23455 réponses à ce sujet

[jeweledleah]

about Clarke.... it may look like magic, but it still obeys the laws of the universe. green magical beam? does not. whatever technology we have working in ME3... has to work within the capabilities of that universe. and that green beam? is utterly impossible. control beam? yes, I could see it working - large scale signal, like the one keepers were supposed to send out, except with different parameters. red beam? considering that it seems to overload the reapers ala Sovereign when you kill Sarne, just on deadly scale? yes, its explainable. Catalyst can amplify both.

but technology to turn everyone into synthetic hybrids, all the while preserving their fenotype and personality and memories etc? considering that collectors had to go through multitude of experiments just to find the right formula to build a human reaper... and that's concidering that reapers built more of themselves in every single cycle and preservation of original conciousness/form is not exactly their primary goal...

and suddenly just like that, green beam works with no issues? even though they have NEVER made small scale hybrids before? riiiiiiight.

Modifié par jeweledleah, 15 avril 2012 - 12:14 .

[Thanatos144]

Can't explain logic to people who refuse to use it...... This thread makes gamers look bad.

[DirtyDeluxe]

Thanatos144 wrote...

Can't explain logic to people who refuse to use it...... This thread makes gamers look bad.

I'm sick of your illogical and contradicting statements. You're a horrible excuse for a troll, and I dont see you making any 5 paragraph statements like some of the players on here that deserve any acceptance, attention, or validity. I dont see one reason why your illogical statements should even scratch the surface of my conscience.

[nickkcin11]

Kunari801 wrote...

T.Attwood wrote...

The ME series wants you to become emotionally involved in the characters, and you let yourself do that which makes the game engaging and meaningful. This is why (in my view) the ending of ME3 has caused such controversy... 

Exactly, BW did a great job on the Mass Effect series in getting us players to really invest care into our Shepard and crew.   ME3 was always going to be sad, since we all knew this was the end of that story.   I didn't expect such an abrupt "Rocks fall everyone dies" ending.   

I expected sad, the ME series has always been dark.   ME1 you love Kaiden/Ashley and possibly Wrex too.  ME2 you also make sacrifices tough I fought like hell and only lost Thane on the Collector base.  In ME3 we loose more, Mordin, Legion, etc.  
As much as I wanted to live and return to my LI, I knew that it quite possible I'd have to sacrifice my Shepard to win and I was good with that as long as it felt MEANINGFUL sacrifice.  However, all three endings have you pretty much destroy the galaxy and strand your crew & LI on some jungle world where you have no idea what will happen to them. 

I beat every sidequest, even UNC: Valuable Minerals, in both games just to give Shepard what I felt was the best shot at surviving. I thought that it wouldn't be fair to Ashley or for that matter any potential LI if they have to live with Shepard dying... twice. But, if I had to die to save my squad or the galaxy, I would. I was prepared for anything in the end. Unfortunately, the ending is so bizarre, I don't think it's possible to be prepared for it. At all. It just is so out of place, like something straight out of 2001: A Space Odyssey. The ending up to the point where you meet the Catalyst isn't that bad. I liked the confrontation with TIM and Anderson's death was another sad moment. But once you meet Star-Child, everything goes to ****. His explanation for why the Reapers are necessary is total bull****. "The created always rebel against their creators". So, judging by that, wouldn't the Reapers rebel against you? And how does creating a race of synthetics to kill organics to make more synthetics so that organics don't get killed by synthetics make any sense. Oh, that's right, it doesn't make any ****ing sense. Then for some reason, Shepard doesn't question the damn thing? And why is that child so damn prevalent in this game? Who the **** cares, he's some random kid. I was way more shaken up when Mordin died. Anyway, so then it gives you your 3 choices, each sounding worse than the previous one.

1.) Destruction: kills all the reapers (nice) but also all your synthetic allies like the geth and presumably EDI (not cool). But Shepard lives if you have a high enough score (very nice).

2.) Control: become the new Illusive Man. Because that sounds like a good idea. Controlling Reapers? For what purpose? Who the hell knows, you just get to control them at the cost of your life. Yeah... no that sounds like ****.

3.) Synthesis: (originally, I stumbled into synthesis because I didn't see the two paths come out of the side. I felt retarded, but I wish the game highlighted all 3 choices in a better way) Basically, think like Saren did and infuse Reapers with organic life... because that sounds like a nice little plan. Sorry, but I think that's creepy as ****. Excuse me for not wanting to be part robot BW... really?

Of course, each one of said choices is color coated... for some reason. I guess BW didn't want to actually make different endings, instead saying that color changes sufficed. Shoot, because I was really looking forward to seeing all my War Assets (which I think in themselves would've been sufficient to kill the Reapers) fight. Instead, I got glimpses of only the largest groups (yay... the geth and quarians were added in <_< that's kind of expected BW, doing the minimum doesn't earn you props). Anyway, so the red/blue/green explosion goes off and destroys the Reapers or causes them to leave. And if you have high enough War Assets, Earth is saved. Yay. Then we learn that all the Mass Relays are destroyed. So isn't that problematic? I mean I can believe it wouldn't necessarily destroy the solar system, maybe it's a different type of explosion, but the aftermath would be terrible. Families seperated, entire fleets seperated, etc. And the Citadel is destroyed, which means the center of galactic politics, basically the capital, is now no more. And everyone on it was killed. Millions. Great. After that, we see that the Normandy is flying away from the explosion for some reason despite the fact:
a.) It couldn't have left after the Crucible fired meaning that the Normandy left during the fight... why?
b.) In order to pick up the squadmates that were with me, the Normandy had to fly down right in front of Harbinger... and not even bother to pick up the Commander who still had a functioning radio. That doesn't make any sense. At all. EVER.
Eventually, the Normandy gets hit by the explosion and crashes on a weird jungle planet. This planet was probably supposed to be like a symbol, but its presence in a Mass Effect is weird and out of place. Are we supposed to believe that a planet like that was left uncolonized? A planet that from the looks of it has nothing wrong as the crew is seen leaving the ship without any masks?
Then slow dramatic zoom pan to Shepard's body which is now mysteriously on Earth. He breathes! Then cut to credits.
mfw this happened
"Well maybe they'll have something post credits?"
It turns out each game was being told as a story to a child by none other than Buzz Aldrin. Yep, Buzz Aldrin. That's cool. Unfortunately, the player learns nothing significant from this other than life went on brah,.

I was left feeling very cheated. I even read a few "professional" reviews to see if anyone else had a problem. No, apparently, there endings "wrapped up everything. Even from way back in Mass Effect 1". So I looked up the endings to see if perhaps I missed something. Nope, I didn't. All endings are the same basically, vague and useless and inconclusive. I don't know how anyone could say these endings "wrapped up everything". I could see not hating the endings, sure, but in NO case are they conclusive. NONE. I don't know what happens to ANYTHING after the credits role. Nothing of the characters that I've grown attached to, nothing of the fate of the galaxy, nothing about even Shepard! WTH!

The problem was the approach that BW took with the ending. Instead of making it end like a War Story that well, I don't know, shows a definite winner, they chose to make it open ended and ambiguous. That's great for games/movies/books that are intended to be a mindf**k, something where the theme is about questioning reality or something like that. Not for a war story. People are mad because that's not how you end a story like Mass Effects, a game series that made characters and story a priority to gameplay. I want to know what happens to these characters. I don't play the game because I want to be mind****ed! I don't play the game because I want a "cool" "artistic" ending. I play the game for the characters, and so does everyone on these forums. And because of that, I was disappointed.

[Archonsg]

@nickkcin11

Just shows which reviewers are shills and or aren't exactly honest when it comes to reviews. Like it or not, professional reviewers rely on advertising revenue so subjective reporting goes out the window.

Best cases I have seen are hedged reviews with statements like "not everyone will like the ending.." or " Bioware went with a different approach with the ending and will not please everyone..." the rest, just either didn't finish the game or are just repeating PR material.

Modifié par Archonsg, 15 avril 2012 - 03:27 .

[Hoodoo Guru]

 Loved the ending,  difficult choices and all have their consequences.  The hero can't always save the day, get the girl/guy and have their pudding without eating  their meat.  Sometimes victory isn't pretty and sacrifices have to be made.  Thanks for having the guts to make a game where the story ends without a sugary, sit-com ending.  The needs of the many...

Modifié par Hoodoo Guru, 15 avril 2012 - 04:10 .

[nickkcin11]

It was funny because Gameinformer had 3 articles of Mass Effect 3. One of the "controversial" ending. One of the Day 1 DLC. One of the 10/10 review. And I'm not saying that Mass Effect 3 isn't a good game. 8.5/10 in my opinion. The rest of the game isn't that bad. But that ending lowers the game by 1.5. If it had ended in a satisfying manner, I would've excused the smaller problems of the game like the lack of dialogue and interaction. But that wasn't the case. I might've even let them give ME3 a 10/10 if they had said, "I didn't have a problem with the ending because I wasn't as focused on the characters of the series as hardcore fans" or something like that. But they flatout lied about the ending which made me disregard the entire review.
Oh, and the fact that ME1, ME2, Halo 3, Fallout 3, and Skyrim didn't get 10/10... yeah left a sour taste in my mouth.

Modifié par nickkcin11, 15 avril 2012 - 04:15 .

[indyracing]

Chris Priestly wrote...


In the meantime, let's give appreciation to Commander Shepard. Whether you loved the ME3 ending or didn't or you just have a lot of questions, he/she has given many of us some of the best adventures we have had while playing games. What was your favorite moment?

Honestly, after finishing the game now about 2 hours ago, the way I feel (and I was prepared to expect an unsatisfactory ending - but I wasn't prepared enough) is that none of my favorite Shepard moments even matter.

It's just a terrible story, and the end was poorly executed, as well (I didn't even know WHICH choice I was making).  Your writers wrote, IMO, only poor endings, and your programmers did a poor job of putting them into game-form.

[garf]

No I don't believe you are listening. Not if you can honestly support this:

Quote from: http://popwatch.ew.c...ending-bioware/

[Anyalla Shauni Lee]

Hoodoo Guru wrote...

 Loved the ending,  difficult choices and all have their consequences.  The hero can't always save the day, get the girl/guy and have their pudding without eating  their meat.  Sometimes victory isn't pretty and sacrifices have to be made.  Thanks for having the guts to make a game where the story ends without a sugary, sit-com ending.  The needs of the many...

That is your opinion, and you have every right to it, though the issues most fans have aren't tied to whether or not the ending was, "happy," just that it was inconsistent with the plot. Though I am genuinely glad you and some others have enjoyed the ending. It's just harder to find people that have because of the plotholes and lack of closure to the series.

[Hoodoo Guru]

Anyalla Shauni Lee wrote...

That is your opinion, and you have every right to it, though the issues most fans have aren't tied to whether or not the ending was, "happy," just that it was inconsistent with the plot. Though I am genuinely glad you and some others have enjoyed the ending. It's just harder to find people that have because of the plotholes and lack of closure to the series.

Thanks, not everybody wants to let people have there own opinion.  I did have problems with the game, like the lack of dialogue between characters, not as many choices and opportunities as there was in two and the long hangups as missions are reloading..  Suprised that I onply had two complete lock ups though.

Modifié par Hoodoo Guru, 15 avril 2012 - 05:52 .

[nickkcin11]

Anyalla Shauni Lee wrote...

Hoodoo Guru wrote...

 Loved the ending,  difficult choices and all have their consequences.  The hero can't always save the day, get the girl/guy and have their pudding without eating  their meat.  Sometimes victory isn't pretty and sacrifices have to be made.  Thanks for having the guts to make a game where the story ends without a sugary, sit-com ending.  The needs of the many...

That is your opinion, and you have every right to it, though the issues most fans have aren't tied to whether or not the ending was, "happy," just that it was inconsistent with the plot. Though I am genuinely glad you and some others have enjoyed the ending. It's just harder to find people that have because of the plotholes and lack of closure to the series.

My problem isn't that the ending is dark or not sugary or non-sit-com-like. I'll give an example, Donnie Darko. If you've never seen it, watch it, it's amazing. I won't spoil anything too badly, but it ends in a BITTERSWEET way and gives the watcher a good ol mind****. The Mass Effect 3 ending however isn't Bittersweet. It's a complete failure (not as an ending, it is that but that's not what I meant here) for the player. A bittersweet ending is one where the failures that happen are countered by the good that was done. The goal was achieved despite the cost of _____. In ME3's ending, if any attention is paid to the technical lore, the galaxy is still pretty much screwed. They're either trapped in the Sol system or possibly obliterated as per the Arrival DLC. Shepard either commits the genocide of synthetics, takes the roll of the Illusive Man (at the expense of himself. So how does he control the Reapers if he dies? Wtf?), or takes the roll of Saren (infusing organics with synthetics... because that's not what the Reapers already did with spectacular results!). Personally, I was mad because despite making all the "right" decisions over the course of 3 games, despite doing all the sidequests in all 3 games, and despite having all my powerful allies at the end, I was not given a "better" ending. And by better, I mean an ending that wasn't so negative and helpless. Hope. And I wasn't given that and it was impossible to achieve hope. Mass Effect isn't a warning, its ending can't just be purely bleak. It's a story and I want ton know how Shepard won something, not just saved the galaxy from one threat only to doom it to another. want to know what Shepard's legacy is, regardless if he is alive to witness it.

Not going to even touch on the injustice that was how the other characters were treated... by not being treated to at all.

In a nutshell, this is just one of the reasons I'm mad about the ending (inconclusive and out of place) but on the subject of happy or sad, this was the problem I saw.

Modifié par nickkcin11, 15 avril 2012 - 06:05 .

[BlazingZephyr]

Hoodoo Guru wrote...

 Loved the ending,  difficult choices and all have their consequences.  The hero can't always save the day, get the girl/guy and have their pudding without eating  their meat.  Sometimes victory isn't pretty and sacrifices have to be made.  Thanks for having the guts to make a game where the story ends without a sugary, sit-com ending.  The needs of the many...

You know... sugary and happy isn't what most people are looking for. The issue with the ending has little to do with Shepard dying. The main issue is the lack of logic and contradiction to lore:

1 - Multiple solar systems, with all of the races inhabiting them, are wiped out by the relay explosions

2 - The jungle planet the crew lands on cannot support the lives of some of the species in the crash, since they don't all eat the same foods.

3 - A green light couldn't make every organic (with several different types of DNA and protein designs)partly robotic. And even if it did, how does that guarantee peace? Can't the synthesized life create more advanced Synthetic life, thus continuing the "chaos"?

4 - If all it took was the crucible to create the other "solutions," why didn't God-boy build a Crucible and synthesize life so he doesn't have to use the reapers?

5 - Character placement is off (Joker running; crew on ship; Anderson beats Shep to citadel; Illusive man behind you)

And a plethora of other illogical details.

Modifié par BlazingZephyr, 15 avril 2012 - 06:13 .

[Archonsg]

Anyalla Shauni Lee wrote...

Hoodoo Guru wrote...

 Loved the ending,  difficult choices and all have their consequences.  The hero can't always save the day, get the girl/guy and have their pudding without eating  their meat.  Sometimes victory isn't pretty and sacrifices have to be made.  Thanks for having the guts to make a game where the story ends without a sugary, sit-com ending.  The needs of the many...

That is your opinion, and you have every right to it, though the issues most fans have aren't tied to whether or not the ending was, "happy," just that it was inconsistent with the plot. Though I am genuinely glad you and some others have enjoyed the ending. It's just harder to find people that have because of the plotholes and lack of closure to the series.

Think you are kinder then most. Me, I just wonder if they are so enamored by the Hollywood "sacrifice the hero" coupled with multiple explosions that they just don't stop to think what each choice really means, what the state of the galaxy is and even if taken at face value, that ending was inconsistent within itself. 

The shockwave that brought the Normandy down, for example. It either has or doesn't have kinetic energy transfer, which from the downing of the Normandy it has. And to anyone who stopped to think about it would have some serious questions like; if that shockwave can rip engines off their mounts, and affect a space vessel's structural integrity, what of people made of flesh and bones, what about the other space vessels, you know that big armada you brought to earth, are they all downed?

Then if you have a background in physics or know just how things that go "boom!" works you start asking, how far is the Normandy from the epicenter of that particular explosion, considering its already in full FTL flight, considering dissipation, would give you a very good idea just how powerful the initial blast is.

And that JUST from that one bit, part of the 10 min or so mess of an ending. So, yeah, kudos to those who are happy with the ending. Me, when someone forces upon me a choice that I would not make, when it's been clearly advertised that I would have control of choices that lead to totally separate and different endings and then I find this is not so, yes, I'll suspend my "suspension of disbelief" and pick things apart.

[Hoodoo Guru]

nickkcin11 wrote...

My problem isn't that the ending is dark or not sugary or non-sit-com-like. I'll give an example, Donnie Darko. If you've never seen it, watch it, it's amazing. I won't spoil anything too badly, but it ends in a BITTERSWEET way and gives the watcher a good ol mind****. The Mass Effect 3 ending however isn't Bittersweet. It's a complete failure (not as an ending, it is that but that's not what I meant here) for the player. A bittersweet ending is one where the failures that happen are countered by the good that was done. The goal was achieved despite the cost of _____. In ME3's ending, if any attention is paid to the technical lore, the galaxy is still pretty much screwed. They're either trapped in the Sol system or possibly obliterated as per the Arrival DLC. Shepard either commits the genocide of synthetics, takes the roll of the Illusive Man (at the expense of himself. So how does he control the Reapers if he dies? Wtf?), or takes the roll of Saren (infusing organics with synthetics... because that's not what the Reapers already did with spectacular results!). Personally, I was mad because despite making all the "right" decisions over the course of 3 games, despite doing all the sidequests in all 3 games, and despite having all my powerful allies at the end, I was not given a "better" ending. And by better, I mean an ending that wasn't so negative and helpless. Hope. And I wasn't given that and it was impossible to achieve hope. Mass Effect isn't a warning, its ending can't just be purely bleak. It's a story and I want ton know how Shepard won something, not just saved the galaxy from one threat only to doom it to another. want to know what Shepard's legacy is, regardless if he is alive to witness it.

Not going to even touch on the injustice that was how the other characters were treated... by not being treated to at all.

In a nutshell, this is just one of the reasons I'm mad about the ending (inconclusive and out of place) but on the subject of happy or sad, this was the problem I saw.

Actually Donnie Darko is one of my favorite movies, and a great sound track.  I think Shephard takes the place of the catalyst, if I interpreted it right..  I did notice a few things that seemed to contradict each other here and there, can't remember them now though.  My armor moved on the citadel when I destroyed the relays and the Synthetics.

[jeweledleah]

what amuses me though is that apparently having hero survive with the crew and save the day is sugary. even though best case scenario where relays and Citadel stay operational - we still have every planet and major colony in ruins, billions of people dead, friends and family dead.

but hey - hero survives and reunites with the crew, automatically means sugary sweet? wut?

would you call the ending of DA2 sugary sweet? cause guess what? Hawke survived, could have potentially saved every single companion (not counting sibling that dies in the very beginning) and got to stay with their LI.

why do people have so much against a little happiness? when did even a little bit of happiness become a cliche to shun?

see i don't have a problem with people who like the tragic type of ending. what I have a problem with is people who think that it should be the only available outcome.  in choice of 3 colors.

Modifié par jeweledleah, 15 avril 2012 - 06:38 .

[sefudargo]

the Star Child ruins a lot. who in there right mind thought it was a good idea of adding a god like character at the end. I would be like if Q showed up at "Best Of Both Worlds" snapped his fingers and told Picard that he could detroy the borg but eventually somthing similer would come along. he could control the Borg and spare Humanity but he would become one and lose his humanity and the borg will assimilate other civilazations. or strip all civilization of there what makes them unique and have them all connected. no Picards would say FU Q we will fight the borg and find a way.
that is what Sheperd would have done

[Hoodoo Guru]

jeweledleah wrote...

what amuses me though is that apparently having hero survive with the crew and save the day is sugary. even though best case scenario where relays and Citadel stay operational - we still have every planet and major colony in ruins, billions of people dead, friends and family dead.

but hey - hero survives and reunites with the crew, automatically means sugary sweet? wut?

would you call the ending of DA2 sugary sweet? cause guess what? Hawke survived, could have potentially saved every single companion (not counting sibling that dies in the very beginning) and got to stay with their LI.

why do people have so much against a little happiness? when did even a little bit of happiness become a cliche to shun?

see i don't have a problem with people who like the tragic type of ending. what I have a problem with is people who think that it should be the only available outcome.  in choice of 3 colors.

I don't have anything against a little happiness, I like it a lot, but it is nice for a change to have to make a tough decision where not everything is going to be perfect, makes you think about the consequences more and think through the outcomes and what is more important for you and the "future."

[Blue Liara]

garf wrote...

No I don't believe you are listening. Not if you can honestly support this:

Quote from: http://popwatch.ew.c...ending-bioware/

This yes you clearly are listening. You are listening and looking for weakness and ways to manipulate and exploit your fans so you can make as much money as possible. Good to know that you really care Bioware thats why you come out with this disgusting spin. I was starting to have the tiniest sliver of hope with the ending DLC thinking that maybe you would NOT clarify and instead rewrite but this just confirms that you don't care about the fans.

Don't worry soon you won't have any fans to care about. 

[Aurelius369]

DirtyDeluxe wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

Can't explain logic to people who refuse to use it...... This thread makes gamers look bad.

I'm sick of your illogical and contradicting statements. You're a horrible excuse for a troll, and I dont see you making any 5 paragraph statements like some of the players on here that deserve any acceptance, attention, or validity. I dont see one reason why your illogical statements should even scratch the surface of my conscience.

BAAAAM! Right in the kisser!

[jeweledleah]

Hoodoo Guru wrote...

jeweledleah wrote...

what amuses me though is that apparently having hero survive with the crew and save the day is sugary. even though best case scenario where relays and Citadel stay operational - we still have every planet and major colony in ruins, billions of people dead, friends and family dead.

but hey - hero survives and reunites with the crew, automatically means sugary sweet? wut?

would you call the ending of DA2 sugary sweet? cause guess what? Hawke survived, could have potentially saved every single companion (not counting sibling that dies in the very beginning) and got to stay with their LI.

why do people have so much against a little happiness? when did even a little bit of happiness become a cliche to shun?

see i don't have a problem with people who like the tragic type of ending. what I have a problem with is people who think that it should be the only available outcome.  in choice of 3 colors.

I don't have anything against a little happiness, I like it a lot, but it is nice for a change to have to make a tough decision where not everything is going to be perfect, makes you think about the consequences more and think through the outcomes and what is more important for you and the "future."

well we'll agree to disagree, becasue I don't think its nice for a change.  i think its terrible.  I think chosing between how you suicide is bad.  I think being faced with 3 choices were EACH have horrible outcome is terrible.  when you realize that the galaxy is actualy better off you if you just let the crucible be destroyed and allow this cycle to conclude.

commit genocide (geth and EDI), preserve reaper status quo except with destroyed relays, or forcibly homogenize every living being in the galaxy (and never mind the fact that it actualy makes no scientific sence - in a science fiction story).

sacrifice only has meaning when its something you chose to do for the actual greater good, not when its something you are forced into to fascilitate "good job breaking it, hero" trope.

AND it doesn't fit with the rest of the series that were all about overcoming impossible odds.  ME3 included.

Modifié par jeweledleah, 15 avril 2012 - 06:51 .

[Blue Liara]

“With the Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut we think we have struck a good balance in delivering the answers players are looking for while maintaining the team’s artistic vision for the end of this story arc in the Mass Effect universe,” said Ray Muzyka, Bioware’s co-founder

More evidence that you have NOT listened to fans. Most fans do not want "answers" to the current absurd Star Child ABC nonsensical ending. They do not want to Clarify. They want a NEW ending.

The old ending is beyond saving.

"a good balance"

HOW?!! How have you struck any kind of a balance between what the fans have been asking for. The fans have been asking mainly for one thing, to FIX THE ENDINGS. Keeping the endings the exact same and then adding some cinematic scenes at the end is NOT striking a balance.

Unless balance means sacrificing your fans at the alter of the false deity of Artistic Integrity. Just so you can serve your higher God of making as much money as possible.

This is a disgrace Bioware you think your fans are dumb and will fall for this pathetic PR and patrionizing. I for one will never buy another game from EA. I'm sure many of your soon to be former fans will do likewise.

Your Artistic Integrity argument is a FLAT OUT LIE!!!

That is what makes the argument so annoying. NO ONE BELIEVES YOU.

[nickkcin11]

sefudargo wrote...

the Star Child ruins a lot. who in there right mind thought it was a good idea of adding a god like character at the end. I would be like if Q showed up at "Best Of Both Worlds" snapped his fingers and told Picard that he could detroy the borg but eventually somthing similer would come along. he could control the Borg and spare Humanity but he would become one and lose his humanity and the borg will assimilate other civilazations. or strip all civilization of there what makes them unique and have them all connected. no Picards would say FU Q we will fight the borg and find a way.
that is what Sheperd would have done

I can't say I know anything about Star Trek, but what little I do know is this, the Reapers are essentially like the Borg. And I have no clue who Q is, but assuming he can do what you say, this analogy is basically perfect.
That's how I felt. I felt that with all the War Assets I got from Mass Effect 1,2, and 3, I had more than a good chance at destroying the Reapers. Plus if everything went "sideways" as Garrus would say, I could fire the Crucible then. As kind of a last resort.
The biggest problem I have with these endings are that they force the player to make the biggest decision yet without having all the effects. Basically all will be decided based on the information you receive from Star Child (who only has like 14 lines of dialogue, and out of that how many actually explain your choices?). If they (for some reason) had to make this the ending, shouldn't they have at least told the player how/what? When I pick destroy, does it have to destroy all the synthetics or is that a choice? And if it happens regardless, why? Can that be fixed? etc.
@Hoodoo Guru
Glad to see you like Donnie Darko. It is amazing and sad and all these emotions at once. And to top it off, "Mad World" plays. Amazing. That movie had me obsessed with mind**** endings and sad endings. I've been so far unable to match it. The difference between that movie and ME3 is that D. Darko actually makes sense when you take into account its lore. ME3 doesn't really. Interestingly IMO, the Indoctrination Theory feels a lot like Donnie Darko. Unfortunately, I'm 97% sure it's not really what BW intended.
 

[Dratkin]

Jessica1995 wrote...

DirtyDeluxe wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

Can't explain logic to people who refuse to use it...... This thread makes gamers look bad.

I'm sick of your illogical and contradicting statements. You're a horrible excuse for a troll, and I dont see you making any 5 paragraph statements like some of the players on here that deserve any acceptance, attention, or validity. I dont see one reason why your illogical statements should even scratch the surface of my conscience.

Holy crap! BOOM!

lol hard on this one.