23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Mercedes595]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Sorry if I misunderstood some things, just really "clarifying" stuff.  Actually, I not only want to see the geth fighting, I want to see Jack's Biotic kids, Krogan on dino-back, rachni swarms, and so on.  I think it is one of the saddest things that you gather all these war assets that are just numbers with no fun stuff.

But, I do also find it sad that we are not treated to the real eye candy that was waiting to be shown-the battles are one thing, but Rannoch rebuilding-we've waited for it maybe and possibly worked for it, depending upon our choices.  The redemption of all these flawed characters and groups of characters.  None of them without some sort of "sin".  The Asari seemed to play while others took charge.  The Krogan and Turians doing the heavy lifting-the promise of Krogan children being on the verge of happening.  Mordin's redemption, the Turians as well.

There was just so much promise denied.

Cant agree more. The Geth for me were only the most (in)visible top of the iceberg as at least their fleet could have been included in the cutscene where all the fleets you have gathered arive into our system and begin fighting the reapers.
Also the possibility of defeating the reapers conventionaly would have been nice. in ME1 Turian Alliance fleet without any anti reaper weapons (Thanix) defeated Sovereign. Now you have gathered every flying bucket in the galaxy, equipped them with better weapons and you (the devs) are telling me there is absolutly no chance to defeat the reapers????

[Gamer391]

3DandBeyond wrote...

I don't mean to insult you and you are welcome to your opinions of course, but..

I'm sorry what games were you playing exactly?  Lack of control-that is exactly where in the rest of the games and where is that stated in all the press the devs put out leading up to this game?  You know, where they said it was all about player choice (control), vast differences in endings, no ABC endings, no requirement to play MP for SP, and so on.

Or maybe you mean they didn't mean it when they said the Rachni would figure prominently in the ending.

A happy ending would be corny?  But Joker and all the others landing on the jungle planet is thoughty and deep?  Or how about the charred gasping Shepard torso-that is not corny at all?

And you really think the ending was Shepard's story (you know we saw everything previously from Shepard's point of view)?  What Shepard exactly throughout these 3 games would ever have stood idly by while some demented, evil god being in kid's clothing that has been turning people into goo, says that turning people into goo is done to help them?  Exactly which Shepard would when told that turning them into goo is done so they can ascend in a different form, would just casually say oh, please mr. star kid, we want to keep our current form?  Feck that, what Shepard wouldn't have a few very choice words to say at least?

Oh, and I'm sorry but exactly what games were you playing if in the end all those people Shepard cared about, oh even a love interest, are meaningless and unnecessary?  The games have always been about those relationships Shepard forged, so now they don't matter?  The ME series set itself apart in that the player as Shepard could direct all those relationships and could choose to care or not.  So, now they don't matter?  I'm stumped.  I've played 3 different games-one where Liara basically gave up part of her life for love or just friendship, to find the dead body of Shepard and then further gave up that body to Cerberus in the hope Shepard might live again.

I played games where Mordin became real and overcame (could overcome) flaws in his previous thinking and came to care for Krogan and lived to change the bad thing he had helped happen.

I played games where my decisions at least had the artifice of importance and seemed to determine things.  But, ultimately where they lead is to a discussion of a character I never fought and never knew about who says things and offers choices that only some deluded individual with some design on godhood would believe.  And on top of that Shepard who apparently hasn't suffered or sacrificed enough for an ungrateful galaxy, must now always sacrifice it all so that ungrateful galaxy can continue on, blissful in the knowledge that at least one person cared enough.

And as if that's not enough, Shepard's LI and friends that also may have sacrificed a lot and learned a great deal from Shepard, can deal with futility on a large scale.  It's not bad enough that Shepard died once, but Shepard must die again and again apparently until they get it right. 

The ending is a compilation of nonsensical parts thrown together and called artistic and deep.  The fact that it makes use of many cliche pieces in ways that don't even fit together bears out that it is neither.

One of the main points is that the reapers have been the enemy, the antagonist and the emotional counter to Shepard as hero.  In a good story you don't replace either the good or the bad guy at the end and certainly not in the last few moments or pages of a story.  The game stops once Shepard is hit by Harbinger's beam.  The interaction with a dying Anderson is magnificently done, but it is the only bright spot in a dreary demented ending.  And even there the game fails.  Shepard doesn't even seem to care.  So, I want to know in what ME game does this make sense?

This. Hats off to you. You put it perfectly. We have just been proved idiots who spend their money thinking that the producers will deliver to our expectations. And even those who came up with the whole story and everything, chose to end it in the most insensible, idiotic, incomprehensive way possible. Mass Effect franchise is dead. Unless they fix ME3. At least for me. RIP - ME. 

Modifié par Gamer391, 04 juin 2012 - 06:40 .

[Redbelle]

If it's a bittersweet ending your looking for then try the one from Halo Reach.



The endings 'ending' happens around the 5:25sec mark but the rest sets up the 'what for' and 'why' the Spartan finds itself in that situation.

Btw, the Spartan who gets skewered on the orbital gun was a squadmate........ He was the likable crazy one and the last survivor out of a squad of 5....... or 6,

[MSandt]

3DandBeyond wrote...

No, actually you don't.  Shepard consistently told teammates the goal was to come out alive.  Shepard may have known the odds, but that was a goal.

The goal was to defeat the Reapers. If they cared about survival, they could've taken Normandy to some faraway planet and lived their lives in peace.

Also, there's a recurrent theme that a type of Shepard will often state and that is that you don't rob Peter to pay Paul-you don't sacrifice some here to save others over there.  The Arrival changes that up because again in a stupid way there is no choice that fits with what all Shepard's might do.

I agree about the Arrival but that's got nothing to do with this. At the end of ME3 Shepard sacrificed herself, not others.

And still no being with a brain would willingly submit to choices being given out or pointed to by this star kid.

I guess you could have pretended jumping off the station by exiting the game at that point if you really think that'd have been better than doing what you came there to do.

You don't have any chance to disagree here, to shoot him in his glowy face, to pick up a Cain and shoot up his home and die in a blaze of glory.

You'd have preferred that over defeating the Reapers? "I can't live so no one can!"

Instead, Shepard wimps out, trudges on, says nothing, makes a choice.

Which was great, no convenient cheap tricks out of nowhere to help her out, only two paths to glory! It was the complete opposite of what I expected (i.e., a typical Star Wars ending) and I loved it!

You came to destroy the reapers, yes.  But, if you found the head reaper guy was living in the Citadel, the thing you want to do has changed.  You'd still want to kill the reapers, but you'd want to be sure they never come back again.  He gives no such assurance and even with Destroy he doesn't rule it out.  Shepard asks if they will indeed be destroyed and the kid says yes, but the peace won't last and the chaos will come back.  Which presumably means the kid will be back too with his solution to bring order to chaos.  His solution is the reapers.

Yes, you'd obviously want the "kid" to never again come up with more Reapers but at that point, what choice did she have? Taking a Cain as per your suggestion would have sealed the fate of everyone else in the galaxy. It'd probably take millions of years to manufacture another armada of Reapers anyway. Besides, it looked as if the Citadel did get destroyed in the process, destroying the kid along with it.

[Benchpress610]

Mercedes595 wrote...

MSandt wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

And I don't call forced suicide a sacrifice or bittersweet at all. Point out the sweet please.

Howabout the fact that you succeeded in preventing a genocide of all advanced races, including your own? Oh, and the whole top-floor scene was just stunning audiovisually.

+1

Except that the astonishing visuals and stunning musical effects could not cover up the load of horse manure being spoken by glowboy.  

[MSandt]

3DandBeyond wrote...

And yes, movies should all have unhappily ever after endings and games are meant to be lost and the overwhelming successes of both LotR and Star Wars indicate that a majority of people hate happy endings because they are too cliche and improbable.

I don't care about the majority. The game I got was better than I expected so I'm happy.

[3DandBeyond]

MSandt wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...


S/he didn't care at all about shooting Anderson. 

And what makes you think that? There was little reaction (which in itself was brilliant!) because they both knew what the situation was, that she had little control over her actions at that point. Anderson knew it, Shepard knew it. Why dwell on that when you've got more pressing matters at hand? Moreover, they were both barely alive at that point anyway.

They provide artificial plot points and yet assign no meaning to the fact Shepard shot his/her mentor and father figure?  A slight wince would not have been an inhuman effort.

And I don't call forced suicide a sacrifice or bittersweet at all.  Point out the sweet please.

Howabout the fact that you succeeded in preventing a genocide of all advanced races, including your own? Oh, and the whole top-floor scene was just stunning audiovisually.

In fact, you merely postponed this.  The kid indicates the cycle will begin again, but in preventing that genocide you have become like them in effect.  You strip away your humanity and do things without protest (adrenaline still works) and impose genocide yourself.  You kill what makes people alive (Shepard consistently says this) and you kill what you helped make or you kill what made people follow you in the first place.

Please do go back and see the hype fans were a party to as the game was promoted by the devs.  The ending is nothing like anything they said and in fact is exactly what they said it wouldn't be.

I don't listen to hype, especially from developers. Maybe from now on you'll learn not to listen to hype either?

I may listen to it, doesn't mean I buy all of it, but if someone is making a game and says the ending will not be an ABC ending and other things, then those are sticking points.

I disagreed with what you said here and felt they did matter a great deal, but you don't seem to think they matter at all.  And where in your game did your love interest share any of those heartfelt feelings about Shepard dying?  Mine walked off the Normandy and showed no emotion whatsoever, appeared unscathed and not at all concerned about a thing.

I didn't establish any relationships. I'm a male but my character was female so I aborted whenever someone tried to get too friendly.

Then you failed to actually play the game and relationships are not only love affairs, but those with friends and teammates, and so on.  The game was made to have you or your Shepard care about something.  The fact that you didn't means you were not playing the game and it also explains why the ending was ok with you.  You are not the intended fan of such a game that involves relationships.  Doesn't mean you can't play it, but it means you don't care that it involves relationships, so you don't care that they exist.  In order to fully buy into the game, you must actually care about these people as if they are people in some way.  It is a game about the character rich interaction.

And I don't get the meaning here that you seem to think because you are male you can't play a female that has someone get friendly.  I really don't.  I am female and could play a male who maybe liked guys or girls and females that like either as well.  It's called role playing. 

But, as I said, they could have just removed the Normandy scene.

The Normandy scene is just one problem with all of this, but since you didn't care about the relationships this is all lost on you.  You have no reason to care about sharing drinks in a bar with Garrus or seeing Wrex and Eve's kids or seeing Tali's home on Rannoch or little blue children or seeing Jacob and his child or seeing Jack happy in some way at last and proud of "her kids".  But, again the game was meant to be about those things.

[Mercedes595]

3DandBeyond wrote...
In a good story you don't replace either the good or the bad guy at the end and certainly not in the last few moments or pages of a story.

Ehm, Darth Vader in Return of a Jedi...... just a detail. The replacing or changing of a bad guy in the very end has been used and succesfuly in the past.

3DandBeyond wrote...
The game stops once Shepard is hit by Harbinger's beam. 

Stopped an hour earlir for me

3DandBeyond wrote...
The interaction with a dying Anderson is magnificently done, but it is the only bright spot in a dreary demented ending.  And even there the game fails.  Shepard doesn't even seem to care.  So, I want to know in what ME game does this make sense?

Agree its great inan otherwise pointless setting, but he cares. Its clearly visible. But they are both dead tired and badly wounded and they both know they are going to die, so there are no big gestures of grief and stuff, but you can see and hear that the whole situation has a big emotional impact on them.

[Holger1405]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Holger1405 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
Now, onto your idea that Control is Paragon. Again, anyone that has been told by any reaper-like entity that they can control the reapers has been indoctrinated, crazy, evil, or all of the above. So, maybe a paragon could choose it-a deluded one who all of a sudden wanted to be a dead god.

No one, in the entire series, has ever been told, "by any reaper-like entity," that it is possible to control the reapers, before the Catalyst spoke to Shepard.

TIM had the plan to control the Reapers long before he got indoctrinated, and the Reapers didn't approve his plans. Clearly shown by their attack on the sanctuary. Saran did search for a weapon, but as he realized what Sovereign really is, he tried to convince Sovereign that Organics can be useful.
   
Thus Shepard is the first one who is been told that she/he can control the Reapers. Well I don't consider her/him "indoctrinated, crazy, evil or all of the above."

So what's left here?  A good character can't choose a solution for the right reasons, because a bad character has similar goals for the wrong reasons? That's not even remotely logical.    

At what point was TIM indoctrinated?  Point out where exactly this took place.  You have no idea if he was first indoctrinated and then thought he could assert control because there's no way of knowing when he was indoctrinated, but the kid references it.  He indicates TIM couldn't control the reapers because he was already under their control.

The sanctuary was TIM's program to figure out how he could control the Reapers.  If TIM was indoctrinated before he funded or while he operate the sanctuary it would make no sense at all for the Reapers to let him do that. The Reapers attacked the sanctuary because it was a threat to them. If they had control over TIM at this point they could simply let him shut down the place.  

Thus TIM tried to control the Reapers before he was indoctrinated.

Furthermore, there is no in game evidence whatsoever that the Reapers or the Catalyst did tell TIM that he could control the reapers. Again you are speculating outside of in game knowledge.    

3DandBeyond wrote...
Saren was also told he could control them, but again we don't have a clue which came first, his indoctrination or the idea to control.

Any in game proof for this statement?

3DandBeyond wrote...

But furthermore, Shepard only needs to look at the glowing boy in front of him as an example of someone who controls the reapers.  The star kid controls them and you've said you think he could have had good intentions.  So, in your opinion the kid meant to do good things, but has been doing what I see as evil things-making people goo.  He has been making people goo by using the reapers he controls.  This example alone would show Shepard that only crazy, evil, or delusional people exert control.  And this nonsensical "kid" is telling Shepard s/he can control them, too or instead.  Yeah, that sounds just great.

Again: A good character can't choose a solution for the right reasons, because a bad/evil character has similar goals for the wrong reasons? That's not logical.    

3DandBeyond wrote...
And Shepard has rejected and resisted the idea all along, but in the end Shepard simply trusts this "kid".  That makes no sense.  Shepard would not trust the idea of control as presented at all.

And no there's no gamebreaking problem with space magic when it explains away more mundane things or advances a plotline; the problem lies in making it a crucial, critical part of the major event in a story.

But it is all still moot.  All of this is based upon what the kid says. And the kid can't be trusted.  You've not once really addressed this-there's no proof at all of anything he says.

This is a circular conversation because even though you indicate the kid may be lying, you don't think that matters, which is unfathomable for me.

I've laid out reasons as have others for not accepting any of the choices.  The hurdle is too high.  The burden of proof is on the star kid and he is not credible.  No, a good person wouldn't choose control because they wouldn't believe it and it wouldn't even make sense.  A normal person would ask how they could control them if they're dead.  A normal person would ask the kid to hit the reaper off switch and would lay out a claim why.

I already made my point about way I think that Shepard can trust the word's of the Catalyst.

3DandBeyond wrote...

In order to accept what you believe, I would at the bare minimum need to know when Saren and TIM were indoctrinated in relation to their belief they could control the reapers AND I would need substantial proof the kid was telling the truth, and not just his word.

I made my Point about TIM above. Now it's up to you to proof to me that Saren's goal was to control the Reapers too.   

Modifié par Holger1405, 04 juin 2012 - 09:08 .

[3DandBeyond]

MSandt wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

And yes, movies should all have unhappily ever after endings and games are meant to be lost and the overwhelming successes of both LotR and Star Wars indicate that a majority of people hate happy endings because they are too cliche and improbable.

I don't care about the majority. The game I got was better than I expected so I'm happy.

But you are not Bioware and we are hoping Bioware is listening.  Bioware is a business and they should care about the majority.  Or else they will cease to exist.  So, if you like Bioware games then you too actually should care somewhat about it as well.

Consider that there are people that have come here and told others that if they don't like it then just don't buy Bioware games.  Great idea if you want them to stop making games.  The fact is we have liked ME and want to still like it.  We don't want them to stop making games, we in fact want them to keep making quality games.

What good is done if we just were never to complain at all and simply went away, hating ME3's ending?  This is never something businesses want customers to do.  They always want to know why a customer is unhappy, even if ultimately they can't help them.   It's inconsiderate to just leave and never tell Bioware why.  They have given me something great and I owe them more than silence.

[Holger1405]

Mercedes595 wrote...

MSandt wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

And I don't call forced suicide a sacrifice or bittersweet at all. Point out the sweet please.

Howabout the fact that you succeeded in preventing a genocide of all advanced races, including your own? Oh, and the whole top-floor scene was just stunning audiovisually.

+1

+2

[rosscourt]

 i just wanted to say that I just bought and finished ME3 this past week and I really enjoyed the entire journey up to and including my ending. So thank you for the experience. I try to avoid official game forums because they tend to be the Mos Eisley wretched hive of scum and villany of internet forums but I wanted to thank you all.

I hope you get the chance to come back to this setting in a future game because I would love to see the fallout of all the fleet races being stuck in sol and it's sector space with no mass transit and how all the eezo leaks/explosions on and around earth shape the evolution of those species. I expected that the mass relays would be used but I didn't expect you to make the bold decision of cutting off interstellar travel. It was a genius move for the possibilities it sets up for the universe. 

I appreciated that the scale of the ending was so far beyond the actions of one soldier (or infiltrator). It made sense in two that all of my decisions would have immediate effects on the situation as that was a small scale, almost dirty dozen like plot. Here, the scale of the conflict would have made that ridiculous and the lead up to the final decision is set up in a way that no previous decisions should effect it anyway. It's a wholy new experience with an intelligence and power vastly beyond our own, what would it care that I let the council die or renegade pushed a guy of the window?

oh and you made me cry over an amphibian and a reptile. If I had to do an extended cut of my ending statement I would add "Which is no small feat," but I shouldn't have to because I trust you to understand the weight and implications of my original statement, having experienced everything leading up to it. 

Thanks Bioware. I'll be back for your next offering. 

[Benchpress610]

MSandt wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

And yes, movies should all have unhappily ever after endings and games are meant to be lost and the overwhelming successes of both LotR and Star Wars indicate that a majority of people hate happy endings because they are too cliche and improbable.

I don't care about the majority. The game I got was better than I expected so I'm happy.

G4U...you like the ending as is?...keep it...we want better.

[MSandt]

Benchpress610 wrote...

Mercedes595 wrote...

MSandt wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

And I don't call forced suicide a sacrifice or bittersweet at all. Point out the sweet please.

Howabout the fact that you succeeded in preventing a genocide of all advanced races, including your own? Oh, and the whole top-floor scene was just stunning audiovisually.

+1

Except that the astonishing visuals and stunning musical effects could not cover up the load of horse manure being spoken by glowboy.  

And how was it horse manure? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the origin of the Reapers was never established in either Mass Effect or Mass Effect 2 (unless you considered the "we're infinite" bit a satisfactory explanation). But it was known that they 1) were part machine, part organic and that 2) they destroyed advanced organic civilizations in an endless cycle. What remained to be explained was who created them and why. The "glowboy" didn't really even reveal anything we didn't alread know except his identity as the creator, which we knew existed out there somewhere the whole time.

[akenn312]

Mercedes595 wrote...

akenn312 wrote...

Is anyone seeing a trend here? Everytime someone says they really like the ending the main reason they like it is for the "artsy" unhappy ending sacrifice by Shepard and they consider that above all else what makes the story good. I can give them that a noble sacrifice can be moving, but Shepard's death was not so great that you can ignore bad storytelling or a story that ignores almost everything it set up in the previous games. This is what makes his death stupid. Ignoring plot holes and bad storytelling doesn't magically make his death meaningful.

So because Shepard dies it's cool Bioware just dropped everything important from Mass Effect 2 and 1? Like I don't know…the Collector Base being kept or destroyed or the conduit on Ilos that could get them to the Citadel…Nah they don't need that they have this new London conduit. At least mention why you don't use the Ilos Conduit.

Because Shepard goes out hard we don't have to care if the final three choices make sense or not? Or care about the fact people are intentionally not using Cain's to fight against the Spider Reapers after using a Cain blew up a Reaper easily or realizing throught the story synthetics and AI's were not a threat at all that organics could't handle?

Because Shepard dies jumping into a beam of space magic and Buzz Aldren does a cameo easter egg in the game we can now accept Joker running away from an energy wave that no one else in the fleet ran away from, and like an idiot get the Normandy stranded on a weird jungle planet for no reason. Or the huge fact of Shepard bringing the entire galaxy with him only to get them stranded in Sol and last but not least squad-mates disappearing in thin air?

What type of logic is this? Why do you people just blindly ignore this stuff? It's obvious this is a poorly written story especially the end. What is it? You can't accept they made a bad story or something? Or do you really not see the things wrong with it?

OK, there are two things being mixed here in this discussion. First Shepard died, second the story is full of plot holes and the ending is totaly bat**** crazy stupi and all that.
There were moment in the ending that i liked. Moments which reminded me of cutscenes like Mordins sacrifice and other realy great moments in the game. I just had to totaly shut off thinking about the lore and logic of it all. Then it was kinda beautiful. Up until the three choices. Those just broke it for me totally.
But i have absolutly no problem with Shep ending up dead in all endings (does wearing N7 tags make you Shepard? Is the Citadel full of concrete? Did Shepard survive falling through the atmosphere yet again?). You can see through the whole story that the wories and strain of fighting slowly destroyes him. Can you imagine him after all that (disregarding the events on earth) on a beach somewhere drinking a cocktail with Garrus????? Man that would be even more nonsensical then the current ending. And thats saying something.

But I totaly ageree with the trend here, that the lack of closure (meaning the teammates) is just wrong.

So basically you do think the ending is bad, but you also decide to fill in the rest of the plot hole mistakes or just ignore them and fall back on your previous emotional connection to the story to enjoy it. I think that's what I see the most. I even tried to do that at first.

To me the real issue with the end that I see now is that if a story is full of holes then they will be craters when you get to the ending. If the story parts are already going wheels off track & getting away from the previous games and the lore then of course the ending is going to be really batshizz crazy.

That's what is frustrating for me as a fan this stuff is extremely obvious. It insults my intelligence. For example, only a Thresher Maw is powerful enough to kill the Spider Reaper on Tuchanka, then we have to use a targeting laser synced up with the Quarian fleet as the only way to kill a Spider Reaper on Ranoch…Then  finally one tiny little Cain heavy weapon can now kill a Spider Reaper on Earth even when it's closed. But nooo… no one ever uses a Cain again (that would make too much sense) they just shoot assault rifles and a weak grenade launchers at the Spider Reapers. So they can get lazed and die without any chance at all.

It's not full of noble deaths It's just dumb.

You just can't do stuff like that in a story and not tick people off eventually. In Mass Effect 3's ending they are constantly doing this. I'm not saying we can't have emotional connection to the story it's just they pull too much crap out of the blue in the London part of the mission. It's like they just rushed through without checking the facts. This just seems extremely obvious to me. They put stuff in hoping we wouldn't notice or the scary thing is they didn't notice themselves.

But when someone says this was better than was expected…I'm scratching my head. This is totally not what any game should try to pull.

I'm really not buying that people are not seeing this stuff and it's just a minority that does.

Modifié par akenn312, 04 juin 2012 - 07:15 .

[3DandBeyond]

@Holger,
You have never offered any proof as to why Shepard should believe the kid.  You've offered only what he says which is not proof and the Crucible, which is an unknown entity since no one knows where the plans originally came from.

And now you demand proof from me-things that are clearly stated in the game and that I did point out to you several times over?

Since everything done after Shepard meets the kid hinges on Shepard's belief the kid can be trusted (and even you said he could be lying), then nothing but that matters at all.  That is the biggest problem with the ending.  It makes anything afterward suspect.  Now, again unless you can prove he is not lying and/or evil and/or crazy, then no one in their right mind would believe him and do a thing he says.

[Mercedes595]

3DandBeyond wrote...

You came to destroy the reapers, yes.  But, if you found the head reaper guy was living in the Citadel, the thing you want to do has changed.  You'd still want to kill the reapers, but you'd want to be sure they never come back again.  He gives no such assurance and even with Destroy he doesn't rule it out.  Shepard asks if they will indeed be destroyed and the kid says yes, but the peace won't last and the chaos will come back.  Which presumably means the kid will be back too with his solution to bring order to chaos.  His solution is the reapers.

Eh, I care to differ here. The HalfVisibleVI said, the fact that you got this far, ie. created the Crucible and got to where you stand (whereever that may be) you have broken the cycle - not sure he says it at this point, or when talking about the destroy option. However, if you were to destroy the reapers (and not to control them to make them fly into a star - thats what I would have done "Galaxy minus Reapers, but with Geth = Happy dead me), you can be 100% sure they wont be coming back. Unless your own civilization does not create another "solution" to the whole synthetics killing organics problem......

[Nincehelser]

 In order to get back to the actual point of the thread:

   I have played Mass Effect for many years now.  I don't even want to know how many hours I've spent finding those elusive Keepers, fighting the Thorian, Rachni, Saren, Collectors, Batarians, Blue Suns, etc.  I've bought the books, which do a great job bringing this universe to life.  I looked forward to the final, epic conclusion of this trilogy, all the while wondering how they'll manage to bring all these disparate elements together at last.

   As I played ME3, I had a growing sense of the fact that this may be the greatest game I've ever played. I was impressed as Liara casually blew away the Cerberus troops following her on Mars (A far cry from her cowering in a corner on Therum) I wanted to bro-fist Garrus as he had become the Reaper War advisor to the top military of the galaxy on Palaven.  I was nervous as I charged head-first at an angry Reaper while trying to sound the Thresher Maw Hammers.  I laughed as Ashley lay, inebriated, on the floor, calling me "a damn space pirate."  I cheered as Grunt burst through the tunnel at the end of his mission (My little boy grew up!).  I laughed as Tali drowned her sorrows over Miranda's death with an "Emergency Induction Tube." I let Garrus win the bottle-shooting contest, just to give him one, just this once.  I fought man-tears as Liara, my usual LI, wanted to share her memories with me as a way of saying good-bye.  I may have crossed some lines, but using a refugee camp to indoctrinate slave soldiers for a private army is low, even for you, Mr. Illusive Man.  I fought desperately against the final tide of Reapers, trying to launch those missles on Earth. Marauder Shields shot me as I limped toward the final, final objective.

  I loved the many scenes where the galaxy came together, like the teenage girl being cared for by the turian C-Sec officer, the asari consulate agent helping to expedite a human mother's paperwork, the woman who sold her favorite car to give the salarian the best armor on the market, and many others. This is why Shephard fights.

  For these experiences and the many weeks (months?) playing the previous games, BioWare, you have my heartfelt thanks.

  And then I reached the ending.  The culmination of all my playthroughs.  Everything I loved about the Mass Effect universe, every race I had unified, every odd side quest achieved, everything I had worked for, vanishing before my eyes.  The ending.

   I am not a writer.  I am not a programmer, not a story-teller, not any sort of creative person.  You, the people at BioWare, are.  Please, do something about the endings.  I don't want a typical happy ending.  I don't know what ending I want.  I know I just don't want endings that completely and irrevocably destroy everything I have come to love about the Mass Effect universe while simultaneously making no logical sense.

  And if you don't, then this has still been one of the greatest gaming experience I've ever had.

  Thank you for everything you've done, are doing, and will continue to do.

[3DandBeyond]

MSandt wrote...

And how was it horse manure? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the origin of the Reapers was never established in either Mass Effect or Mass Effect 2 (unless you considered the "we're infinite" bit a satisfactory explanation). But it was known that they 1) were part machine, part organic and that 2) they destroyed advanced organic civilizations in an endless cycle. What remained to be explained was who created them and why. The "glowboy" didn't really even reveal anything we didn't alread know except his identity as the creator, which we knew existed out there somewhere the whole time.

The "why" does exist within the games-they return from a hibernation outside of the galaxy in order to reproduce (human reaper in ME2 as ugh as that was) and to do that they take in organic goo.

The glow boy revealed nothing credible.  The only thing of value that he states is that he controls the reapers which may or may not even be true.  We may think he created them which if we do means he could again, so they are never truly gone.  He actually implies that he will since he sees chaos returning and he hates chaos.  But for all we know he could be a tuna fish sandwich with no power whatsoever.  He supposedly reveals truths to Shepard but then doesn't reveal himself, so what did we actually learn?  All we still know is that somebody created the reapers, we don't know who did at all.  So the revelation of the kid achieved exactly nothing.

[MSandt]

3DandBeyond wrote...

But you are not Bioware and we are hoping Bioware is listening.

Okay, but you're not Bioware either and I'm hoping that they're not listening.

What good is done if we just were never to complain at all and simply went away, hating ME3's ending?  This is never something businesses want customers to do.  They always want to know why a customer is unhappy, even if ultimately they can't help them.   It's inconsiderate to just leave and never tell Bioware why.  They have given me something great and I owe them more than silence.

I agree about the principle but what bothers me is not that people didn't like the ending but the quality of their arguments.

[Archonsg]

@3dandbeyond and @holger1405
Peace, take a deep breath now. Sorry I am late of this particular discussion but hear me out please.

In regards to the control option, I think both of you are correct, and wrong.


Lets just first agree that "Destroy" is as Renegade as you get. Geth, Allies? What Allies, ya sure they aren't really living things, blow them up. EDI, nah, she's just a sex toy that doesn't know it yet, then again maybe she does, given what Joker downloads off the net ... so blow her up too. Don't need no stinking synthetics as friends anyways."

And that "Synthesis" is just plain bat **** crazy.

Control though, I see both your POVs.
But because the ending does not take into account one of the big game mechanics in the game, the Paragon / Renegade decision tree (yet another reason why this ending IS BROKEN in relation to Mass Effect the series) you are left to interpretation as to what "control" would exactly do.

You see, I do agree with Holger that control is the only option that does not "Mass Genetically rape" every race out there or cause you to betray people who are dying, fighting for you as an ally.
I also happen to agree with 3D that control as an option is no long-term solution or even a solution ON ITS OWN.

Therein lies the problem.
A paragon WOULD take control of the reapers if he or she can be sure he or she actually takes control not just get elecro-fried to death to the background of manical laughing from the catalyst, that those three options were the only available ones, and THEN FLY EVERY SINGLE REAPER AND THE CITADEL INTO THE SUN. After making sure there are no survivors on the citadel of course.


But without that "fly into the sun" option, taking control for control's sake is not just Renegade, its bad in the evil sense, its stupid as again you have every indication that the Catalyst isn't telling you the entire truth. It's in control, thus it CAN stop everything, remove the Reapers from Battle, halt all reaper ground forces in fact, he can end it all right there, but he doesn't and he wants you to die. Again I cannot stress this enough, it tells you to go kill yourself and IS STILL KILLING PEOPLE THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO SEE, IN SPACE AT THE TIME, and you (Shepard) thinks it's a good idea to do what it says? <_<


Now as for Space Magic, there's space magic as in Biotics, and there's Space Magic as in "Ignore actual physics of how much force it requires to compromise a superstructure like that of a Mass Relay" (please for gods sake DO THE MATH before saying "its a different explosion") which in EVERY scene has an explosion FIRST followed by bits and pieces of a Relay flying outwards from source of kinetic / momentum force. You don't have to be a physicist or even need a degree in advanced physics, just a little common sense and understanding that ;

1) you need xxx amount of kinetic/momentum force to break something apart
2) you need xxx amount of force to not just crack or dent an object but to cause catastrophic damage to an object
3) any less than xxx amount of force even from an explosion would not cause structure to fail

And yes, we are told to ignore that because explosions make for exciting viewing. Now THAT'S Space Magic

Modifié par Archonsg, 04 juin 2012 - 07:36 .

[Holger1405]

3DandBeyond wrote...

@Holger,
You have never offered any proof as to why Shepard should believe the kid.  You've offered only what he says which is not proof and the Crucible, which is an unknown entity since no one knows where the plans originally came from.

I did offer an explanation way I think that Shepard could trust the Catalyst. If you don't remember go back and read my post's.

3DandBeyond wrote...
And now you demand proof from me-things that are clearly stated in the game and that I did point out to you several times over?

I like to have proof for your claim that Saren's goal was to control the Reapers. If this is clearly stated in the game then it should be easy to proof. There are thousands of Videos on YouTube about Saren.

Modifié par Holger1405, 04 juin 2012 - 07:32 .

[3DandBeyond]

Mercedes595 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

You came to destroy the reapers, yes.  But, if you found the head reaper guy was living in the Citadel, the thing you want to do has changed.  You'd still want to kill the reapers, but you'd want to be sure they never come back again.  He gives no such assurance and even with Destroy he doesn't rule it out.  Shepard asks if they will indeed be destroyed and the kid says yes, but the peace won't last and the chaos will come back.  Which presumably means the kid will be back too with his solution to bring order to chaos.  His solution is the reapers.

Eh, I care to differ here. The HalfVisibleVI said, the fact that you got this far, ie. created the Crucible and got to where you stand (whereever that may be) you have broken the cycle - not sure he says it at this point, or when talking about the destroy option. However, if you were to destroy the reapers (and not to control them to make them fly into a star - thats what I would have done "Galaxy minus Reapers, but with Geth = Happy dead me), you can be 100% sure they wont be coming back. Unless your own civilization does not create another "solution" to the whole synthetics killing organics problem......

Ok first thing is the star kid is evil-he sends reapers to turn people into goo.  I don't think a rational person would accept the word of someone who has been doing that.

And as to the destroy option, the kid says the reapers will be destroyed, but eventually the chaos will return and his solution to end the chaos has been the destruction of advanced organic life.  If you get to that point in believing him, then you reach his conclusion that he will find some way to restore the order to the chaos and the only thing he knows is the destruction of advanced organic life.  The choices the Crucible supposedly made are to deal with the situation at hand and not some future chaos.

But, it all still boils down to believing what the evil kid who's not a kid says.  No one can point out any actual in game proof that this kid is to be believed in the first place.  A guy who wants to kill everyone you know using his stupid logic has a full bowl of marbles missing at best.

[3DandBeyond]

Holger1405 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

@Holger,
You have never offered any proof as to why Shepard should believe the kid.  You've offered only what he says which is not proof and the Crucible, which is an unknown entity since no one knows where the plans originally came from.

I did offer an explanation way I think that Shepard could trust the Catalyst. If you don't remember go back and read my post's.

3DandBeyond wrote...
And now you demand proof from me-things that are clearly stated in the game and that I did point out to you several times over?

I like to have proof for your claim that Saren's goal was to control the Reapers. If this is clearly stated in the game than it should be easy to proof. There are thousands of Videos on YouTube about Saren.

Ok, let me state this as succinctly as possible.  I have asked you for proof, not explanations or your belief as to why you can trust the star kid.  I asked for proof.  Now, all of a sudden you want me to prove something to you and yet you have not answered what I have asked of you.  You first.  Proof.

And then even if Saren's goal was not to specifically control the reapers, he did want to assert control-of Krogan on Virmire.  But I have always asserted it is most obvious in TIM and in the star kid himself.  Both of them are tainted and you even believe the star kid may be acting out of good intentions as was TIM at some point in time.  And you do not know when TIM first became indoctrinated.  Sanctuary doesn't point to that at all.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 04 juin 2012 - 07:43 .

[Mercedes595]

3DandBeyond wrote...

MSandt wrote...

And how was it horse manure? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the origin of the Reapers was never established in either Mass Effect or Mass Effect 2 (unless you considered the "we're infinite" bit a satisfactory explanation). But it was known that they 1) were part machine, part organic and that 2) they destroyed advanced organic civilizations in an endless cycle. What remained to be explained was who created them and why. The "glowboy" didn't really even reveal anything we didn't alread know except his identity as the creator, which we knew existed out there somewhere the whole time.

The "why" does exist within the games-they return from a hibernation outside of the galaxy in order to reproduce (human reaper in ME2 as ugh as that was) and to do that they take in organic goo.

The glow boy revealed nothing credible.  The only thing of value that he states is that he controls the reapers which may or may not even be true.  We may think he created them which if we do means he could again, so they are never truly gone.  He actually implies that he will since he sees chaos returning and he hates chaos.  But for all we know he could be a tuna fish sandwich with no power whatsoever.  He supposedly reveals truths to Shepard but then doesn't reveal himself, so what did we actually learn?  All we still know is that somebody created the reapers, we don't know who did at all.  So the revelation of the kid achieved exactly nothing.

True, true and  a little not true. We learned that the GlowSnot created the reapers as a solutio for blah, blah, blah...
The question is, who created him. Answer to that would in my opinion be some long gone civilization who had some serious problems with synthetics they created.
As I wrote above, if you destroy the reapers (or choose synthesis or maybe even control), you end the cycle of destruction caused by the reapers. But the LightBoy hints you will not avoid the chaos and destruction caused by synthetics you will create blah, blah, blah...
In case this realy happens, yours might be the nbext civilization that creates another Catalyst, who will be responsible for another cycle of reaper devastation....