Bluntly. Businesses rely on the good opinion the consumer has of them. Without a good opinion the consumer will move on. Therefore the opinion of the consumer does matter.
Customers often times don't know what they want until they try the product personally; so opinion is usually often blurred by the unknown.
If you have the mental capacity to focus long enough to read more than 140 characters; check out the link. I think you may find it interesting: www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_09_06_a_ketchup.html
Bluntly. Businesses rely on the good opinion the consumer has of them. Without a good opinion the consumer will move on. Therefore the opinion of the consumer does matter.
Customers often times don't know what they want until they try the product personally; so often time's opinion is often blurred by the unknown.
If you have the mental capacity to focus long enough to read more than 140 characters; check out the link. I think you may find it interesting: www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_09_06_a_ketchup.html
Why are you so insulting in all of your posts?
Is it necessary? Is the only possible way for you to communicate is through acting belligerent?
Where have I heard all the OP's flawed reasoning before?
OH YEAH.. when people complained about Fallout 3. I hear all the same kind of trite garbage, listened to the game journalists talking trash about the players, and what happened? We got a real ending after all. Not only that, but the same journalists that talked smack PRAISED the DLC.
So, dear OP, feel free to take your condescending opinion that you're trying to pass off as fact elsewhere. This road's been traveled before.
Where have I heard all the OP's flawed reasoning before?
OH YEAH.. when people complained about Fallout 3. I hear all the same kind of trite garbage, listened to the game journalists talking trash about the players, and what happened? We got a real ending after all. Not only that, but the same journalists that talked smack PRAISED the DLC.
So, dear OP, feel free to take your condescending opinion that you're trying to pass off as fact elsewhere. This road's been traveled before.
The circumstances between ME3 and Fallout 3 can be classified in almost two completely different categories....
Fans of ME3 feel the Final moments of the narrative fail to sufficiently blend with the rest of the story.
Unfortunately, the majority of this vocal minority lack the lexicon to describe their blight. So they usually resort to clumsily mentioning nuanced details that they would like changed.
The Fallout 3 ending was much different. I really don't understand how you could compare the two. Then again, seeing that you happen to be one of the vocal minorities; I'm not very surprised by your intellectually bankrupt statement.
Funny that the dear OP wasn't around on this thread to speak his wisdom:
Zine2 wrote...
This is not meant to be nice. This is meant to be a blunt, honest, and to the point assessment - because everyone seems to be trying to avoid the Elephant in the room.
Mass Effect's Ending attempts to condone and justify genocide. This is why it is almost universally reviled.
The one common element in all the endings is that you will meet an entity known as the "Catalyst". Set aside all of the other plot holes and minor complaints, and focus on the Catalyst for now.
This is the entity that created the Reapers. This is the entity that is directly responsible for the genocide of multiple sentient races over tens of thousands of years. It is his fault that Earth, Palaven, Thessia, and the Galaxy is burning.
The Catalyst is in fact a war criminal on a scale worse than any of our own real-world tyrants. Hitler's gas chambers, Genghis Khan's campaigns of extermination, and Tamerlene's pyramid of skulls is nothing compared to what the Reapers have done. That it tries to disguise itself as a young child does nothing to exonerate it of the magnitude of its crimes - it's actually sickening. It's like Hitler having plastic surgery to look like an innocent child.
Even worse, this is an entity that attempts to justify its genocidal actions - in a way that is bluntly little different from the real world genocide of the Jews.
It uses euphemisms to describe mass murder. It uses the term "Chaos" to describe people, as though they are a problem and not living, breathing, beings. It calls its actions a "Solution", just as the certain people called the Holocaust their "Final Solution". It even goes as far as calling the the liquification of corpses into Reaper components as "Ascension", no different from how the Concentration Camps collected the hair and skin of the dead victims to use as furniture components.
Even worse, the premise of the Catalyst is fundamentally a racist premise. It boils down to "Organics and Synthetics are so different that they will always end up destroying each other". Really? You are now judged by your component parts - metal or protein - instead of the content of your character? How offensive would it be in real life to hear someone say you should be judged by the color of your skin?
To top it all off, the player is not allowed to question its actions. It must stand idly by and accept its justifications. You are not allowed to tell it that is wrong. Mac Walters and Casey Hudson actually thought this was a good thing too, as noted here in the "Final Hours":
Mac Walters on the Star Child/Reapers "Originally, with the catalyst, the star child at the end of the game, I had written that much more in the guise of a investigative style conversation, where there is something he tells you but then, you get to ask a bunch of questions and you get your questions answered. But then me and Casey talked and decided, lets keep the conversation "High level". Give you the details that you need to know, but don't get into the stuff that you don't need to know. Like "How long have they been reaping?" You don't need to know the answers to the mass effect universe. So we intentionally left those out"
But given that they were planning to allow the player to ask only softball questions ("How long have you been reaping?", as opposed to "Why did you not seek a different solution that did NOT involve mass murder?"), they were apparently so in love with their "Genocide is justifiable!" ending that they didn't think it was a big deal.
====== But it gets even worse. You are not simply prevented from telling the Catalyst that it is wrong. You are also forced to go along with its next plan - its next "solution".
This is why the most popular alternate ending thus far is the "I refuse all of your options" ending. Players would seriously rather have the entire galaxy wiped out than be forced to serve the Catalyst.
And you know what? Because they are absolutely right.
Genocide is wrong. Period. There is no room for debate. Nothing can justify what the Catalyst did, no matter how much it claims it's so much smarter than all of us. No matter how much Mac Walters thinks its smarter than all of us.
And this is ironically a lesson that the rest of the series spends so much time teaching us. It shows us that even beings of another races are people "just like us" with their own hopes and dreams. It doesn't matter if the Elcor are big and look funny. We love them because they have art, and culture, and feelings too, even if we cannot fully comprehend it like they do. ----
This is why the ME3 ending was a total and abject failure. It is not art. It is not deep. It is offensive.
It is about a brat AI proudly explaining his Mein Kampf. That people should be judged along racial lines: Organic vs Synthetic. And that because of these racial lines, he was totally justified in committing genocide over, and over, and over again.
And the player is forced to become one of the pawns in his game. That is why players hate the ending; and why the most popular "alternative" ending is one wherein the player completely and totally rejects the Catalyst's "options", even if it means certain military defeat. ----- [Also... since some people will argue "But the Catalyst is correct about organics and synthetics!"
The Catalyst was in fact completely and totally wrong. Just because it says it's correct does not mean it is true. That is the trick used by propagandists everywhere.
Instead, what people should do is to analyze the strength of its arguments. And frankly, anyone with some common sense would realize that this is a very weak argument.
There is nothing that inherently forces Organics and Synthetics to fight each other. Races and people fight all the time. Turians make war on Krogans. Krogans make war on Salarians. Even without synthetics there will still be conflict in the universe.
However, the Catalyst's premise is that there is a divide between Synthetics and Organics, and that they are "fated" to kill each other. That's not a sound argument. That's just racist ideology. Again that's just judging people based on their component parts - metal or protein - rather than the strength of their character. Only a racist in the real world would claim that your character is dictated by the color of your skin, just as the Catalyst's grand assertion that being a Synthetic or an Organic hard-wires you down a particular path is no less racist.
And ironically, you can in fact forge an alliance between an organic and Synthetic race (Quarians and Geth) within the game - proving that the divide between the two is nothing more than a lie.
Therefore, what the Catalyst is saying is not factual. Just because it says "the cycle will continue" without its intervention does not make it true. It's just an arrogant being who is trying to play God, and which has killed trillons of sentient beings in the name of upholding its flawed premise.]
tl;dr? Thought so. Okay, just for your very intellectial mind, here's a simplified version from me:
Ludica wrote...
I'm going to focus on the Catalyst aspect of the ending. It stated two things that it asserted as fundamental recurring laws in ME universe: 1)Organics always create syntetics 2)syntetics always destroy organics
The only race to truly create another syntetic race was Quarians. Were Geth hostile? Did they destroy Quarians during the first war? No.
The only hostile syntetics in the galaxy are: - Reapers - Heretic Geth.
Heteric Geth are creations of Reapers. Reapers are creations of Catalyst. There is nothing that supports an idea of "Reapers saving organics from syntetics". In fact, the game is around destroying that idea. The peace with quarians and geth, EDI discovering her humanity, hell, back in ME2. If Catalyst was right, she'd kills us then and there.
So what's the point?
Catalyst forces it entirely by himself, his assertions and ideas are made-up by him, and their background is more fragile than a wet house of cards under carpet bombing. He and the Reapers are the only syntetic problem left. He is a racist hypocrite(in other words - a four-letter word beginning with "N" and ending with "I") whose smug delusions make no sense.
All of this wouldn't have been a problem. Because it makes sense for a villain to be insane and deluded. But the problem is:
You are forced to accept his reasoning. You are forced to accept "Reapers were right". You are not allowed to disagree with what i've just listed.
None of the endings allow you to defeat it's points.
1)Destroy - you destroy all syntetics, not just Reapers. You are forced to accept an idea of all syntetic races being a threat. You are forced to become a racist, something the eternity of ME 1-3 was set up to disprove.
2)Control - you are forced to accept the Reapers are necessary just in case Catalyst was right. You are once again accepting it's racist viewpoints.
3)Synthesis - this one is a little less obvious. But this is what you truly do - you transform everyone into Reapers. Here, you accept that the organics and syntetics can't coexist together, so the problem must be resolved by rewriting their DNA. It's like painting all black and white people with gray paint and excpecting it to solve anything. Once again, incredibly racist.
So in all 3 endings, you are forced to become a racist. I'm gonna ask people who defend this ending on BSN(despite how few of them there are)... do you feel happy? Do you feel heroic?
I don't. I feel like Bioware took advice from that customs turian from ME2.
tl;dr again? Still trying to pull a snob?Okay, time to perfectly predict your responses in a true Mass Effect 3 ending fashion:
Response 1, blue: "lol Godwin's law, how cliche. Checkmate."
Well, i wasn't the one to use the word "solution". The Catalyst was.
Response 2, green: "lol you're wrong and you make no sense. Checkmate"
I don't excpect any kind of reasoning to support that one, so i'll just ignore it.
Response 3, red: "lol immature brat trying to assert the genius of Bioware. Grow up, kid. Checkmate"
Let me tell you something about kids.
When kids go past a certain age, they become "teenagers". The rest of the world calls them kids anyway, but they like a fancy word to suit their "status". And you are one of them.
The cartoons you watched as a kid, all that stuff(whatever you watch these days. In my days it was Ninja Turtles, the 1980's version.), simply "isn't in your life" anymore. Because of adult pressure and peers bandwagoning said pressure, you're forced to alienate from those works, and take a new liking. To support what "hit" and "emo" these days. That means: dark works.
You hold the word "dark" as a sacred cow, as a quality stamp. It's rare to see people like you outside of Twilight(and it's equivalent from past generations. Because there is always one.) boards, but sometimes it happens. Liking dark works becomes a social status to you. So anything that isn't dark is instantly childish, immature, and not worth watching/reading/playing. So you dismiss people that like lighthearted works as kids, why exactly?
Because you as a kid liked lighthearted works, and you're afraid to come across as a kid again. That's right, you're scared. Scared that your peers will laugh at you for watching "My Little Pony". That's why you're trying to sound intellectual. You're desperately calming yourself into thinking "i'm right... true art is dark... these kids got nothing on me..." and you use any kind of argument , you cling to anything that can help your self-denial.
Now why not all teenagers behave like you? Because most of them have other ways to calm themselves and their self-esteem down. You don't.
That's why we see naturally conflicting insults here: "vocal minority" and "hivemind". Other conflicting insults: "knowledge addict" and "intellectually bankrupt". So you repeately insult people for both thinking and not thinking. This is another quality of a teenager: not having his/her own views established. You're told only kids like light works, and you repeat after those who did so, using the same arguments once used against you.
tl;dr? Oh well, let the insults come. Ican take a self-denying masquerading shell with self-esteem issues of an underage smoker. And funny that there were no insults in my post. Analysis and critisism. Either way, typing this was fun for me.
Since I just spent the last half an hour writing an answer only to come back and see the other thread being shut down... and I don't want this half an hour go to waste, I'm copy-pasting here now. Sorry in advance for the wall of text. I have fought my way through the OP's story.
Hello, OP. First off, the fact that you compare Star Wars and the mystery of the midichlorians (from which I believe you have no idea what you are actually talking about when mentioning them in here) to the face of a Quarian and the fact that players want closure shows me just how little you really understand of the underlying issue the fans or, more specifically, the RetakeME3 movement has with the ending of the Mass Effect series.
1. Shepard, war torn and exhausted, leaped into the crucibles energy source sacrificing his life to intertwine existences between synthetics and organics.
So your Mass Effect story ended with a sacrifice for the greater good. That's good for you, but how good is this ending really? From all we know Shepard dies in this ending and while this is not necessarily an issue since many people could well live with Shepard dying, you should refrain from insulting and bashing others for not necessarily wanting that. Mass Effect has all along been about choice and consequence, cause and effect. I personally, after playing a full Paragon playthrough, importing my character from ME1 to 2 to 3, after maximizing my EMS and promoting my MP character, fail to see why Shepard has to die. I fail to see the underlying cause. Another issue I would like to address with the Synthesis ending is the fact that in the end, the Synthesis ending - according to the Starchild - is a means to merge all organic life with all synthetic life. This may in theory sound like a way to harmony, but thinking back to Saren Arterius' conversations on Virmire and to the harvesting of organic life to merge them with cybernetics into a new Reaper shell in the Collector Base I fail to fully believe the Starchild, an entirely new, unknown character I only just met one minute ago. Sorry, but I'm not religious and I don't believe in this god's greater plan for the galaxy and I don't want it's wisdom forced on me.
2. The writing team behind Mass Effect 3 was able to elevate the narrative premise by weaving a philosophical debate about the relationship between organic and synthetic coexistence. The entire story throughout the third addition is laced with the ideas of life, harmony, and self preservation.
More than ever, the story has morphed into a game about big themes and big ideas.
Just some of the thoughts explored throughout this game...
EDI and free will, Synthetic dominance, Lineage, Genophage, Causality, Geth/quarian conflict, Determinism, Legacy - Miranda's father, Synchronicity and Kaiden, False Theology-Asari Prothean Gods, personal fulfillment, etc.
Compared to the previous installments that may have skimmed over some of these topics, all the philosophical and sociological debates/conflicts in this iteration have the main goal of bolstering the main theme of Mass Effect 3,
The existence of The Creators vs. The Created.
I can agree with the first paragraph. However, this process of lacing the story with ideas of life, harmony and self-preservation went on throughout all the three games, not just the third game. The examples you gave were quite well chosen, EDI's new-found free will and the Geth-Quarian Conflict were certainly major examples for how harmony between synthetic life and organic life is very well possible and in no way doomed to end in all-out war between the creators and the created, which however is exactly what the Starchild wants to make us think. Just stop and think for a minute. Legion has told us so much about the Geth, how they evolved into AI's over time, what their actual plan was and how everything they did was always done in the name of self-preservation. The Geth's goal was to upload into one mega-structure so that all wisdom, all input, all experience and all knowledge could be shared. They would all become a collective consciousness and as long as organics did not involve themselves in this, they would have no role in this happening. The Geth never did anything wrong. When the Geth first gained intelligence, the Quarians wanted to disable them. The Geth tried to stop them from doing that since it would have meant their death. Have you seen the recent trailer for the upcoming "Quantic Dream's Kara"? You should watch it, it is a very touching take on this very topic. (I will post the link at the end) When the Geth then were attacked by the Quarians in order for them to retake Rannoch, the Geth - now facing sudden extinction - went to the Reapers, the very entities they never wanted to turn to, for help in order to ensure their own survival as a race. The Quarians were over 300 years of being at odds with the Geth simply blind to alternative, even though there were outliers like Zaal'Koris. And in the end... they had peace. They even cooperated to help the Quarians adapt to the new environment of their homeworld. Is this a sign that the created will always oppose their creators? Do children always go at odds with their parents? We all know the answer - not every child does. This entire conflict completely alienates the thesis of the Starchild that created always end up annihilating their creators. Therefore the ending is completely unreasonable and Shepard should at least have had the chance to object, as he always did. Instead, now the most cruel and ruthless human being of the galaxy, Jack Harper aka The Illusive Man, all of a sudden was correct? I do not believe that, with all due respect.
3. Two camps are formed because of this instance. The story the writers wish to tell, and the fans who feel entitled to observe the story they themselves envisioned.
The writers, it seems, realized the message that they wanted people to take from this third installment. This had the team shifting the narrative focus to a more elevated dynamic.
The coexistence of Synthetics vs. Organics.
I do not exactly disagree with this thesis, but I think I just showed that even if that is true, this very conflict does not have to end in extinction. Also I do not see how the Asari philosophy being based on the Protheans contributes to that specific thesis but I think I may be getting picky. If so, I apologize. In any way, the conversations I had with Javik on Thessia did make me wonder what the origin of other religions all over the galaxy might have been then. But I digress...
4. To this end, Mass Effect 3 succeeds in weaving a narrative from beginning to end. To say otherwise is disingenuous.
Philosophical themes trounce the Neanderthal-dopamine induced urges people wish to see in this addition. Especially in the end game where this theme becomes the stories main focal point.
Honestly is a cameo appearance from Wrex for the 50th time really going to add anything to the finality of this story? No.
Yes, Mass Effect 3 does weave a narrative from beginning to end, although it is clearly visible - and claiming otherwise would be disingenious - that after Mass Effect 1 and 2 the intended focus of the story shifted in Mass Effect 3 from the original Dark Energy thesis to the Synthetic/Organic conflict. Dark Energy build-ups seem to have disappeared entirely in Mass Effect 3, which I can understand considering the shift away from the original theory. And here I'm not judging Bioware's decision in any way. The story could still have played out incredibly good at this point.
And now to the ending... yes, I do believe Bioware did intend a very philosophical take on the ending and while I do not necessarily mind that idea, the way it turned out was mediocre at best. To be honest, if it had specifically told me what happened to Wrex and all the other major characters, - and that is where we fundamentally differ in opinions - I think I could have almost accepted the ending. And that is where we come to your 5th point...
5. Unfortunately I find a Star Wars Syndrome happening with this series. A fan base digesting every bit of corn fructose they can gulp down. Needing everything to be spelled out; desperate to know every last bit of information.
Why must one need to see Tali's face? Why do we need to know a detailed history of the Protheans? How come we need to see the Rachni and Krogan attack the enemy? Isn't the struggle of loss and war already inferred multiple times throughout the story? The focus of the end game is obviously being developed on a much deeper/different theme.
Midichlorians anyone? You do not need to know how exactly the force works...
This desperate need to dig up plot holes and inconsistencies from the hard core is entirely unhealthy for the series and its fans. All stories have inconsistencies, stories you tell to your friends are punched up exaggerations of what really happened. Your Facebook account is not a mirror image of the life you lead, but the life you wish you lived.
I completely and entirely disagree with your entire viewpoint here and to be fair, I doubt you have been a passionate fan of the series and believe you missed the point. The Mass Effect series HAS BEEN and WILL ALWAYS BE a character-driven sci-fi saga without match, no matter it's ending. BUT that being said, Bioware here betrayed this very focus of the entire series. After I have spent 100 hours laughing, crying and feeling with my companions, my squadmates, my friends, my comrades, my brothers-in-arms, I would like to know how their story turned out. I personally romanced Liara and no matter what you think of her as a character or whatever, her romance scene and a lot of other scenes in all over the Mass Effect series made me feel deeply for the character. While many people find the "little blue children" story a bit cheesy and boring and cannot see why that would matter in any way, I think TRUE passionate fans, who really got engrossed in the story's plot, it's characters, it's twists and turns and all it's little secrets, will understand me when I say I am disappointed that I never got the chance to experience Shepard being alive and settling down with Liara wherever in the galaxy. Shepard dying is contrary to what most people believe not an obligation. If Bioware was true to their word, my Shepard would have survived to see another day! My Shepard would NOT have bought a single word the Starchild said, NO. It alienates every single word I ever said when I was asked how I can still go on after everythng I've been through. I was fighting for my loved ones! I fought on to see my friends and my love again one day. I fought for them. I fought for everyone who depended on me getting the job done and a sacrifice should not have been forced, it should have been an option! It should have been the effect of a decision I made somewhere, sometime, somehow, not the task put on me by some weird AI god I only just met a minute ago! If that is Star Wars syndrome to you, then you have understood absolutely nothing about the last 5 years of Mass Effect and you should play these games again and LISTEN to what your characters say. As for the rest: Yes, I do think I deserved to see Tali's face. And by seeing her face I mean SEEING her face, not staring at a stock photo that was photoshopped. I could have done that too, I don't need Bioware for that. After all, she was a squadmate all the way through Mass Effect, from 1 to 3 and a lot of people grew to love Tali'Zorah. To some people that may seem weird as it's just a character in a game but hey! We're passionate fans for a reason, we deserve to see her face if we already romance her! And YES, I did want to see the Rachni and Krogan fight the enemy together and not have to save their race from utter extinction again. Why? I will be honest, this time not because I felt much for the Rachni. I felt sorry for the Rachni in Mass Effect 1. Commiting genocide was not an option to any of my Shepards. Mac Walters then personally confirmed that the Rachni will play a significant role in the final confrontation and all they did was help build the Crucible... sorry, but the Rachni as a War Asset for the Crucible weren't needed for me. I could have finished the Crucible without them too, that is NOT what I call significant. So that is just a blatant lie and reason enough to be mad. Isn't the struggle of loss and war already inferred multiple times throughout the story? I'll answer that with a yes, but only because we really did see a lot of death and destruction throughout the story of all three Mass Effect games but let us be clear: The Mass Effect games were always focusing around conflicts. Mass Effect 1 told us the tale of Shepard's hunt for Saren and how both crossed quite a few lines to reach their goals. In the end, it ended in thousands dead during the Battle of the Citadel. Mass Effect 2 right on started with the death of half of the Normandy SR1 crew and then focused on the abduction and processing of hundreds of thousands of innocent human civilians. It was a brutal revelation, but the insights it offered us into the real enemy - the Reapers - were fundamental and shocking. MAss Effect 3 then of course was full of loss, conflict and struggle but that is the brutal truth of war. There will always be losses. There will always be sacrifices, some necessary and some due to wrong decisions. All the species this time had a take in this war. The Batarians took the worst of all and even the peaceful Elcor and Volus weren't spared. But we all saw this coming and we were trying to prepare for this. To warn the galaxy that this will happen. It was obvious from the very beginning that not everyone would make it but it was clear that in order to stop this giant threat, we would have to make sacrifices so all the trouble we went through to unite the galaxy under the threat of a common enemy could have been the basis for a lasting peace in the galaxy. It could have been the last war. The endings we got unfortunately point at something way worse than war... cultural and political genocide.
And generally, comparing Mass Effect, a story where YOU, the player, decide the canon of the story, to Star Wars, where George Lucas, the story writer, decides the canon, lacks any sense. Sorry. Bringing up the midichlorians won't help there and even then - we know what the midichlorians are: Microscopic lifeforms responsible for all life in the galaxy and, more importantly, for the existance of the force itself and wherever the force is strong, a high concentration of midichlorians is to be found. The Force simply is a universal power, an energy that spans the entire galaxy and everything in and around every single one of us. And those capable of focusing deep enough to communicate with the midichlorians or even to control them can focus their energy to affect everything around you with the mere power of your mind. This has nothing to do with science fiction however, that is fantasy. And comparing fantasy to Mass Effect is, to say it very plain, BS.
This is anything but a desperate need to dig up plot holes. Even so, why would someone not want to get every mystery solved after 5 years of hard work to find answers to all the questions of this story? Why make a trilogy if you're not willing to answer the fans' questions? Bioware even said it before release that they would answer all the questions. Anything less is just unacceptable and that's more proof that you are anything but a passionate fan. Leaving open plots is unhealthy for a plot. The open questions are not solved by saying "All races are about to battle the Reapers." More importantly I would like a clear answer to the question "What is the origin of the Reapers?" or "Why do synthetics and organics HAVE to end up fighting? Why is there, after the entire theme of Mass Effect has been harmony and peaceful coexistance, no way for this very harmony to last?" Those are only a few questions left unanswered and every passionate and honest fan would love answers to these and many more questions. And while I agree that some things are better left to imagination, I have to say that these things should not be major plot questions that have been standing since the very beginning of the entire series. With all due respect, but that is a no-go.
And last but not least...
6. In the end, it would seem the Bioware writing team effectively succeeded in what they wanted to say in the Mass Effect saga. This is something I can respect. Instead of appeasing to the vocal mob; they finished the story on their own terms.
Mass Effect became a tale about cultural synthesis. The Mass Effect team was finally able to find this series a voice. Knowing this, makes me content that I have finished this series in its entirety; in the way it was meant to be seen.
And I enjoyed every minute of it.
I think Bioware and the writers succeeded in making the saga what they wanted it to be, but not what the fans hoped it would be and not what it was promised to be. That unfortunately is something I can not respect.
And please, for ****s sake, please! Refrain from this BS like "vocal mob", "vocal minority" and whatever. We are all fans. Some are bigger, more passionate fans and some are in for the fun of the gameplay. I can respect both sides and since we all are grown-ups, everybody else should respect it too. You don't need to agree to every word people say, but you should respect other opinions, as every grown-up, intelligent human being would.
Unfortunately however, my Mass Effect story became an unfinished story of cultural and political genocide since I chose the destroy ending. My Shepard is breathing, I have no clue how he got back to Earth (atmosphere re-entry and the impact would have killed the last cell in his body if he really fell off the Citadel) and the destruction of the Mass Relays after what I learned in Arrival leaves no galaxy worth mentioning behind... effectively, it is annihilated.
Still, I can respect people who liked the ending. I personally am proud to say I loved the saga as a whole. It was the best sci-fi saga I ever played and I really enjoyed the last episode of this saga no matter the plotholes. But, and that makes me as a big fan of these games sad, I'm disappointed with the ending.
I apologize for the wall of text and hope someone (at least the OP) reads it. That was just my opinion and is not meant to represent anyone else's opinion or the opinion of the RetakeME3 movement.
Why did you have to ressurect this thread after the other one was shut down for good reason?
Seriously, ignore this MintyCool. I am not even part of the Retake movement and he/she will say that "ignore MintyCool" is some kind of argument against the endings.
But no, the truth is that he/she will never take the time to read your posts and respond to you in kind, even if you are civil, rational, and apply critical thought. He/she is a trouble maker whether it's intentional or not, so just leave it be and try to find someone more honest and open to debate with. The only purpose of threads like these is to drive people further apart instead of encouraging critical self inquiry and open discussion.
Ladies and gentlemen: It's time to adjourn this particular flame war.
The OP will not be responding for 24 hours, nor will nine other people in "that other thread".
I am a fan of axiological argument as a whole, but this forum is about games, not meta-theory. If you think someone is trolling, there is good advice on the topic in the forum rules.
In other words, let's talk about ME3, and not why we think other people are screwed in the head for their particular views on other people who play ME3.
Check mate, really? Why the ending works is not universal nor is anyone's interpretation of it either, with the exception of the author which in most literature we rarely hear from.
I would relate this to artistic integrity since that term is being thrown around like wildfire, however, that is too bothersome...
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
