even though the odd was very slim.

Shepard went through the odds to try breaking the cycle. The Prothean has acknowledged that what he/she has done was something that was never seen in the history of the galaxy filled with repeated genocidal cycle commited by the reapers. Right up to the fleet approaching Earth; the story had reached a climax where Shepard and the rest of the galaxy is about to undo the Reapers and it's all because of the protagonist's existence.

Then the catalyst happened, every philosophical direction the game was taking suddenly became meaningless. Whatever the truth the catalyst believed in is the absolute truth and we must accept that. And suddenly Shepard, and us the players, have to comply with that unacceptable philosophy.

This in my view was an absolute betrayal against the central theme of the ME story-line, and for me this is absolutely unacceptable. If this was a book I wouldn't even bother keeping it in my bookshelf. The way Bioware portrays human value is simply unacceptable by any philosophical standard in my book.

Modifié par HKR148, 11 mars 2012 - 12:32 .


#132
krthomps1

krthomps1
  • Members
  • 16 messages

thoaloa wrote...

Should have just thrown some hair and his/her omnitool into the beam. Wonder what would happen if you threw random stuff into the magic blender of reality.


LOL!!
That's awesome.

#133
Cataya

Cataya
  • Members
  • 36 messages
Biotic Sage, I just wanted to say that I agree with your OP. :)

#134
Biotic Sage

Biotic Sage
  • Members
  • 2 842 messages

Baronesa wrote...

Then why not another option? Reject all 3? Refuse to choose and let your decisions/alliances determine the outcome of the battle. Too low EMS? Reapers win. And then add degrees of success. That will make the whole building of alliance worthwile in the end, not just during the campaing. You would get to see how your preparations play a role.

And finally... uhh a little explanation on why Joker was playing around the Relays? or maybe instead of that show a Reaper shooting Normandy down and they crashing on earth? At least that would make more sense. Yes I don't liek that they are lost on Gilligan's planet... but if they at least gave us a reason why they were escaping.


For your first point, that option would feel very lame to me.  The Reapers have been established as unbeatable through military might time and time again.  The military commanders of the giant fleet have accepted that they can do nothing except provide a distraction so that the Crucible can be deployed and hope that it works, because that literally is their last hope.  And also that would take away from the impactfulness and depth of the ending, and undermine the Reapers as an enemy, as the truly terrifying world-destroyers that they are.

For your second point, I could do with a little more context here too.  I would have liked better editing, showing continuity with the Normandy making the jump to FTL as a direct result of trying to get away from the blast of energy.  And of course I thought it was ridiculous when Liara stepped out of the Normandy at the end when I took her with me on the final mission and we charged Harbinger together and got ****ed up by a giant laser beam.  Another part of the ending that could be better.

#135
Navasha

Navasha
  • Members
  • 3 724 messages
OPs points..

1) Agree. What we are talking about here is called the 'Singularity'. Its the point where computational power exceeds organic mental capability. This will happen in real life eventually. When computers can think faster and more creatively than the human mind, all human invention ceases. Everything new will have been developed by a computer first. At that point, human society breaks down and becomes pointless. You can read about this in many books and internet articles.

2. Also agree. Shepard is just one person. The choices you make drive the narrative, but that doesn't mean that your will is all-supreme. Most people are complaining about Anderson on the council. If you picked him... he was councilor.... for a while! He decided it was not for him and stepped down. Yours was a recommendation and Anderson accepted without realizing he wasn't quite fit for politics. Just because you made a choice doesn't mean the galaxy has to accept your choice as universal truth.

#136
beryls

beryls
  • Members
  • 33 messages

Biotic Sage wrote...

I've seen some fair criticisms of the endings (most that I disagree with but they are fair), and then I've seen some criticisms that have not been thought out at all.  Here are the three that annoy me every time I see them:


3. "Bioware got lazy!"

Whether you agree with the ending or not, how can you call something that was so masterfully crafted lazy?  When I hear people say "Bioware got lazy!" all I am hearing is them saying (in a whiny voice I might add) "I disagree with the direction Bioware took with the series!"  That's fine, you can say that.  But don't insult them by saying they "got lazy."  The team poured so much energy into this project and it was of such high quality in so many areas that I'm sure they just want to burst into frustrated tears when they read something like that.  I guarantee you they didn't "get lazy;"  that's how they wanted to end their magnum opus, and I guarantee you if they were going to cut corners anywhere in the game it damn well wouldn't be the final 5 minutes.


Yes they got lazy, for their fanalii the end to their vaunted trillogy how did they end it with 3 choices and they used the same cut sceen for all three, they just changed the color spectrum. This is pure laziness. No mater what you do its the same sceen, flashy light from citadel, reapers leave earth, joker races off in normandy, you see nomandy crash landed and joker and and 2 squad mates get off. Really pitiful.

#137
Biotic Sage

Biotic Sage
  • Members
  • 2 842 messages

Harbinger of Hope wrote...

thoaloa wrote...

Should have just thrown some hair and his/her omnitool into the beam. Wonder what would happen if you threw random stuff into the magic blender of reality.


My DNA and omni-tool...

Will it blend? That is the question.


Haha

Now all beings come equipped with an "Awesome Button."

#138
lasertank

lasertank
  • Members
  • 630 messages

Biotic Sage wrote...

lasertank wrote...

If you think what Catalyst said is incorrect, why would you destroy the Geth and EDI. You believed that there will be peace between organics and synthetics but you choose a way to destory the synthetics? That's a contradiction here.

Consider the following questions before jumping.
1. Why does this require me to dissolve?
2. Is there anything special in my DNA
3. If this is the ultimate solution why had it not been done before? 
4. What roles do humans play in this solution?
Before these questions got answered, any normal person would never jump into the stupid beam.



For your first point, see my above post a couple back.  I don't want to destroy the Geth and EDI.  I'd rather not.  But with the options presented that was the most acceptable sacrifice to me.

For your second point, these are all good questions.  And Shepard should have been able to ask more of them via the investigate option to the Catalyst.  This is where the ending isn't "flawless."  However, with what we are presented with: an inflexible immediate decision to be made, it all comes down to how the Crucible actually works, which I guess we just have to accept these are the rules of the science in the science fiction.


Let me ask you a question. If further arguemnt can be made before you choose from these options, would you feel a little more satisfying?

#139
Baronesa

Baronesa
  • Members
  • 1 934 messages

Biotic Sage wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

Then why not another option? Reject all 3? Refuse to choose and let your decisions/alliances determine the outcome of the battle. Too low EMS? Reapers win. And then add degrees of success. That will make the whole building of alliance worthwile in the end, not just during the campaing. You would get to see how your preparations play a role.

And finally... uhh a little explanation on why Joker was playing around the Relays? or maybe instead of that show a Reaper shooting Normandy down and they crashing on earth? At least that would make more sense. Yes I don't liek that they are lost on Gilligan's planet... but if they at least gave us a reason why they were escaping.


For your first point, that option would feel very lame to me.  The Reapers have been established as unbeatable through military might time and time again.  The military commanders of the giant fleet have accepted that they can do nothing except provide a distraction so that the Crucible can be deployed and hope that it works, because that literally is their last hope.  And also that would take away from the impactfulness and depth of the ending, and undermine the Reapers as an enemy, as the truly terrifying world-destroyers that they are.

For your second point, I could do with a little more context here too.  I would have liked better editing, showing continuity with the Normandy making the jump to FTL as a direct result of trying to get away from the blast of energy.  And of course I thought it was ridiculous when Liara stepped out of the Normandy at the end when I took her with me on the final mission and we charged Harbinger together and got ****ed up by a giant laser beam.  Another part of the ending that could be better.


Yay, seems that at least we agree to some degree on point 2 XD

Regarding point one, I disagree for the following reasons that I posted elsewhere:

"We can't defeat the reapers with conventional means" Sorry but the whole trilogy showed us that we can... in fact it seems we have been more successful than previous cycles. Yes it will take a lot of lives fighting conventionally, but the Reapers are not stupid either, if they are losing they will leave/regroup etc.
Sovereign was defeated by the security forces of the citadel and Admiral Hackett's fleet, at a great cost, yes. But remember that the Geth were also present. By the ending, if you forged all possible alliances, you have the Geth, the Quarian, Turians, Alliance... that is more than enough to destroy many reapers. We saw how the Quarians destroyed one, right? It would be a fierce battle, with MANY loses, but the united galaxy you created with your actions is able to overcome the threat presented by the reapers with conventional means, in the same way the incredibly outnumbered Rebel Alliance managed to defeat the Empire.

#140
Biotic Sage

Biotic Sage
  • Members
  • 2 842 messages

beryls wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

I've seen some fair criticisms of the endings (most that I disagree with but they are fair), and then I've seen some criticisms that have not been thought out at all.  Here are the three that annoy me every time I see them:


3. "Bioware got lazy!"

Whether you agree with the ending or not, how can you call something that was so masterfully crafted lazy?  When I hear people say "Bioware got lazy!" all I am hearing is them saying (in a whiny voice I might add) "I disagree with the direction Bioware took with the series!"  That's fine, you can say that.  But don't insult them by saying they "got lazy."  The team poured so much energy into this project and it was of such high quality in so many areas that I'm sure they just want to burst into frustrated tears when they read something like that.  I guarantee you they didn't "get lazy;"  that's how they wanted to end their magnum opus, and I guarantee you if they were going to cut corners anywhere in the game it damn well wouldn't be the final 5 minutes.


Yes they got lazy, for their fanalii the end to their vaunted trillogy how did they end it with 3 choices and they used the same cut sceen for all three, they just changed the color spectrum. This is pure laziness. No mater what you do its the same sceen, flashy light from citadel, reapers leave earth, joker races off in normandy, you see nomandy crash landed and joker and and 2 squad mates get off. Really pitiful.


This is exactly the response I was criticizing!  Obviously this is the imagery they wanted to leave you with, leave us all with, regardless of our different experiences throughout the game.  This was not "lazy," it was an intentional authorial choice.

#141
krthomps1

krthomps1
  • Members
  • 16 messages

HKR148 wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

2. "Nothing mattered!"

You may as well extend this logic to real life.  If everything ends, including life itself, and infinite continuation is necessary for you to feel something "matters," then nothing you do in your real life matters either.  None of the relationships you have, none of the decisions you make, nothing.  Everything mattered in Mass Effect; Shepard touched the lives of thousands of individuals, and some on a very personal level i.e. Love Interest and squad/crew. 

As for our choices in the game resulting in direct consequences, we saw these consequences throughout the game.  Throughout the entire game we saw the consequences of our actions over the past 2 games.  We saw the result of the relationships we've nurtured, we saw the result of saving the council, saving Wrex, or keeping our crew alive in ME2.  Granted, the Collector Base choice from ME2 could have been integrated better, but we saw a great deal of direct consequences.  Now, the end game, that's a huge decision.  All 3 decisions may look the same with a wave of energy, but just think of the ramifications for the future of the galaxy.  I like that Bioware left that part, the part after Shepard's story, up to us.  And yes, the ripples of your decisions are still going on even though you don't get to personally witness them.  The Krogan are either cured of the genophage or doomed to extinction.  The Quarians could be alive to rebuild or dead since the middle of the game.  This is huge, and I scoff at anyone who says "nothing mattered."  Just because you'd like to see more direct evidence of what you do (which is a fair criticism) doesn't mean that "nothing mattered."


If this was a game that was only about the good of the entire society, then your argument can be backed by that. But the central theme of the game is not and the last 15 minute was a clear abandonment of the type of genre the Mass Effect was supposed to be. Do you ever read a literature that spends 4/5 of its portion on Romance than suddenly 1/5 it's turning into a non-sensical murder mystery? I would call that a garbage literature. That's what I find the ending unacceptable.

I've been copy/pasting my argument on several thread tealking about the basically the same argument. Really don't want to spam this,

[Here]

What I absolutely am not tolerating is the traumatic betrayal of the central philosophy that Bioware was trying to build up in ME3. Take Paragon path for an example. The definition of 'hope' was not only that the rest of the galaxy will survive, but 'hope' that he/she will be able to get through the ordeal along with people he/she cherishes (love interest, squad members, friends etc.) even though the odd was very slim.

Shepard went through the odds to try breaking the cycle. The Prothean has acknowledged that what he/she has done was something that was never seen in the history of the galaxy filled with repeated genocidal cycle commited by the reapers. Right up to the fleet approaching Earth; the story had reached a climax where Shepard and the rest of the galaxy is about to undo the Reapers and it's all because of the protagonist's existence.

Then the catalyst happened, every philosophical direction the game was taking suddenly became meaningless. Whatever the truth the catalyst believed in is the absolute truth and we must accept that. And suddenly Shepard, and us the players, have to comply with that unacceptable philosophy.

This in my view was an absolute betrayal against the central theme of the ME story-line, and for me this is absolutely unacceptable. If this was a book I wouldn't even bother keeping it in my bookshelf. The way Bioware portrays human value is simply unacceptable by any philosophical standard in my book.


I love the thought you put into this.  But I disagree that we had to accept the Catalyst's "truth".  The only option that seems to suggest this was synthesis.  I destroyed the reapers because I disagreed with the catalyst, and so did Biotic Sage, it seems.  I rejected what this self-appointed god-thing believed was good for the galaxy, and acted accordingly.  This was also, specifically, the reason I didn't pick "synthesis".  His logic was wrong, and his method flawed. 
The supremely heroic vision of Shepard was not lost in those last moments for me.  She accomplished exactly what she set out to do.  The reaper cycle of extinction was ended.  Organic life was to have the chance to write its own future.  She went out as the greatest hero the galaxy will ever know. The fact that the mass relays were destroyed is poetic as well.  We no longer require the "guidance" of this catalyst.  We will do it ourselves.  Absolute independence from the reapers and their creators.  I think it is a beautiful thing, and it a fitting, heroic culmination of everything the series stands for. 

#142
SandTrout

SandTrout
  • Members
  • 4 171 messages

Biotic Sage wrote...

I've seen some fair criticisms of the endings (most that I disagree with but they are fair), and then I've seen some criticisms that have not been thought out at all.  Here are the three that annoy me every time I see them:

1. "Obviously the Catalyst is wrong in thinking that synthetics will always destroy organics because look at what's happening with the Quarians and the Geth!  They are getting along!"

This does not disprove the Catalyst's assertion....

But neither do we have any evidence that the Catalyst's assertion is correct, or even really any reason at all to think he may have been correct.

2. "Nothing mattered!"

You may as well extend this logic to real life...

It's a game, not real life, and even in real life, you can reasonably expect your actions to matter within the scope of reasonable consiquences. In ME, you united empires on a galactic scale, you didn't just save a toddler from drowning. Your claim is that everthing that Churchhill did durring WW2 shouldn't have mattered.

As for our choices in the game resulting in direct consequences, we saw these consequences throughout the game...

and then we saw them all get wiped into insignificance by the complete destruction of the galaxy's infrastructure, an act that would, necessarily, result in a dark-age for most of the galaxy.

3. "Bioware got lazy!"

Whether you agree with the ending or not, how can you call something that was so masterfully crafted lazy?

I, for one, don't think that BioWare got lazy, because everthing else in the game is so well done. That just makes it that much more bizzare that they managed to foul up the ending as badly as they did. In any other game, the ending we got would be considered an obvious cop-out for a real ending. Here, most people have seen too much quality writing to accept that this is true laziness, which is what is fueling the 'false-ending' conspiracy theories.

#143
Umbrellamage

Umbrellamage
  • Members
  • 365 messages
Games are art, but they are also entertainment.  Any hybrid has to strike a balance between thriving as art, and being successful as a medium for entertainment.  ME3 does both right up until the end.  But in the last 5 minutes the balance shifts heavily over to art, flying in the face of almost everything established up to that point.  In games we rely on continuity of plot, and logic to make sense of things with some artistic lisence given to allow theatrics and emotion. 

The catalyst's argument is flawed at a base level.  Not because he argues the synthetic/organic aspect despite the peace brokered.  But because he doesn't argue the true meat, creator and created.  Conflicts between the creator and the created are bound to occur.  It's even stated that the created will rebel against their creators.  Had he left it at that instead of shifting back to the synthetic/organic argument he might have had a foot to stand on.
 
However that foot dissolves when one also considers that the synthesis ending is based entirely on the synthetic/organic dynamic, and doesn't come close to addressing the issue of the creator/created conflict.  In the synthesis only life actually changes.  So it's entirely correct to presume that at some point the synthesized could again create synthetics out of synthetic materials, and presumably if they were not alive at the time of synthesis they would be true synthetics.  The creator/created dynamic would remain intact and synthetics could potentially destroy synthesized life.  

In life, things I do matter because I can either see or experience their effects.  I can talk to people to get their perspective on how things effect them, why things matter to them.  From there the web of experience and understanding only grows larger.  If something notable happens it may be written down, but largely it falls to an existential experience.  I can also deduce the effects my actions have.  I can show a friend something cool in javascript or CSS3, and in the next site they code I can see that they utilized what I showed them, they may even thank me for it.  And I think, "paragon +2".  As a people we thrive on logical cause/effect interaction.  We enjoy asking questions and answering them, we enjoy learning.

When someone gives their life they can't experience the effects, they can't learn anything, they can't have their questions answered (not going into a discussion on afterlife in any capacity right now).  But they are also no longer alive to feel anxiety over the lack of answers, the lack of effect, experience, and connection.  The way the ending is handled we don't actually have any questions answered, but we are presented with a list of new questions as we see things happening that we don't understand.  Why is the Normandy in the relay?  What happened to my crew?  What was the final effect for everything I've done over the past games?  Yes our character may be dead except for one ending, but we are not dead, we are very much alive and in desparate need of having our anxiety quelled, our questions answered.  The anxiety is there because the Mass Effect universe is one we genuinely care about, mass relays or no.  We care about the characters just as we would care about friends.  

This is where the nothing matters feeling comes in.  This entire series is based around choices and consequences.  Up until the end we see the overall effect, but then when we hit the end we're hit with a black hole of nothingness.  The player is treated like he/she is dead, but we aren't, we're very much alive, and in being alive we want to see what the effect of our decisions were.  Did every species die a slow death due to starvation?  How quickly was earth rebuilt?  What was the damage overall?  Do our companions ever get off the planet or do they set up a nice vacation resort?  I'm sure some of these will be answered in DLC, but the lack of any epilogue, any personal closure is jarring.  Our questions are not answered, our desire to learn is not sated.  On this front all anyone really needs for closure is a DA:O style epilogue at least telling us what effect we had on the final picture in this game of choices.  We want to learn the history of this universe. The legacy of our Shepard.

As for the bioware got lazy point, it may be blunt, but it feels accurate.  For the three choices we get one final cutscene with a few plot holes, subtle alterations and a different color filter.  For the finale of a trilogy of this magnitude don't you think IT deserves an individual cutscene for each end, at the very least?  

It's not so much the endings themselves people have issue with, it's the vehicle through which we have to experience them.  The vehicle of the catalyst god child feels inherently flawed because aside from being forced in 5 minutes before the end, Shepard acts entirely out of character for this finale.  People are angry, they reject this end because the Shepard they see is not recognizable to them.  The actions of Joker, who stood by Shepard thick and thin are not recognizable.  The actions of his squad mates (who presumably make it back to the Normandy because Garrus and Liara were with me for the mad dash, and he stepped out of the Normandy later, in different cutscenes) are simply not recognizable.  Garrus would not leave Shepard's body, Liara would not leave his body, no one that comes to mind would leave Shepard when the stakes are that high, if there was a hope he could be alive and the mission could be accomplished.

From here is where the idea of a hallucination or dream crops up.  The actions of everyone save, maybe Anderson and TIM, are absolutely incomprehensible to the vast majority of the fans who spent years with each of these characters throughout ME1 and 2.  We feel angry, like this was all just a cop out to force a poorly written and "artistic" ending.  Any ending that opens up plotholes and fundamentally changes the nature of a character, or multiple characters without sound reasoning in story is poorly written and forced.  There's no way around that.

The game is masterful, the ending is just a sloppy mess of art with no consideration for game.  And Mass Effect deserves so much more.  Of course, all this is moot if Bioware has some ingenious plan for a true ending.  At this point that all remains to be seen.

Modifié par Umbrellamage, 11 mars 2012 - 12:51 .


#144
HellzMonkes

HellzMonkes
  • Members
  • 21 messages

Biotic Sage wrote...

mushoops86anjyl wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

mushoops86anjyl wrote...

It's not an ending. It's a cliffhanger full of plotholes.


Thanks for reading!


You didn't satisfactorily address this.


That's not what this thread is about.  I'd be happy to go into a discussion about the alleged "plotholes" with you in a different thread or over PM.  This thread is about the three ridiculous arguments that I see all over these forums lately.  And I guarantee that even if you did somehow read my entire post in 1-2 minutes that you could not have properly reflected and considered what I was saying.  In other words, you may have heard but you didn't listen.


allged ? did that really just ocme off your keyboard, are you on crack, if you cant see it there is no point in saying anyhting, your are an idiiot spouting off stuff to justify your perspective and its wrong. everoyne has their own oppinion but yours is worng and oyur triyn to pass it off as knowledge dont be such a try hard kid

#145
Biotic Sage

Biotic Sage
  • Members
  • 2 842 messages

Baronesa wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

Baronesa wrote...

Then why not another option? Reject all 3? Refuse to choose and let your decisions/alliances determine the outcome of the battle. Too low EMS? Reapers win. And then add degrees of success. That will make the whole building of alliance worthwile in the end, not just during the campaing. You would get to see how your preparations play a role.

And finally... uhh a little explanation on why Joker was playing around the Relays? or maybe instead of that show a Reaper shooting Normandy down and they crashing on earth? At least that would make more sense. Yes I don't liek that they are lost on Gilligan's planet... but if they at least gave us a reason why they were escaping.


For your first point, that option would feel very lame to me.  The Reapers have been established as unbeatable through military might time and time again.  The military commanders of the giant fleet have accepted that they can do nothing except provide a distraction so that the Crucible can be deployed and hope that it works, because that literally is their last hope.  And also that would take away from the impactfulness and depth of the ending, and undermine the Reapers as an enemy, as the truly terrifying world-destroyers that they are.

For your second point, I could do with a little more context here too.  I would have liked better editing, showing continuity with the Normandy making the jump to FTL as a direct result of trying to get away from the blast of energy.  And of course I thought it was ridiculous when Liara stepped out of the Normandy at the end when I took her with me on the final mission and we charged Harbinger together and got ****ed up by a giant laser beam.  Another part of the ending that could be better.


Yay, seems that at least we agree to some degree on point 2 XD

Regarding point one, I disagree for the following reasons that I posted elsewhere:

"We can't defeat the reapers with conventional means" Sorry but the whole trilogy showed us that we can... in fact it seems we have been more successful than previous cycles. Yes it will take a lot of lives fighting conventionally, but the Reapers are not stupid either, if they are losing they will leave/regroup etc.
Sovereign was defeated by the security forces of the citadel and Admiral Hackett's fleet, at a great cost, yes. But remember that the Geth were also present. By the ending, if you forged all possible alliances, you have the Geth, the Quarian, Turians, Alliance... that is more than enough to destroy many reapers. We saw how the Quarians destroyed one, right? It would be a fierce battle, with MANY loses, but the united galaxy you created with your actions is able to overcome the threat presented by the reapers with conventional means, in the same way the incredibly outnumbered Rebel Alliance managed to defeat the Empire.


Well I'll have to continue to disagree here.  I saw what it took to take down Sovereign, I saw every single military force in the galaxy getting obliterated by the Reapers throughout the entire game, and I know the numbers regarding how much military force each race has.  The Reapers number in the thousands or maybe even hundreds of thousands.  We just don't have the numbers.  A single Reaper can cleave through the defenses of the heart of galactic civilization like butter.  Even with the weapon advancements since then what it comes down to is just too many of the squids.  It would be like Shepard going up against 20 brutes, 30 banshees, and 50 phantoms on insanity...all at once.

#146
WarBaby2

WarBaby2
  • Members
  • 1 019 messages

krthomps1 wrote...
I think that just the fact that we are raising these kinds of issues here is proof that Bioware has really accomplished something here.


Yea, something most fans of the franchise didn't need... well done.

Why going all out existential on the audience in the last few minutes of something that sould have been the epic ending to a heroic saga? That's what I never will understand... let them have their happy end, detroy the reapers and be reunited with the crew. After everything is said and done, BW could still have done the gloomy forshadowing part... but not as an ending.

#147
HKR148

HKR148
  • Members
  • 734 messages

krthomps1 wrote...

HKR148 wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

2. "Nothing mattered!"

You may as well extend this logic to real life.  If everything ends, including life itself, and infinite continuation is necessary for you to feel something "matters," then nothing you do in your real life matters either.  None of the relationships you have, none of the decisions you make, nothing.  Everything mattered in Mass Effect; Shepard touched the lives of thousands of individuals, and some on a very personal level i.e. Love Interest and squad/crew. 

As for our choices in the game resulting in direct consequences, we saw these consequences throughout the game.  Throughout the entire game we saw the consequences of our actions over the past 2 games.  We saw the result of the relationships we've nurtured, we saw the result of saving the council, saving Wrex, or keeping our crew alive in ME2.  Granted, the Collector Base choice from ME2 could have been integrated better, but we saw a great deal of direct consequences.  Now, the end game, that's a huge decision.  All 3 decisions may look the same with a wave of energy, but just think of the ramifications for the future of the galaxy.  I like that Bioware left that part, the part after Shepard's story, up to us.  And yes, the ripples of your decisions are still going on even though you don't get to personally witness them.  The Krogan are either cured of the genophage or doomed to extinction.  The Quarians could be alive to rebuild or dead since the middle of the game.  This is huge, and I scoff at anyone who says "nothing mattered."  Just because you'd like to see more direct evidence of what you do (which is a fair criticism) doesn't mean that "nothing mattered."


If this was a game that was only about the good of the entire society, then your argument can be backed by that. But the central theme of the game is not and the last 15 minute was a clear abandonment of the type of genre the Mass Effect was supposed to be. Do you ever read a literature that spends 4/5 of its portion on Romance than suddenly 1/5 it's turning into a non-sensical murder mystery? I would call that a garbage literature. That's what I find the ending unacceptable.

I've been copy/pasting my argument on several thread tealking about the basically the same argument. Really don't want to spam this,

[Here]

What I absolutely am not tolerating is the traumatic betrayal of the central philosophy that Bioware was trying to build up in ME3. Take Paragon path for an example. The definition of 'hope' was not only that the rest of the galaxy will survive, but 'hope' that he/she will be able to get through the ordeal along with people he/she cherishes (love interest, squad members, friends etc.) even though the odd was very slim.

Shepard went through the odds to try breaking the cycle. The Prothean has acknowledged that what he/she has done was something that was never seen in the history of the galaxy filled with repeated genocidal cycle commited by the reapers. Right up to the fleet approaching Earth; the story had reached a climax where Shepard and the rest of the galaxy is about to undo the Reapers and it's all because of the protagonist's existence.

Then the catalyst happened, every philosophical direction the game was taking suddenly became meaningless. Whatever the truth the catalyst believed in is the absolute truth and we must accept that. And suddenly Shepard, and us the players, have to comply with that unacceptable philosophy.

This in my view was an absolute betrayal against the central theme of the ME story-line, and for me this is absolutely unacceptable. If this was a book I wouldn't even bother keeping it in my bookshelf. The way Bioware portrays human value is simply unacceptable by any philosophical standard in my book.


I love the thought you put into this.  But I disagree that we had to accept the Catalyst's "truth".  The only option that seems to suggest this was synthesis.  I destroyed the reapers because I disagreed with the catalyst, and so did Biotic Sage, it seems.  I rejected what this self-appointed god-thing believed was good for the galaxy, and acted accordingly.  This was also, specifically, the reason I didn't pick "synthesis".  His logic was wrong, and his method flawed. 
The supremely heroic vision of Shepard was not lost in those last moments for me.  She accomplished exactly what she set out to do.  The reaper cycle of extinction was ended.  Organic life was to have the chance to write its own future.  She went out as the greatest hero the galaxy will ever know. The fact that the mass relays were destroyed is poetic as well.  We no longer require the "guidance" of this catalyst.  We will do it ourselves.  Absolute independence from the reapers and their creators.  I think it is a beautiful thing, and it a fitting, heroic culmination of everything the series stands for. 


If the point of the storyline was about the larger-than-life views, every single personal element has been sacrificed for sake of that, and the complete lack of closure for any major characters in the game is what makes me extremely dissatisfied. Take the stories from the WWII for example, war never is a fight for the society, there's always personal element attached to it; I've dissected the ending over and over again and I just simply cannot find enough personal element being involved in the ending scene to make me believe that the ending was tangible enough for the central theme of the series.

#148
lasertank

lasertank
  • Members
  • 630 messages

Biotic Sage wrote...

lasertank wrote...

If you really think ME3 plot is flawless, fine. But apparently most players don't share with your opinions. There are plenty of reasons and proofs showing the ME3 story is ill-written, contrived, and illogical, and I will not repeat them here. Please go through those discussion threads.


If you read my posts, you would see that I think it's anything but "flawless."  I have yet to encounter a flawless work of fiction.  Even in my OP on this thread I mentioned parts that could have been done better.


Then there's nothing we can argue about anymore. The last difference between you and me is that I think these flaws are too evident to ignore. Their evident existence could jeopardize the logic and the tone of the whole ME3 plot, and you think they are fine.

#149
deathscythe517

deathscythe517
  • Members
  • 539 messages
Indeed, it wouldn't kill Bioware to do a better ending, hell, if you're willing to they could easily splice the imagery of the three endings into three distinct endings - lazy as that may be - but at least it would make more sense with some light editing.

#150
Aspex

Aspex
  • Members
  • 84 messages
Thank you for posting this. It's heartening to see someone point out the criticisms of the endings that are unfair, especially given the rampant emotions that are running around at this stage.

I agree with your first assertion that the Catalyst cannot be proven wrong, though it's a double edged argument. It's the white swan/black swan example of science: on one hand, the Catalyst can be 'right' for a trillion cycles, but it only takes one cycle to not fit with the hypothesis in order to disprove it. Continuing on from that within the cycle, though, it can exist for a trillion years without such an eventuality as the death of organics - but it'll only take one single event for that to be proven wrong as well. As you say, you can't actually prove the Catalyst right or wrong, for people on either side of the argument.

Point two, I think, depends on the context of the 'nothing mattered' criticism. On the larger scale extended across all three games, I definitely agree - Shepard's actions had massive ramifications on the galaxy, for better or worse. I've made this argument before, that I will present here again: yes, the mass relays and the citadel might be gone, the military forces of the galaxy might be stranded on the Sol system. All very bleak, but there is also success: keep in mind that Shepard didn't just kidnap every single man, woman and child across the galaxy to fight at Earth. There are civilians left on the original planets, even if they might be burning, and that in itself is a massive victory despite the unimaginable losses - the alternative would have been that there would have been NOTHING left.

Also keep in mind that the mass relays and Citadel were never meant to be part of the natural process of evolution and development. They were placed there to accelerate the development of the advanced races of the cycle for harvesting - one could argue (and I certainly do) that the destruction of those things that the Reapers created and would have served as the cycle's death sentence do not deserve to survive. The destruction of the mass relays and Citadel are incredibly significant because they signify a return to 'normalcy' and the pace at which the galaxy should have gone without the Reapers' involvement, and in that ending is probably the greatest one that anyone could have hoped for.

However, the 'nothing mattered' criticism for me is fair if applied within the context of the game itself, if we aren't considering the ME universe from a lore point of view (which, ironically, should leave most people content with imagination). The point being made is the disconnect between EMS and the final battle and Shepard's ending; regardless of the number you get, it does not seem to alter the final path in any way. Compare this with ME2, where not having your squadmates' loyalties could result in dire ramifications of who survives in the end. Admittedly, the counter-argument would be that the 5k EMS at destroy ending results in Shepard's survival, but it seems so specific in its scope of application that one has to wonder what exactly the purpose of EMS was in the first place.

The third point I definitely agree. Never have I played a game before that evoked so many different emotions - excitement, sorrow, anger, amusement. When we say that ME3 was awesome, that is all credit to Bioware and the work that they have done. Yes, there might be hiccups here and there with the quality of work (for me, it was when Shepard picked up a rock from Rannoch for Tali to 'carry home in your pocket'; the rock texture failed to load, which...sort of killed the mood. >.>) , but the worst criticism one can level is that the ending somehow managed to 'destroy the entire series' or 'was the result of a few minutes'. It didn't - the greatness of the entire trilogy far eclipses the controversy that the ending is generating, and I keep that in mind whenever I feel upset or angry about how things happened. Just think about it: if there is such a massive uproar over the endings on BSN, what do you think went on in the dev and writing teams at Bioware? I can only imagine how paralysing it must have been for everyone involved, and how many 'endings' they went through before they arrived at this particular set. Bioware is hardly lazy, and the creation of their ending, despite its flaws, does not mean they are lazy.

Now if I may, I would add a point four to your list just because it annoys me greatly as well:

4. I played this game for entertainment, not some deep metaphysical or meaningful message!

Then you shouldn't have liked the Mass Effect series as a whole. The trilogy contains so many themes and significant features: the struggle against a seemingly unstoppable force and the importance of always carrying on, the conflict between organics and synthetics, the placement of humanity in the universe and how insignificant we actually are in the grand scheme of things. The balance of sacrifice and hope in ME3, how far we are willing to go and how much we are willing to pay for victory, how hope is the very thing that drives organics against all odds to do that which would have been considered impossible. The evolution of the Quarian/Geth conflict from ME1 to 3 has been one of the greatest story arcs I have ever seen, and it contains so many 'deep metaphysical and meaningful' messages that it has caused me to just stop and ponder on it for long periods of time.

The Mass Effect series as a whole is not great because it provided instant gratification, nor would it be what it is today if it had only aimed to provide instant gratification for its players. It is great for me because it provides so many lessons, so many messages to consider regardless of how controversial they are, so much time spent simply thinking about the game and the universe Bioware has created. Commander Shepard's story and the three games are only windows through which we look into this universe where humanity is not alone, where we are looked upon with contempt and fear, where we recklessly drive forward against all warnings against it. The games provide only a tiny glimpse over a few years at most into a universe which has existed for and will continue to exist for trillions of years, and there is where its significance lies.

If you played this game for entertainment, fine; I played for entertainment, but the depth of the universe is something that cannot be ignored. If you aren't happy with the ending (and I am not entirely pleased, though as OP has covered, plot holes and logical fallacies are a different matter), fine; but don't write off the entire series and the bold messages it presented just because it didn't 'entertain' you.