1594 réponses à ce sujet

[Tiax Rules All]

Falconee wrote...

Drenick18 wrote...

yeah, like I said in another thread, it's too good an opportunity to "break the fourth wall" for Bioware to pass up. If you picked the Synthesis and Control endings, then YOU have been indoctrinated as well, not just Shepard in-game, but also you in real life. Because you bought into the Reaper logic! "Synthesis... yeah, why not. Just like you guys, the Reapers"

But if you picked Destroy the Reapers, you just told the god-child to go shove it, you're Destroying the Reapers anyway, and your not betraying everything you stood for. So yeah, DLC here we go.

No, it was a moral question.

First thought: Destroy them all.

But then i rethought. It wouldnt be a "my" Shepard choice to whipe out a whole species, even if they are a threat to you. I never did this.  You cannot just kill so much lifeforms if there is an alternative.

And there was (or seemed to be) an alternative, controlling the Reaper. Which would save the people i fought for, assuring that the Reaper will never come back. The ultimate last sacrifice for humanity, after all.

im telling you, armed with this knowledge, playing this game or even the older games over will be strkly different. You will realise that almost everybody in the game at some point says "you need to KILL the reapers, dont comprimise, you may not like what you have to do (sacrifice geth and EDI? thoguht thats never shown)

Its done over and over and over. you will be like "duh, destroy option" at the end, "i should have seen the signs"

even TIM says to LAng in holo-recording "shepard was always going to stick to his ideals and i respect that"

EVEN the bad guy hints that you need to be strong for the end. no hesitation...

[Angelus Silver]

So after reading the initial post and all of the responses I can see the argument clearly. Here is the thing though, Bioware stated that even if they continue the ME universe with other games in the future this initial trilogy was about Shepard and ME3 ends his storyline period. Whether or not you got that actual 20 seconds of ending time is irrelevant. War is not pretty and since some video games now a days try to depict a real situation. Heroes are great in a war situation but ultimately they end up sacrificing themselves to let others go on.

[Falconee]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Falconee wrote...

Drenick18 wrote...

yeah, like I said in another thread, it's too good an opportunity to "break the fourth wall" for Bioware to pass up. If you picked the Synthesis and Control endings, then YOU have been indoctrinated as well, not just Shepard in-game, but also you in real life. Because you bought into the Reaper logic! "Synthesis... yeah, why not. Just like you guys, the Reapers"

But if you picked Destroy the Reapers, you just told the god-child to go shove it, you're Destroying the Reapers anyway, and your not betraying everything you stood for. So yeah, DLC here we go.

No, it was a moral question.

First thought: Destroy them all.

But then i rethought. It wouldnt be a "my" Shepard choice to whipe out a whole species, even if they are a threat to you. I never did this.  You cannot just kill so much lifeforms if there is an alternative.

And there was (or seemed to be) an alternative, controlling the Reaper. Which would save the people i fought for, assuring that the Reaper will never come back. The ultimate last sacrifice for humanity, after all.

im telling you, armed with this knowledge, playing this game or even the older games over will be strkly different. You will realise that almost everybody in the game at some point says "you need to KILL the reapers, dont comprimise, you may not like what you have to do (sacrifice geth and EDI? thoguht thats never shown)

Its done over and over and over. you will be like "duh, destroy option" at the end, "i should have seen the signs"

even TIM says to LAng in holo-recording "shepard was always going to stick to his ideals and i respect that"

EVEN the bad guy hints that you need to be strong for the end. no hesitation...

=)
Ok, maybe i made a BIG mistake with not recognising ME as a great game for me earlier and started with ME 3.

[Rawgrim]

Angelus Silver wrote...

So after reading the initial post and all of the responses I can see the argument clearly. Here is the thing though, Bioware stated that even if they continue the ME universe with other games in the future this initial trilogy was about Shepard and ME3 ends his storyline period. Whether or not you got that actual 20 seconds of ending time is irrelevant. War is not pretty and since some video games now a days try to depict a real situation. Heroes are great in a war situation but ultimately they end up sacrificing themselves to let others go on.

DLC and expansion packs is still considered part of ME3, if they should produce any.

[Tiax Rules All]

Falconee wrote...

But do they win if i control them?
Clearly, the explanation in this thread seems to point in that way.

But, somehow what i have seen and read in the game is somewhat different. What if i really control the Reaper?

you have to read my words carefully... You never control anything. shep is not on the citadel, he never phsically is there. he never pysically sees the boy or the crucible..

the choice of control is an illusin its a metaphor for, you are comprimising with reapers. It plays out in sheps mind that he controls them, they leave, earth happy, normady running, crashing , happy..

but in reality hes sitting in a pile of rubble and the choice is in his subconscience wether you comprimise and stay dead or chose defy and wake up.

when i say its all in his head. i mean exactly that. shep never blinks an eye in real life after after the destroyer beam if you do not win the mind game and wake up at end.

[Falconee]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Falconee wrote...

But do they win if i control them?
Clearly, the explanation in this thread seems to point in that way.

But, somehow what i have seen and read in the game is somewhat different. What if i really control the Reaper?

you have to read my words carefully... You never control anything. shep is not on the citadel, he never phsically is there. he never pysically sees the boy or the crucible..

the choice of control is an illusin its a metaphor for, you are comprimising with reapers. It plays out in sheps mind that he controls them, they leave, earth happy, normady running, crashing , happy..

but in reality hes sitting in a pile of rubble and the choice is in his subconscience wether you comprimise and stay dead or chose defy and wake up.

when i say its all in his head. i mean exactly that. shep never blinks an eye in real life after after the destroyer beam if you do not win the mind game and wake up at end.

Hmm, what you say makes sense. Im giving up my resistance. I just lost the game. =)

Thats hard to realize, so please excuse.

[Myrmedus]

There is support for and against this theory, and for me there are things that make it undeniable yet other things that strongly suggest it's true.

Firstly, I do agree things are a bit off after you're hit by Harbinger. I don't consider the visuals off, I've seen this in many games when a character is severely injured (MGS4 microwave hallway anyone?) but two things stick out to me:

- The radio saying everyone is dead combined with Anderson being on the Citadel before you.

Anderson shows no signs of injury so, unlike you, I don't see how the guys on the radio could've confused Anderson for being dead. In addition, I don't understand how he got there first. You can clearly see while running that everyone ahead of you gets fried, which means Anderson must've been behind you. However, after you're hit, Harbinger flies off: why would he fly off when there was still another human behind you sprinting to the beam?!

- The "Destroy" ending scene with Shepard breathing under rubble.

How is this possible? Shepard was on the Citadel, which blew up, when he destroyed the Reaper mainframe. If he were somehow still alive, he'd be spaced? And if he landed on Earth obviously he wouldn't wake up because we know what happens when you fall to a planet from ME2!

- The oily shadows in your dreams

This is how the Rachni Queen described the indoctrination of her people.

All of these things are almost indisputable proof...or simply a mess. However, there are some things that happen at the end that fit with earlier parts of the game:

- The Catalyst's reasons

The Reaper you talk to on Rannoch basically says the same things: they bring order to the chaos of the galaxy. You respond saying synthetics and organics don't have to war with each other and the Reaper says the Battle of Rannoch disproves you. So, it's clear that the Reapers believe synthetics and organics are destined to war, like what the Catalyst tells you.

I don't know what to think to be honest.

However, regardless of whether the ending is indoctrination, hallucination or real, the complaints about the ending still stand and are still valid - let me explain why for each possibility:

Indoctrination: It is the wrong time in the narrative to do it without an objective conclusion afterwards, in my opinion. I had considered this a potential twist at some point of the ME trilogy, that our character actually has to contend with indoctrination because up until this point we appeared to have been strangely immune to it.... It would've been an interesting twist, especially how BW chose to present it and "pull the wool over our eyes" to show indoctrination from a subjective point of view as up until now we've only seen it objectively. However, this was something to consider for ME2 I feel and not something to pull out at the very end. Indoctrination as a conclusion may have been passable for a one off video-game or movie but not as the conclusion to a trilogy. It would've been fine if there was a conclusion afterwards - perhaps the Reapers are destroyed and then the indoctrination effect wears off etc. - but simply ending it there with only a Shepard "breath" is not good enough.

Hallucination: Similar to indoctrination but more acceptable in the narrative if they had continued the story from after the hallucination. I'd also argue it would've been a fairly pointless development.

In both of these two cases, I would argue that BW were probably trying to be too clever for their own good. I can understand how choosing the "Destroy" option would be like fighting off indoctrination but quite honestly this was something to try out earlier in the narrative with a definitive outcome and not now, especially since it limits us to one "ending" if it's true.

Real: We've seen all the complaints so I don't need to recite them.

The same issues still stand regardless of what the outcome is: the ending still is not appropriately conclusive to the trilogy. And by conclusive I don't necessarily mean a sunshine and bunnies ending but as is there simply is no conclusion...it's more like a cliffhanger or a mess.

Additionally, I can see how it would function for the "Destroy" and "Control" endings because all through the game we've seen how TIM was being lured and controlled by the promise of "Control", and one could argue that choosing the "Control" option is the Reapers luring you into this same thing. "Destroy" would be holding your resolve as you had been throughout the whole game until that point. However, I don't know how "Synthesis" factors into this. Some have postulated this also lets the Reapers win but I'm not entirely sure if that's true and how it can be true in the context of real-world choices (ie. not the choice within your apparently indoctrinated vision).

If a DLC is released to clear this up I will be angry. I will purchase the DLC, I will conclude the game, but I will be angry. ME2 released lots of additional chapters with new stories: Overlord, Shadow Broker and specifically Arrival that was a direct continuation of the linear plot. However, ME2 was complete as it was released and these were essentially "expansions". If a DLC is required to clean up the mess that is ME3's ending then the game was released incomplete.

This is also ironic, because I would actually have no qualms paying more money for a game like ME3 over something else like Syndicate or Asura's Wrath because it's simply more: it's a better game and it has significantly more content. In terms of money for content, ME games are very cheap compared to some others out there that last a measly 7-8 hours for $60.

However, what I can't accept is an incomplete game, even if it's a 30 hour incomplete game. We are also so invested in these characters, invested in our Shepard and invested in the ME Universe: you must conclude this appropriate to the quality of the trilogy as a whole and if you planned this all along then don't pull this **** again. The final instalment in an epic trilogy is not the time for an experimental ending.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 13 mars 2012 - 09:22 .

[Rip The Reaper]

People are pointing out the indoctrinated and hallucination possibilities but if it's true thats what it was....Bioware STILL could have done it better....just saying.

[Myrmedus]

It was the wrong time to do it if either of them was what happened, unless you were able to overpower it. And, in the case where you do, it should've been clear that you did and the ending should've continued on after it.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 13 mars 2012 - 09:15 .

[Avarenda]

Myrmedus wrote...

There is support for and against this theory, and for me there are things that make it undeniable yet other things that strongly suggest it's true.

Firstly, I do agree things are a bit off after you're hit by Harbinger. I don't consider the visuals off, I've seen this in many games when a character is severely injured (MGS4 microwave hallway anyone?) but two things stick out to me:

- The radio saying everyone is dead combined with Anderson being on the Citadel before you.

Anderson shows no signs of injury so, unlike you, I don't see how the guys on the radio could've confused Anderson for being dead. In addition, I don't understand how he got there first. You can clearly see while running that everyone ahead of you gets fried, which means Anderson must've been behind you. However, after you're hit, Harbinger flies off: why would he fly off when there was still another human behind you sprinting to the beam?!

- The "Destroy" ending scene with Shepard breathing under rubble.

How is this possible? Shepard was on the Citadel, which blew up, when he destroyed the Reaper mainframe. If he were somehow still alive, he'd be spaced? And if he landed on Earth obviously he wouldn't wake up because we know what happens when you fall to a planet from ME2!

Both of these things are almost indisputable proof...or simply a mess. However, there are some things that happen at the end that fit with earlier parts of the game:

- The Catalyst's reasons

The Reaper you talk to on Rannoch basically says the same things: they bring order to the chaos of the galaxy. You respond saying synthetics and organics don't have to war with each other and the Reaper says the Battle of Rannoch disproves you. So, it's clear that the Reapers believe synthetics and organics are destined to war, like what the Catalyst tells you.

I don't know what to think to be honest.

However, regardless of whether the ending is indoctrination, hallucination or real, the complaints about the ending still stand and are still valid - let me explain why for each possibility:

Indoctrination: This occurs too suddenly. It is also the wrong time in the narrative to do it, in my opinion. I had considered this a potential twist at some point of the ME trilogy, that our character actually has to contend with indoctrination because up until this point we appeared to have been strangely immune to it.... It would've been an interesting twist, especially how BW chose to present it and "pull the wool over our eyes" to show indoctrination from a subjective point of view as up until now we've only seen it objectively. However, this was something to consider for ME2 I feel and not something to pull out at the very end. Indoctrination as a conclusion may have been passable for a one off video-game or movie but not as the conclusion to a trilogy.

Hallucination: Similar to indoctrination but more acceptable in the narrative if they had continued the story from after the hallucination. I'd also argue it would've been a fairly pointless development.

In both of these two cases, I would argue that BW were probably trying to be too clever for their own good. I can understand how choosing the "Destroy" option would be like fighting off indoctrination but quite honestly this was something to try out earlier in the narrative with a definitive outcome and not now, especially since it limits us to one "ending" if it's true.

Real: We've seen all the complaints so I don't need to recite them.

The same issues still stand regardless of what the outcome is: the ending still is not appropriately conclusive to the trilogy. And by conclusive I don't necessarily mean a sunshine and bunnies ending but as is there simply is no conclusion...it's more like a cliffhanger or a mess.

If a DLC is released to clear this up I will be angry. I will purchase the DLC, I will conclude the game, but I will be angry. ME2 released lots of additional chapters with new stories: Overlord, Shadow Broker and specifically Arrival that was a direct continuation of the linear plot. However, ME2 was complete as it was released and these were essentially "expansions". If a DLC is required to clean up the mess that is ME3's ending then the game was released incomplete.

This is also ironic, because I would actually have no qualms paying more money for a game like ME3 over something else like Syndicate or Asura's Wrath because it's simply more: it's a better game and it has significantly more content. In terms of money for content, ME games are very cheap compared to some others out there that last a measly 7-8 hours for $60.

However, what I can't accept is an incomplete game, even if it's a 30 hour incomplete game. We are also so invested in these characters, invested in our Shepard and invested in the ME Universe: you must conclude this appropriate to the quality of the trilogy as a whole and if you planned this all along then don't pull this **** again. The final instalment in an epic trilogy is not the time for an experimental ending.

I think you hit the nail right on the head.

[Tiax Rules All]

Myrmedus wrote...

...
- The radio saying everyone is dead combined with Anderson being on the Citadel before you.

Anderson shows no signs of injury so, unlike you, I don't see how the guys on the radio could've confused Anderson for being dead. In addition, I don't understand how he got there first. You can clearly see while running that everyone ahead of you gets fried, which means Anderson must've been behind you. However, after you're hit, Harbinger flies off: why would he fly off when there was still another human behind you sprinting to the beam?!

you overlooking the even more obvious fact that anderson would have never been anywhere near that charge in the first place. Anderson is a freaking admiral. hes not gonna go death sprinting at the reapers, thats what sheps for. Anderson commands, hes to valueble to be a human shield. He only is with you on eath fighting cause he has to. otherwise. he gives orders. It makes even less sense that he also beats you to the beam and goes in without anybody else seeing you.  The truth is. Shepard imagines his good friend with him in his dying hallucinatin. maybe sheps scared and his subconscience wants a riend to be with him through this. so the brain projects it. Maybe Anderson is supposed to be the only true voice of reason during the wole sequence, both TIM and catalyst try to manipulate your instinct to destroy. TIM wants you to control, you will die, game over. Catalyst wants you to synthesis, this too will not wake shep at the end. Only listening and following anderson will give you the true ending.

However, what I can't accept is an incomplete game, even if it's a 30 hour incomplete game. We are also so invested in these characters, invested in our Shepard and invested in the ME Universe: you must conclude this appropriate to the quality of the trilogy as a whole and if you planned this all along then don't pull this **** again. The final instalment in an epic trilogy is not the time for an experimental ending.

umm why not? you may not like it but an true ending dlc will make a fortune, the final installment is the PERFECT TIME for this crap. they will make you buy it and if you are angry after, so what? they got your money and you cant boycott ME4, cause there is not one....

Modifié par Tiax Rules All, 13 mars 2012 - 09:29 .

[JunMadine]

Avarenda wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...

There is support for and against this theory, and for me there are things that make it undeniable yet other things that strongly suggest it's true.

Firstly, I do agree things are a bit off after you're hit by Harbinger. I don't consider the visuals off, I've seen this in many games when a character is severely injured (MGS4 microwave hallway anyone?) but two things stick out to me:

- The radio saying everyone is dead combined with Anderson being on the Citadel before you.

Anderson shows no signs of injury so, unlike you, I don't see how the guys on the radio could've confused Anderson for being dead. In addition, I don't understand how he got there first. You can clearly see while running that everyone ahead of you gets fried, which means Anderson must've been behind you. However, after you're hit, Harbinger flies off: why would he fly off when there was still another human behind you sprinting to the beam?!

- The "Destroy" ending scene with Shepard breathing under rubble.

How is this possible? Shepard was on the Citadel, which blew up, when he destroyed the Reaper mainframe. If he were somehow still alive, he'd be spaced? And if he landed on Earth obviously he wouldn't wake up because we know what happens when you fall to a planet from ME2!

Both of these things are almost indisputable proof...or simply a mess. However, there are some things that happen at the end that fit with earlier parts of the game:

- The Catalyst's reasons

The Reaper you talk to on Rannoch basically says the same things: they bring order to the chaos of the galaxy. You respond saying synthetics and organics don't have to war with each other and the Reaper says the Battle of Rannoch disproves you. So, it's clear that the Reapers believe synthetics and organics are destined to war, like what the Catalyst tells you.

I don't know what to think to be honest.

However, regardless of whether the ending is indoctrination, hallucination or real, the complaints about the ending still stand and are still valid - let me explain why for each possibility:

Indoctrination: This occurs too suddenly. It is also the wrong time in the narrative to do it, in my opinion. I had considered this a potential twist at some point of the ME trilogy, that our character actually has to contend with indoctrination because up until this point we appeared to have been strangely immune to it.... It would've been an interesting twist, especially how BW chose to present it and "pull the wool over our eyes" to show indoctrination from a subjective point of view as up until now we've only seen it objectively. However, this was something to consider for ME2 I feel and not something to pull out at the very end. Indoctrination as a conclusion may have been passable for a one off video-game or movie but not as the conclusion to a trilogy.

Hallucination: Similar to indoctrination but more acceptable in the narrative if they had continued the story from after the hallucination. I'd also argue it would've been a fairly pointless development.

In both of these two cases, I would argue that BW were probably trying to be too clever for their own good. I can understand how choosing the "Destroy" option would be like fighting off indoctrination but quite honestly this was something to try out earlier in the narrative with a definitive outcome and not now, especially since it limits us to one "ending" if it's true.

Real: We've seen all the complaints so I don't need to recite them.

The same issues still stand regardless of what the outcome is: the ending still is not appropriately conclusive to the trilogy. And by conclusive I don't necessarily mean a sunshine and bunnies ending but as is there simply is no conclusion...it's more like a cliffhanger or a mess.

If a DLC is released to clear this up I will be angry. I will purchase the DLC, I will conclude the game, but I will be angry. ME2 released lots of additional chapters with new stories: Overlord, Shadow Broker and specifically Arrival that was a direct continuation of the linear plot. However, ME2 was complete as it was released and these were essentially "expansions". If a DLC is required to clean up the mess that is ME3's ending then the game was released incomplete.

This is also ironic, because I would actually have no qualms paying more money for a game like ME3 over something else like Syndicate or Asura's Wrath because it's simply more: it's a better game and it has significantly more content. In terms of money for content, ME games are very cheap compared to some others out there that last a measly 7-8 hours for $60.

However, what I can't accept is an incomplete game, even if it's a 30 hour incomplete game. We are also so invested in these characters, invested in our Shepard and invested in the ME Universe: you must conclude this appropriate to the quality of the trilogy as a whole and if you planned this all along then don't pull this **** again. The final instalment in an epic trilogy is not the time for an experimental ending.

I think you hit the nail right on the head.

I second this.

[Abram730]

Esquin wrote...

No. You're wrong.

I get it. I just wanted some kind of closure. You're ignoring the issue. We just wanted to know what happened to our galaxy after we made our decision. Thats all.

So you demand that Bioware stop makeing Mass Effect games?  That is the reason for your anger?

[Garland7A]

I just have to say with all the "leaks" going on at BioWare, there is no way they could keep this a secret, if true.

look at all the leaks for ME3
script
prothean dlc
entire mp beta on xbox live months early
From Ashes on xbox live weeks early
inc batarian/geth mp dlc

im sure i forgot a few

Modifié par Garland7A, 13 mars 2012 - 09:30 .

[Abram730]

JoeLaTurkeyII wrote...

If this is true, it's like selling Mass Effect 2 and then telling everyone they'll have to buy the actual Collector Base mission as DLC.

Can you point me to where Bioware says they will be selling different endings as DLC?

[Falconee]

Modifié par Falconee, 13 mars 2012 - 09:39 .

[Tiax Rules All]

Falconee wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...


However, what I can't accept is an incomplete game, even if it's a 30 hour incomplete game. We are also so invested in these characters, invested in our Shepard and invested in the ME Universe: you must conclude this appropriate to the quality of the trilogy as a whole and if you planned this all along then don't pull this **** again. The final instalment in an epic trilogy is not the time for an experimental ending.

But dont forget, that there is an ending where Shepard remains dead (or dies) even if you destroy the Reapers. ^^

hey thats not my quote... Its a SETUP!   seriously though. its not, i dont want to be associated with that post.

[jrubal1462]

Falconee wrote...

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Falconee wrote...

But do they win if i control them?
Clearly, the explanation in this thread seems to point in that way.

But, somehow what i have seen and read in the game is somewhat different. What if i really control the Reaper?

you have to read my words carefully... You never control anything. shep is not on the citadel, he never phsically is there. he never pysically sees the boy or the crucible..

the choice of control is an illusin its a metaphor for, you are comprimising with reapers. It plays out in sheps mind that he controls them, they leave, earth happy, normady running, crashing , happy..

but in reality hes sitting in a pile of rubble and the choice is in his subconscience wether you comprimise and stay dead or chose defy and wake up.

when i say its all in his head. i mean exactly that. shep never blinks an eye in real life after after the destroyer beam if you do not win the mind game and wake up at end.

Hmm, what you say makes sense. Im giving up my resistance. I just lost the game. =)

Thats hard to realize, so please excuse.

Yeah, in our defense, that little child was quite convincing in his argument. Officer Gamble says it best after his "first" desk pop.
 

[Saberchic]

Esquin wrote...

No. You're wrong.

I get it. I just wanted some kind of closure. You're ignoring the issue. We just wanted to know what happened to our galaxy after we made our decision. Thats all.

^This.

Sorry OP, but I already figured out Shep was being slowly indoctrinated during the game. The dreams screamed indoctrination. I wanted to see what happened after that. How did my decisions affect the rest of the galaxy? There was no closure.

[thegoldfinch]

Falconee wrote...
But dont forget, that there is an ending where Shepard remains dead (or dies) even if you destroy the Reapers. ^^

If that is meant to be an argument against this theory, I always interpretted that particular ending (dying even though you chose Destroy) as Shepard simply not having enough forces to push back the Reapers while s/he was going through the indoctrination vision. She may have fought off indoctrination, but she ultimately dies from the battle.

[MortalEngines]

I want to know why everyone is so convinced this magical ending DLC is coming? Has anyone ever seen the ending of a game put in as a DLC a few weeks after a game? EVER? 

This is the company that was rattled after Fox News complained about Alien side boob and you really expect me to believe they went "we'll keep the ending secret till global release". What about people with no internet? What about people who didn't get high enough EMS?

What happens if there is no DLC? Does that mean the indoctrination theory is nonsense? To me, I feel it is already. People seem to claim it's true because it's the only way the story makes sense. Am I the only one who sees that the story doesn't make sense - that's why the ending is so shockingly bad. There is no closure AND it doesn't make sense.
You do release it's possible for things not to make sense rather than make a contrived theory in order to smooth your own fears over the reality that the ending is pretty simple and crap. And don't give me a 'Bioware wouldn't possible ruin a game like this...etc etc"

The simple fact is Bioware can make mistake, so have many many other games (including DA2 - another bad ending). Things can seem like good ideas at the time and turn out to be bad. Also it's pretty evident that the ending was half-baked from the scrambling that ensued after they tried to change the dark matter ending orginally planned.

But I'll likely be told I just don't 'get it' like I'm some nit-wit with no imagination. I get it - just doesn't mean it's true. This reminds me of all the crazy Assassin's Creed and Alan Wake theories that go around.

Modifié par MortalEngines, 13 mars 2012 - 09:37 .

[Myrmedus]

Tiax Rules All wrote...

Myrmedus wrote...

...
- The radio saying everyone is dead combined with Anderson being on the Citadel before you.

Anderson shows no signs of injury so, unlike you, I don't see how the guys on the radio could've confused Anderson for being dead. In addition, I don't understand how he got there first. You can clearly see while running that everyone ahead of you gets fried, which means Anderson must've been behind you. However, after you're hit, Harbinger flies off: why would he fly off when there was still another human behind you sprinting to the beam?!

you overlooking the even more obvious fact that anderson would have never been anywhere near that charge in the first place. Anderson is a freaking admiral. hes not gonna go death sprinting at the reapers, thats what sheps for. Anderson commands, hes to valueble to be a human shield. He only is with you on eath fighting cause he has to. otherwise. he gives orders. It makes even less sense that he also beats you to the beam and goes in without anybody else seeing you.  The truth is. Shepard imagines his good friend with him in his dying hallucinatin. maybe sheps scared and his subconscience wants a riend to be with him through this. so the brain projects it. Maybe Anderson is supposed to be the only true voice of reason during the wole sequence, both TIM and catalyst try to manipulate your instinct to destroy. TIM wants you to control, you will die, game over. Catalyst wants you to synthesis, this too will not wake shep at the end. Only listening and following anderson will give you the true ending.

Anderson being there or not is conjecture, though. He is an Admiral but when **** hits the fan even Admirals run into battle.

Regardless, this still doesn't make sense to me. The Catalyst is essentially the embodiment of the Reapers. Why would the Reapers want synthesis? My issue is that the Control and Destroy options make sense because they were a theme throughout the game's entire narrative: Control = Bad (TIM), Destroy = Good (Alliance). However, Synthesis doesn't really fit. What you're saying about it is conjecture and not backed up by anything, since there is nothing to back it up with. That is not a slight against you but rather a remark that nothing in the game explains its relevance even on a symbolic level.

However, what I can't accept is an incomplete game, even if it's a 30 hour incomplete game. We are also so invested in these characters, invested in our Shepard and invested in the ME Universe: you must conclude this appropriate to the quality of the trilogy as a whole and if you planned this all along then don't pull this **** again. The final instalment in an epic trilogy is not the time for an experimental ending.

umm why not? you may not like it but an true ending dlc will make a fortune, the final installment is the PERFECT TIME for this crap. they will make you buy it and if you are angry after, so what? they got your money and you cant boycott ME4, cause there is not one....

Your answer is not a direct response to my quote. You are describing why they would do it from a money-grabbing perspective, I already comprehend this, what I am saying is that I do not accept it.

If I go to watch The Dark Knight Rises, I do not expect the movie to cut to static 10 minutes from the end in the cinema - if it did I would expect a refund.

If I read The Deathly Hallows, I do not expect the page where Voldemort and Harry's spells collide to finish prematurely, only to find the remaining pages blank.

There is meant to be a degree of honour between any seller and customer with regards the products they sell. If you buy a caravan you do not expect it to collapse 10 metres down the road (Snatch anyone?) - if you buy a car you do not expect it to die after 10 miles. All of these things are potentially possible, and it is possible a seller can get away with it, but it does not generally happen due to commercial honour that is expected, especially of large companies.

If this is truly what BW/EA have done intentionally then it is an unpredecented rip-off scheme and I do not accept it. The irony is that I could've accepted paying $80 for ME3 and getting Javik along with a complete game for that. However, it is the underhand tactics that I do not accept. And I do not believe it will be without repercussions for EA. I am under no illusions: BW's games are that good that I would likely continue to buy them, but there are EA games I have purchased where I am on the fence about; games that I could easily live without but thought "Why not?" such as the FIFA and NHL series. If EA have staged such a blatant and underhand rip-off then at least from me as a customer they will lose more money than they gain in the long run because I will not purchase a single pure EA game again. They are not a good enough game developer to back this up. Their games are not unmissable.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 13 mars 2012 - 09:43 .

[Tiax Rules All]

Saberchic wrote...

Esquin wrote...

No. You're wrong.

I get it. I just wanted some kind of closure. You're ignoring the issue. We just wanted to know what happened to our galaxy after we made our decision. Thats all.

^This.

Sorry OP, but I already figured out Shep was being slowly indoctrinated during the game. The dreams screamed indoctrination. I wanted to see what happened after that. How did my decisions affect the rest of the galaxy? There was no closure.

nothing to appologise for other then wasting everybodies time because this post has nothing to do with the topic. Its clearly stated we dont care if you like it or not. im just trying to answer questions and clarify if i can.

[Falconee]

Im Sorry Tiax, heres the right quote.

Tiax Rules All wrote..

 The truth is. Shepard imagines his good friend with him in his dying hallucinatin. maybe sheps scared and his subconscience wants a riend to be with him through this. so the brain projects it. Maybe Anderson is supposed to be the only true voice of reason during the wole sequence, both TIM and catalyst try to manipulate your instinct to destroy. TIM wants you to control, you will die, game over. Catalyst wants you to synthesis, this too will not wake shep at the end.

But dont forget, that there is an ending where Shepard remains dead (or dies) even if you destroy the Reapers. ^^

[ed87]

This is not the problem. Even IF it was the problem, a long essay being necessary to explain the ending to most should be deemed a failure in writing. Its like trying to understand doodles on a notebook