498 réponses à ce sujet

[Swords and Lasers]

yukon fire wrote...

Swords and Lasers wrote...

SimKoning wrote...

Swords and Lasers wrote...

SimKoning wrote...

I like science fiction because it's fiction based around scientific speculation. What the writers did was the equivalent of having wizards show up at the end of an otherwise semi realistic western series, or a demon invasion at the end of Gladiator.

I would like people who loved the ending to explain the space magic please...

I would like people who hated the ending to quit being ***holes to those who do.

How am I being an ***hole? Do you have something to add besides an ad hominem attack? If my analogy is a false one, then can you please explain why it is? 

"Cowboys and Aliens?" 

Yeah, wasn't a big fan of that movie... 

"Obviously it's set in the future so you have to make some leaps of faith but we didn't want it to be just magic in space.” —. Mac Walters, lead writer of Mass Effect

 
It's your attitude that makes you an ***hole. You're aggresive stance of people's OPINIONS of a video game. You attack them, demanding explanations to things you don't understand. They don't owe you jack****. They had fun and who are you to tell them otherwise, wanting scientific explanations of a VIDEO GAME. It's just a VIDEO GAME. Move on with your life.
... Peace out.

You call him names because he has questions, yell at him that is just a game and still end with "peace out"? Why is this so personal that you have to curse him out? 

ALL of these "questions" have been addressed time and time again by those who've liked the ending yet him and approximately 90% of those who hate it, don't want to except those answers that work for those who liked it. I haven't witnessed anyone who liked the ending try to convince those who did otherwise. Yet those who hate it want to be told that they are right and want everyone to agree with them. And anyone who disagrees is treated with the same condescending remarks over and over. "What about the plotholes?... You're stupid if you don't see them." And let's not forget " You liked it?... ****... fanboy ... etc, etc"

As far as cursing him out, since the time I've been on BSN, I've seen people get blasted for giving there OPINION just because it's not the BSN popular opinion, and this has elavated over the past couple of weeks. I'm just calling it like I see it, and if that means I come off as sinking to their level... oh well (or "I don't give a f*ck).

Is it personal to me? No, we're all just a bunch of nerds on a forum for a video game company. But instead of asking about it being personal to me, let's ask why it's so personal to them that they critisize anyone who doesn't jump on their bandwagon of hate.


edit: Spelling error. Probably more... oh well

Modifié par Swords and Lasers, 22 mars 2012 - 06:31 .

[Ashilana]

And yet no mention of the genocide discussing starchild.  

[Dragoonlordz]

Ashilana wrote...

And yet no mention of the genocide discussing starchild.  

It is covered in the context of making the choice. The VI representing what I assume is the AI at the core of the citadel aka the catalyst (of which none has ever seen due to the keepers killing anyone who tries to enter as shown by footage in LotSB), it is just what it is. The brain works using electrical signals through pathways so mabe the AI can read those electrical signals and can therefore know what Shepard knows, it also knows Shepard has implants which is synthetic in nature which could also provide a link to the knowledge Shepard has but in the end none of that matters if right or wrong and thats the beauty of imagination .

It needs not be more than that to me and I have no problem using my imagination to fill in gaps whether the answer is what I assume or not makes no difference. Since when has it become a crime to use imagination with games, movies and books? I consider it a bonus when something sparks imagination not a burden. All previous ME titles had also this element and half the topics ever discussed on BSN were relating to peoples theories and imagination. In the end whether you like that answer or not is not an issue for myself. My enjoyment of the ending does not change because others do not feel the same way or have issues that I do not.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 22 mars 2012 - 06:34 .

[Ashilana]

So strange that you can just ignore the endings proclamation that genocide is justifiable.

[Dragoonlordz]

Ashilana wrote...

So strange that you can just ignore the endings proclamation that genocide is justifiable.

It may feel that way, I may feel that way, I may not. I do not question you on your motives for the things you do yet I believe you believe in what you feel. I do not need to justify what another feels. I only need to justify to myself what I feel and likewise for my character.

[Su13perfitz]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I actually enjoyed the endings, they were kind of cliché but I still liked it. 

Maybe I'm just weird but the ending was nice (imho) and left universe/franchise extremely open to new stories/titles. With passing of time and evolving technology as a factor, also as fondness of space based titles viewed from the perspective of first steps into the unknown or new beginnings I am partial to both ends of the scale. 

Edit: Reason why I loved it.

I liked everything about it (although the format of final choice has been done many times before).

• I loved from Anderson and Shepard sitting together near the end. It was a touching moment.
• The scenery walking down towards your fate as the battle rages outside showing every second walking is taking it's toll on life of others.
• The crew leaving the ship in lush green forest looking up at the sky (especially Ash which was my LI), smiling and looking happy to be alive (I like to think fondly remembering my Shepard and their love for each other). On a land so far away and an adventure about to begin to trying to reach home.
• Seeing Joker and EDI together where they can be together, a bond present since ME2.
• The music and soundtrack to the game even the end music.
• Shepard giving everything he has to save everyone after being hit by the Reaper near the end, the feeling that he gave it his all and saved the ones he loved while bleeding to death and barely hanging on to life and regardless of the outcome.
• The final scene on the planet with nice scenery looking at the moon with grandfather and child talking about what once was and the story inspiring the child to reach for the stars (maybe lead character in ME4) and knowing life goes on plus more including imagining how they (my companions) lived out the remainder of their lives, were they happy or sad, did they remember him decades on and will peace remain all sparks imagination.
• I felt all the choices had an impact in the game during the game, the repercussions occur in time but I am gone and not present so naturally I do not or would not know how things turn out for everyone.
• I liked how TiM reacted and what he says as he looks at the Earth after my actions too when I shot him.
• You were told the game would provide closure to elements brought up in the first two. This was done in the game rather than the ending and I felt they accomlished it very well. You will never get 100% closure on everything because the outcomes are infinite over time. You make choice x save it saves y (closure), he goes on and lives happy life or sad one (closure), he had a child and that child went on and lived his life (closure) again and goes on forever.
• It feels like a title/game that shows more than most others implies the journey matters most rather than the destination and last five or ten minutes of the game and I am happy with that.
• The choices I had hard time choosing which to do and that is good, I RP as my character in those situations and that world. I do not play as a god controlling his every actions and knows every consequence. Played it through his eyes and it was good for that reason and why I had a back and forth between choices/platforms at end as I struggled to pick one.

[/list]
Like I have said in the past I do not treat any game not even ME franchise as a dictionary or thesaurus, a biography or documentary or require everything to be answered. I treat it as a form of entertainment. In that it succedded and hence the enjoyment. I also have stated you will never get 100% closure on everything. How much is enough is subjective. If you require facts to enjoy your games as opposed to emotional response to enjoy a game then so be it but as a form of entertainment it did just fine by me and I have been a long time member of Biowares community and purchaser of their titles like many others.

The choices mattered to me where it counted which was part of the 45 hours I spent playing the game prior to the end, the final choice was mere icing on a cake and not the be all and end all of everything that I did prior. As long as whatever option or choice or lack of gave an emotional conclusion to the end of the trilogy then I was content and happy with that, as said the choices for me were covered in everything leading up to that point the ending required emotional impact. Since what matters to me the choices having an impact in the game prior to reaching the end, my own personal desire was for the end to just cover the emotional element to finish off. It did that for me, I did not feel the need to know everything that happens to everyone after or need every missing link attached. ME3 did an amazing job of clearing up choices from the past two games and even some amazing choices through the rest of ME3. 

The climax for me meaning the ending just needed an emotional farewell send off to my Shepard via the end of a trilogy and it did well in that regard for myself. I have no problems with people who disliked the ending I just wished they showed those who did some respect and acknowledgment instead of snide remarks and retaliation for liking what they did not. I created a thread expressing my love of the ending and a thanks to Bioware for giving me something I greatly enjoyed and I saw but it is a shame I got attacked so often after I created it out of what I assume was fear my love of something others did not would somehow diminish there "everyone" hates it stance. I felt I had to keep stressing the emotional requirement in what stated here because far too often people assume I am wrong for enjoying it when I clearly had different expectations and desires for this part fo the game instead.

The majority of what some of us wished to clear up from the past two titles was done so during the game prior to the ending and we did get to make some major choices and see their immediate impact during the game. Why is it so wrong to desire less a need for yet more clarification right at the end when at the end the most important element is an emotional farewell to the character we loved first and foremost. If we felt such emotion at the end then it fulfilled what we desired and if the game was entertaining it fulfilled it's reason for existing in the first place. 

I have zero issue with DLC (optional) as solution for those who do not like or had not enjoyed it but I ask they show some respect and reason in what they ask for and how they ask for it and do not force patch over what it is I loved since optional method does not ruin something for someone else out of spite when both can gain enjoyment if keep optional. 

I also happen to like DE:HR and is also in my list for best of past year titles. There is nothing wrong with using a DE format ending, the exposition argument is subjective and infinite in how much exposition each person sets as their own personal requirement for enjoyment too. 

None of this changes the fact all games have a framework which allows a story to be told but the story is always theirs (developers) to tell within that framework of choices they allow and some allow for no choices while other offer more (that is a creators prerogative and not something they owe you or me). It also does not change that it is far more healthy to view games as they are meant to be, a form of entertainment not an oxygen supply or requirement for eternal happiness and there will always be elements in almost all games one likes or dislikes. Take it as it is and gain what enjoyment you can but keep it realistic in that no game will fulfill your every desire.

The ending to TW2 was not perfect or amazing to myself either but the choices affecting the impact during the game was, just as is the case for the period during 95% of ME3 was the case. TW2 did also not tie up all loose ends and exposition given was not perfect but overall the game was epic despite this as is (imho) ME3. Skyrim another great game again where the ending tied up almost nothing (referring to the civil war aspect instead of dragons) as the game continues as thought it had no impact but this does not destroy the quality of the game itself overall. I will also state that all games including ME1 and ME2 left elements to the imagination and as a way to tell stories this has always been the case even though it appears some do not acknowledge the fact they had to use their imagination in previous titles because they are controlled by emotions right now, even most of the debating going on here since the dawn of ME has been reliant on imagination of what x, y or z means or could of been.

It didn't go wrong for me, it did what I wanted it to do. Emotional component to finale of the game not spreadsheet of facts and general knowledge about everything or database, wall charts or epilogue cards to sum up what have seen prior. The only things I wanted from this game was choices that showed clear impact during the game (it did this even if you do not like the outcome of some of those choices), provide many dialogue choices through the game (they pulled that off okay with me), good overall story plus combat entertaining (succeeded imho) and make the final farewell to the character in an emotional way for the end (which did). 

A simple difference in expectations and desires for the product even though I have played Bioware's games as long as most people here. 95% of the game I loved and 5% I liked or was okay with. Overall it makes it in the list of top four of games I liked in past year. 

With regard to the endings impact of each choice, I did not play as an all seeing god like overlord who had all the answers and knew all the outcomes prior to making choices but instead I role played through the eyes of my Shepard, regardless of each outcome they were seen as specific to the end of that characters story. That character did not know what would of happened if picked a or b if he actually picked c. Each to him was individual and the impact unique through his eyes so when I play it, I role play it as in see it through the eyes of my character not an overlord god approach who knows it all. In that sense so knowing everything is not important to my character for example each choice at the end is unique to each Shepard because he does not know the outcome of the other choices as he never picked them himself.

I find those who use the space magic term to attack another's view quite silly.

Stand in front of a cave man with planted C4 a mile away using a detonator to activate it, to the cave man it appears to be magic. The same principle with even the smallest of things such as a lighter starting fires. It is constantly reminding the player through out the game that even though they have the plans they do not know what it does, lack of understanding of something that's more advanced. Every race that found a relay did not understand how they worked to begin with and they were vastly more advanced than the own species technology, same with Prothean beacons jumping a civilizations knowledge in leaps and bounds. The Reapers also more advanced and people do not know everything about how they work down to each and every square centimetre of the ship.

What I mean is just because you do not understand something does not mean it's not possible or that it's actually magic and I personally did not need to know how to take apart and rebuild a relay or the normandy to be satisfied with believing they are possible to exist in that universe. As said I am not interested in the game becoming a documentary encyclopedia or biography even dictionary or thesaurus. Not all technology has to be explained to me to enjoy the game of which stated in first post but people are choosing to ignore that statement in order to further their own agendas.

With regard to plot holes I also addressed this as there are ways to get your head around elements, using imagination and interpretation. It is just the case some people either do not want to think about it and want to see or do it and others who refuse to change from the stance of "if they do not agree with me then they are wrong". That stubborn and arrogant reaction is detrimental to the social element of this site being if you refuse to believe or be open to another's opinion then your just saying the same thing over and over again with an element of "trolololo, I can't hear you. <fingers in ears>" which is not a good thing for discussions or debate about the games most of us love. 

In all previous games people have had to think about and imagine why somethings happen or what something means, each and every ME title had this so I find it surprising how bitter some are over having to continue doing such in this title. Most of the threads created on the site have been theoretic in nature from the offset and has been a bonus to debating and discussion because of that, not an offense to require such in the games. 

I will also point out every single title in ME has also had plot holes, this is not something new yet some people are treating as such. Lastly I will state again if what some people are looking for is an encyclopedia of instead of a video game then that's up to them but for myself I was looking for something both entertaining and that had some emotional impact (ME3 ticked these boxes for me). I spent the same amount of money as most people who dislike it and been a fan of Bioware as long as most people here so implying those who do like the ending are in any way, shape or form less fans compared to themselves they would be gravely mistaken and so much so that they don't realise most of us have spent and invested more time and money into Bioware and their products than some of those making such claims. 

I disliked the openess of the ending very much. You are entirely removed from the consquences of your actions which leaves me with nothing but frustration. I expected to feel emotions ffs I cried when legion and mordin died but the end left me with this blank feeling. Why didn't they show Wrex arguing in a councik chamber or liara infront of a bunch of screens etc. The entire crew would fight the reapers till the end period. Also remember mass effect is more about the other characters than shepard. They could wrap up the entire ending with a better prologue and still make more ME games. Another issue is the gaping plot holes more than I care to mention. Finally when you put the series in context the cruicble itself is deus ex machina then at the very end you have dialous ex machnia god child. He used flawed logic and more over I am forced to accept his answers. Shepard becomes a "tragic hero" but this runs counter to the themes of the entire series. The overriding theme is together we can overcome and the last 10 minutes run rampant with fatalism. The end does not belong and it has nothing to do with similar cutscences.

If this was fan fiction I would have closed the page and regreted reading it. Another issue I have is about the work game belonging to the developers. While from a legal perspective that is true from an art spective it is not. It belongs to itself with the artisan trying to bring it to life and the people that interact with it giving it meaning. They made it they must be right is very very flawed design perspective even for the simple reason that hey, people mess up.You may not care about the problems but that will not make them go away. Can you in good faith say you not like the plot holes fixed and more subtainial catalyst conversation, or maybe even a more subtainial prologue. If you must speculate on art it is unfinished. I could swallow the godchild and weird ending if they would simply plug the holes both before and after.

[Erield]

Swords and Lasers wrote...

ALL of these "questions" have been addressed time and time again by those who've liked the ending yet him and approximately 90% of those who hate it, don't want to except those answers that work for those who liked it. I haven't witnessed anyone who liked the ending try to convince those who did otherwise. Yet those who hate it want to be told that they are right and want everyone to agree with them. And anyone who disagrees is treated with the same condescending remarks over and over.

I really only have one major question that I have so far not seen in any sort of satisfactory answer (other than space magic):  How does the Red Beam of Destruction kill all Reapers, AI, Geth, etc but not Shepard?  

If the destruction were limited to the Reapers, that would make sense.  The Star Child says, "You can wipe out all synthetic life, if you want.  Including the Geth.  And most of the technology you rely on.  Even you are partly synthetic."  I can see a way for it to work if Shepard dies--but he doesn't.  Not always.  (And, yes, that breath at the end is a signifier that he's alive; they did it for the same exact reason that the Big Bad at the end of the movie takes a breath, or twitches a hand, or whatever.)

[Dethead123]

I do not like the ending at all that being said I don't feel any inclination to convince Dragoonlordz or anyone else they are wrong. Because they aren't wrong. If they like the game's ending that is their initiative we aren't fighting to make everyone conform to our side. Nor are we fighting for Bioware to force these endings out. You all need to remember that instead of initiating a flame war or argument against someone who enjoyed it. And those who enjoy the ending need to stop being as immature as the ones that claim are being. We are all adults and in the case we aren't we need to act like adults.

Treat each other with respect regardless what your stance is.

[iorveth1271]

[quote]Dragoonlordz wrote...

I loved from Anderson and Shepard sitting together near the end. It was a touching moment.[/quote]

I loved that scene too. It was a touching moment and to be fair: had the game ended there and then, with either of you surviving based on decisions made throughout the game and then the Crucible simply doing whatever it was supposed to do (take Reapers out for example would've been a start), then a well-written Epilogue and I would have been a happy bunny. Still some plotholes there but I could have ignored them without a second of hesitation.

[quote]The scenery walking down towards your fate as the battle rages outside showing every second walking is taking it's toll on life of others.[/quote]

I don't exactly agree that this alone takes it's toll on the lives of all the others fighting out there but it was still an impressive, though awkwardly confusing scene with this child there... but oh well

[quote]The crew leaving the ship in lush green forest looking up at the sky (especially Ash which was my LI), smiling and looking happy to be alive (I like to think fondly remembering my Shepard and their love for each other). On a land so far away and an adventure about to begin to trying to reach home.[/quote]

Yeah, well... I didn't like that scene. It was ruined by Garrus getting out of the Normandy when he should have died there at the Conduit in my squad... I didn't understand it. Killed the atmosphere, aside from the major plotholes.

[quote]Seeing Joker and EDI together where they can be together, a bond present since ME2.[/quote]

Yeah, to be fair it felt a bit awkward at first to have Joker and a... machine... in a romance... but turns out, I liked it. I felt happy for Joker anyways, he had something to come back to after everything was over so that was something.

[quote]The music and soundtrack to the game even the end music.[/quote]

Any negative comment on the soundtrack from my side would be a lie... it was nothing less than epic, I will admit.

[quote]Shepard giving everything he has to save everyone after being hit by the Reaper near the end, the feeling that he gave it his all and saved the ones he loved while bleeding to death and barely hanging on to life and regardless of the outcome.[/quote]

Yeah, nice scene... except the "regardless of the outcome" felt wrong compared to everything I felt made the Mass Effect series so special. If my decisions really had mattered all along, my Shepard would have found a way to survive. He survived Akuze, he survived Sovereign and Saren, hell... not even the Grim Reaper himself could keep him. He just came back and saved the day again from the Collectors AND came out of that again... sane and alive with his entire crew. He came out of the Bahak system alive. He survived Rannoch face-to-face with a badass Reaper Destroyer. He survived Tuchanka face-to-face with another badass Reaper Destroyer... My Shep was a survivor. He would have found a way.

[quote]The final scene on the planet with nice scenery looking at the moon with grandfather and child talking about what once was and the story inspiring the child to reach for the stars (maybe lead character in ME4) and knowing life goes on plus more including imagining how they (my companions) lived out the remainder of their lives, were they happy or sad, did they remember him decades on and will peace remain all sparks imagination.[/quote]

Yeah, I won't lie here. I hated that scene. Since my Shepard had this breath-scene after the destroy end, and then that Granpa mentioning "One more story"... and then "continue the legend with downloadable content"... it felt infuriating. Also I don't like being left in the dark about the state of the galaxy after everything I've done. That also comes with the fact that my Shep would've found a way to survive. He would know how everything turns out because he would live to see it. That much is clear.

[quote]I felt all the choices had an impact in the game during the game, the repercussions occur in time but I am gone and not present so naturally I do not or would not know how things turn out for everyone.[/quote]

The first 20 minutes on Earth I felt that way too... until I noticed that I could just point and shoot as in every other combat scene. No choices at the end, nobody dies, no serious impact on the ending from your decisions all the way to ME3... but yeah, you wouldn't see everything happen over time. If I am the forger of my Shepard's story, my Shepard would have survived. and lived to see how things turn out. I can't make decisions in a RPG and never see the impact but leave the impact to your imagination... you might as well give them no impact at all and right away say "It doesn't matter."

[quote]I liked how TiM reacted and what he says as he looks at the Earth after my actions too when I shot him.[/quote]

I got major flashbacks of ME1 when I saw him shoot himself. It was the exact same ending except... well, he didn't come as an end boss like Saren did. A shame  that there was no such thing as an end boss aside from Marauder Shields, if you ask me.

[quote]You were told the game would provide closure to elements brought up in the first two. This was done in the game rather than the ending and I felt they accomlished it very well. You will never get 100% closure on everything because the outcomes are infinite over time. You make choice x save it saves y (closure), he goes on and lives happy life or sad one (closure), he had a child and that child went on and lived his life (closure) again and goes on forever.[/quote]

Yeah but I never got to see Liara's blue children... or Tali's face in real time instead of a photoshopped stock photo... I never found out what was going on with Haestroms sun, Gianna Parasini never returned... I could continue this list. I think we all see where this is going.

[quote]It feels like a title/game that shows more than most others implies the journey matters most rather than the destination and last five or ten minutes of the game and I am happy with that.[/quote]

Yeah, the journey matters more. I agree with that, though an epic conclusion would've been nice. Some answers, some closure, just some kind of satisfaction and variety. And by variety I mean actual variety, not Blue asplosion, Red asplosion and Green asplosion. But I have to agree, I overall liked the game no matter the ending. I haven't replayed it yet but I overall liked it, as I did with the other two games. Just the ending did not satisfy me the least bit.

[quote]The choices I had hard time choosing which to do and that is good, I RP as my character in those situations and that world. I do not play as a god controlling his every actions and knows every consequence. Played it through his eyes and it was good for that reason and why I had a back and forth between choices/platforms at end as I struggled to pick one.[/quote]

Seeing as how my character early on already had decided to save the Rachni, to cure the Krogans and to unite the Quarians and Geth, those decisions didn't give me too much trouble but hell if some of these scenes didn't give me the chills. Mordin's sacrifice, Legion's sacrifice, just to name two of them... brilliant moments. But I honestly had more trouble resolving the situation between Adams and Chakwas in the mess hall on the Normandy than deciding whether or not to cure the Genophage.

[quote]Like I have said in the past I do not treat any game not even ME franchise as a dictionary or thesaurus, a biography or documentary or require everything to be answered. I treat it as a form of entertainment. In that it succedded and hence the enjoyment.[/quote]

Seems legit. I can respect that and hopefully others can as well. I may not 100% agree but it's your opinion and it sure was a lot of entertainment. If it wasn't, none of us would have laughed or grinned or even cried once or more throughout the game. Stick to your opinion

[quote]I also have stated you will never get 100% closure on everything. How much is enough is subjective. If you require facts to enjoy your games as opposed to emotional response to enjoy a game then so be it but as a form of entertainment it did just fine by me and I have been a long time member of Biowares community and purchaser of their titles like many others.[/quote]

I think if it had been well done, 100% closure would have been more than possible. But agreed, how much is enough is definitely subjective. You can never make everyone a happy bunny, which is why things like total boycott or something will ultimately IMO lead nowhere. A compromise is the best way to go, one that works for both sides preferably, both those who were okay with the endings and Bioware and those who were to say it mildly "disappointed" with the endings. But true, Bioware games so far have always been quite entertaining. Unfortunately, and I am not the only one to notice it, this seems to have changed a bit at the very least since the Golems of Amgarrak DLC for Origins, where this tendency to mediocrity first manifested. Then came Dragon Age 2... well, before I start an argument on that, I'll stop it

Nevertheless, I have to go, I'm afraid. However, I'd like to quote this one last part just because it's important in everything going on with the ending controversy right now...

[quote]I find those who use the space magic term to attack another's view quite silly.[/quote]

...and...

[quote] That stubborn and arrogant reaction is detrimental to the social
element of this site being if you refuse to believe or be open to
another's opinion then your just saying the same thing over and over
again with an element of "trolololo, I can't hear you. <fingers in
ears>" which is not a good thing for discussions or debate about the
games most of us love. [/quote]

I couldn't agree more with these two statements. And that being said, I respect your opinion. You should stick with it

Stay polite, hold the line! We're all fans of the same game guys, don't forget that

Iorveth Out.

Modifié par iorveth1271, 22 mars 2012 - 07:20 .

[Swords and Lasers]

Erield wrote...

Swords and Lasers wrote...

ALL of these "questions" have been addressed time and time again by those who've liked the ending yet him and approximately 90% of those who hate it, don't want to except those answers that work for those who liked it. I haven't witnessed anyone who liked the ending try to convince those who did otherwise. Yet those who hate it want to be told that they are right and want everyone to agree with them. And anyone who disagrees is treated with the same condescending remarks over and over.

I really only have one major question that I have so far not seen in any sort of satisfactory answer (other than space magic):  How does the Red Beam of Destruction kill all Reapers, AI, Geth, etc but not Shepard?  

If the destruction were limited to the Reapers, that would make sense.  The Star Child says, "You can wipe out all synthetic life, if you want.  Including the Geth.  And most of the technology you rely on.  Even you are partly synthetic."  I can see a way for it to work if Shepard dies--but he doesn't.  Not always.  (And, yes, that breath at the end is a signifier that he's alive; they did it for the same exact reason that the Big Bad at the end of the movie takes a breath, or twitches a hand, or whatever.)

This isn't the way I originally accepted endings but after watching, it makes a better answer than any I could give and quite frankley it works for me works. Someone just posted this on BSN with an apology to Bioware.



Like I said, this works for me. It 's not for everyone.

Heads up, it's over 20 mins long.

[Erield]

Swords and Lasers wrote...

Erield wrote...

Swords and Lasers wrote...

ALL of these "questions" have been addressed time and time again by those who've liked the ending yet him and approximately 90% of those who hate it, don't want to except those answers that work for those who liked it. I haven't witnessed anyone who liked the ending try to convince those who did otherwise. Yet those who hate it want to be told that they are right and want everyone to agree with them. And anyone who disagrees is treated with the same condescending remarks over and over.

I really only have one major question that I have so far not seen in any sort of satisfactory answer (other than space magic):  How does the Red Beam of Destruction kill all Reapers, AI, Geth, etc but not Shepard?  

If the destruction were limited to the Reapers, that would make sense.  The Star Child says, "You can wipe out all synthetic life, if you want.  Including the Geth.  And most of the technology you rely on.  Even you are partly synthetic."  I can see a way for it to work if Shepard dies--but he doesn't.  Not always.  (And, yes, that breath at the end is a signifier that he's alive; they did it for the same exact reason that the Big Bad at the end of the movie takes a breath, or twitches a hand, or whatever.)

This isn't the way I originally accepted endings but after watching, it makes a better answer than any I could give and quite frankley it works for me works. Someone just posted this on BSN with an apology to Bioware.



Like I said, this works for me. It 's not for everyone.

Heads up, it's over 20 mins long.

I think Indoctrination Theory is very intriguing, but also wrong.  Mostly I think that because if it were true I'd have to hate Bioware, instead of just being very, very disappointed in them. 

Also, I guess I misunderstood your post?  I thought you were on the side of people who like the endings, saying that they've posted answers to the people who hate the endings, but the people who hate the endings just ignore the answers.  If that sentence made sense...which I'm not sure it did.  Regardless, I think the presentation of the endings was terrible, and the endings themselves are sad.  And I'm still looking for a non-Indoctrination theory on how Red Beam of Death isn't Space Magic.

I'm glad people like the endings; I just wish I could.

[Ashilana]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Ashilana wrote...

So strange that you can just ignore the endings proclamation that genocide is justifiable.

It may feel that way, I may feel that way, I may not. I do not question you on your motives for the things you do yet I believe you believe in what you feel. I do not need to justify what another feels. I only need to justify to myself what I feel and likewise for my character.

Feeling has nothing to do with it.  The starchild gives you three options after expounding on the importance of genocide.

One is the illusive man's choice while indoctrinated.

One is to transform all life in the universe without their consent.

And one (the one we are rewarded with a cut scene of living) requires massive genocide.


Just because you feel a certain way... does not change the reality of what is presented in the ending.

[Dragoonlordz]

Ashilana wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Ashilana wrote...

So strange that you can just ignore the endings proclamation that genocide is justifiable.

It may feel that way, I may feel that way, I may not. I do not question you on your motives for the things you do yet I believe you believe in what you feel. I do not need to justify what another feels. I only need to justify to myself what I feel and likewise for my character.

Feeling has nothing to do with it.  The starchild gives you three options after expounding on the importance of genocide.

One is the illusive man's choice while indoctrinated.

One is to transform all life in the universe without their consent.

And one (the one we are rewarded with a cut scene of living) requires massive genocide.


Just because you feel a certain way... does not change the reality of what is presented in the ending.

You prefer he or she stood there and bled to death doing nothing at all because he didn't want to make a choice?

My Shepard was barely alive he could hardly move, was a bleeding mess and dying so he would not be lasting long in first place and your arguing it about not choosing to alter fate just because you disagreed with a AI? Many things in life you only have some/few choices also some where you have none. Forces outside of your control in life and expressed as such in game. If you wanted your Shepard to bicker with an AI and die standing there then what would you have achieved? You would of just killed everyone anyways because you led them all to Earth to the jaws of the Reapers and because you had a 'hissy fit' with a VI everyone died doing nothing but argue with a AI..

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 22 mars 2012 - 02:39 .

[Eckswhyzed]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Ashilana wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Ashilana wrote...

So strange that you can just ignore the endings proclamation that genocide is justifiable.

It may feel that way, I may feel that way, I may not. I do not question you on your motives for the things you do yet I believe you believe in what you feel. I do not need to justify what another feels. I only need to justify to myself what I feel and likewise for my character.

Feeling has nothing to do with it.  The starchild gives you three options after expounding on the importance of genocide.

One is the illusive man's choice while indoctrinated.

One is to transform all life in the universe without their consent.

And one (the one we are rewarded with a cut scene of living) requires massive genocide.


Just because you feel a certain way... does not change the reality of what is presented in the ending.

You prefer he or she stood there and bled to death doing nothing at all because he didn't want to make a choice?

My Shepard was barely alive he could hardly move, was a bleeding mess and dying so he would not be lasting long in first place and your arguing it about not choosing to alter fate just because you disagreed with a AI? Many things in life you only have some/few choices also some where you have none. Forces outside of your control in life and expressed as such in game. If you wanted your Shepard to bicker with an AI and die standing there then what would you have achieved? You would of just killed everyone anyways because you led them all to Earth to the jaws of the Reapers and because you had a 'hissy fit' with a VI everyone died doing nothing but argue with a AI..

It wouldn't be an ending choice if it wasn't tough. And where did you get this whole "genocide is justifiable"? Of course genocide is justifiable if the alternatives are even worse (they aren't, in my opinion, but that's the subject of a different post).

[EmEr77]

"I also happen to like DE:HR and is also in my list for best of past year titles. There is nothing wrong with using a DE format ending, the exposition argument is subjective and infinite in how much exposition each person sets as their own personal requirement for enjoyment too."

This isn't DE. This is Mass Effect.

I appreciate your opinion, but you do not seem to justify from a critical standpoint why the ending is valid. Unfortunately it does not matter how much you "like" the ending or how "powerful" you thought it was, from a critical standpoint it was flawed, and absolutely not justifiable by any means. I thought the idea of the ending given was absolutely powerful--however, that does not mean I actually agree with the choice to use this ending with regards to THIS story line.

The idea that "we'll never know anything, it's all hopeless anyway" is an idea that so far only T.S. Eliot has been able to successfully convey through his poem "The Wasteland" and even still, he presented a viable resolution for how Western culture can redeem itself. In Mass Effect we are presented no such option, and I'm not entirely sure this story line ranks with the test-of-time caliber of a T.S. Eliot work.

An armada of aliens is stranded in our solar system, unable to gather the resources to support themselves, which essentially means that everyone who came to fight with us is going to simply starve and die.

Our crew abandoned us, including your love interest at the end of the game. At some point when you are bloody and near death on the way up the Citadel, Joker and your crew decide they are going to abandon the fight, and you, and run--even though the Normandy is leading the charge in the fight against the Reapers around earth.

The "solution" presented to us by the Star Child is a Diabolus Ex Machina, the counter-part to a Deus Ex Machina, which is frowned upon by literary academics as being a cheap way out for a writer who does not understand the internal logic of their own story. A Deus Ex Machina can effectively be used, but rarely has--and does not work in this instance at all, considering this is a game that is built around actions and repercussions and consequences as a direct result of OUR choices--which is what was advertised to us in the first place.

These are just a few things which ultimately sour the ending, and believe it or not there is objectivity with regards to the analysis of literary works even "art," which stems from critically flawed issues on a fundamental level--the rules by which EVERYTHING is created by. Without a firm grasp of the fundamentals everything falls apart, and we get an ending much like this that is jarring, out of place, inconsistent, filled with plot-holes, and leaves the audience with questions that cannot actually be answered by going back and taking a deeper look into the story itself, thus negating the replayability factor entirely.

[Egonne]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Egonne wrote...

It would be very similar to walking into the Louvre and using a red crayon to put a bigger smile on the Mona Lisa. Something like that may be 'your thing' but I seriously question but your taste and judgement.

The 'star kid' twist at the end was something I saw as a potential ending. Didn't surprise me although personally I wish they wouldn't have gone that route. The lack of truly different endings is also disappointing but not devastating. They could just be making a complex nihilistic statement on how all the little decisions don't really matter.

All that is a matter of personal taste. I can understand someone being okay with that.

What I am NOT okay with are the gaping plot holes: Normandy inexplicably in the Mass Relay system, squad mates who were part of the failed Citadel Beam charge exiting a crashed Normandy unscathed, and Shepard lying wounded under a pile of debris.

Sure, if you are okay with the plot holes from six-year old children then you should be fine with this. Sure, if you thought the other ME games had a Duke Nukem style writing that existed just because someone thought they would throw in a plot, then you shouldn't be expecting anything that great and would be fine with this.

But in respect to the rest of the series, which was brilliant, I cannot respect an ending that wasn't even subpar; it was random nonsense. No person who truly thought the other ME games were brilliant and expected the same quality from ME 3 should be able to honestly accept this. It is NOT good writing by ANY standard.

Google ME1 and ME2 plot holes, Don't pretend this is something new that somehow the writing has always been amazing all of the time, there has always been plot holes in the ME franchise so why would you expect that to magically disappear with this title. Bit silly (imho) people complaining about plot oles as though Bioware has never had such before but like I said Mass Effect is not a biography and documentary instead it is a form of entertainment and if they provide and emotional finale (ending) instead of a spreadsheet of facts then I am okay with that.

You appear to have had a different desire and expectation then myself, I wanted an emotional farewell to Shepard at the end, not a spreadsheet or everything in the known universe to be explained in great detail. I also have no problem using my imagination for some plot and story elements which again is not something new with ME franchise and people have always had this; those people most of time over years here have created vast amounts of threads talking about what they think x or y means, how did z happen.

Of course there have been plot holes.  There are ALWAYS plot holes.  It is just the plot hole DENSITY that makes the ending incoherent.

1. Shepard gets hit with the beam.  How long did he lay there? How was it that NO ONE, friend or enemy, stubbled on him while he was unconscience? This requires fairly little imagination but the total has begun.

2. Anderson making it to the beam? This is starting to get big.  The absolute emphasis that NO ONE made it to the beam and the implication that most if not ALL were killed is too strong.  Still tolerable though.

3. Anderson getting beamed to a different part of the Citadel? Really? How did that happen? And how did he get to the Illusive Man's platform when there seems to be only one path to it.  This STILL isn't too much of a strain.  But it is starting to get big.

4. The Illusive Man's presence on the Citadel.  This is a minor one.  But still isn't explained (although normally I'd be fine with that) and still adds to the total.

5. How did Hackett know Shepard was on the Citadel?  Sure, the Citadel arms opened, but how did Hackett know SHEPARD opened them.  And what is with their conversation?  Hackett asks no questions of Shepard and doesn't comment at ALL about him being on the Citadel.  And what about the crew of the Normandy?  Didn't they think Shepard was dead?  Did Hackett forget to tell them Shepard was alive and on the Citadel? Did they not WANT to talk to Shepard?   This is starting to get out of hand.

6. The Mass Relay's NOT destroying entire systems when they explode.  This, again, is a minor one because it can be explain due to the odd way the Mass Relay were being used (to synthesis/control the reapers).  But the total is starting to get pretty large.

7. Normandy and Joker in the Mass Relay stream? This is a BIG one.  No reason is given on WHY he should be.  Didn't Hackett tell him Shepard was alive and on the Citadel? This is out of character in almost EVERY way.  This SHOULD have been explained. And if the Normandy WASN'T in the Mass Relay System then wouldn't that explosion have wiped out the Fleet and Earth?  Now we are starting to stretch 'imagination' pretty far. 

8. Normandy surving a forced ejection from the Mass Relay system? Wasn't that established to be destructive? This COULD be explained away as well.  But the total is starting to get overwhelming.

9. Normandy crashing on a planet? And an inhabitable one at that? In a normal ending this could simply be ignored because it is such a common plot problem (the new Star Trek movie had the same problem).  But we are still adding to a VERY big total.

10. My squad mates inexplicably exiting the Normandy after it crashed? Now HERE we have the BIG one.  This simply DOESN'T make any sense at all.  How did they get there? Why did they leave the battle?  This ending, which was already pushing believability, just totally unraveled.

11. My squad mates not only are ON the Normandy but seem UNSCATHED a mere minutes (possibly hours if you stretch it a LOT) after being part of the failed Citadel beam charge? The story just built up how devastating that charge was.  Shepard was incredibly hurt.  How did they get out without a scratch?  This is HUGE! It is impossible to overexaggerate the problem here.

12. My squad mates, who magically appeared on the Normandy, and who are in remarkable health, also seem quite HAPPY? WHAT!?!?!?!  Didn't they just witness what they thought was Shepard's death? Didn't they just witness the destruction of the mass relays? Didn't they lose any chance at all of seeing ANY of their loved ones again (at least for quite some time)?  And they seem HAPPY? This synthesis process must be some pretty strong stuff.  

[Dragoonlordz]

Egonne wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Google ME1 and ME2 plot holes, Don't pretend this is something new that somehow the writing has always been amazing all of the time, there has always been plot holes in the ME franchise so why would you expect that to magically disappear with this title. Bit silly (imho) people complaining about plot oles as though Bioware has never had such before but like I said Mass Effect is not a biography and documentary instead it is a form of entertainment and if they provide and emotional finale (ending) instead of a spreadsheet of facts then I am okay with that.

You appear to have had a different desire and expectation then myself, I wanted an emotional farewell to Shepard at the end, not a spreadsheet or everything in the known universe to be explained in great detail. I also have no problem using my imagination for some plot and story elements which again is not something new with ME franchise and people have always had this; those people most of time over years here have created vast amounts of threads talking about what they think x or y means, how did z happen.

Of course there have been plot holes.  There are ALWAYS plot holes.  It is just the plot hole DENSITY that makes the ending incoherent.

1. Shepard gets hit with the beam.  How long did he lay there? How was it that NO ONE, friend or enemy, stubbled on him while he was unconscience? This requires fairly little imagination but the total has begun.

2. Anderson making it to the beam? This is starting to get big.  The absolute emphasis that NO ONE made it to the beam and the implication that most if not ALL were killed is too strong.  Still tolerable though.

3. Anderson getting beamed to a different part of the Citadel? Really? How did that happen? And how did he get to the Illusive Man's platform when there seems to be only one path to it.  This STILL isn't too much of a strain.  But it is starting to get big.

4. The Illusive Man's presence on the Citadel.  This is a minor one.  But still isn't explained (although normally I'd be fine with that) and still adds to the total.

5. How did Hackett know Shepard was on the Citadel?  Sure, the Citadel arms opened, but how did Hackett know SHEPARD opened them.  And what is with their conversation?  Hackett asks no questions of Shepard and doesn't comment at ALL about him being on the Citadel.  And what about the crew of the Normandy?  Didn't they think Shepard was dead?  Did Hackett forget to tell them Shepard was alive and on the Citadel? Did they not WANT to talk to Shepard?   This is starting to get out of hand.

6. The Mass Relay's NOT destroying entire systems when they explode.  This, again, is a minor one because it can be explain due to the odd way the Mass Relay were being used (to synthesis/control the reapers).  But the total is starting to get pretty large.

[color=rgb(170, 170, 170)">7. Normandy and Joker in the Mass Relay stream? This is a BIG one. ]Now we are starting to stretch 'imagination' pretty far.[/color] 

8. Normandy surving a forced ejection from the Mass Relay system? Wasn't that established to be destructive? This COULD be explained away as well.  But the total is starting to get overwhelming.

9. Normandy crashing on a planet? And an inhabitable one at that? In a normal ending this could simply be ignored because it is such a common plot problem (the new Star Trek movie had the same problem).  But we are still adding to a VERY big total.

10. My squad mates inexplicably exiting the Normandy after it crashed? Now HERE we have the BIG one.  This simply DOESN'T make any sense at all.  How did they get there? Why did they leave the battle?  This ending, which was already pushing believability, just totally unraveled.

11. My squad mates not only are ON the Normandy but seem UNSCATHED a mere minutes (possibly hours if you stretch it a LOT) after being part of the failed Citadel beam charge? The story just built up how devastating that charge was.  Shepard was incredibly hurt.  How did they get out without a scratch?  This is HUGE! It is impossible to overexaggerate the problem here.

12. My squad mates, who magically appeared on the Normandy, and who are in remarkable health, also seem quite HAPPY? WHAT!?!?!?!  Didn't they just witness what they thought was Shepard's death? Didn't they just witness the destruction of the mass relays? Didn't they lose any chance at all of seeing ANY of their loved ones again (at least for quite some time)?  And they seem HAPPY? This synthesis process must be some pretty strong stuff.  

How long was he or she unconcious at the start of the game? When the Reapers first attacked and was knocked out. Funny how was not a problem then but it is now...What do you mean how did he (Anderson) make it to the beam they never implied noone could make it or that noone did. He arrived before you, he had already probably moved on, this is not a giant leap in assumption. There was a vast amount of times he (Illusive Man) could of got on the Citadel, he was never near you or around you in the first place he was clearly somewhere else as shown be VI link on Cerberus base and he could of been there on the Citadel all along or just snuck on board before the arms closed ot landed prior to you and went into the beam there are multiple ways could of got there or already been there.

There are a dozen ways he (Hackett) could of known Shepard was on the Citadel from someone relaying information that you woke up and stepped into the beam and more including your implants being tracked hell maybe he was monitoring communications from the Citadel and why would he wish to have some random chit chat when everyone is dying and time is not on their side for some chin wagging so why would he go pestering him or her about what they had for dinner or every little detail while everyone was dying and when time was of the essence?

The crew were quite likely told to retreat either while you were assumed dead or they were knocked further away outside the initial blast radius of the laser and could not make it back with the Reaper there baring down on them so retreated out of range and got picked up maybe even was in process of escaping and flew past when you woke up and they saw you enter the beam of which Harbringer is shown chasing something off in the distance, half the team just got wiped out and they may have decided to try to find another way to achieve their goals like find a way inside or left it up to you to get the job finished.

You appeared to be dead, Joker and the rest by time Shepard woke up were probably already retreating by then, even if (Hackett) had wished to tell them it would of served very little purpose when time is running out to have them fly back and do what when possible Harbringer is chasing after them? Or maybe they are the ones who told Hackett they saw you enter the beam as they were running away from Harbinger.

You keep going back to Hackett telling them you were alive.. Why would he? He has much bigger problems to deal with then a few of your crew and what if it was them who told Hackett you was alive for reason stated above, maybe Hackett after hearing this told them to keep retreating or they were still trying to escape Harbringer which is why entered FTL. Also what do you mean inhabitable planet? The one I saw was lush forests and peaceful skies with wildlife present. Does it mean by using my imagination it's wrong? No it just means you don't want to accept my answers or anything without being shown regarding how x, y and z is possible. Every Bioware title has plot holes, everyone of them has required truly vast stretches of imagination to fill in details across the series and thats what kept most of these forums lively through the years.

You then go back and ask the same question twice in which case I will not be answering twice. Are these plot holes yes, but by the sounds of it you need your hand held more so through the game than me which if that gives you enjoyment fine it does not give me as much. Not everyone wants everything answered, questions spark imagination and some people like that, it seems that most people here just don't like to think about it and prefer to be told. Fair enough if you need to be told everything but don't attack those who prefer the former even if you prefer the latter. As said before half the content ever talked about on BSN since the dawn of ME1 was speculation, imagination and asking others why, how and what for. Without that element this forums would of died long ago.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 25 mars 2012 - 06:15 .

[wantedman dan]

The OP and I respectfully disagree.

I must add that I sincerely appreciate this thread. The OP is an arbiter of respect.

[Dragoonlordz]

wantedman dan wrote...

The OP and I respectfully disagree.

I must add that I sincerely appreciate this thread. The OP is an arbiter of respect.

It is beginning to change as I lose my patience with some people who have recently taken part.

Though I will regain composure to continue discussion.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 25 mars 2012 - 05:47 .

[jspiess]

I personally think that the new material is going to address these plot holes/inconsistencies that are so heavy in the ending sequences. Mass Effect has always been able to keep me "in" the story. At the end, my personal bs meter was going off of the charts unlike it has ever before when playing the Mass Effect series. It is very unfortunate. I hope it gets fixed.

[Dragoonlordz]

jspiess wrote...

I personally think that the new material is going to address these plot holes/inconsistencies that are so heavy in the ending sequences. Mass Effect has always been able to keep me "in" the story. At the end, my personal bs meter was going off of the charts unlike it has ever before when playing the Mass Effect series. It is very unfortunate. I hope it gets fixed.

You will be right about that first bolded part, as in that is exactly what they are addressing with this additional DLC. As mentioned by them it's purpose will be exposition and answering questions that people felt they wanted answered in order to bring closure to those who require such answers. Obviously I do not require them to personally but I am glad if they resolve your own questions and help towards your enjoyment in that DLC.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 25 mars 2012 - 06:14 .

[Liber320]

Waaaaaaay tl;dr, especially at 2 30 AM.

That being said, what I hate the most about the ending is what it did to the Reapers. It changed them from a seemingly unstoppable and incomprehensible force of terror and destruction into a galactic cleaning crew.

Then there's the Normandy thing, the Mass Relay explosions that are big enough to be seen when the entire galaxy is in view, the pretty much carbon-copy "different" endings and the fact that it was pretty much the exact same as the original Deus Ex endings (the choices, the consequences, and how you choose)

[Dragoonlordz]

Liber320 wrote...

Waaaaaaay tl;dr, especially at 2 30 AM.

That being said, what I hate the most about the ending is what it did to the Reapers. It changed them from a seemingly unstoppable and incomprehensible force of terror and destruction into a galactic cleaning crew.

Then there's the Normandy thing, the Mass Relay explosions that are big enough to be seen when the entire galaxy is in view, the pretty much carbon-copy "different" endings and the fact that it was pretty much the exact same as the original Deus Ex endings (the choices, the consequences, and how you choose)

In my playthrough they still exist. I merely made them retreat. Up until that point they really were force of terror. But like always the terror is always in how the weapon is used rather than the existance fo the weapon itself, it is probably more terrifying that such a force was being controlled by a single AI, though I personally believe within the chain they are capable of independant thought and actions as long as carry out the overriding goal.

Personally I am more inclined to believe the relays imploded as opposed to exploded pushing the majority of the force inwards not outwards, or that the energy which is relating to the codex entry about when they explode is converted for the purpose of the pulse wave, that altered energy wave does not carry the same consequences as the original and it's purpose could be to relay whatever choice you make to the Reapers in the other parts of the galaxy. I consider these mere possiblities but I have no problems doing so because for me the ending sparked my imagination which I consider a blessing not a curse as far to often these days when everything holds your hand and explains it all away after such is done the game becomes worthless as there is not as much left to think about. Those titles get turned off and not played again for me.

I had no problem overall but did notice the fact it did feel like copy paste of DE:HR relating to how was handled which is not the end of the world to me as I liked DE:HR. I think it was a bit cliché to use what has already been used before especially so recently but it is for me not the be all and end all.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 25 mars 2012 - 07:39 .

[VoodooDrackus]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

The OP and I respectfully disagree.

I must add that I sincerely appreciate this thread. The OP is an arbiter of respect.

It is beginning to change as I lose my patience with some people who have recently taken part.

Though I will regain composure to continue discussion.

I too loved the ending and I have to say you are very patient.

I would take the time to do what you are doing here... but I would just run out of patience. So good job trying to field their attacks/questions.

I have said it before, a lot of what people are thinking of as plot holes are just unanswered questions.
It is only a plot hole if it is an unanswered question that is essential to the outcome of the story. The story outcome is where you choose which state the galaxy should be in. Everything else is fluff.

Personally I thought the ending was beautiful. Sucks that negativity over shadows the positive.

So much hate here, can't wait for it to go away so that real dialogue over the entire series can occur.

[VoodooDrackus]

Dragoonlordz wrote...


In my playthrough they still exist. I merely made them retreat. Up until that point they really were force of terror. But like always the terror is always in how the weapon is used rather than the existance fo the weapon itself, it is probably more terrifying that such a force was being controlled by a single AI, though I personaly belive within the chain they are capable of independant thought and actions as long as carry out the overriding goal.

Personally I am moe inclined to belive the relays imploded as opposed to exploded pushing the majority of the force inwards not outwards, or that the energy which is relating to the codex entry about twhen they explode is converted for the purpose of the pulse wave, that altered energy wave does not carry the same consequences as the original and it's purpose could be to relay whatever choice you make to the Reapers in the other parts of the galaxy. I consider these mere possiblities but i have no problems doing doing so because for me the ending sparked my imagination which I consider a blessing not a curse as far to often these days when everything holds you hand and explains it all away after such is done the game becomes worthless as there is not as much left to think about. Those titles get turned off and not played again.

I had no problem overall but did notice the fact it did feel like copy paste of DE:HR relating to howwas handled which is not the end of the world to me as I liked DE:HR. I think it was a bit cliché to use what has already been used before especially so recently but it is for me not the be all and end all.

Yes. Since the cores contain Element Zero which is used in biotics, that energy is being used to send out biotic waves that can have the effect you chose on organic/synthetic/reaper technology.
You have been using biotic power, seeing it used, throughout all 3 games. Biotic powers can rip apart the mass of something, hold things in stasis, lift things up, etc. Biotics use Element Zero and the crucible is essentially able to do the same thing.

If you look at the arrival supernova explosion, the Element Zero is not focused and creates a devastating explosion.
The Mass Relays at the end of 3 are being used to send out the change to the galaxy and have to be sacrificed in the process to unleash the wave needed. You see the relays speeding up before the Element Zero is unleashed.

I like that it sparks my imagination as well. Kind of reminds me of when I saw Powder and discussed that movie with my friends after. Not sure why I brought that up.