jpoppawusc wrote...
This is the risk that BioWare took to bring thought-provoking RPG subject matter to mainstream audiences. There are no plot holes in the ending. All three options, and their multiple variations, all make sense with the events and lore of the series. The Catalyst is not some sort of galactic god; it's just the culmination of thousands of synthetic civilizations that have evolved and combined over millions of years and have logically decided on a way to keep their future creators from being eliminated permanently (thus allowing organic life to persist while continuously adding to the immortal collective of synthetics). The Indoctrination Theory is a way for people to explain away an ending that they don't understand. And the constant appearance of the Catalyst boy is just a mental image that Shepard has subconsciously crafted for himself/herself as he/she comes into full awareness of the same knowledge that the Catalyst represents - that ultimate sacfrice and change are necessary to preserve life past the current cycle.
I never expected or wanted Shepard's trilogy to be tied up with a neat little bow. All of the endings require contemplation, and the choices you've made throught the series make a huge difference in how you experience, perceive, and interpret the conclusion. Mass Effect 3 is, for all intents and purposes, a 40 to 50-hour ending sequence, and I'm tired of hearing people say that the payoff wasn't high enough. There's an ending where Shepard lives, an ending where Shepard dies, and an ending where Shepard exhalts all life to a new pinnacle of evolution while he/she becomes an integrated part of everything (not really dead or alive, but carried on as a messiah for all who remain). Crew members live and die by the choices we make at the end. I can think of no more fitting, complete, or satisfying conclusion for the trilogy.
If BioWare adds more context to the ending in the upcoming DLC, that's all well and good, but they've already stated that they're not changing or canonizing it. Ultimately, all of the answers that they could/will provide are already there... it just requires a little thought and personal reflection to see the truth in what they've crafted. Personally, I love discussing it with friends as-is, and when I beat the game, I was absolutely astonished at how much negative press the ending had received, since I was truly impressed with the high degree of intelligence that BioWare had infused into its conclusion.
Gamers wine about everything, yet BioWare broke conventions by respecting and trusting the intelligence of its players by allowing some elements to be open for interpretation. Clearly, that was an unpopular decision.
Well thank you very much. In one post you have managed to not only call people whiny (wine is a drink), but ignorant. That reaffirms that the creator (of said statement) both exemplifies their own thoughts-whining about supposed whining-and can accept drivel wrapped up in superficial, pseudo intellectualism.
Plot holes and something never shown throughout 3 games:
Shepard never contests circular logic at the end. The created will always rebel against and thus destroy the creator so we must destroy you by turning you into goo in order to keep you from being destroyed. Shepard contested everything within the games, yet Shepard goes along with this. Shepard can contest it as I recently said when talking with a dying reaper on Rannoch. That's a plot hole.
Shepard just accepts the kid's word on stuff. Ok, he's turning people into goo. No way I'd believe him, no way Shepard would believe him. That's a plot hole.
The antagonist of a story is the antagonist of a story and is not substituted at the end if you want the story to carry the "reader" along. Stories require "readers" to be on some level emotionally involved with the main characters. Protagonist/antagonist-major characters with love or hate or strong like and strong dislike-emotions that allow "readers" to feel certain important things that drive a story on. You do not change the main one in the last ten pages of a book nor the last 5 minutes of a movie or game. Or, you lose the emotional thread that carries the "reader" with the story. This is disconnect and widens any plot hole.
Choices given are choices that have been or would be denied by Shepard all along 3 games. Control-shown to be advocated and believed possible by at least Saren and TIM. Reapers use control through indoctrination. Control-bad. Plot hole. No logical rational way Shepard would see Control as an authentic choice-others were lied to before and told they could control the reapers, but had been indoctrinated into believing this. Plot hole.
Synthesis-the final stated reason of Sovereign and others often through indoctrinated surrogates such as Saren. TIM has used horrific experimentation (Project Overlord, the use of implants on himself and others, the creation of Cerberus husks), to attempt it under the control of the reapers and ipso facto, the kid. Even the Reapers (things that are turning people into goo) are synthesized beings of a sort. People Shepard respects have dialog options that reject it wholly as anything good. Shepard would not see this as an authentic choice. People were lied to about the true intent and possibilities of control in order to achieve Synthesis. They were indoctrinated to believe control was possible but with an eye on synthesis. Plot hole.
Destroy-the most obvious option/non-option of all. A certain type of Shepard would reject this out of hand or at the very least protest it. It is genocide. It isn't something Shepard would do lightly or without question.
But it matters little since the kid has been sending the big nasties to turn people into goo. No person, certainly no human, and no Shepard would think the kid is being either honest or rational or at best trustworthy. At least it begs the question, "you're turning everyone into goo, why should I believe you?" The kid could say, "because I'm making organic ice cream. And everyone likes ice cream." Basically, I don't care that everyone built the crucible from plans from possibly people who wanted to destroy the reapers (though no one really knows where the plans came from) and I don't care that the Catalyst is supposed to help get rid of the reapers-since no one really knows this for a fact. What I do care about is the Catalyst is telling me he's the puppet master behind sending things to turn people into goo and now he says after millennia of doing this, he suddenly wants to help. Ah, but no. A very real possibility is the crucible's plans came from him in order to facilitate the goo process. It's just as valid a thought or moreso than thinking he wants to be friends now. Major plot hole. I cannot accept that the evil guy in the corner wants to help me.
I don't care if the kid wants to save all the bunnies in the galaxy, but must kill advanced organics in order to do this. I don't want to die. I don't want my friends to die. I don't want the galaxy's smart people to die and become goo so bunnies can live. Sorry, I don't. Or maybe he means amoebae. Oh sure, kill me so that amoebae can live long and prosper. How does he know that after killing all advanced organics some great amoeba plague won't come along and kill all those little guys he just saved?
Bioware didn't wrap up the story of your friends-Bioware ruined them. They run from the fight and even if Shepard did survive they left his/her charred torso sitting in some rubble that what fell from the sky. Your friends that are left and might be left to procreate could be all male. Works for you, right?
Shepard takes a gasp and we should jump up and down and say that's the kind of victorious ending we wanted when we worked to get all that crap together to fight a big war that never came against the enemey that never was the real enemy and wasn't really an enemy but a friend who was trying to kill us to save us? And the dying reaper on Rannoch specifically says it is killing us to save us. What most all of us think is that not only should there be sad sacrificial things done and a Shepard dies possibility, but that there can also be choices that lead to a truly victorious Shepard survives ending. And further one with context, closure, and one that plain makes some sense. Maybe at least Shepard should take a bounce when hitting the Earth after falling such a distance.
It isn't that Bioware left some of the ending open to interpretation. It's that Bioware left the whole ending open to interpretation, but the ending made a large group of fans (people that loved the game, bought the games, bout every bit of minutiae associated with the games) not wanting to interpret it. People weren't sad, they were aghast. Aghast at the very idea that this was now being portrayed as some intellectual, highbrow ending that one needed to be intelligent to grasp. It's like the story of the Emperor's New Clothes. People didn't want to appear stupid or incompetent and were told they were if they couldn't see the new clothes. No one wanted to point out the emperor was naked. So to appear smart, they would say they loved his new clothes. People are told that only the dumb don't get the ending, so not wanting to appear dumb they often go along and agree that it is super de dooper smart and art.
I'm going to agree with a previous poster by disagreeing with him. In order to accept this ending, you've been sold a bill of goods. If you take it at some face value and believe it is just awesome and explains everything, then that is indoctrination. It means they've told you you are intelligent if you "get" it and you've convinced yourself it makes sense and anyone that disagrees is the enemy and stupid and whiny and demanding and full of self-entitlement. No one wants to be that. So the ending is great, you're smart. The emperor is fully dressed, lookin' good.
There's so much that is wrong with the ending even in terms of just how a story should be told, but also that it in no way takes into account the choices players made in the games.
We also actually wanted Bioware to take a look at how they promoted the game to get people to pre-order and get the CE, all the promises that various people made and tell us exactly how the ending(s) live up to those promises. They can't and won't.
I'm a consumer and I have the right to complain when a product does not deliver as promised. You can whine and call me a whiner, but most complainers work for the good of everyone, even those that fail to recognize a problem.
In order to buy into the circular logic one must fully understand Bubble's Law.
Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 23 mai 2012 - 05:31 .
Ce sujet est fermé
I like the outrage it generates - it is what I feel is missing on so many issues in real life.
Retour en haut
