1634 réponses à ce sujet

[gubaru]

Can the completely insulting misuse of evolution be added to the list of grievances? I'm hard-pressed to say what is the worst point the Catalyst makes in regard to evolution in the synthesis ending: There's an end to evolution; that evolution leads to the same place (creating synthetic life) across an entire galaxy and countless cycles or that it always takes the same amount of time (about 50,000 years) for the less advanced species the Reapers leave alive to get there. I think the last two grow out of the first. Evolution has no goal and it has no end. Species will become extinct (including humans, eventually) but evolution will continue. For me, using a scientific concept you don't understand and relying on your audience not understanding it either was the most insulting part of the ending.

[CDRSkyShepard]

Good morning! (To all of you for which this is morning, anyway) I'm up and about, and my first order of business is editing the OP. I got some good stuff while I was sleeping. Just an update:

- I now have petition links. I will put them under "War Assets." Please read them and make sure you know what you're supporting. I know a lot of us support different ways to deal with the ending, different plot points annoy us, etc, so make sure you're signing something you support.

- I will be putting a disclaimer in the OP that not everyone has to agree with everything in the OP...it's just a compiled list of what fans think is wrong. You yourself might agree or disagree with some points, and that's just fine. I myself disagree with some of them, and I wrote the thing.

- I will be adding instructions on how to put the Fleet banners into sigs.

- I will be adding the link to the Child's Play Charity Drive in the "War Assets" section.

- I will be adding a section for blogs in the "War Assets" section. This might later go into the Media section, but for now that's where I want to put it, and we'll see how that goes.

- I have some new articles for the Media section, including a pro-ending Penny Arcade article.

- General tidying up of the OP.

I hope everyone is staying strong out there, keep it coming!

[DoctorCrowtgamer]

Yeah I agree with the OP. What Bioware needs to understand is that the reason we don't like the endings is because they did such a good job with the rest of the games and then just through it out the window. It's the same thing with the Star Wars SEs,I don't dislike them because I hate Star Wars or George Lucas I dislike them they messed up something that was pretty much perfect to begin with.

[Karrie788]

GREAT post OP.

We wouldn't be so passionate about the endings if we weren't so invested in the games and if we didn't enjoy Bioware games in general.
I've trusted Bioware for years. Deep down, I still hope they will do the right thing. They have listened to us so many times during the past. Maybe that's wishful thinking, but I have hope.

[Deklan_Caine]

Excellent post!

[Dormitorius]

+1

[Matt561]

I loved the game, the end just didn't seem like it was from the same game I was playing. As soon as that platform went up it was like everything went to default Shepard with no import.

[Moirai]

This is superb:

http://arkis.deviant...25?moodonly=1#/

Why? Because it is, in concept, fundamentally true to the overall Mass Effect experience. It presents us with a forth option.

Shepard's option.

The option to make our own choice, to break the cycle completely by not following anything presented by this ancient 'intelligence'. The option to say a big FU to it and all that it stands for.

We will choose our own destiny. We will NOT pick one from some preordained 'list' presented by some out of touch AI. To do so would only be following its rules, and that goes against everything Shepard has ever stood for.

Shepard should have been able to tell this AI, that we didn't ask for your 'solution' and we don't want it. How dare they make choices for us. How dare they be so arrogant to assume that each cycle will play out the same way and wipe out countless trillions based on some ancient event, which may have had any number of other reasons for turning out the way it did. Besides, its logic is completely flawed, since it has never given any cycle a chance to prove that it can transcend the original Synthetic/Organic issue.

The AI is simply wrong, flawed and has no right to play god with the galaxy. And all its so called final 'options' are therefore also flawed and unacceptable.

If they truly wish to stop the chaos, there is another option...

That the AI and the Reapers kill themselves and leave us alone.

That should have been a Shepard 'choice' through interaction. To beat them with their own flawed logic.

EDIT: On another level of utterly flawed logic, this AI seems to be blind to the fact that both itself and the Reapers are performing pretty much the very task that they purport to be trying to avoid. That being, synthetics wiping out organics. They are effectively creating almost the same situation that they pretend to be trying to stop.

At this point the AI should have been talked into a logic deadend from which it's only response would be to terminate itself and the Reapers, much in the same way President Eden in Fallout 3 was.

Bah..

Modifié par Moirai, 13 mars 2012 - 07:11 .

[RubiconI7]

Down to the last line here...for me, everything else can be forgiven, but I just can't let go the closure of the characters and the universe that we helped shape for the past three games.

And why oh why did Shepherd become so un-Shepherd like in the last 15 minutes?!

Modifié par RubiconI7, 13 mars 2012 - 06:54 .

[xlI ReFLeX lIx]

Thanks for the banners! CANADIAN FLEET!!

[CDRSkyShepard]

Moirai wrote...

This is superb:

http://arkis.deviant...25?moodonly=1#/

Why? Because it is, in concept, fundamentally true to the overall Mass Effect experience. It presents us with a forth option.

Shepard's option.

The option to make our own choice, to break the cycle completely by not following anything presented by this ancient 'intelligence'. The option to say a big FU to it and all that it stands for.

We will choose our own destiny. We will NOT pick one from some preordained 'list' presented by some out of touch AI. To do so would only be following its rules, and that goes against everything Shepard has ever stood for.

Shepard should have been able to tell this AI, that we didn't ask for your 'solution' and we don't want it. How dare they make choices for us. How dare they be so arrogant to assume that each cycle will play out the same way and wipe out countless trillions based on some ancient event, which may have had any number of other reasons for turning out the way it did. Besides, its logic is completely flawed, since it has never given any cycle a chance to prove that it can transcend the original Synthetic/Organic issue.

The AI is simply wrong, flawed and has no right to play god with the galaxy. And all its so called final 'options' are therefore also flawed and unacceptable.

If they truly wish to stop the chaos, there is another option...

That the AI and the Reapers kill themselves and leave us alone.

That should have been a Shepard 'choice' through interaction. To beat them with their own flawed logic.

EDIT: On another level of utterly flawed logic, this AI seems to be blind to the fact that both itself and the Reapers are performing pretty much the very task that they purport to be trying to avoid. That being, synthetics wiping out organics. They are effectively creating almost the same situation that they pretend to be trying to stop.

At this point the AI should have been talked into a logic deadend from which it's only response would be to terminate itself and the Reapers, much in the same way President Eden in Fallout 3 was.

Bah..

While I don't think fans should re-write the ending on the off chance a re-write takes place, I definitely love this concept, and I hope BioWare sees it! I'll find a way to work it into the OP. Thanks!

[Moirai]

On the issue of the 'indoctrination' theory, I have to say that when I played the final charge to the beam scene with Harbinger firing at you, it felt very wrong.

Shepard's hit by a beam and then...all her armour has vanished, along with her weapons, and she's just wearing her casual outfit.

How does a laser manage to effectively atomise Shepard's armour and not atomise Shepard? And how could she be wearing her casual clothes under her armour...?

Leaving her with some smoking armour would have made some sense. But to remove it completely was just jarring.

It was at that point I just sat there, staring at the screen, feeling completely confused and wondering what the heck had just happened. Everything felt different and nothing seemed to make much sense from that point on. It almost felt like it was just tacked on from a different version of the game. It all just felt...wrong.

EDIT: On a side note, after mentioning Fallout 3 in my previous post; it's interesting to note that fans of that particular game also strongly disliked the ending, and Bethesda did actually listen and 'fix' it with the Broken Steel DLC.

That's major kudos to Bethesda for listening to their fans. I can only hope Bioware can also see the sense in keeping their fans happy too.

Modifié par Moirai, 13 mars 2012 - 08:01 .

[RubiconI7]

Moirai wrote...

On the issue of the 'indoctrination' theory, I have to say that when I played the final charge to the beam scene with Harbinger firing at you, it felt very wrong.

Shepard's hit by a beam and then...all her armour has vanished, along with her weapons, and she's just wearing her casual outfit.

How does a laser manage to effectively atomise Shepard's armour and not atomise Shepard? And how could she be wearing her casual clothes under her armour...?

Leaving her with some smoking armour would have made some sense. But to remove it completely was just jarring.

It was at that point I just sat there, staring at the screen, feeling completely confused and wondering what the heck had just happened. Everything felt different and nothing seemed to make much sense from that point on. It almost felt like it was just tacked on from a different version of the game. It all just felt...wrong.

EDIT: On a side note, after mentioning Fallout 3 in my previous post; it's interesting to note that fans of that particular game also strongly disliked the ending, and Bethesda did actually listen and 'fix' it with the Broken Steel DLC.

That's major kudos to Bethesda for listening to their fans. I can only hope Bioware can also see the sense in keeping their fans happy too.

Your Shepherd was wearing Casual clothes? Mine was wearing a burnt out version of the N7 armor..Wierd.
And yes, I agree the blast from Harbinger felt very wrong in the end...with a never-overheating-pistol and everything.

[RubiconI7]

I think theory with the Guardian being the fail-safe is one of the ways that explains all the plotholes on Reaper/Guardian behavior.

[Verit]

CDRSkyShepard wrote...
I hope everyone is staying strong out there, keep it coming!

Nice work, this is the only thread regarding the ending so far that I think deserves a sticky. You did a good job detailing the problems with the ending and above all you still gave Bioware the respect they deserve for making an otherwise great game.

Modifié par -Draikin-, 13 mars 2012 - 09:04 .

[RubiconI7]

@CDRSkyShepard

Great, strong piece.

http://social.biowar...index/9878789/1

[Eclipse merc]

I support this thread.

[Baryonic-Member]

The problem with the ending is that it is stupid and riddled with plot
holes. The fact that the Citadel is sapient is freaking stupid and
completely undermines the plot of the first game. Why have Sovereign
evaluate the state of galactic civilization if the Catalst can just do
it and activate the relay when the time is ripe. And since the Citadel
has control of the relay network, why didn't it shut it down and isolate every system?

The fact how the crucible just casually flies in and docks in the middle of a battle with Reapers all around ignoring it
is stupid.

And
why did the Catalyst suddenly help Shepard destroy/control the Reapers?
And why did the fact that Shepard was there prove that its solution
wouldn't work anymore? If for some reason the solution would be
obsolete, why didn't the Catalyst just order the Reapers to retreat or
whatever (since it controls the Reapers)? Why let Shepard choose?

And
if we were to assume that the Catalyst can't shut down the Mass Relay
network, why didn't the Reapers invade the Citadel first (instead of
rushing to Earth), like Sovereign planned in the first game? Before the
game came out, people defended the Reapers' reluctance to invade the
Citadel by the fact that the council species could supposidely shut the
wards and seal the station, but that wasn't a problem when the Reapers
moved it above Earth.

I'm fine with a dark ending, like all the
Mass Relays getting destroyed in order to destroy the Reapers, but only
if it makes sense, not this Catalyst crap with no explanation on how the
Crucible works. If they would have explained that it released a pulse
that destroyed all Mass Effect technology (which is based on the Relays
and therfore the Reapers) and that it was relayed by the Mass Relays,
then that would sort of made sense. I would have forgiven BioWare for
the Crucible deus ex machina purpose if the Catalyst was just removed
from
the story and the original dark energy would replace it.



The
Reapers should have invaded the Citadel at the beginning of ME3 and
shut down the relay network. They would then have proceeded to invade
Earth, while Shepard was standing trial. Shepard would then escape in a
similar fashion with the Normandy. Since the Normandy carries a Reaper
IFF, it would be able to use the relay network. It would then rally the
galaxy similarily to how he did in ME3, rallying species and attempting
to reproduce the Reaper IFF. When investigating what it does to a
Mass Relay, they discover that the 12 Prothean scientists from Ilos
spent their last years on the Citadel trying to find a permanent
solution to the Reapers. They managed to create the blueprints for a
device that could potentially destroy the Reapers, but they didn't have
any resources to build it, nor any beacons or communications to send the
blueprints anywhere. They managed to upload the blueprints to the
Mass Relay network from the Citadel, and Shepard and company discovers
it when the Reaper IFF unlocks some of the deeper secrets of the relays.
But they need teh Citadel to use the weapon, both for a power source
and to make teh "reaper killign" pulse spread across the galaxy through
the relays (since the Citadel controls teh relay network, yes.) With the
IFF, Shepard and company figures out a way how to do that (while still
rallying the other species). Yes. The Citadel could be moved to Earth in
a smiliar fashion and teh end game is basically teh same, yes. Except
there would be no freaking sapient Catalyst, no.

But at the end,
on the Citadel when Shepard can activate the crucible, Harbinger makes
an appearance. He explains the motivation of the Reapers (dark energy
destroying the galaxy) and also explains how activating the Crucible
will destroy not just the Reapers, but all Mass Effect technology, including the relays (since our ME technology is based on the reapers'). Yes.

Modifié par Baryonic-Member, 13 mars 2012 - 09:09 .

[Leshoyadut]

Moirai wrote...

On the issue of the 'indoctrination' theory, I have to say that when I played the final charge to the beam scene with Harbinger firing at you, it felt very wrong.

Shepard's hit by a beam and then...all her armour has vanished, along with her weapons, and she's just wearing her casual outfit.

How does a laser manage to effectively atomise Shepard's armour and not atomise Shepard? And how could she be wearing her casual clothes under her armour...?

Leaving her with some smoking armour would have made some sense. But to remove it completely was just jarring.

It was at that point I just sat there, staring at the screen, feeling completely confused and wondering what the heck had just happened. Everything felt different and nothing seemed to make much sense from that point on. It almost felt like it was just tacked on from a different version of the game. It all just felt...wrong.

Yeah, my Shepard had melty armor all over her. Lost covering on her right arm, I believe, but most of it was charred to **** and melted all over. I didn't think it felt that out of place, since the beam also didn't kill the one dude crawling towards you as you walk to the beam. I figure, Shepard just got caught in the heat from the beam, with the arm covering falling off from having melted too much.

I also wish to state that I wasn't dissatisfied with the endings in and of themselves (other than the destruction option; I was really sad to get the geth together with the quarians only to kill off the geth as they started to help the quarians rebuild Rannoch). They were the end to Shepard's story, even the one with Shepard being alive on the ruins of the Citadel. It was the end of her story. It played that role admirably.

What really got me was the lack of the "perfect run" option, basically what others have described: Use the examples of bringing the turians and krogan, and the geth and quarians together to show the Catalyst that the Reaper and Synthesis are not the only options, that we should choose our own ways, as well as the complete lack of explanation of what happened after the battle for Earth. If those two things were fixed (and Tali's face were properly made and modeled without just using a stock image), I would say it's the perfect game to me. Yes, there are a few things that fall through, but overall it was amazing.

I definitely support this.

[Maugrim]

Man Chris really is evil...

[Maugrim]

[bleetman]

RubiconI7 wrote...

Your Shepherd was wearing Casual clothes? Mine was wearing a burnt out version of the N7 armor..Wierd.

Yeah, mine too. It's possibly not as obvious from the front, but I could pretty clearly make out that it was armour from the back.

@Makenzie

I want a lifesize huggable Garrus pillow now.

Modifié par bleetman, 13 mars 2012 - 09:36 .

[mattahraw]

Nice comic!

[DrowNoble]

Should be stickied. Also I'm 100% in agreement with this.

Remember people: HOLD THE LINE

[glacier1701]

You might want to add this Forbes Article to the list. Shoots down most game journalists who are dismissing our concerns as being from 'whiners'. Really is nice to see that a business magazine which is read by investors is defending gamer rights whereas so called game journalists are being dismissive of us and being very 'childish' about it.