23455 réponses à ce sujet

[jpoppawusc]

sdinc009 wrote...

No plot holes!? Really!? Then why was Joker in a relay jump befoere the energy blast? Why is Shepard so complacent with what is now (for no comprehecible reason) the new antagonist? Why would Shepard choose Control when that was the goal of the secondary antagonist (Illusive Man) all along? Why would Shepard choose Synthesis when that is the goal of the main antagonist (the Reapers)? Why would Shepard choose Destroy even though that's the primary goal of the entire series the genocidal consquence is directly in conflict with the character regardless of paragon or renegade. There's some plot holes for you

Q:  "Then why was Joker in a relay jump befoere the energy blast?"
A:  Between the time that Shepard and the forward team went down trying to reach the Citadel beam, to the time he/she finally speaks to Hackett about the Crucible activation, Sovereign-class Reapers are already descending on the battlefield.  Everyone assumes that Shepard is dead during that time.  With everything going bad, it is Joker's responsibility to pick up as many survivors as he can and head out of the Sol system.  With no reason to doubt that his friends are on the way to total eradication, Joker is well on his way to the Charon Relay before the blast catches up to them.

Q:  "Why is Shepard so complacent with what is now (for no comprehecible reason) the new antagonist?"
A:  Shepard is close to bleeding out, and he/she's been seeing the boy in his/her head for months.  Besides, what choice does he/she really have but to listen and believe, since the Crucible didn't operate like the weapon everyone assumed it to be.

Q:  "Why would Shepard choose Control when that was the goal of the secondary antagonist (Illusive Man) all along?"
A:  Intent.  The Illusive Man has already displayed that his methods of control come at too high of a cost for humanity.  Shepard's only goal in choosing Control would be to save as many people as possible while sacrificing himself/herself and forcing the Reapers to withdraw.  It's also the closest he/she can hope to come to restoring the galaxy to its previous state, without genocide or the unknown of synthesis.

Q:  "Why would Shepard choose Synthesis when that is the goal of the main antagonist (the Reapers)?"
A:  The Reapers' goal is assimilation into themselves as a means of preservation.  True synthesis is not possible without the operational parameters developed by synthetics in the Citadel (their pinnacle of advancement) and by organics in the Crucible (their pinnacle of advancement designed to supplement the Citadel's existing capabilities) joining in a complete method of manipulating dark matter to benefit both sides.  Shepard recognizes this as a new opportunity that is critically different from the Reaper cycle, which did not take organic desire for individuality and free will into account.

Q:  "Why would Shepard choose Destroy even though that's the primary goal of the entire series the genocidal consquence is directly in conflict with the character regardless of paragon or renegade?"
A:  The Reapers have been committing genocide for millions of years.  I'm sure that some versions of Shepard would gladly make an exception to the no-genocide rule if it meant taking down the Reapers.  Shepard would not have been able to predict that the Crucible's genocide against the Reapers would include all synthetic existence, but at the point of such desperation, he/she may have simply carried out the plan that he/she, Anderson, and Hackett had already initiated.  It wouldn't be seen as simple genocide, but a way to cut their losses in the face of annihiliation.  That type of Shepard would have disregarded Control because it was the Illusive Man's plan, and he/she would have also disregarded Synthesis because it held too many unknowns, without a way for Shepard to see things through in the aftermath.
 
So, in my opinion, there are no plot holes.

Modifié par jpoppawusc, 23 mai 2012 - 05:32 .

[3DandBeyond]

The problem is that in order for an ending to be complete it must take into account not just one version of Shepard, but all versions.  Destroy might work for one version, but not all.  And the one version that wouldn't pick destroy, wouldn't pick the others, either.

Also, Joker just picked up people that had been fighting where Shepard was when the beam hit-quite possibly what happens.  Yet, they are unscathed.  Generally, a reaper beam vaporizes people instantly, but not this one.  And Joker is able to land in such a confined area, grab them up, without getting hit by said reaper beam, and quickly fly off to where.

Every time it's been shown that a planet has so far been left untouched by reapers, it is also said they won't be left alone for long.  The reapers are also said to be very thorough and they find all forms of advanced organics before finishing a cycle.  No planet is safe.  Javik was the only anomaly.

There was another option open to Shepard in reality.  It was a stark one and one that Shepard and Hackett discussed if they could not find or didn't have the Catalyst.  They'd fight conventionally to the last person, no matter what.  No retreat, no surrender.

It wasn't about just who picked what option before or how they used it, it was also about the idea of it.  Shepard couldn't and shouldn't feel that the reaper kid would now give up and allow anyone to control his babies.  He had not done so before and anyone that thought they could had been indoctrinated.  Shepard would be more likely to believe s/he was being indoctrinated than to believe s/he was actually being offered the ability to control them.

Synthesis wasn't only about what the reapers were, it was also about what it does to all life.  It destroys the spirit within. Beings, devoid of adversity and strife and all, stagnate and eventually self-destruct.

And again, no true paragon Shepard would run off and choose genocide/destroy.  Some form of Shepard might think this was an awesome option, but some wouldn't.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 23 mai 2012 - 05:46 .

[LiarasShield]

Still their are plot holes the created don't always destroy or rebel against their creator otherwise the reapers would've attacked or destroyed the catalyst and the geth wouldn't help the quarians rebuild rannoch when they're free from reaper control

And shepard giving into the enemy in the first place wether bleeding to death or not is still not really acceptable to me unless harbingers beam ****ed shepards brain as well besides making shepard really bloody

[Voodoo-j]

jpoppawusc wrote...

sdinc009 wrote...

No plot holes!? Really!? Then why was Joker in a relay jump befoere the energy blast? Why is Shepard so complacent with what is now (for no comprehecible reason) the new antagonist? Why would Shepard choose Control when that was the goal of the secondary antagonist (Illusive Man) all along? Why would Shepard choose Synthesis when that is the goal of the main antagonist (the Reapers)? Why would Shepard choose Destroy even though that's the primary goal of the entire series the genocidal consquence is directly in conflict with the character regardless of paragon or renegade. There's some plot holes for you

Q:  "Then why was Joker in a relay jump befoere the energy blast?"
A:  Between the time that Shepard and the forward team went down trying to reach the Citadel beam, to the time he/she finally speaks to Hackett about the Crucible activation, Sovereign-class Reapers are already descending on the battlefield.  Everyone assumes that Shepard is dead during that time.  With everything going bad, it is Joker's responsibility to pick up as many survivors as he can and head out of the Sol system.  With no reason to doubt that his friends are on the way to total eradication, Joker is well on his way to the Charon Relay before the blast catches up to them.

Q:  "Why is Shepard so complacent with what is now (for no comprehecible reason) the new antagonist?"
A:  Shepard is close to bleeding out, and he/she's been seeing the boy in his/her head for months.  Besides, what choice does he/she really have but to listen and believe, since the Crucible didn't operate like the weapon everyone assumed it to be.

Q:  "Why would Shepard choose Control when that was the goal of the secondary antagonist (Illusive Man) all along?"
A:  Intent.  The Illusive Man has already displayed that his methods of control come at too high of a cost for humanity.  Shepard's only goal in choosing Control would be to save as many people as possible while sacrificing himself/herself and forcing the Reapers to withdraw.  It's also the closest he/she can hope to come to restoring the galaxy to its previous state, without genocide or the unknown of synthesis.

Q:  "Why would Shepard choose Synthesis when that is the goal of the main antagonist (the Reapers)?"
A:  The Reapers' goal is assimilation into themselves as a means of preservation.  True synthesis is not possible without the operational parameters developed by synthetics in the Citadel (their pinnacle of advancement) and by organics in the Crucible (their pinnacle of advancement designed to supplement the Citadel's existing capabilities) joining in a complete method of manipulating dark matter to benefit both sides.  Shepard recognizes this as a new opportunity that is critically different from the Reaper cycle, which did not take organic desire for individuality and free will into account.

Q:  "Why would Shepard choose Destroy even though that's the primary goal of the entire series the genocidal consquence is directly in conflict with the character regardless of paragon or renegade?"
A:  The Reapers have been committing genocide for millions of years.  I'm sure that some versions of Shepard would gladly make an exception to the no-genocide rule if it meant taking down the Reapers.  Shepard would not have been able to predict that the Crucible's genocide against the Reapers would include all synthetic existence, but at the point of such desperation, he/she may have simply carried out the plan that he/she, Anderson, and Hackett had already initiated.  It wouldn't be seen as simple genocide, but a way to cut their losses in the face of annihiliation.  That type of Shepard would have disregarded Control because it was the Illusive Man's plan, and he/she would have also disregarded Synthesis because it held too many unknowns, without a way for Shepard to see things through in the aftermath.
 
So, in my opinion, there are no plot holes.

Good responses,  some I view differently, but no doubt, they can be viewed that way.

But again, the issue is not opinion, its that we did not get the endings Bioware stated and implied, and in every other way said we would.

[Voodoo-j]

Right up to the release date I might add.

[jpoppawusc]

We got closure. We got enough context to explain almost every question we may have. We know if Shepard lives or dies, and we know what happens to his/her love interest. Our choices throughout the series played a huge role in how each of those endings would be viewed, and the final choice reflected the same grey dynamic that we've dealt with for more than 150 hours. What more did BioWare promise us, exactly?

[3DandBeyond]

Voodoo-j wrote...

But again, the issue is not opinion, its that we did not get the endings Bioware stated and implied, and in every other way said we would.

Quite right.  We can debate the ending forever.  Huge numbers of people think it stinks at best.  It's not consistent with the way the story has been told, does not take into account the way some could play the game, and enters an alternate reality.

But, the biggest break is with what was promised and what was not delivered on as promised. 

One main thing...in order to get that fantastically satisfying Shepard lives in a pile of scorched flesh and rubble scene one must play multiplayer.  But, not so according to Bioware.  You don't need to play MP to get the best ending.  But, yes you do.  And as the best ending, well in what twisted mind is this so all fired great?  Yippee Shepard is a pile of gasping goo and didn't get turned into reaper goo.  Yay!

And lest you think that they were being honest about this-it's written that in order to succeed at the game you must play multiplayer.  I've already said where it is many times over.


And here again is a thread where they list the promises made and broken:

http://social.biowar.../index/10056886

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 23 mai 2012 - 05:53 .

[Voodoo-j]

jpoppawusc wrote...

We got closure. We got enough context to explain almost every question we may have. We know if Shepard lives or dies, and we know what happens to his/her love interest. Our choices throughout the series played a huge role in how each of those endings would be viewed, and the final choice reflected the same grey dynamic that we've dealt with for more than 150 hours. What more did BioWare promise us, exactly?

I guess there is no more point speaking with you if you don't know at least that.
If your truly not trolling go back a few pages and read up.  Someone has a link to a vid of all the quotes Bioware made, indicating no A B C choice, as well as the multiple different endings.  Short of that watch the ME 1 documentaries.  From the beginning it was about the player sculpting their own story from the options Bioware put in the game.   

And if you think the ending as it is covers the end of the series as completely as it should.
1. You obviously don't pay attention to Bioware games you have played, or never played them.
(are you just a "I shot the bad guys and won yaaaay!" player or do you even know what the story is?)
2.Your a troll, or completely blind to the story.

[jpoppawusc]

LiarasShield wrote...

Still their are plot holes the created don't always destroy or rebel against their creator otherwise the reapers would've attacked or destroyed the catalyst and the geth wouldn't help the quarians rebuild rannoch when they're free from reaper control

And shepard giving into the enemy in the first place wether bleeding to death or not is still not really acceptable to me unless harbingers beam ****ed shepards brain as well besides making shepard really bloody

The Catalyst and Reapers would say that, given enough time, Quarians and Geth would find another reason to take up arms against one another.  The Geth would have been impossible to destroy without unifying factors of the Reaper invasion, but there's no reason to think that the Geth would not have eventually eliminated the Quarians if they ever tried to retake their homeworld (with or without Reaper circumstances).  Also, a cease-fire was only made possible by the same Reaper circumstances, but even if all Reapers were eradicated, I doubt the peace would have lasted.  Just because it logically made sense to cooperate in the face of mutual annihilation doesn't mean a centuries-old conflict would've been completely put to bed, ya know?

Modifié par jpoppawusc, 23 mai 2012 - 05:58 .

[LiarasShield]

That our choices would affect the endings that we'd get 16 potentially different endings and how we wouldn't get a a bc ending which we did ultimately get and no our actions don't really change or alter the same 3 endings we get at the end


And no we don't know if shepard dies cause a small breath and then cut to credits means shepard could still easily die on earth

And your love interest and loyal crew abandoning the fleets and going ftl or using the relays before they explode and leaving us all to potentially die at the reapers hand or slowly starve to death in space is not ****ing cool

We got screwed over Li wise because he or she doesn't mourn our loss or even show care that we may have died just ended up on a stranded planet and probably repopulating a jungle planet with joker or some other male or female of the crew

AND THE GIANT CLIFF HANGER IS OUR FORCES BEING TRAPT IN SPACE OTHER THEN BEING LIED TO IN BIOWARES INTERVIEWS BUT A COMPLETE CLIFF HANGER WHERE ALL OUR FORCES ARE TRAPT IN OUR DAMAGED SOLAR SYSTEM

NOT ONLY DOES SHEPARD GIVE INTO THE THE CATALYSTS THE REAPERS CREATOR BUT WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THE SACRIFICE IF EVERYBODY YOU WERE TRYING TO SAVE EITHER DIE OR NEVER GO HOME THEIR WOULDN"T BE A POINT WOULD THERE?

[Benchpress610]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

Benchpress610 wrote...

AlienShagger wrote...

Benchpress610 wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--- AlienShagger has some good points. ...

Well said sir...!!!

Crap... republicans/libertarians agree with me

G4U....now let's keep politics out of this please...

I'm not talking about politics.  I'm using a real historical example to illustrate how a populace can be "indoctrinated" into believing something that is not a fact through constant repetition.  Notice your own knee-jerk reaction that you want politics kept out of this discussion.  Did I espouse any political view?  No, I didn't.  I used the words "Constitution." "Thomas Jefferson," "Obama," "Ammendment," and "State."  None of them were given ANY kind of preferential treatment.

In other news, Obama Ammended his opinion of Thomas Jefferson by Stating that, when it came to being able to run a marathon, he had impressive Constitution.

That was GIBBERISH.  Watch people tell me to stop being political, because they saw the word "Obama," Stopped reading, and fired off their self-indoctrinated "I don't like to talk politics!" statements.

Oh my comment wasn't addressed at you bro... as you can see I agreed with your previous post. He conveniently left it out....

[LiarasShield]

jpoppawusc wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Still their are plot holes the created don't always destroy or rebel against their creator otherwise the reapers would've attacked or destroyed the catalyst and the geth wouldn't help the quarians rebuild rannoch when they're free from reaper control

And shepard giving into the enemy in the first place wether bleeding to death or not is still not really acceptable to me unless harbingers beam ****ed shepards brain as well besides making shepard really bloody

The Catalyst and Reapers would say that, given enough time, Quarians and Geth would find another reason to take up arms against one another.  The Geth would have been impossible to destroy without unifying factors of the Reaper invasion, but there's no reason to think that the Geth would not have eventually eliminated the Quarians if they ever tried to retake their homeworld (with or without Reaper circumstances).  Also, a cease-fire was only made possible by the same Reaper circumstances, but even if all Reapers were eradicated, I doubt the peace would have lasted.  Just because it logically made sense to cooperate in the face of mutual annihilation doesn't mean a centuries-old conflict would've been completely put to bed, ya know?

Still the geth never rebelled against their creators the quarians the quarians attacked them first and fought back in response and then allowed the quarians to flee the logic does not work

[LiarasShield]

You would know this if you played legions side mission

[Voodoo-j]

Like I said before, IF I had never played ME 1 and 2, I'd really care less about the ending, it wouldn't bother me. But I didn't I picked up ME1 thinking, hey this might be fun (no clue what I was buying other than it was a sci fi shooter). Honestly I thought it was going to be some cheesy sub par game.

Then I played it, I liked it so much I got it for the xbox as well, with the extended documentaries, art work, ect. Then I watched an interview on tv (can't remember what it was) but I was completely hooked, the way they described where they were going with it was phenomenal, and they followed through with what they said, right up to the ending.


(I shouldn't say it wouldn't bother me, more like I'd toss it to the side and say the ending kinda sucked and have an impression not to purchase Bioware games in the future.)

Modifié par Voodoo-j, 23 mai 2012 - 06:05 .

[AlienShagger]

jpoppawusc wrote...

We got closure. We got enough context to explain almost every question we may have. We know if Shepard lives or dies, and we know what happens to his/her love interest. Our choices throughout the series played a huge role in how each of those endings would be viewed, and the final choice reflected the same grey dynamic that we've dealt with for more than 150 hours. What more did BioWare promise us, exactly?

Your theory makes no sense. The global synthesis cumshot is just ludicrous. Shepard surviving the explosion on the Citadel is just not an option, without another Lazarus project. And the accident of Joker plus your love interest surviving by crashlanding on some accidentally inhabitable planet, WITH one of the squad members that was just blasted together with you on the way to the beam?

That stuff is something I can pull out of my ass in 10 seconds of brainstorming - which is exactly what Shepard is doing. He is not conscious.

[3DandBeyond]

jpoppawusc wrote...

We got closure. We got enough context to explain almost every question we may have. We know if Shepard lives or dies, and we know what happens to his/her love interest. Our choices throughout the series played a huge role in how each of those endings would be viewed, and the final choice reflected the same grey dynamic that we've dealt with for more than 150 hours. What more did BioWare promise us, exactly?

There's no satisfying closure in any of that.  Shepard takes a gasp (if you play multiplayer) in a heap of rubble. Happy day!  That does no mean Shepard goes on to have a life.

We know some silliness about what a child might write about what happened to the love interest.  Great, now maybe Garrus and Joker will find true love.  That's wonderful closure.

I can easily play the game and get less than a lot of war assets (that are just like playing cards and are meaningless to the ending) and get the exact same choices and endings as someone that got every single thing.  In fact, there's even a way to get the gasp ending by playing MP and promoting a lot of characters-that is not reflecting choices made throughout the SP game.  Without MP, I just may only not get the gasp ending.  But with a certain amount of assets I can get every other one of the vastly different endings that were promised.  And even those are not vastly different-looking from each other.  Blue, green, red, marines cheer, reapers die or leave.  Joker runs off opens garden of eden on planet that may not have food Garrus or Tali could eat.  Great closure.

Bioware promised no A, B, or C ending.  Oh, no we didn't get that did we?  We got red, green, and blue.  Vastly different.  They also said it would be like no 2 players would even get the same ending.  Hmmm, they are the same exact endings.  They do have some that differ by degree, but you really have to not play the game much at all to get the few worse and worst endings.  Still the satisfying closure cutscenes look almost exactly alike.

Bioware promised many things.  Read the thread I cited.

Some people that have posted here don't think the beginning scenes of ME2 make sense where Shepard dies after falling to a planet in armor and given a whole lot of stuff in the story that makes it remotely possible that the Lazarus project could take place.  But they fully believe that Shepard gasps thing makes sense.

I do agree with others that the only thing that could make this ending make sense is if it were Indoctrination.  I have reasons that I don't want it to be and so that necessarily clouds any full acceptance I could have of it, but it's the only thing that explains it fully.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 23 mai 2012 - 06:06 .

[LiarasShield]

The creator of the reapers is wrong because the geth never attacked the quarians first the quarians attacked them first and the geth defended themselves and allowed the quarians to live and escape until the reapers took control over their network with their reaper code not only does the created will always destroy their creator not work

But The catalyst saying that they destroy organics to save organics from being destroyed by synthetics is completely ass retarded and stupid because they control and manipulate the geth to kill us the very same organic they claim to be trying to save Let alone the reapers killing us instead of supposedly destroying the dangerous synthetics that are killing us

Modifié par LiarasShield, 23 mai 2012 - 06:10 .

[LiarasShield]

so many flaws that you over look it scares me beyond all reason lol

[3DandBeyond]

Interview with Casey Hudson...

www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/01/10/mass1525-effect-3-cas5ey-fdsafdhudson-interviewae.aspx

Interviewer: [Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2] “Is that
same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?”
Hudson: “Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to
build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about
eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is
coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot
more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many
decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that
stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings,
where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got
ending A, B, or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and
variety in them.”

“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.”

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 23 mai 2012 - 06:11 .

[LiarasShield]

The circular logic is broken by thee events with the triliogy and within the events of the third game and saving organics from advanced machines isn't killing the organics you claim to be saving nor controling the advanced machines you claim to be protecting us from

[Flubberlub]

I think that they needed more time
I'm hoping that this means that they will release "the Truth" at sometime in the near future

[AlienShagger]

LiarasShield wrote...

The creator of the reapers is wrong because the geth never attacked the quarians first the quarians attacked them first and the geth defended themselves and allowed the quarians to live and escape until the reapers took control over their network with their reaper code not only does the created will always destroy their creator not work

But The catalyst saying that they destroy organics to save organics from being destroyed by synthetics is completely ass retarded and stupid because they control and manipulate the geth to kill us the very same organic they claim to be trying to save Let alone the reapers killing us instead of supposedly destroying the dangerous synthetics that are killing us

There's no reason to discuss whether the kid lies or not; he is 100% disengenuous when mentioning "even you are partly synthetic" and suggesting that he will die too, while trying to talk Shepard out of the Destroy option. That's the only option where Shepard lives. Unless he's like a pile of flesh now with no structure to it due to destroyed synth part of him. That would be pretty hilarious: a human flesh-blob hit by a Reaper beam, exploded on the Citadel and re-entered the Earth's atmosphere...

[jpoppawusc]

LiarasShield wrote...

That our choices would affect the endings that we'd get 16 potentially different endings and how we wouldn't get a a bc ending which we did ultimately get and no our actions don't really change or alter the same 3 endings we get at the end


And no we don't know if shepard dies cause a small breath and then cut to credits means shepard could still easily die on earth

And your love interest and loyal crew abandoning the fleets and going ftl or using the relays before they explode and leaving us all to potentially die at the reapers hand or slowly starve to death in space is not ****ing cool

We got screwed over Li wise because he or she doesn't mourn our loss or even show care that we may have died just ended up on a stranded planet and probably repopulating a jungle planet with joker or some other male or female of the crew

AND THE GIANT CLIFF HANGER IS OUR FORCES BEING TRAPT IN SPACE OTHER THEN BEING LIED TO IN BIOWARES INTERVIEWS BUT A COMPLETE CLIFF HANGER WHERE ALL OUR FORCES ARE TRAPT IN OUR DAMAGED SOLAR SYSTEM

NOT ONLY DOES SHEPARD GIVE INTO THE THE CATALYSTS THE REAPERS CREATOR BUT WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THE SACRIFICE IF EVERYBODY YOU WERE TRYING TO SAVE EITHER DIE OR NEVER GO HOME THEIR WOULDN"T BE A POINT WOULD THERE?

First, there were at least 16 variations of the 3 primary endings.  BioWare never said how different they would be, and personally, I get a drastically different impression from each, despite the seemingly small differences in cinematics.  I don't expect everyone to see it the same way.

Why would BioWare make a point of showing Shepard breathe in only one ending if he/she was only going to die moments later?  Be serious.

The crew did what it needed to survive.  They would logically hope to regroup in whatever unexpected aftermath would follow.  They have no reason to believe that Shepard or Anderson are still alive until they see the final result of the blast, something they only experienced after their initial escape and subsequent separation from Earth.

Liara was my first Shepard's love interest (out of seven total variants), and I didn't get the same impression.  Instead, I was quite satisfied by events with her leading into the final conflict.  And what do you mean, she didn't mourn the loss of Shepard?  We only see a brief two seconds of Liara in the ending scene, and I don't expect those two seconds to be spent crying her eyes out, especially since Liara has been through this loss before.  And this time, she likely felt it coming.  Then again, she could also be carrying Shepard's child.

And humans being stranded on Earth sounds like a silly complaint, doesn't it?

Shepard does not give into the Catalyst.  The Catalyst is changed by the introduction of the Crucible and its organic parameters, and this opens possibilities that were never an option in previous Reaper cycles.  And by the way, Reapers and the Catalyst are both synthetic, and in many ways, the Reapers are part of the Catalyst.  Thus, they would not "rebel against their creators".

No one knows what could happen after the final scene.  Regardless of the final choice, the people who survive still retain more knowledge than any previous cycle, so it wouldn't take thousands of years to get back into space.  It's time to rebuild for a new future, and just the fact that a few people are separated should be little reason for concern.  Maybe they won't make it back to Earth in their lifetimes, but especially in the case of synthesis, who knows how long a newly synthesized human could live?  Those are not answers that BioWare needs to explain, as it would just be conjecture.

[3DandBeyond]

Voodoo-j wrote...

Like I said before, IF I had never played ME 1 and 2, I'd really care less about the ending, it wouldn't bother me. But I didn't I picked up ME1 thinking, hey this might be fun (no clue what I was buying other than it was a sci fi shooter). Honestly I thought it was going to be some cheesy sub par game.

Then I played it, I liked it so much I got it for the xbox as well, with the extended documentaries, art work, ect. Then I watched an interview on tv (can't remember what it was) but I was completely hooked, the way they described where they were going with it was phenomenal, and they followed through with what they said, right up to the ending.


(I shouldn't say it wouldn't bother me, more like I'd toss it to the side and say the ending kinda sucked and have an impression not to purchase Bioware games in the future.)

Let me also tell you something that I never see written anywhere about this.  I bought ME1 for PC, but then my PC died and I had all but forgotten about it.  I finally did install it and played it.  I got ME2 for the PS3, played it, loved it, got ME3 for the PS3.  Ugh ending.  Ok, just ugh.  Then I got a 360 and someone knowing I had wished I could play all 3 games on one platform (I don't like playing games with fighting on the PC much), before I finished ME3, got me the 360 games.  I have been playing them.  And it is surprising how different they are. 

You have way more access to different people and dialog throughout ME2 and 3.  Some characters from ME1 (not in the PS3 games) show up again in 2 and 3 and add assets to ME3.  I can't say they add a lot, but I'm about 2/3 through with ME3 again (finding lots of stuff that contradicts the ending thru 3 games) and I have enough assets for the gasp ending with a fair galactic readiness score.

This is amazing to me.  I think it makes sense, but they have never said anything about how trimmed down the PS3 versions are.  I won't say these characters add a lot of assets, but it's enough if you find all of them to really "help" any game that reflected all this at the end.  As it is even the trimmed down PS3 version where I didn't get everything nets me the same endings as my nitpicky 360 one.  I've been purposely trying to find everything so I don't miss conversation options.

[Voodoo-j]

16 .. um yeah I do know how to count.. at best 6

Refer up to the Casey Hudson reference.
We have very little variety, opening their graphics program and changing colors..
Really your going to defend that right?