I finished the game with my ME1/ME2 imported main character. I hated the endings
(for that character), and will go ahead and add my primary reasons for feeling that way...
I feel there are a couple of conversations (primarily with Javik) within the game that are well written, compelling, and foreshadow the ending decisions and options given by the Catalyst. There are two "universal" principles I wish to address.
1) Synthetic life will ultimately revolt and attempt to destroy its creators. This becomes the central idea driving the plot (being the Reapers' motivation that we have struggled to discern throughout the series). Part of my problem with the assertion is, as others have stated, that my Shepard spent three games disproving it only to be forced to accept it in the end. The geth were saved, evolved, and brought into a new era of cooperation with the quarians after a 300 year war we are told need not have happened in the first place. We are allowed to converse extensively with EDI- over the course of three games once again she develops from basic self-awareness to self-determination and ultimately a character that feels "alive" - a synthetic being that perceives intrinsic value in basic mores we attribute to the best of humanity even when they violate self-preservation. There is no ending option in the game that both ultimately preserves this "solution" to the Catalyst's "problem" and truly defeats the Reapers (one could argue this point to some degree with the "control ending" - but I have other issues with that one). Indeed, the destruction ending pointlessly invokes the destruction of "all" synthetic life, including EDI and the geth, no matter the decisions made or future promised for cooperation between synthetics and organics.
Even if this ending did not conflict with the evolution of my character and the game, I have an issue with the principle of inevitable conflict. As far as I recollect, only Javik ever poses anything resembling a logical argument as to why synthetics and organics are incompatible while separate, paraphrasing:
"No one knows why organic life exists, some say an accident, some say a miracle"
"Synthetic life knows who created it, and knows organics are imperfect"
SO WHAT?
The notion that this will inevitably lead to war and extinction is never really defended, but at least it's an argument. Something close to a defense is offered by Javik's second objectionable universal principle.... paraphrasing again
2) "It's Evolution. The strong dominate the weak." I had this conversation with our resident prothean and enjoyed the fact that the story investigated the matter. I said to myself "he's a soldier, not a scientist, and he's a product of his society." I object to the principle as stated because it is a blatantly false allegation... symbiosis and cooperative survival are a Fact of evolution in our universe, and even if one were to limit one's argument to in-game evidence then we have once again spent much of the game demonstrating that united species against a common enemy is a viable means of survival. Still, this seems the only justification for suggesting synthetics and organics cannot cooexist: the flawed assumption that advancement eventually requires conflict.
Fundamentally, I object to the endings because, in their exclusivity, they appear to invalidate compelling ideas and the nature of my main character developed throughout the games, and thereby do a disservice to that specific character of Shepard (this is not to say that the endings are themselves bad, but rather that there is no ending to fit certain characters and mass effect storylines).Finally- I would bring up two lesser problems which have been discussed at length.
a) The ending sequence involving the Normandy makes no sense with other aspects of the plot as presented.
Shepard's death, in circumstances where she/he dies, seems insufficiently justified to me. The notion of sacrifice is prevalent throughout the series, and the tone of individual sacrifice offered at Virmire, at Tuchanka with Mordin, with Thane on the Citadel, and with Legion on Rannoch is perfect. Individual sacrifice for the sake of the many, and each character "dies" to resolve a specific problem. It's unclear why the nature of the catalyst and crucible should demand that sacrifice of shepard (he/she dies because he couldn't shoot the power conduit from far enough away? or because his all-organic DNA is needed, for some reason, to write an evolved hybrid organic/sythetic genetic code? It's not as if there isn't ample DNA 99.9999% similar to his/hers patiently decaying by the keepers over where the conduit fed out).
I'll be honest and say that I want to be able to have a Shepard-survives ending (let's call it "happy"). We've seen a great deal of sacrifice throughout the series, and demanding that Shepard die seems only to send a message that's already been received- that reality is grim and the galaxy is a harsh, bleak place. In circumstances where Shepard dies- better that it be an inability to survive the wounds collected on the way to the conduit rather than determined by the completely arbitrary demands of the catalyst/crucible.
Thank you so much for the fantastic game. I would like to see the endings added to - to explain plot gaps and to have a resolution that truly fulfills certain of my characters... but ultimately I do appreciate the gripping story and game experience I've followed from the start.
Modifié par Casuist, 22 mars 2012 - 11:22 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
ESPECIALLY after watching this!! 
