1594 réponses à ce sujet

[MassiveEffects]

LMShepard wrote...

If that entire sequence after the beam blast was just a hallucination and Shepard is actually lying in the rubble on Earth, then the war is not over. The crucible is still inactive, the Reapers are still attacking and the Illusive Man is still alive. NOTHING HAS BEEN ACHIEVED! How is this a better ending that the ending at face value? Wars are not won in dreams. If any of the final sequences were a hallucination, it would be on the Citadel when both Shepard and Anderson are lying there, dying then Admiral Hackett calls in saying that the crucible isn't firing.

I don't have faith in Bioware that they will pull this out for the real fans. Sadly, EA has indoctrinated the Bioware staff. John Riccitello is the Star-child and has given Casey Hudson, Mike Gamble and Mac Walters options...and the only colour ending they get is GREEN.

It's sad, really.

If I had to pick my poison, not winning at all is still preferable to winning by means of a weird, nonsensical, textbook example of deus ex machina that doesn't (in my admittedly subjective opinion) fit with existing and established Mass Effect lore at all.

[Smiley556]

Skelter192 wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Yuoaman wrote...

What's your interpretation of the Prothean VI not recognizing even the small amount of indoctrination that Shep was under?

answer seems quite obvoius to me.
it has been explained multiple times in thread.

Shepard was never indoctrinated during game. its only at the indoctrination hallucination scene at the end that you can CHOOSE to be indoctrinated or break free. if you chose destroy, shep is never indoctrinated in the game at any point. control and synthesis result in you giving into indoctrination and you spend the last 2 minutes of the game indoctrinated /dead, which you would never know untill you see the shepard lives ending, this breath in the rubble on earth is everything.

as stated before why would you have an indoctrination attempt at the end if you were already indoctrinated.

That makes no sense.

Awsome comeback to stated evidence.

Modifié par Smiley556, 13 mars 2012 - 03:48 .

[WaPuS]

Cudo's I never really hated the ending and was initially a bit disappointed, but after reading this it all makes sense. And I see people are still fighting this so let me put it this way, end of the game is not the end... they are still going to do the ending. Those of you who complain about Bioware profiteering, we're you really not going to buy the DLC anyway? Say Bioware gave you the ending without DLC, if it was amazing which I'm sure it is going to be, I'm sure you would have bought any DLC anyway.

After reading this view Bioware just continues to amaze me with their writers.

[Mr Indivisible]

Smiley556 wrote...

Mr Indivisible wrote...

+ 1 to wrong, also you shouldn't beat up your customer base by saying "ME3 the last game in Shepard's Trilogy" then releasing DLC just so you can get the real ending.

As state earlier, DLC for ME3 is still ME3. Releasing the ending as DLC doesnt do anything to discredit the statement "ME3 the last game in Shepard's Trilogy" .

Doesn't change the fact at all that your beating up your fan base by forcing them to purchase DLC to get the true ending.

And yes it does Smiley556, I and the rest of the world was sold a package, that package was Mass Effect 3, the end of the trilogy. When I purchase a game that has years of press and announcements that it will be the final installation in the trilogy, I expect the ending to come with that game. 

To release the ending in a DLC, is like breaking ME3 up into chapters at best, multiple games at worst, which I have no problem with ( I love Halflife and its episode system just wish they'd bring out the next episode)  IF they had announced it first, but to make me pay more, without informing me up front, is underhanded and poor practice.

[Mio]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Mio wrote...

I actually don't have a problem with DLC in theory, and I have actually been ok with most of Bioware's output on that front. I'm simply saying that if it was Bioware's intent the whole time to present us with intentionally "bad" content only to hold back the "good" content to be distributed later, then I would recommend that people boycott it so as to not give the impression to game publishers/developers that thier customers can be manipulated in such a fashion. If such DLC is released under a "we made a mistake" banner then I may consider getting it, but I will be cautious about their intentions from now on.

you are assuming the ending we got are mistakes or accidents. Bioware planned this. The ending is real time playing through indctrination. the ending is meant to trick you and manipulate you just as much as its doing it in game to shepard. That is the magic. Not a mistake. It was a risk.

basically "We are going to forego the traditional dragon age style predictable slide show epilogue, for something deep and profound. Indoctrination is such a HUGE part of the series. Saren, cerberus researchers, TIM and countless others have fallen to indoctrination and nobody has spent more timearound reaper artifacts then shepard. He is a strong willed individual, which allowed him to resist it all the way up until he got nearly killed/knocked out at the end and harbinger was focusing on the climax and stopping shepard.

It was the reapers last chance to beat shepard. and if you chose anything other then destroy with >4000 EMF then you become indoctrinated and never wake from it. your mind is lost. more importanly though the PLAYER is indoctrinated. the game manipulated you into changing the theme of destroy reapers (which is present from begging game) to some kind of silly comprimise or deal with the reaper. you lose and the game laughs at you as you think you have saw a wack ending instead of the truth. Its all (in OP) setup for a live shep on eath that never was on the citadel...

And you are assuming that this is in fact some clever plan on the part of Bioware's, of which I really see no proff of. I do think this is the ending they intended to give us, not some clever manipulation.

If what you are saying is the case then I feel that will set bad precedent about how compaines can handle there game content, and I personally will not get it if that turns out to be the case. I do concede that it will likely be a sucess if it turns out to be that way.

Modifié par Mio, 13 mars 2012 - 03:53 .

[Tiax Rules All]

Skelter192 wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Yuoaman wrote...

What's your interpretation of the Prothean VI not recognizing even the small amount of indoctrination that Shep was under?

answer seems quite obvoius to me.
it has been explained multiple times in thread.

Shepard was never indoctrinated during game. its only at the indoctrination hallucination scene at the end that you can CHOOSE to be indoctrinated or break free. if you chose destroy, shep is never indoctrinated in the game at any point. control and synthesis result in you giving into indoctrination and you spend the last 2 minutes of the game indoctrinated /dead, which you would never know untill you see the shepard lives ending, this breath in the rubble on earth is everything.

as stated before why would you have an indoctrination attempt at the end if you were already indoctrinated.

That makes no sense.

sigh... Prothy VI would only recognise shep as indoctrinated if you taked to him sfter the "ending" thats when indocctrination happens or doesnt. read the op, the the end of the charge when the destroyer hits Shep is the end of reality and start of indoctrination sequence.

shep visits VI during game = no indoctrination up till then
choose destroy with >4000 = no indoctrination
----------------------------------
choose control or synthesis endings = shep never wakes up, reapers win, you are indoctrinated.

[Smiley556]

Mr Indivisible wrote...

Smiley556 wrote...

Mr Indivisible wrote...

+ 1 to wrong, also you shouldn't beat up your customer base by saying "ME3 the last game in Shepard's Trilogy" then releasing DLC just so you can get the real ending.

As state earlier, DLC for ME3 is still ME3. Releasing the ending as DLC doesnt do anything to discredit the statement "ME3 the last game in Shepard's Trilogy" .

Doesn't change the fact at all that your beating up your fan base by forcing them to purchase DLC to get the true ending.

And yes it does Smiley556, I and the rest of the world was sold a package, that package was Mass Effect 3, the end of the trilogy. When I purchase a game that has years of press and announcements that it will be the final installation in the trilogy, I expect the ending to come with that game. 

To release the ending in a DLC, is like breaking ME3 up into chapters at best, multiple games at worst, which I have no problem with ( I love Halflife and its episode system just wish they'd bring out the next episode)  IF they had announced it first, but to make me pay more, without informing me up front, is underhanded and poor practice.

And that package includes DLC. The same was done with ME2. If the ending is a paid DLC, you are not forced to buy it, in the same way you were never forced to buy Shadow Broker and Awakening. But wether you bought and played them or not, they are an integral part of the story and it is assumed it has in the story in ME3. Just like the ending to ME3 will be an integeral part to the story which you can choose not to buy if you so wish.

[Nilofeliu]

too tired to write...

Modifié par Nilofeliu, 13 mars 2012 - 04:02 .

[Ryan546]

first of all OP you are stating this as a fact which it clearly isn't. It is a decent theory but still has holes and doesnt provide any closure so its still irrelevant.

[jellmoo32]

Tiax Rules All,

You clearly put a lot of thought into this, and that is actually quite appreciated. You've pieced together a rather interesting interpretation of events. That being said, working with the notion that your theory is correct, it still leaves me with quite a few issues.

- Indoctrination was presented as a very slow burn process. Weeks and months of constant exposure in order to get somebody indoctrinated. This theory seems to contradict this.

- This completely removes any closure with TIM. Granted this could be solved via DLC.

- There is still no exposition at the end. For such a strongly character/dialog based franchise, having no exposition at the end, is still incredibly off putting for a very large segment of the fan base. Again, could be fixed via DLC.

- Your ending totally conflicts with the rest of the series to this point. What is presented as a character driven space opera that is relatively straight forward (with required twists and turns) really shouldn't have such an incredibly ambiguous ending that is wide open to interpretation and scrutiny. This does not feel like a payoff.

Ultimately, even if you are right, your interpretation remains a terrible way to end a story *unless* there is DLC/expansion made to support it. That is likely an issue in and of itself for quite a few people.

[Smiley556]

Ryan546 wrote...

first of all OP you are stating this as a fact which it clearly isn't. It is a decent theory but still has holes and doesnt provide any closure so its still irrelevant.

Present those holes, please. We are very interested in discussing them. We are fully aware that it doesnt provide closure, but we cant really help that. The story isnt finished yet so ofcourse it wont provide closure untill it is.

[MaxShine]

I spend some time thinking about it, I cannot make sense of the ending. So far I believe the best approach to make at least some sense is really this indoctrination theory. If the event displayed were real, then like I said before, it is just junk that does not make any sense.

Modifié par 100RenegadePoints, 13 mars 2012 - 04:09 .

[Tiax Rules All]

Ryan546 wrote...

first of all OP you are stating this as a fact which it clearly isn't. It is a decent theory but still has holes and doesnt provide any closure so its still irrelevant.

oh really i havent been accused of that during this thread yet. Still im gonna have to dissagree with you.  I do believe this to be the ending as intended. but i have also stated that even if this is not the indended view of the ending, It will be MY view of the ending, because I can plug EVERY plot hole with it. because shep "wakes up" at the end of the perfect ending and well im not going to re-write the OP.

and its absolutely not irrelevant in fact i think its MORE relevant. if the ending is not over. and shep is still alive in the rubble of london,  then the story CAN and almost HAS TO go on. You dont think thats relevant? I cant think of anything more relevant.

Upcoming DLC is not really in the OP but talked about much in the thread.

[Mr Indivisible]

Smiley556 wrote...

Mr Indivisible wrote...

Smiley556 wrote...

Mr Indivisible wrote...

+ 1 to wrong, also you shouldn't beat up your customer base by saying "ME3 the last game in Shepard's Trilogy" then releasing DLC just so you can get the real ending.

As state earlier, DLC for ME3 is still ME3. Releasing the ending as DLC doesnt do anything to discredit the statement "ME3 the last game in Shepard's Trilogy" .

Doesn't change the fact at all that your beating up your fan base by forcing them to purchase DLC to get the true ending.

And yes it does Smiley556, I and the rest of the world was sold a package, that package was Mass Effect 3, the end of the trilogy. When I purchase a game that has years of press and announcements that it will be the final installation in the trilogy, I expect the ending to come with that game. 

To release the ending in a DLC, is like breaking ME3 up into chapters at best, multiple games at worst, which I have no problem with ( I love Halflife and its episode system just wish they'd bring out the next episode)  IF they had announced it first, but to make me pay more, without informing me up front, is underhanded and poor practice.

And that package includes DLC. The same was done with ME2. If the ending is a paid DLC, you are not forced to buy it, in the same way you were never forced to buy Shadow Broker and Awakening. But wether you bought and played them or not, they are an integral part of the story and it is assumed it has in the story in ME3. Just like the ending to ME3 will be an integeral part to the story which you can choose not to buy if you so wish.

I smell a corporate stoog trying to justify the sale of additional product to complete an incomplete game. ME2 was a complete game without the DLC, same with ME1. If the DLC is so key to the ending, then the game they sold was incomplete, if the DLC just adds to the existing game, then the game was complete. 

Break it out like this, if by DLC Bioware always intended to (not because of the petition or anything) add an additional sequence to the end, where Sherpard gets up, shaking off the indoctrination and continuing the fight. The game was never complete. 

If the DLC adds additional missions or content during the normal course of the game, prior to the ending, the game was complete and whole, and the DLC is an extra as it should be.

You should not break a game out into DLC components just to allow players to finish it, you will alienate your market and destroy your fanbase. The caviat to this is if you announced it in the begining "Mass Effect 3 will be a multi-part story, which we will begin with part one in March of 2012, and release part 2 in the third/fourth quarter then part 3 in the new year." Ok we have been told, and have no right to complain.

[Yuoaman]

Tiax Rules All wrote...
sigh... Prothy VI would only recognise shep as indoctrinated if you taked to him sfter the "ending" thats when indocctrination happens or doesnt. read the op, the the end of the charge when the destroyer hits Shep is the end of reality and start of indoctrination sequence.

shep visits VI during game = no indoctrination up till then
choose destroy with >4000 = no indoctrination
----------------------------------
choose control or synthesis endings = shep never wakes up, reapers win, you are indoctrinated.

That isn't how indoctrination works, though - unless someone smuggled a Reaper device aboard the Normandy immediately after Thessia. And even then it probably wouldn't be enough time to indoctrinate him by the time the ending takes place.

[MassiveEffects]

100RenegadePoints wrote...

I spend some time thinking about it, I cannot make sense of the ending. So far I believe the best approach to make at least some sense is really this indoctrination theory.

Mirrored my thoughts exactly. In my opinion, indoctrination theory still doesn't make it a good ending, just a vastly less terrible ending than if you interpret the ending as literally true. That is, if they don't make post-"ending" DLC, but quite frankly I'm not holding my breath on that possibility. In addition, if they charge for it, I'll find it ethically objectionable. The sad thing is that I'll probably still buy it.

Modifié par MassiveEffects, 13 mars 2012 - 04:13 .

[Smiley556]

jellmoo32 wrote...

Tiax Rules All,

You clearly put a lot of thought into this, and that is actually quite appreciated. You've pieced together a rather interesting interpretation of events. That being said, working with the notion that your theory is correct, it still leaves me with quite a few issues.

- Indoctrination was presented as a very slow burn process. Weeks and months of constant exposure in order to get somebody indoctrinated. This theory seems to contradict this.

- This completely removes any closure with TIM. Granted this could be solved via DLC.

- There is still no exposition at the end. For such a strongly character/dialog based franchise, having no exposition at the end, is still incredibly off putting for a very large segment of the fan base. Again, could be fixed via DLC.

- Your ending totally conflicts with the rest of the series to this point. What is presented as a character driven space opera that is relatively straight forward (with required twists and turns) really shouldn't have such an incredibly ambiguous ending that is wide open to interpretation and scrutiny. This does not feel like a payoff.

Ultimately, even if you are right, your interpretation remains a terrible way to end a story *unless* there is DLC/expansion made to support it. That is likely an issue in and of itself for quite a few people.

Most of these points are again about closure to the story and can quickly be argued with the fact that, as repeated many times, and very clearly hinted at by bioware in the 'bonus' scenes, the story is indeed not over yet.

As for the slow indoctrination process, Shepard has most definatly been exposed to indoctrination, mostly as seen in Awakening. And the fact that shepard is suffering from the symptoms of being indoctrinated is made clear throughout the game. In the codex it is stated inoctrination can be fast or slow, which affects the end result.nowhere does it state that it Has to be a very slow process, just that a slow process is prefered.

[JasonTan87]

MassiveEffects wrote...

100RenegadePoints wrote...

I spend some time thinking about it, I cannot make sense of the ending. So far I believe the best approach to make at least some sense is really this indoctrination theory.

Mirrored my
thoughts exactly. In my opinion, indoctrination theory still doesn't make it a good ending, just a vastly less terrible
ending than if you interpret the ending as literally true.

I feel the indoctrination theory is just us (the players) trying to come to terms with the absolute rubbish that  was given to us for an ending after over 30 hours of phenomenal gameplay and narrative.  Of course, I would like to be proven wrong, but I find that quite unlikely.

In either case, indoctrination or no indoctrination, what we got is still terrible writing.

[Avl521]

The OP doesn't get it.
It's a single ending with about 30 seconds of added footage between the different choices and a flashy color.

THE GAME IS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLETE.
It's supposed to be the ENDING of the trilogy, then end of it all.
So we have two options: Either THAT was the true ending in which case it is the worst ending in entertainment media EVER.
OR that was "an indoctrination" in which case BioWare sold us an incomplete game that lacks the true ending and is therefore ripping us off.
It's like if you bought Mass Effect 2 and finished it but you had to buy the Suicide Mission as DLC because "that is the true ending". Let me ask you which one is even worse? Think about it.

It's like buying Assassin's Creed II and then having to buy the whole Vatican/Rome mission to kill Rodrigo Borgia because if not you won't see Minerva at the end. The SAME thing is what you're suggesting. We finish ME3 and see that pathetic excuse for an ending just to have BioWare tell us "Oh sorry we ruined the whole series for you, here, buy this 15 dollar DLC so you can see the true ending that SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE DISK FROM THE BEGINNING."

It's one thing having a Prothean as DLC, that is ok with me, I don't care about day one DLC, but withholding a part of the story, THE MOST IMPORTANT part of the story for that matter, to sell it later? That is just unacceptable.

[Lugaidster]

Mr Indivisible wrote...

I smell a corporate stoog trying to justify the sale of additional product to complete an incomplete game. ME2 was a complete game without the DLC, same with ME1. If the DLC is so key to the ending, then the game they sold was incomplete, if the DLC just adds to the existing game, then the game was complete. 

Break it out like this, if by DLC Bioware always intended to (not because of the petition or anything) add an additional sequence to the end, where Sherpard gets up, shaking off the indoctrination and continuing the fight. The game was never complete. 

If the DLC adds additional missions or content during the normal course of the game, prior to the ending, the game was complete and whole, and the DLC is an extra as it should be.

You should not break a game out into DLC components just to allow players to finish it, you will alienate your market and destroy your fanbase. The caviat to this is if you announced it in the begining "Mass Effect 3 will be a multi-part story, which we will begin with part one in March of 2012, and release part 2 in the third/fourth quarter then part 3 in the new year." Ok we have been told, and have no right to complain.

To be fair, the only complete game without DLC in the franchise is ME1. Liara's shadow broker dlc is a pretty big part of ME, as is the Arrival DLC (the others I can disregard). 

[Ryan546]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Ryan546 wrote...

first of all OP you are stating this as a fact which it clearly isn't. It is a decent theory but still has holes and doesnt provide any closure so its still irrelevant.

oh really i havent been accused of that during this thread yet. Still im gonna have to dissagree with you.  I do believe this to be the ending as intended. but i have also stated that even if this is not the indended view of the ending, It will be MY view of the ending, because I can plug EVERY plot hole with it. because shep "wakes up" at the end of the perfect ending and well im not going to re-write the OP.

and its absolutely not irrelevant in fact i think its MORE relevant. if the ending is not over. and shep is still alive in the rubble of london,  then the story CAN and almost HAS TO go on. You dont think thats relevant? I cant think of anything more relevant.

Upcoming DLC is not really in the OP but talked about much in the thread.

The biggest problem is that the catalyst does not say that Shepard will die w/o his tech, he would most likely survive but have limited functions.  the boy just mentions this to show how tech is already intergrated into the system. 

In the citadel the walls could have moved allowing anderson to get ahead of you.  You interpreted the ambigousness in a certain way and presented it as fact.  

Also when coats says that nobody made it shepard was still down so it is a valid assumption that coats just didnt see him and/or anderson get up.  

All in all nothing matters besides the fact that it was a poorly put together ending no matter how you look at it.  It provided no closure and took away the importance of all your choices.  hopefully it will somehow get patched/ DLC

Edit: This series wasn't supposed to end like 2001: A Space Oddyssey with an ending open for translation, it worked very well for that movie but the series demanded closure, your choices playing out and finality.

I would have much rather had a traditional ending dependant on your galactic resources and previous decisions

Modifié par Ryan546, 13 mars 2012 - 04:20 .

[Lugaidster]

Avl521 wrote...

The OP doesn't get it.
It's a single ending with about 30 seconds of added footage between the different choices and a flashy color.

THE GAME IS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLETE.
It's supposed to be the ENDING of the trilogy, then end of it all.
So we have two options: Either THAT was the true ending in which case it is the worst ending in entertainment media EVER.
OR that was "an indoctrination" in which case BioWare sold us an incomplete game that lacks the true ending and is therefore ripping us off.
It's like if you bought Mass Effect 2 and finished it but you had to buy the Suicide Mission as DLC because "that is the true ending". Let me ask you which one is even worse? Think about it.

The second one at least makes some business sense, the first one is just stupid. There's better ways to present the experience we are argueing here. However, because we were given what we have here, we're trying to make sense of the mess. Do you have a better theory than they're just stupid and messed up? I'd like to hear it, because I'd rather think they're ballsy/greedy than stupid and ME1 and 2 were just a fluke.

Cheers

[Tiax Rules All]

jellmoo32 wrote... 

Tiax Rules All,

You clearly put a lot of thought into this, and that is actually quite appreciated. You've pieced together a rather interesting interpretation of events. That being said, working with the notion that your theory is correct, it still leaves me with quite a few issues.

challange accepted...

- Indoctrination was presented as a very slow burn process. Weeks and months of constant exposure in order to get somebody indoctrinated. This theory seems to contradict this.

the kid is the slow indoctrination. not only was he not really at the ending or dreams. he was never on the shuttle and never in the vent. nobody else ever saw him or reacted to him. entering the shuttle soldiers helped other soldiers and people onto the shuttle but never looked or offered help to the boy at all. never. hes not there. this video is 3 min long explains the boy perfectly  

- This completely removes any closure with TIM. Granted this could be solved via DLC.

true but doesn't mean it didn't happen. DLC incoming...

- There is still no exposition at the end. For such a strongly character/dialog based franchise, having no exposition at the end, is still incredibly off putting for a very large segment of the fan base. Again, could be fixed via DLC.

again get your believer fixed, dlc is coming.

- Your ending totally conflicts with the rest of the series to this point. What is presented as a character driven space opera that is relatively straight forward (with required twists and turns) really shouldn't have such an incredibly ambiguous ending that is wide open to interpretation and scrutiny. This does not feel like a payoff.

or for someone like me it seems daring and outside the box, also i like it. am im not alone. so whos to say what they can or cant do for the ending of thier game. there are no rules they need to adhear to. there are expectaions but they are not rules.

Ultimately, even if you are right, your interpretation remains a terrible way to end a story *unless* there is DLC/expansion made to support it. That is likely an issue in and of itself for quite a few people.

do i have to say DLC is coming again...

[Smiley556]

Avl521 wrote...

The OP doesn't get it.
It's a single ending with about 30 seconds of added footage between the different choices and a flashy color.

THE GAME IS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLETE.
It's supposed to be the ENDING of the trilogy, then end of it all.
So we have two options: Either THAT was the true ending in which case it is the worst ending in entertainment media EVER.
OR that was "an indoctrination" in which case BioWare sold us an incomplete game that lacks the true ending and is therefore ripping us off.
It's like if you bought Mass Effect 2 and finished it but you had to buy the Suicide Mission as DLC because "that is the true ending". Let me ask you which one is even worse? Think about it.

It's like buying Assassin's Creed II and then having to buy the whole Vatican/Rome mission to kill Rodrigo Borgia because if not you won't see Minerva at the end. The SAME thing is what you're suggesting. We finish ME3 and see that pathetic excuse for an ending just to have BioWare tell us "Oh sorry we ruined the whole series for you, here, buy this 15 dollar DLC so you can see the true ending that SHOULD HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE DISK FROM THE BEGINNING."

It's one thing having a Prothean as DLC, that is ok with me, I don't care about day one DLC, but withholding a part of the story, THE MOST IMPORTANT part of the story for that matter, to sell it later? That is just unacceptable.

THE GAME IS SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLETE.  <- THIS is an assumption. Where OP's post is based on a list of evidence, this is assumption that keeps cropping up. 

The story is not complete. How do we know this? Because the story is not complete. It ends without any closure and explenation to what happens and a guy saying 'oke, one more story about shepard'. I know you WANT the story to be complete, but it isnt. And people say the indoctrination theory is wishfull thinking...

[Madecologist]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

squad mates that were following you during the charge, did not get to normady, run away, get into relay and try to outrun a blast that they had no idea was coming. Its not overlooked plot hole, its an intentional oddity to make you realise its fake/ sheps wishfull imagination.  If anything the didnt make that point obvois enough for people to get. so some still think that Bioware just doesn't know how to write, whicj is incorrect

Perhaps, but it can also be something more insidious.

Emotional Provocation. Sometimes writers try to create a tense emotion to make you freak. Problem is it can many times perform a character assasination or worst, create plot holes or narrative discontinuity.

So two models stand before us: Model 1: This is all a clue to hint at there is something 'ajar' going on. It makes no sense because it shouldn't (being a hallucination and all).

Model 2: Bioware wanted to illicit a strong emotional reaction from us by creating a scene that puts the Normandy and crew in Jeapordy, but the guy that wrote it apprently did not know where the rest of the story was going and editing missed that a scene was discontinous.

Model 2 implies bad writing. Now you are right that it is a little... harsh to assume BW dropped the ball on writing, but even Steven King admits to dropping the ball sometimes (this is why a peer reader and editors are such a critical part on literary writing). Though in theory these checks exist in the game industry they are 'in house'. The 'editor' is probably the lead designer or lead writer.

Basically it is not far fetch to assume someone somewhere messed up and no one caught it (even on something as monumental as the ending of a trilogy). The video game industry (heck even the literary one) are riddled with events where a good author produced a bad piece of fiction and it was never caught by the filters.

Lastly, if model 1 was true... why was it not resolved in the game? This is suppose to be the end of a triology, the end of Shepard's tale; not part 3 of a 4+ part story. Even if it were true, then we get a different can of worms (as to having a teaser 'cliff hanger' in a true finale). Remember at no point did BW say the triology is going to be expanded (only the franchise would be).

Modifié par Madecologist, 13 mars 2012 - 04:22 .