23455 réponses à ce sujet

[T.Attwood]

I thought this was an interesting poll:
http://social.biowar...8&poll_id=31420

It gives you an idea of the strength of feeling regarding the ending.

[nickkcin11]

Netherspin wrote...

Venix117 wrote...

I have to say I am genuinley upset about the endings, I mean props to BW for making me feel like this and getting such an emotional reaction from me but it is not a good reaction, for so many reasons that others have stated I loathe the endings, I truly despise them Im sorry if this seems harsh i dont normally out right slag of somones hard work but i am just that upset over this, A game series I have spent weeks playing, a game series that I love with its setting, characters and lre was just destroyed in five minutes.

I wanted to go back and start from the beggining again romancing Ash this time (Never done that yet) making diffrent choices and such but knowing its going to turn out like that just makes me not want too.

To be perfectly honest, in the grand scheme of things love interests should have absolutely no effect on the ending. The Reapers were never going to go "Oh so you have an attractive human female (or young asari or highranking quarian or whatever) as a life-mate, that's cool, we'll back off". Granted I wouldn't mind if saving or destroying the collector base had a bigger impact, but if anything should affect the ending, it should be the grand choices, not how Shepard interacts with his crew or who he flirts with. The Reapers don't care about that, the Alliance don't care - to be honest I doubt if they even know - it should not - no could not - affect how a galactic war panned out.
The love interests are great for flavoring the ride, as they are in all Bioware games, but as with every Bioware game (I've played anyway) they have little or no effect on how the story ends.

Ummm, I kind of beg to differ. Remember when Mordin says that it's hard to fight for the galaxy because there are just so many people? That he needs a personal stake (his nephew)? Well if you don't here's the link.
www.youtube.com/watch
I think that it would affect how Shepard does on the mission, (s)he's fighting for someone (s)he loves. And failure would mean their death. Kind of raises the stakes personally for Shepard.

[Thanatos144]

I keep reading it seems the extended ending seems deserved.....Seems to me that many keep saying the same thing that they it doesn't make sense which means they couldn't understand the it. If you understood it you wouldn't say it makes no sense.

[T.Attwood]

nickkcin11 wrote...

Netherspin wrote...

Venix117 wrote...

I have to say I am genuinley upset about the endings, I mean props to BW for making me feel like this and getting such an emotional reaction from me but it is not a good reaction, for so many reasons that others have stated I loathe the endings, I truly despise them Im sorry if this seems harsh i dont normally out right slag of somones hard work but i am just that upset over this, A game series I have spent weeks playing, a game series that I love with its setting, characters and lre was just destroyed in five minutes.

I wanted to go back and start from the beggining again romancing Ash this time (Never done that yet) making diffrent choices and such but knowing its going to turn out like that just makes me not want too.

To be perfectly honest, in the grand scheme of things love interests should have absolutely no effect on the ending. The Reapers were never going to go "Oh so you have an attractive human female (or young asari or highranking quarian or whatever) as a life-mate, that's cool, we'll back off". Granted I wouldn't mind if saving or destroying the collector base had a bigger impact, but if anything should affect the ending, it should be the grand choices, not how Shepard interacts with his crew or who he flirts with. The Reapers don't care about that, the Alliance don't care - to be honest I doubt if they even know - it should not - no could not - affect how a galactic war panned out.
The love interests are great for flavoring the ride, as they are in all Bioware games, but as with every Bioware game (I've played anyway) they have little or no effect on how the story ends.

Ummm, I kind of beg to differ. Remember when Mordin says that it's hard to fight for the galaxy because there are just so many people? That he needs a personal stake (his nephew)? Well if you don't here's the link.
www.youtube.com/watch
I think that it would affect how Shepard does on the mission, (s)he's fighting for someone (s)he loves. And failure would mean their death. Kind of raises the stakes personally for Shepard.

Exactly. Things like this make the game more interesting. Getting the player to care about the characters, and then presenting them with choices at the end that could jeopardise that relationship, or make you consider self sacrifice in order to save your LI but will never be with them, makes the game more interesting. It is when this choice is removed and the relationships that are build up amount to nothing and are inconsequential to the ending, is where the game has gone wrong. I would guess this is what Venix117 is talking about, when he says...

Venix117 wrote...
I wanted to go back and start from the beggining again romancing Ash this time (Never done that yet) making diffrent choices and such but knowing its going to turn out like that just makes me not want too.

He is saying that the relationship that would be built up will not affect the outcome to the ending, so there is no point in playing the game a second time. Venix117 was hoping to see a different ending, but knowing nothing would change makes (for him) subsequent play-throughs futile. I fully agree with him.

[ClixWizard]

Thanatos144 wrote...

I keep reading it seems the extended ending seems deserved.....Seems to me that many keep saying the same thing that they it doesn't make sense which means they couldn't understand the it. If you understood it you wouldn't say it makes no sense.

What you just said makes no sense.

But seriously, the ending as is didn't make sense. It's based on circular logic.

Modifié par ClixWizard, 15 avril 2012 - 08:13 .

[Thanatos144]

ClixWizard wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

I keep reading it seems the extended ending seems deserved.....Seems to me that many keep saying the same thing that they it doesn't make sense which means they couldn't understand the it. If you understood it you wouldn't say it makes no sense.

What you just said makes no sense.

But seriously, the ending as is didn't make sense. It's based on circular logic.

You mean the logic that Machines don't think or act like humans???????Gee who would have thunk it?[smilie]../../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie] Sorry but the whole idea that alien machines are suppose to follow human thinking is wired to me.

[darkway1]

zarnk567 wrote...

darkway1 wrote...

Levi1988 wrote...

Anyone else feel like Casey Hudson should be forced to resign and that EA should be sued into bankruptcy?

lol...that's a bit over the top.....but I do think that people are getting pissed over EA/Biowares lack of responce to the most reasonable questions....it's like poking a corpse with a stick....just wasting your time, it's dead.

What's sad is that if Bioware just came out and talked about the ending instead of hiding behind PR talk there would probably be alot less rage from alot of people.... But alas..... that is the bioware of old, not the new BioEA. 

Yes I agree,the silence is not doing EA/Bioware any good,they have made the call not to change any thing on the grounds of artist integrity.......in which case then explain your art,after all,art is all about the comunicating of idea's, explain these idea's,explain what exactly the ending is all about?

[4509]

I notice that a particular forum was closed because of apparent slanderous responses toward EA/Bioware "buying reviews". And while the Retake Mass Effect 3 movement has been exposed to slanderous comments about us being entitled crybabies, we are not in a position to cut off the means of communication, the companies are. I hope everyone takes this to heart and remains polite towards those who we are in debate with. We should only deal in facts and we have enough facts that there is a LARGE number of very hurt fans who would like additional endings added to Mass Effect 3. We don't want them to remove the ones they have that the writers worked so hard on hoping we would like them (thank you by the way for making these games so good up until the endings), we just want additional endings that make it possible for our gameplay and PURCHASE of there products worthwhile. Honestly, if all the relays blow up anyway (which in Arrival destroyed the enitre star system), what was the point in me buying the previous 2 games and making all those choices. We all paid for the games, making them popular enough to justify a 2nd and a 3rd. We have the right to ask for control over our endings as we were told we would get.

P.S. Bioware, please stop closing threads. Just ignore the rude people, they're just acting out of frustration.

P.P.S VIVA LA RETAKE!!!!

[Thanatos144]

4509 wrote...

I notice that a particular forum was closed because of apparent slanderous responses toward EA/Bioware "buying reviews". And while the Retake Mass Effect 3 movement has been exposed to slanderous comments about us being entitled crybabies, we are not in a position to cut off the means of communication, the companies are. I hope everyone takes this to heart and remains polite towards those who we are in debate with. We should only deal in facts and we have enough facts that there is a LARGE number of very hurt fans who would like additional endings added to Mass Effect 3. We don't want them to remove the ones they have that the writers worked so hard on hoping we would like them (thank you by the way for making these games so good up until the endings), we just want additional endings that make it possible for our gameplay and PURCHASE of there products worthwhile. Honestly, if all the relays blow up anyway (which in Arrival destroyed the enitre star system), what was the point in me buying the previous 2 games and making all those choices. We all paid for the games, making them popular enough to justify a 2nd and a 3rd. We have the right to ask for control over our endings as we were told we would get.

P.S. Bioware, please stop closing threads. Just ignore the rude people, they're just acting out of frustration.

P.P.S VIVA LA RETAKE!!!!

You have a right to whine, cry and complain you do not have a right to
force them to change their game.....Can you even understand the difference?

[jeweledleah]

when a mentally sick person forgets to take their medication and as a results, proceeds to strip naked and run through the crowded streets, waving a beach towel and screaming at the top of their lungs: "they are trying to smother me in nutella!" I understand perfectly fine what's going on. a sick person forgot to take their meds and now their brain is playing tricks on them. doesn't mean their actions make sense though.

[nickkcin11]

Thanatos144 wrote...

ClixWizard wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

I keep reading it seems the extended ending seems deserved.....Seems to me that many keep saying the same thing that they it doesn't make sense which means they couldn't understand the it. If you understood it you wouldn't say it makes no sense.

What you just said makes no sense.

But seriously, the ending as is didn't make sense. It's based on circular logic.

You mean the logic that Machines don't think or act like humans???????Gee who would have thunk it?[smilie]../../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie] Sorry but the whole idea that alien machines are suppose to follow human thinking is wired to me.

No, as we just saw with EDI and the Geth, synthetics are "human". And by human I mean they have a soul. They are "people". Legion gave his life to make sure the geth can't be controlled by the Reapers. The Geth didn't destroy their creators when they had the chance. IMO, that sounds like something a human, not a robot, would do. Throughout ME3, EDI basically learns how to become more human and by the end, she is. When we finally reach the end and the stupid Star Child is like "the created will always rebel against their creators" and basically says that organics and synthetics can't live in harmony together, that it will always lead to extermination, is bull****. The geth and EDI prove it! And his solution to the synthetics destroying organics solution is to make synthetics that kill organics... so that organics don't get killed by synthetics... WHAT? What people are saying is that they understand what BW was trying to do, but the way it was executed doesn't make sense in the lore of the game. Like it's a plot hole. Sizes of said potholes are equal to the mistakes in you comment which rendered it unreadable.

[3DandBeyond]

T.Attwood wrote...

Netherspin wrote...
Edit: As for the repeated question about why the reapers doesn't rebel against the catalyst, if the created will allways rebel against the creator, Soverign gives us the answer to that on Vermire - the Reapers believe themselves to be the first, counterintuitive as it may seem, they think they evolved on their own and created by noone.

If the catalyst can prevent the reapers from attacking their creator (i.e. the catalyst) by making them believe they evolved on their own, then why not use that as a solution for all synthetics to prevent them rebelling against their creators? This means, the catalyst already knows the best solution, but chooses not to use it! Instead, the catalyst has taken the route of genocide by wiping out organic life.

The catalyst is so messed up. He is intelligent enough to create the reapers, but cant see that he has already has the solution to the galaxies problems.

This is one of the main problems with the Catalyst-it's either crazy or just plain stupid. 

And I agree about the thought you don't end a series with a cliffhanger.  It may seem artistic, but it is horrible.  You also don't end a series with every path pointing to sad, deplorable outcomes.  It may seem artistic in that it goes against the flow of a happy ending, but sad disturbing endings don't make fans want to play more ME3 content.  It ain't good for business so it ain't good for the game.

I am old enough to have really loved a lot of old hollywood movie classics with sappy endings and then the '60s and  '70s hit and every freaking movie ended on a bad note.  Heroes died, love interests ran off never to be seen again, and so on.  This was considered art and it mostly stunk.  The Graduate was one of the bright notes and dare I say it is pretty artistic.

The difference is these games were supposed to give us a real choice in the matter.  Our actions were supposed to determine a good or bad impact, not one final choice.  I don't want all the sacrifices made to end up meaning only one thing basically or to be the choice between bad, worse, and worst.  The dumbest fan has way more logic than the Catalyst Kid.


Fan: I love you, Mass Effect.
Bioware/EA: I love you too, fan.
Fan: Show me.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 15 avril 2012 - 08:44 .

[Murvel88]

BioWare: "On the Mass Effect 3 endings. No, we aren't listening."

I think the community has been VERY clear on this. We do not want you to "clarify" anything. We want a NEW ending that makes sense and that stays true to the promises you made us! Your "artistic integrity" be damned, you are not da Vinci, Dali or van Gogh. You are an entertainment company and we have given you money for a product which YOU promoted with LIES. It is painfully obvious to me that you do not care about your customers. I've lost faith in you BW.

[Thanatos144]

nickkcin11 wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

ClixWizard wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

I keep reading it seems the extended ending seems deserved.....Seems to me that many keep saying the same thing that they it doesn't make sense which means they couldn't understand the it. If you understood it you wouldn't say it makes no sense.

What you just said makes no sense.

But seriously, the ending as is didn't make sense. It's based on circular logic.

You mean the logic that Machines don't think or act like humans???????Gee who would have thunk it?[smilie]../../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie] Sorry but the whole idea that alien machines are suppose to follow human thinking is wired to me.

No, as we just saw with EDI and the Geth, synthetics are "human". And by human I mean they have a soul. They are "people". Legion gave his life to make sure the geth can't be controlled by the Reapers. The Geth didn't destroy their creators when they had the chance. IMO, that sounds like something a human, not a robot, would do. Throughout ME3, EDI basically learns how to become more human and by the end, she is. When we finally reach the end and the stupid Star Child is like "the created will always rebel against their creators" and basically says that organics and synthetics can't live in harmony together, that it will always lead to extermination, is bull****. The geth and EDI prove it! And his solution to the synthetics destroying organics solution is to make synthetics that kill organics... so that organics don't get killed by synthetics... WHAT? What people are saying is that they understand what BW was trying to do, but the way it was executed doesn't make sense in the lore of the game. Like it's a plot hole. Sizes of said potholes are equal to the mistakes in you comment which rendered it unreadable.

EDI is not human.....She never even comes close to it. She is a observer
from the outside....But the same can be said about all the non human
species...This goes double for the Asari. One of the things Bioware did better than anyone other than novelists is to show non humans as just that. Yet still give them something we can recognize so we sympathize.

[3DandBeyond]

I would not at all mind if the DLC included an explanation of the endings and how they fit together with all that came before, because I'd really like to see how they came up with this and understand their thought processes.

But, I don't want this as something instead of content that makes sense, ties up loose ends, allows me to participate, includes a happy ending possibility, and makes my choices matter.


And of course the non-human (synthetic and organic) are not human, but they are imbued with what we call humanity.  It's not only sentience, but a conscience, and a soul.  The fact is that even if it's electronic impulses that formulate the idea of good or bad, right or wrong, joy or sadness, it's all the same thing.  Human bodies do the same thing.  We are met with stimuli and it gets transmitted to us and we feel it as something.  Synthetics like EDI do something similar, but the difference is she told herself how to perceive these things.  She learned to love Joker because Shepard said she should try. 

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 15 avril 2012 - 08:57 .

[Thanatos144]

Murvel88 wrote...

BioWare: "On the Mass Effect 3 endings. No, we aren't listening."

I think the community has been VERY clear on this. We do not want you to "clarify" anything. We want a NEW ending that makes sense and that stays true to the promises you made us! Your "artistic integrity" be damned, you are not da Vinci, Dali or van Gogh. You are an entertainment company and we have given you money for a product which YOU promoted with LIES. It is painfully obvious to me that you do not care about your customers. I've lost faith in you BW.

Speak for yourself and not me.

[nickkcin11]

Murvel88 wrote...
Your "artistic integrity" be damned, you are not da Vinci, Dali or van Gogh.

I laughed. I don't agree necessarily agree with them not supporting their ending (despite the fact it sucked... badly), but their reason was terrible. It was a terrible choice of words. How is a crappy, ambiguous, out of place, illogical, destroys the entire series for many people type ending "artistic"? Whatever.

[Thanatos144]

nickkcin11 wrote...

Murvel88 wrote...
Your "artistic integrity" be damned, you are not da Vinci, Dali or van Gogh.

I laughed. I don't agree necessarily agree with them not supporting their ending (despite the fact it sucked... badly), but their reason was terrible. It was a terrible choice of words. How is a crappy, ambiguous, out of place, illogical, destroys the entire series for many people type ending "artistic"? Whatever.

I guess they should have consulted you abiut it then.... seeing as you must be the one and only expert on art huh?

[nickkcin11]

Thanatos144 wrote...

nickkcin11 wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

ClixWizard wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

I keep reading it seems the extended ending seems deserved.....Seems to me that many keep saying the same thing that they it doesn't make sense which means they couldn't understand the it. If you understood it you wouldn't say it makes no sense.

What you just said makes no sense.

But seriously, the ending as is didn't make sense. It's based on circular logic.

You mean the logic that Machines don't think or act like humans???????Gee who would have thunk it?[smilie]../../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie] Sorry but the whole idea that alien machines are suppose to follow human thinking is wired to me.

No, as we just saw with EDI and the Geth, synthetics are "human". And by human I mean they have a soul. They are "people". Legion gave his life to make sure the geth can't be controlled by the Reapers. The Geth didn't destroy their creators when they had the chance. IMO, that sounds like something a human, not a robot, would do. Throughout ME3, EDI basically learns how to become more human and by the end, she is. When we finally reach the end and the stupid Star Child is like "the created will always rebel against their creators" and basically says that organics and synthetics can't live in harmony together, that it will always lead to extermination, is bull****. The geth and EDI prove it! And his solution to the synthetics destroying organics solution is to make synthetics that kill organics... so that organics don't get killed by synthetics... WHAT? What people are saying is that they understand what BW was trying to do, but the way it was executed doesn't make sense in the lore of the game. Like it's a plot hole. Sizes of said potholes are equal to the mistakes in you comment which rendered it unreadable.

EDI is not human.....She never even comes close to it. She is a observer
from the outside....But the same can be said about all the non human
species...This goes double for the Asari. One of the things Bioware did better than anyone other than novelists is to show non humans as just that. Yet still give them something we can recognize so we sympathize.

www.youtube.com/watch
www.youtube.com/watch
What qualifies as being "human" for you? EDI doesn't just focus on self-preservation, is that not one of the traits that seperates us from animals? And she would risk her life for her crew members. Would a robot do that? I don't mean a literal human, no she is not. But she has humanity, she has a soul.
As for the Asari... they definitely are alive and have a soul. So? I think you took me literally. The Asari are very close to being human. VERY. Except they're blue but that's not important.


And no, 95% of everyone on these forums agrees that having a tryhard "mind****" ending that leaves nothing answered is not artistic. It just isn't. Not in the way they're trying to use it. BW is trying to say that, "Oh, nobody understands our work! We are so underappreciated in our time!" BW, you make great video games (notice the present tense there, that's semi-important. I don't think ME3 was bad despite having the worst ending I've ever witnessed in a series I care about) with complex scenarios and a plethora of lore. That's art. Trying to be artistic however in your endings, that's not art. That's failure. It's not that we don't get it, it's that it doesn't make ANY sense at all. At all.

Modifié par nickkcin11, 15 avril 2012 - 09:13 .

[Chocho_GURU]

Thanatos144 wrote...

nickkcin11 wrote...

Murvel88 wrote...
Your "artistic integrity" be damned, you are not da Vinci, Dali or van Gogh.

I laughed. I don't agree necessarily agree with them not supporting their ending (despite the fact it sucked... badly), but their reason was terrible. It was a terrible choice of words. How is a crappy, ambiguous, out of place, illogical, destroys the entire series for many people type ending "artistic"? Whatever.

I guess they should have consulted you abiut it then.... seeing as you must be the one and only expert on art huh?

Don't tire yourself, it's not just his opinion.

[Thanatos144]

nickkcin11 wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

nickkcin11 wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

ClixWizard wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

I keep reading it seems the extended ending seems deserved.....Seems to me that many keep saying the same thing that they it doesn't make sense which means they couldn't understand the it. If you understood it you wouldn't say it makes no sense.

What you just said makes no sense.

But seriously, the ending as is didn't make sense. It's based on circular logic.

You mean the logic that Machines don't think or act like humans???????Gee who would have thunk it?[smilie]../../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie] Sorry but the whole idea that alien machines are suppose to follow human thinking is wired to me.

No, as we just saw with EDI and the Geth, synthetics are "human". And by human I mean they have a soul. They are "people". Legion gave his life to make sure the geth can't be controlled by the Reapers. The Geth didn't destroy their creators when they had the chance. IMO, that sounds like something a human, not a robot, would do. Throughout ME3, EDI basically learns how to become more human and by the end, she is. When we finally reach the end and the stupid Star Child is like "the created will always rebel against their creators" and basically says that organics and synthetics can't live in harmony together, that it will always lead to extermination, is bull****. The geth and EDI prove it! And his solution to the synthetics destroying organics solution is to make synthetics that kill organics... so that organics don't get killed by synthetics... WHAT? What people are saying is that they understand what BW was trying to do, but the way it was executed doesn't make sense in the lore of the game. Like it's a plot hole. Sizes of said potholes are equal to the mistakes in you comment which rendered it unreadable.

EDI is not human.....She never even comes close to it. She is a observer
from the outside....But the same can be said about all the non human
species...This goes double for the Asari. One of the things Bioware did better than anyone other than novelists is to show non humans as just that. Yet still give them something we can recognize so we sympathize.

www.youtube.com/watch
www.youtube.com/watch
What qualifies as being "human" for you? EDI doesn't just focus on self-preservation, is that not one of the traits that seperates us from animals? And she would risk her life for her crew members. Would a robot do that? I don't mean a literal human, no she is not. But she has humanity, she has a soul.
As for the Asari... they definitely are alive and have a soul. So? I think you took me literally. The Asari are very close to being human. VERY. Except they're blue but that's not important.


And no, 95% of everyone on these forums agrees that having a tryhard "mind****" ending that leaves nothing answered is not artistic. It just isn't. Not in the way they're trying to use it. BW is trying to say that, "Oh, nobody understands our work! We are so underappreciated in our time!" BW, you make great video games (notice the present tense there, that's semi-important. I don't think ME3 was bad despite having the worst ending I've ever witnessed in a series I care about) with complex scenarios and a plethora of lore. That's art. Trying to be artistic however in your endings, that's not art. That's failure. It's not that we don't get it, it's that it doesn't make ANY sense at all. At all.

Yes I know you dont like the ending....Okay. But EDI never once acts like a human but consistantly asks how a human would act. She is a observer.

[EugeneBi]

Mass Effect Entusiast

[Thanatos144]

Chocho_GURU wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

nickkcin11 wrote...

Murvel88 wrote...
Your "artistic integrity" be damned, you are not da Vinci, Dali or van Gogh.

I laughed. I don't agree necessarily agree with them not supporting their ending (despite the fact it sucked... badly), but their reason was terrible. It was a terrible choice of words. How is a crappy, ambiguous, out of place, illogical, destroys the entire series for many people type ending "artistic"? Whatever.

I guess they should have consulted you abiut it then.... seeing as you must be the one and only expert on art huh?

Don't tire yourself, it's not just his opinion.

Opinion is the opertive word. He stated it as fact.

[indyracing]

Chris Priestly wrote...

We appreciate everyone’s feedback about Mass Effect 3 and want you to know that we are listening.

If you are actually listening, I wonder if someone one at Bioware could deign to give up a bit of their free time to answer a few questions about the ending?

My main specific question is why does the end of this trilogy trample on everything built up in the entire series up until the end?

I know the Catalyst says that the Reapers are a solution to the problem of created alwasy destorying their creators - but where is the evidence for this ever actually being true?  Or Synthetics always destroying Organics?

I know the Reapers are, technically, Synthetics, but honestly I never looked at them that way at all.  Everytime I fight "Reapers" it's against Organics.  True, they are indoctrinated or converted to husks and the like, but husks, cannibals, marauders, brutes, ravagers and banshees are all organic.  Never once in the series did I ever feel I was fighting an overpowering army of Synthetics.  If I was supposed to feel this way, then I suspect you guys did a very poor job all through the series getting this point across (if this was the intended ending all along, which I highly suspect it was not).

To add to that, not long before I'm told by the until-that-point unknown God Child that Synthetics always rebel against their Organic creators, I find out that the one Synthetic race (the Geth), only fought their Organic creators (the Quarians) in self-defense, and I was able to broker peace with them, without Tali dying and with Legion sacrificing himself for the greater good.  I felt I had just disproved the Catalyst's theory, but it was completely ignored.

I also felt, all through the series, that the Geth were no more a threat (and in many ways less of a threat) to Galactic peace than Cerberus, the Krogan or the Batarians.

What Mass Effect was to me (until meeting the Catalyst) was story about choice, hope and perserverance to overcome "impossible" odds.  Shepard gets it done.  What the ending did was simply render every choice I made irrelevant, vanquish all hope, and offer absolutely no chance to overcome the impossible choice offered.  Shepard would not have made ANY of those choices, but done something else.

So back to my question - why does the ending of the series pretty much ignore the main themes of the prior 100+ hours of gameplay?

And a followup question - how was this ending ever allowed to be published?  Surely someone should have been able to tell Walters and Hudson that it just..wasn't..good, right?

[nickkcin11]

Thanatos144 wrote...

Chocho_GURU wrote...

Thanatos144 wrote...

nickkcin11 wrote...

Murvel88 wrote...
Your "artistic integrity" be damned, you are not da Vinci, Dali or van Gogh.

I laughed. I don't agree necessarily agree with them not supporting their ending (despite the fact it sucked... badly), but their reason was terrible. It was a terrible choice of words. How is a crappy, ambiguous, out of place, illogical, destroys the entire series for many people type ending "artistic"? Whatever.

I guess they should have consulted you abiut it then.... seeing as you must be the one and only expert on art huh?

Don't tire yourself, it's not just his opinion.

Opinion is the opertive word. He stated it as fact.

No, I didn't think I had to state that my opinions are in fact opinions. "In my opinion ______________ ..." Nobody writes like that. It's implied that what I'm saying is not in fact proof, but my argument and thus my opinion.

And I think of EDI as like a child. She is learning each day and becoming more and more human. And by the end, she has achieved a conscience and realizes some things are more important than survival. IMO (just so you don't think it's a fact this time) that makes her human in a figurative sense.