23455 réponses à ce sujet

[BlueStorm83]

---  Here's a quick checklist of things we need to assume to have the endings make sense.

Assume that being dissolved makes Shepard the new Catalyst and he can control the Reapers... better than the current Catalyst can.

Assume that being dissolved in a beam while falling is the only way to re write all life to be half synthetic.
-addendum: assume that the resulting beam can tell Synthetic LIFE from synthetic APPLIANCES.  Half organic blenders and toasters would result, otherwise.

Assume that a pipe blowing up can destroy all synthetic life.
-addendum: assume that this beam can tell synthetic life from synthetic technology, otherwise everyone in the fleet dies as life support fails.
-addendum: assume that falling from an exploding space station onto a planet won't kill you.
-addendum: assume that removal of function for cybernetic systems in someone who was already dead and shattered will not cause irreperable damage.
-addendum: assume that pipes can only be shot from 5 feet away.
-addendum: assume that after the explosion has begun, it is a good idea to continue walking toward it.

Assume that energy being Blue will not explode a space station, though green or red energy will.

Assume that destroying Mass Relays via Red, Blue, or Green energy will not destroy the solar system.
-addendum: assume that the clear ruptures in this process do not make terrestrial planets uninhabitable, as earlier stated.

Assume that having a big fleet makes red energy weaker, so it will not destroy a nearby planet, nor will it kill organic life.
-addendum: assume that having ground troops win 10 battles against ground based enemy units can double the strength of a fleet that they may never interact with.

Assume that Synthetic Life is not real life, and Red Energy choices are forgivable.

Assume that controling beings made of the liquefied remains and combined conciousnesses of sentient life murdered and combined against its will, that was then enslaved and forced to visit the same fate upon others, via using Blue Energy is forgivable.

Assume that violating the nature of all life and all free-thinking machines via Green Energy is forgivable.

Assume that a being currently engaged in mass murder is trustworthy enough to take its advice.
-addendum: assume the things that it is saying that apparently make no sense are valid
-addendum: assume that it is not worth trying to argue
-addendum: assume that communicating with the fleet via a working radio channel and having them kill the thing controlling the enemy is not worth considering.

Assume that your allies are too weak to attempt their own survival.

Assume that playing into the hands of one who created your enemy, who has visited untold murder upon innocents, who has been proven to have the ability to twist the minds of your own species as well as others, is not faulty logic.

Assume that following this being's advice will not remove the value of survival.

---  If someone can assume all those things, then I will accept and enjoy the current ending of the game, DESPITE it still breaking the promises made in advertising before the game's release.

[akenn312]

Benchpress610 wrote...

@ Void Of Humanity, 3D, akenn312
 
I think you’re giving BioWare too much credit. This ending has all the hallmarks of a rush job to meet deadline. The massive plotholes are a result of people not checking and rechecking all the possible outcomes from specific actions in the plot.
 
Let’s take for example the destruction of the mass relays. According with in game codex and dialogs mass relays are the biggest mass effect engines in the known galaxy and the rupture of its core, by whatever means, will release a wave of energy so large that would emulate the energy of a super-nova. This wave of energy would obliterate the solar system where the relay is located.  I’m sure they didn’t intended to be interpreted this way, but they didn’t have the time to go over every little detail and set up some facts beforehand to indicate that the planetary system wouldn’t be destroy by the explosion.  
 
They already had to postpone the release of ME3 once. Their EA overlords wouldn’t allow them to postpone it again. With the release date looming, they had to slap something together and came up with hack job we got.
 
In my own experience as project manager sometimes, due to pressure from upstairs, milestones and deadlines become more important that the product itself. It happens very day. BioWare is not an independent entity any longer. Their top executives are now middle managers in the EA corporate structure, so they must adhere to EA’s corporate culture and guidelines.   
 
This video has been posted in this thread before, but I think is worth posting again.

But isn't giving them an out like a cut deadline giving them too much credit? That would mean they had the ability to make a better story but were forced to rush it out by an outside power like EA and made something worse to please them just to get it on the shelves.

I don't really believe that, not after Bioware's attitude that they were extremely proud of the ending. They marketed it way too hard. This was their best effort and what they thought we would like. What we are saying is they had enough time and are just lazy with the story and are okay with retconning because a lot of fans have accepted it in the past and now. whenever they created bad science we have just shrugged and accepted it. ME2 was an amazing retcon, a good game but it really almost made Mass Effect obsolete storywise.

How does a cut deadline explain the main motivation of the Reapers being what it is now? or adding the Catalyst? or changing Cerberus into the galactic empire? Those are things you decide to do way before the development stage. I'll give them certain cuts like the ME2 squadmembers being left, out or the glitches like the face import or the Avenger and Predators always showing up no matter what. But the ending resolution was already written and storyboarded. If not then that's a weird way to end a story if they think it up at the last minute.

I would think this video

& this


Is better than Nerdrage in my opinion, it's not letting Bioware off the hook for just making a bad ending, this breaks down the problems with the begining, the Crucible and the end and not just the Catylist part.

This is not a deadline thing. These guys have been doing this before we just haven't noticed it as much.

Modifié par akenn312, 06 juin 2012 - 08:51 .

[seitani]

I played through the Mass Effect 3 again and i have to say i hated the ending even more than before. I hope they make some good scenes and changes the story on DLC but im very skeptic

[3DandBeyond]

Benchpress610 wrote...

@ Void Of Humanity, 3D, akenn312
 
I think you’re giving BioWare too much credit. This ending has all the hallmarks of a rush job to meet deadline. The massive plotholes are a result of people not checking and rechecking all the possible outcomes from specific actions in the plot.
 
Let’s take for example the destruction of the mass relays. According with in game codex and dialogs mass relays are the biggest mass effect engines in the known galaxy and the rupture of its core, by whatever means, will release a wave of energy so large that would emulate the energy of a super-nova. This wave of energy would obliterate the solar system where the relay is located.  I’m sure they didn’t intended to be interpreted this way, but they didn’t have the time to go over every little detail and set up some facts beforehand to indicate that the planetary system wouldn’t be destroy by the explosion.  
 
They already had to postpone the release of ME3 once. Their EA overlords wouldn’t allow them to postpone it again. With the release date looming, they had to slap something together and came up with the hack job we got.
 
In my own experience as project manager sometimes, due to pressure from upstairs, milestones and deadlines become more important that the product itself. It happens very day. BioWare is not an independent entity any longer. Their top executives are now middle managers in the EA corporate structure, so they must adhere to EA’s corporate culture and guidelines.   
 
This video explains this in more detail and better than I ever could. It has been posted in this thread before, but I think is worth posting again.

I actually am not giving them much credit at all.  We have nothing that says Bioware was acting in good faith with buyers.  In fact, they have consistently set this up as an adversarial relationship.

I've often said they need to hire a PR person at least, someone who knows how to woo a crowd or customers.  They have shown a complete lack of knowledge about Customer Service or just plainly how to communicate with people that are unhappy with you.  Instead, they accuse someone of threatening them (notifying the media) because that person said unless they fix the ending he won't buy anymore Bioware games.  Wow, thin skin for sure.

I've even said that there are much better ways to even deal with people that you will never agree with and those that you may never fully satisfy.  I think they have really forgotten who pays their salaries.  The paycheck may say "EA" on it, but it comes from you and me and everyone that bought anything ME related.  You don't punch the person that is the reason for your job.

Beyond that, I have every reason to believe they were rushed, but I also believe that such talented minds (way more talented than mine) could have even fixed that.  You tell your boss, yes I will have a product ready, but in doing so, it will not be a great product.  You have to really face up to things with your boss-you tell them the problem, but also provide the solution.  Bad news is, we can't release a full finished product by the due date.  Good news is, we can get people to pay for one half of a game that can be released given a little more time, and continue working to make the final half of the game for release later.  We can also be working on more DLC to go with the first half, and keep up the hype so when multiplayer hits, everyone will be playing it and providing revenue.  And then, make one game that features the elements leading up to the fight for Earth and the galaxy. You tell your boss that what you will be creating will be the ultimate ME epic in two parts, one that will keep fans coming back for more (read, paying for more).

Yes, still a lot of work, but then along with MP and DLC and the second half which would be the real fighting, ending, and epilogue, there would have been a real potential for a lot of additional revenue.  They needed to make the case for fomenting fan enthusiasm and not disdain.

Instead, they released a partial game with no substantial ending that left fans in the lurch with feelings of disgust for the series based on the ending and a reluctance to put more money into anything with a Bioware/EA logo.

One solution would have meant a delayed release with additional revenue.  The other means a tarnished image, dropped revenue, and scorn.  Adding to that are the implied and actual insults hurled at fans (what do they think a fan is) as well as the mischaracterization of people that have loved their work that they allow to continue to this day.

They apparently may listen but do not understand.  Even people in the retake mass effect movement have continually thanked Bioware for the games they've made.  This is so like a love affair gone bad and no good can come of the guilty party continually passing off the blame or ignoring the real issue.  "I'm sorry that I hurt you" isn't good enough-"I'm sorry I made a mistake" is what is needed. 

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 07 juin 2012 - 05:33 .

[BlueStorm83]

akenn312 wrote...

But isn't giving them an out like a cut deadline giving them too much credit? That would mean they had the ability to make a better story but were forced to rush it out by an outside power like EA and made something worse to please them just to get it on the shelves.

I don't really believe that, not after Bioware's attitude that they were extremely proud of the ending. They marketed it way too hard. This was their best effort and what they thought we would like. What we are saying is they had enough time and are just lazy with the story and are okay with retconning because a lot of fans have accepted it in the past and now. whenever they created bad science we have just shrugged and accepted it. ME2 was an amazing retcon, a good game but it really almost made Mass Effect obsolete storywise.

How does a cut deadline explain the main motivation of the Reapers being what it is now? or adding the Catalyst? or changing Cerberus into the galactic empire? Those are things you decide to do way before the development stage. I'll give them certain cuts like the ME2 squadmembers being left, out or the glitches like the face import or the Avenger and Predators always showing up no matter what. But the ending resolution was already written and storyboarded. If not then that's a weird way to end a story if they think it up at the last minute.

I would think this video

& this


Is better than Nerdrage in my opinion, it's not letting Bioware off the hook for just making a bad ending, this breaks down the problems with the begining, the Crucible and the end and not just the Catylist part.

This is not a deadline thing. These guys have been doing this before we just haven't noticed it as much.

Of COURSE if it was rushed out they'd claim to be proud of it.  You don't go out there and say, "Yup, our parent company, that OWNS US (see the "A Division of EA" logo up at the top of the bioware page?) absolutely ****ed you all!"  No, you claim that it's exactly the way it was supposed to be, so that way you don't look incompetant.  You try to convince people that they're really just not looking at it right.  You say that all your promises were fulfilled, you just have to think a little differently.

Now, if they had really made this the way they wanted, and it fell flat, then the money-smart thing to do would be to say, "Shoot, we tried, but we failed.  Try this, then, maybe this'll be better."  I paid cash-moneys for Broken Steel in Fallout 3.  I'd have paid cash-moneys here to finish Mass Effect 3 in a different way.  Hell, I STILL would pay cash moneys here.

Regardless, I'm 100% done with anything published by EA.  ME3 was the final test, after the pre-launch DLC fiasco.

[3DandBeyond]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

---  Here's a quick checklist of things we need to assume to have the endings make sense.

Assume that being dissolved makes Shepard the new Catalyst and he can control the Reapers... better than the current Catalyst can.

Assume that being dissolved in a beam while falling is the only way to re write all life to be half synthetic.
-addendum: assume that the resulting beam can tell Synthetic LIFE from synthetic APPLIANCES.  Half organic blenders and toasters would result, otherwise.

Assume that a pipe blowing up can destroy all synthetic life.
-addendum: assume that this beam can tell synthetic life from synthetic technology, otherwise everyone in the fleet dies as life support fails.
-addendum: assume that falling from an exploding space station onto a planet won't kill you.
-addendum: assume that removal of function for cybernetic systems in someone who was already dead and shattered will not cause irreperable damage.
-addendum: assume that pipes can only be shot from 5 feet away.
-addendum: assume that after the explosion has begun, it is a good idea to continue walking toward it.

Assume that energy being Blue will not explode a space station, though green or red energy will.

Assume that destroying Mass Relays via Red, Blue, or Green energy will not destroy the solar system.
-addendum: assume that the clear ruptures in this process do not make terrestrial planets uninhabitable, as earlier stated.

Assume that having a big fleet makes red energy weaker, so it will not destroy a nearby planet, nor will it kill organic life.
-addendum: assume that having ground troops win 10 battles against ground based enemy units can double the strength of a fleet that they may never interact with.

Assume that Synthetic Life is not real life, and Red Energy choices are forgivable.

Assume that controling beings made of the liquefied remains and combined conciousnesses of sentient life murdered and combined against its will, that was then enslaved and forced to visit the same fate upon others, via using Blue Energy is forgivable.

Assume that violating the nature of all life and all free-thinking machines via Green Energy is forgivable.

Assume that a being currently engaged in mass murder is trustworthy enough to take its advice.
-addendum: assume the things that it is saying that apparently make no sense are valid
-addendum: assume that it is not worth trying to argue
-addendum: assume that communicating with the fleet via a working radio channel and having them kill the thing controlling the enemy is not worth considering.

Assume that your allies are too weak to attempt their own survival.

Assume that playing into the hands of one who created your enemy, who has visited untold murder upon innocents, who has been proven to have the ability to twist the minds of your own species as well as others, is not faulty logic.

Assume that following this being's advice will not remove the value of survival.

---  If someone can assume all those things, then I will accept and enjoy the current ending of the game, DESPITE it still breaking the promises made in advertising before the game's release.

This is just amazing and so true.  Once again, it is Occam's Razor.

You have to get over a very high hurdle for all of this nonsense to make sense.  When the clearest and most logical thing is staring you right in the face and doesn't require any athletic moves:  the ending doesn't make sense.

[BlueStorm83]

--- I just watched that video that Benchpress posted a while ago. The Tale of Two companies one. Very good, very informative. I never finished New Vegas, due to a DLC issue (it screwed my save file, wasn't a boycott or protest or anything.) Now I want to go back.

--- It's like I'm so fond of saying in reality. Everyone is fated to make the choice that they will choose of their own free will, and they can't deviate from that set course that their own freedom and being dictates.

What does that mean? Basically it means that Shepard will be Shepard and act like Shepard and there's nothing that occurs in the universe that can take that away from shepard, except being trapped and constrained and controlled by something that reduces Shepard to non-Shepard status.

Like **** Writing.

[Void Of Humanity]

I will not be forced to accept Occam's Razor.....
King Of Shaves for me, gives a closer Shave

(Just lightening the mood a little)

[Void Of Humanity]

"We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances." Isaac Newton

[3DandBeyond]

Void Of Humanity wrote...

"We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances." Isaac Newton

An object in motion stays in motion unless acted upon by an external force-or unless it gets mired in ME3 and is forced to make 1 of 3 random choices.  Then, it stops dead in its tracks and screams, "WTF?"

[MSandt]

LiarasShield wrote...

You dismiss everything as fanfiction though alot of fans have given you decent reasoning but then again maybe your shepard would give up and submit to the enemy maybe your shepard would let the reapers live or trapt all your forces

My Shepard accepted the facts of the situation and destroyed the Reapers.

I know the shepard I played as wouldn't give up in the face of adversity she would always try to find another way never give in even if the situation looks bleak even if it looks like it may not end well my shepard wouldn't have given in she would've denied the catalyst twisted logic and she would allow the alliance to fight to the end wether they win or lose that is the way they would've wanted to go out or win my shepard would fought to the end

So your Shepard would have fought against defeating the Reapers?

Your Shepard was just as half-dead, weaponless and lost as mine.

Your simple simplistic idea that submission is ok or nothing else can be done is pure nonsense

The choices of both the Catalyst and Shepard were constrained by the system the Catalyst had built. The only thing they both submitted to were the facts of the situation.

I would've had hackett fire upon the citadel or  have my forces battle it out till the end till the last man or woman is left standing or until all the reapers are destroyed

Destroying the Citadel would have destroyed the only chance of controlling/destroying the Reapers. The entire fleet came all the way there for the Crucible, not because they believed they had a chance to beat the Reapers conventionally.

So your Shepard would have taken the skylift back down, contacted Hackett and told him that she won't destroy the Reapers after all, even though she easily could, because 1) that'd leave the fleet, whose sole raison d'être was defeating the Reapers, in the solar system and 2) cost Shepard's life?

That is a noble way to go out that is how we should be to never surrender to not give into fear or into doubt but to stand our ground in the face of adversity you're whole thing of being submissive doesn't fly with me

Shepard obviously didn't surrender: she destroyed the Reapers as she had wanted to do all along.

[Flubberlub]

Now imagine this:
Bioware employees are every so often looking at this forum. They see what we want. We want a perfected ending. Artistic integrity has destroyed all sense of choice from a game built around decisions. What is it that is holding them back? Failure to admit that they made a mistake in writing? They created something that fans weren't as happy with as they had hoped? So what, we all make mistakes. What its rare is the opportunity to fix these mistakes. This is the chance Bioware has. Why could they let this up? Let this be known:
Fixing does not involve a complete rewrite, it involves listening to what we, as fans, have said. We wanted meaning to our actions throughout the series, why not give us this? Every decision means something. DLC is not the answer.

[MSandt]

3DandBeyond wrote...

No, such speculation is reasonable.  And there is every reason to believe the kid is lying.  I have said consistently and repeatedly that what happens at the end is not something Shepard knows at the point where Shepard would reject the ridiculous choices.  You are minimizing what I've said and trying to make it appear childish when I find it naive and inconceivable that any human being would believe an evil individual that has every reason to lie.  The kid makes people goo.  At one point in another post you say he isn't omnipotent necessarily and now you say he's a godlike being.  Which is it?

The Catalyst's control over the life and death of possibly thousands of civilizations makes him/it godlike. This does not mean he's ominpotent. In fact, his "power" likely comes from technology.

And no the citadel is not the catalyst-since you believe the kid, he says the citadel is not the catalyst, he is.  He says Shepard can destroy the reapers, but so what?  The game fails because it forces Shepard to believe this.

It is totally irrelevant whether Shepard truly believes the kid. She does not have a choice other than the three. In that situation any sane individual would rather go for one of the three options rather than take the lift back down and die for nothing while your forces are being decimated.

I absolutely do not think any reasonable person would accept the word of some evil being that has every reason to lie.  The freaking kid has piles of bodies stacked up inside the front door of his home.  So, pardon me if I think he might not care to be honest.

Okay, let's do it this way: what reasons to lie does the Catalyst have? When you answer, rely on information supplied by the scene/game and not fanfic.

And the point you make about Shepard being injured is a good one.  Uh, reaper beams have never done that before.  They vaporize things-they don't cut them up and blow the armor off people.  Shepard fought one before-as close as Harbinger was in London and any time my Shepard died, she vaporized.  There was nothing left.

It obviously wasn't a direct hit.

Once again, the simplest explanation has the highest probability of being the right one.

And the minor weak wimpy questions Shepard asks are out of character with the Shepard in this game, not some real person who has been stabbed with a knife.  This Shepard has a lot of synthetic parts-in fact most of Shepard's face is synthetic.  And Shepard has always been shown to be larger than life and even though half dead Shepard has jumped, run, fought, fallen, protested, and argued.

Once again, you're simply ignoring the facts of the situation because you don't like them. In this case the simple fact is that Shepard was severely wounded, being barely able to walk or talk. The hit she received was powerful enough to put her in that condition.This is evident and need not be argued against.

You haven't listened to anything anyone says.  You have the game you've always wanted.  Why then does what we say here bother you so?  You should be happy.

Not only am I extremely happy with the game's ending but I'm also happy with this discussion. My "problem" with the haters is simply that they're wrong about the facts. If they admitted that they simply wanted a typical wimpy ending, it'd be a different deal because that'd be a matter of taste. But rather than admitting this, many haters resort to low-quality arguments.

[MSandt]

sdinc009 wrote...

The Catalyst is not the central character of the story. It is not present in the first or second game and appears completely out of the blue at the very end of ME 3. Creating a back story beyond what has already been explained is unnecessary at this point. There reasons are as they put it "unknowable" and that is what makes them a great antagonist.

The Catalyst's existence is hinted at early on in the series. In fact, it'd have been unsatisfying if by the end of it all you had managed to stop the Reaper invasion but not figured out their origin. Of course, leaving that open would have been forgivable, but my point is merely that the creator didn't appear out of thin air. The creator's system, the cycle of death & rebirth, was the raison d'être of the story.

Also, I think you misunderstood my usage of "will". It did not mean it
as some supernatural power, but that it is the protagonists inner drive,
motivations, their willpower to persevere and conquer adversity.
Throughout the entire narrative Shepard imposes his will against many
different forces through dialogue, open fighting, and the decisions that
are made, and yet in the end the very thing that has defined the
character throughout 3 games is inexplicably absent.

And as I already explained, to have her "will" her way out of that situation and come up with some magic trick would have been a cheap, naive Marvel-like moment. Her will already got her there and it's precisely that will that also defeated the Reapers at the cost of her own life. The will you say was absent was in fact more present during those final ten minutes than at any earlier point in the series.

[Benchpress610]

akenn312 wrote...

Benchpress610 wrote...

@ Void Of Humanity, 3D, akenn312
 
I think you’re giving BioWare too much credit. This ending has all the hallmarks of a rush job to meet deadline. The massive plotholes are a result of people not checking and rechecking all the possible outcomes from specific actions in the plot.
 
Let’s take for example the destruction of the mass relays. According with in game codex and dialogs mass relays are the biggest mass effect engines in the known galaxy and the rupture of its core, by whatever means, will release a wave of energy so large that would emulate the energy of a super-nova. This wave of energy would obliterate the solar system where the relay is located.  I’m sure they didn’t intended to be interpreted this way, but they didn’t have the time to go over every little detail and set up some facts beforehand to indicate that the planetary system wouldn’t be destroy by the explosion.  
 
They already had to postpone the release of ME3 once. Their EA overlords wouldn’t allow them to postpone it again. With the release date looming, they had to slap something together and came up with hack job we got.
 
In my own experience as project manager sometimes, due to pressure from upstairs, milestones and deadlines become more important that the product itself. It happens very day. BioWare is not an independent entity any longer. Their top executives are now middle managers in the EA corporate structure, so they must adhere to EA’s corporate culture and guidelines.   
 
This video has been posted in this thread before, but I think is worth posting again.

But isn't giving them an out like a cut deadline giving them too much credit? That would mean they had the ability to make a better story but were forced to rush it out by an outside power like EA and made something worse to please them just to get it on the shelves.

I don't really believe that, not after Bioware's attitude that they were extremely proud of the ending. They marketed it way too hard. This was their best effort and what they thought we would like. What we are saying is they had enough time and are just lazy with the story and are okay with retconning because a lot of fans have accepted it in the past and now. whenever they created bad science we have just shrugged and accepted it. ME2 was an amazing retcon, a good game but it really almost made Mass Effect obsolete storywise.

How does a cut deadline explain the main motivation of the Reapers being what it is now? or adding the Catalyst? or changing Cerberus into the galactic empire? Those are things you decide to do way before the development stage. I'll give them certain cuts like the ME2 squadmembers being left, out or the glitches like the face import or the Avenger and Predators always showing up no matter what. But the ending resolution was already written and storyboarded. If not then that's a weird way to end a story if they think it up at the last minute.

I would think this video

& this


Is better than Nerdrage in my opinion, it's not letting Bioware off the hook for just making a bad ending, this breaks down the problems with the begining, the Crucible and the end and not just the Catylist part.

This is not a deadline thing. These guys have been doing this before we just haven't noticed it as much.

Oh I’m not letting Bioware off the hook at all…no sir…I’m just pointing out that it’s obvious the final minutes of the game look like were put together by a completely different team of developers with no prior knowledge of the game lore and genre. As I posted earlier, it feels like Mass Effect tuned into “Alice in Wonderland”. This kind of disregard for quality and sloppiness from a team that gave us 2.9 games of brilliance can only be attributed to a rush to finish by the deadline.
 
As far as their statements, they sound like typical talking points sent down by corporate. It’s EA talking through Bioware PR people. They, as any other big company, are in damage control and will never accept blame because of legal ramifications. They can’t admit they delivered an incomplete product.  My friend, I’m afraid BW have lost their identity.     
 
If they had more time, would’ve they fitted a different ending to ME3? Probably not, as anyone who’s read the leaked content says the ending wasn’t much different from the one we got. But it would’ve been a more polished product with maybe less plotholes and better textures and graphics…who knows, maybe this whole fiasco has been a blessing in disguise and because the monumental backlash, and feedback they are working on an alternative ending that would be more satisfying.

[Redbelle]

Do you really think 3d is ignoring the facts or is there perhaps a little bit of creative licence going on with this version of Shep. You have stated your view of him in game. However Shep's actions and dialogue outside of the game were programmed into him by a creative writing team that was radically downsized when the ending was written.

Basically the Shep we knew over the majority of ME3 was written and then given over to peer review so other ppl could look at how Shep was behaving and deciding if this was in or out of character and what changes could be made. The writing team was, I think in the credits, around 6 to 8 pp strong. That's alot of ppl to feed into one character in comparison to the 2 who took over and didn't approach the others. Suddenly the Shepard we were given was 2 ppl's vision of Shepard, not the 6-8.

Shepard can be played in many ways throughout ME but come the ending his playstyle suddenly feels very funneled. Yes the situation that was written potentially explains the circumstances but the diminished team behind the scene is another source for his lack of dialogue that does not bring out his Shepardness.

Or to put it simply, The 6-8 man writing team wrought the full fat version of Shepard after many rewrites. The 2 man team, lacking the perspectives and unique insights into the character brought us Shepard-Lite. And not just Shepard-lite but also an ending that lacked connecting scenes to explain how events unfolded.

but it is here that I have to twist around and say that new scenes to explain events were unnessary. Radio chatter could explain the location of, for example, squad mates and their destination after the Harby beam hit. Preparing the player to see them pop out of Normandy after the crash.

You see, if a couple of ppl work on a story it is very easy to get so wrapped up in it that you exclude certain things as you focus on what you want to achieve. This is where the peer review system comes into it's own as submitting the work to others allows a fresh pair of eyes to go over the story and point out areas that need work. Elements of the ending do not lack for ignoring facts. They lack because the facts are poorly written and displayed to the gamer.

[Redbelle]

MSandt wrote...

sdinc009 wrote...

The Catalyst is not the central character of the story. It is not present in the first or second game and appears completely out of the blue at the very end of ME 3. Creating a back story beyond what has already been explained is unnecessary at this point. There reasons are as they put it "unknowable" and that is what makes them a great antagonist.

The Catalyst's existence is hinted at early on in the series. In fact, it'd have been unsatisfying if by the end of it all you had managed to stop the Reaper invasion but not figured out their origin. Of course, leaving that open would have been forgivable, but my point is merely that the creator didn't appear out of thin air. The creator's system, the cycle of death & rebirth, was the raison d'être of the story.

Also, I think you misunderstood my usage of "will". It did not mean it
as some supernatural power, but that it is the protagonists inner drive,
motivations, their willpower to persevere and conquer adversity.
Throughout the entire narrative Shepard imposes his will against many
different forces through dialogue, open fighting, and the decisions that
are made, and yet in the end the very thing that has defined the
character throughout 3 games is inexplicably absent.

And as I already explained, to have her "will" her way out of that situation and come up with some magic trick would have been a cheap, naive Marvel-like moment. Her will already got her there and it's precisely that will that also defeated the Reapers at the cost of her own life. The will you say was absent was in fact more present during those final ten minutes than at any earlier point in the series.

On the matter of the Catalyst forshadowing, can we have a show of hands who remembers the groundwork laid to get ppl ready for the Cat's introduction.......... Or perhaps someone could point to the game, the point in that game and or codex entry and when it became available. I've been wracking my mind for a hint as to the Cat's existence and I'm coming up empty.

On the matter of will, I'd refer you to the above post that in summary states that Shep was impaired. not through in game concerns but by the development team whose cutback in numbers prevented multiple PoV's from influencing the character and the scene.

Modifié par Redbelle, 06 juin 2012 - 11:43 .

[BlueStorm83]

MSandt wrote...

Okay, let's do it this way: what reasons to lie does the Catalyst have? When you answer, rely on information supplied by the scene/game and not fanfic.

Reasons the Catalyst has to lie, as supplied by the scene and the game:

He says his solution will no longer work.  Outside the citadel, visible to Shepard where he is standing, the Catalyst is still carrying out his solution.

All we have SEEN of the Catalyst's handiwork is people being indoctrinated, killed, or reduced to slurry to be made into a Reaper.

He is capable of building machines that commit Genocide.  For evidence, consider everything told us of the Reapers in all three games, before this very conversation.  Lying is a small thing in comparison.

At the time the elevator brought Shepard upward, Shepard was limping toward a control panel to try and make the Crucible, widely accepted to be a weapon that would kill the Reapers, do something.  The Catalyst admits to creating and controlling the Reapers.  Lying to Shepard MAY stop shepard from destroying his creations.

---  Also a valid point: The Catalyst lies to us in the conversation at least once.  He states that the Created will ALWAYS destroy their creators.  Always means without exception, not merely a majority of the time, not 99.9% of the time.  The Geth did not destroy their creators.  They fought them, they killed many, but then, when genocide was within their power, they instead withdrew beyond the Perseus Veil.  That is game CANON.  The Catalyst, or at the very least the Reapers, know this, having directly interfaced Reaper Code with the data nodes within the Geth Consensus that contained Visual Data of the original Quarrian/Geth conflict.  This is a playable scene within Mass Effect 3.  It is, indeed, necessary to play through to reach the conclusion.

---  There.  Information within only the game.  And reasons why the Catalyst might be lying to Shepard.  The exact thing you asked for.  Go ahead, call it all fan fiction.  That's all you're here for anyway, isn't it?

[BlueStorm83]

Redbelle wrote...

On the matter of the Catalyst forshadowing, can we have a show of hands who remembers the groundwork laid to get ppl ready for the Cat's introduction.......... Or perhaps someone could point to the game, the point in that game and or codex entry and when it became available. I've been wracking my mind for a hint as to the Cat's existence and I'm coming up empty.

The only possible foreshadowing of the Catalyst's existence is read in a Planetary Summary in Mass Effect 1.  If you read the description of planet Klencory, it says that a Salarian pays a mercenary army to be stationed there so he can research tombs, that he believes was built by "Beings of Light" that stood to protect organic life from "Synthetic Machine Devils."

This is an inexact match, for multiple reasons.  1) The Catalyst is merely 1 being, the Salarian's beliefs say that the Beings of Light were a race.  2) The Catalyst says that the Reapers are his creation, and also that the Citadel is part of him.  If a space station is part of you, you are Synthetic.  The Reapers are clearly Synthetic creations.  This puts both the Catalyst and the Reapers more in line with the Synthetic Machine devils than the Beings of Light.  3) Vigil, the original Prothean VI from Mass Effect also qualifies as a being of light trying to protect organics from Machine Devils.  This opens the possibility that the Beings of Light in the tombs were other VIs trying to warn of the Reapers.

If the Klencory Klen Ross connection is true, then it's tragically weak foreshadowing.

Also, information that may never be seen by much of a story's audience is not fit to be a foundation for a Climactic Revelation such as the appearance of the Catalyst.

The only other implication of the Catalyst's existence happened during the Priority: Thessia mission, roughly 2 hours play time before the Catalyst's introduction.  Not sufficiently foreshadowed, when taken as part of a 47 hours game that is the third part of a 140+ hour series.

[No_MSG]

MSandt wrote...
Not only am I extremely happy with the game's ending but I'm also happy with this discussion. My "problem" with the haters is simply that they're wrong about the facts. If they admitted that they simply wanted a typical wimpy ending, it'd be a different deal because that'd be a matter of taste. But rather than admitting this, many haters resort to low-quality arguments.

Because a Deus Ex Machina Space Magic Cannon is so much beefier than fighting tooth and nail for every inch of ground, and watching friend after friend die in a massive war of attrition?

[akenn312]

Benchpress610 wrote...


Oh I’m not letting Bioware off the hook at all…no sir…I’m just pointing out that it’s obvious the final minutes of the game look like were put together by a completely different team of developers with no prior knowledge of the game lore and genre. As I posted earlier, it feels like Mass Effect tuned into “Alice in Wonderland”. This kind of disregard for quality and sloppiness from a team that gave us 2.9 games of brilliance can only be attributed to a rush to finish by the deadline.
 
As far as their statements, they sound like typical talking points sent down by corporate. It’s EA talking through Bioware PR people. They, as any other big company, are in damage control and will never accept blame because of legal ramifications. They can’t admit they delivered an incomplete product.  My friend, I’m afraid BW have lost their identity.     
 
If they had more time, would’ve they fitted a different ending to ME3? Probably not, as anyone who’s read the leaked content says the ending wasn’t much different from the one we got. But it would’ve been a more polished product with maybe less plotholes and better textures and graphics…who knows, maybe this whole fiasco has been a blessing in disguise and because the monumental backlash, and feedback they are working on an alternative ending that would be more satisfying.

Oh I agree with you there, I think it's all of the above too. Interesting thing here I honestly never had a problem with Mass Effect 2 but there were rumblings like we have now when that game came out but from a smaller group. Interesting even more. The criticism was plot holes, Deus Ex Machina plot devices and ignoring previous cannon from Mass Effect. Even funnier the people defending ME 2 pointed out, who cares it's what they gave us, the creators of the game didn't have time so it's up to us to fill in the plot holes with head cannon. Who says they have to follow conventional rules in writing to make a great story. Maybe this ending issue was unavoidable.  Foreshadowing possibly.

Watching these vids made back in 2011 and 2010 seem very familiar to where we are now.








http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpjKqHi5Y1M&feature=autoplay&list=ULBo1TorG6eh8&playnext=1


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x2crp-V9eo&feature=autoplay&list=ULWpjKqHi5Y1M&playnext=2


Also this last one is almost exactly the argument that we have here daily
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GpSB3cTGnP0&feature=relmfu

Modifié par akenn312, 07 juin 2012 - 03:52 .

[3DandBeyond]

MSandt wrote...


Okay, let's do it this way: what reasons to lie does the Catalyst have? When you answer, rely on information supplied by the scene/game and not fanfic.

Not only am I extremely happy with the game's ending but I'm also happy with this discussion. My "problem" with the haters is simply that they're wrong about the facts. If they admitted that they simply wanted a typical wimpy ending, it'd be a different deal because that'd be a matter of taste. But rather than admitting this, many haters resort to low-quality arguments.

You are extremely insulting in belittling people and dismissing their use of actual logic.

What reasons would he have for lying.  Really, you can't think of one.

You seem to believe everything he says-well, he said it himself.  His solution is not working anymore.  Harbinger says something similar because Shepard keeps attaining success.  They will find another way.

The Citadel has been moved closer to Earth to make harvesting easier.  So, anything the kid wants Shepard to do (and the kid says he needs Shepard's help), could make harvesting easier as well.

Your assertions are ridiculous and demeaning.

Apparently, you think you are all mature and intellectual because some dark, illogical, meaningless, detached ending has been called art and in order to seem superior you must debase others.

There's nothing logical about anything the star kid says and so there's no reason a logical being would accept what he says.

And it's been discussed over and over and over again, there are conventional methods as well as unconventional ones that could be attempted.

I'd also rather try at least to contact Hackett and tell him to focus the attack on the Citadel where the kid "lives" than willingly do anything the kid says.  All bets should have been off once the star kid says he controls the reapers.

I've never relied on "fanfic" for anything I say is evidence. In fact, I use what characters actually say and do.  The fact that the devs seem to have forgotten a lot of what they previously wrote in these 3 stories is their fault not mine.

The mass relays are one thing.  You think the ending is deep and poignant, well wow.  It's demented and not connected to the rest of the story.

I said Shepard might screw things up worse by making any choice and if the writers had even thought once about the mass relays, that would have been exactly the case.  By making a choice, Shepard causes the explosion/destruction of the mass relays, which within the game has been said will destroy a star system and/or the terrestrial worlds in it.  The citadel is one big mass relay and is right near Earth-it is shown to explode in 2 of the 3 choices so Earth should be toast at the very least.  But, Earth appears ok and there's nothing to show the utter destruction of the star systems and the galaxy as should happen.

Also, in choosing Destroy, Shepard is suddenly taken from player control and apparently needs to walk toward the exploding tube while shooting it-because this is logical.  Shepard dies in every scenario except one-the one where EMS is boosted by multiplayer, because we all know multiplayer affects characters trying to save the galaxy in a story by making the explosion of exploding tubes much weaker.  Also, the other side of the coin is that if EMS is sufficiently low, then the Earth can be vaporized because for some reason super destructo beams and the Crucible are stronger if Shepard doesn't pool together enough assets and/or the god player doesn't play MP, because MP would make sense in Shepard's world.

The created will destroy the creator, but no.  In this cycle the creator has been trying to destroy the created that did not rebel, they only became alive.  That apparently is punishable by death.

Synthetic life that organics have created are the threat apparently so in order to remove the threat of synthetics, advanced organics must die (being turned into people goo sure looks like dying, but the star kid says they aren't killing people-that sounds like a lie).  Ok, so organics must die to prevent the threat of possible future synthetics from killing them.  I think the real threat is the reapers that can be seen at present killing people and not some future synthetic life form that someone could actually put an off switch in.

And if as you say Shepard is so close to death as to be unable to mount some sufficient protest, then Shepard could reject all this nonsense by just laying down and dying.  And if Shepard is so weak and feeble, how is it that Shepard can go and assert Control over the reapers and have enough strength to make them do something in the split second before vaporizing?  Or, I suppose you think Shepard's spirit lives on in the Citadel now.  Space magic-so much better than fanfic as you put it.

And the kid said it himself-enough to make any thinking person stop and say, "wait a minute".  TIM couldn't exert control because they already controlled him.  So, they made or allowed TIM to think he could control them, but the already controlled TIM.  So, Shepard would really logically think that now they were going to actually allow someone to control them, when before they wouldn't.

And since you seem to agree with me that the Crucible was the kid's plan, then there's no reason to think any choice is an authentic choice.

But, you don't care.  You have stereotyped everyone who disagrees as someone who just wants butterflies and ponies at the end.

Sure, many of us do want one possible ending to be a happy one.  But we also want there to be widely divergent endings, so there could be happier, and their could be sadder.

We realize that even a happy ending isn't totally happy, because the galaxy is still a mess.  A lot of people have died, worlds are in shambles or destroyed.  Where are the butterflies and ponies in this?  

Basically what we would like is that "sweet" is possible.  There's nothing bittersweet in any of the ONE ending cutscenes.  It's all bitter and demented and illogical and moronic. 

Before you insult people you really ought to read more and you really need to play all 3 games.  Have you played more than ME3?  It doesn't sound like it.  At the very least you need to stop saying what you think people want and quit saying they are making things up when we've actually gone to great lengths to use reason and intelligence and facts from within 3 games, comics, and books, to support what we say.

[3DandBeyond]

MSandt wrote...

sdinc009 wrote...

The Catalyst is not the central character of the story. It is not present in the first or second game and appears completely out of the blue at the very end of ME 3. Creating a back story beyond what has already been explained is unnecessary at this point. There reasons are as they put it "unknowable" and that is what makes them a great antagonist.

The Catalyst's existence is hinted at early on in the series. In fact, it'd have been unsatisfying if by the end of it all you had managed to stop the Reaper invasion but not figured out their origin. Of course, leaving that open would have been forgivable, but my point is merely that the creator didn't appear out of thin air. The creator's system, the cycle of death & rebirth, was the raison d'être of the story.

Also, I think you misunderstood my usage of "will". It did not mean it
as some supernatural power, but that it is the protagonists inner drive,
motivations, their willpower to persevere and conquer adversity.
Throughout the entire narrative Shepard imposes his will against many
different forces through dialogue, open fighting, and the decisions that
are made, and yet in the end the very thing that has defined the
character throughout 3 games is inexplicably absent.

And as I already explained, to have her "will" her way out of that situation and come up with some magic trick would have been a cheap, naive Marvel-like moment. Her will already got her there and it's precisely that will that also defeated the Reapers at the cost of her own life. The will you say was absent was in fact more present during those final ten minutes than at any earlier point in the series.

The catalyst's presence is in no way hinted at early on in the series.  If you are talking about the "beings of light" that's ridiculous.  They were supposed to help people against the machine devils and were something an eccentric volus believed-he was searching for their crypt, but that was a minor codex entry and not even ever found to be true.

Contrary to that are the words of Sovereign, who said the reapers were nations unto themselves and the very name he is called by, though not his true name, is indicative of them being autonomous entities that were in control of themselves.

There was no foreshadowing of some overseer and in order to bolster a story line that involved one, the writer needs to provide true backstory and not just pull one out of his assets at the very end.

The reapers were awesome frightening adversaries that were made almost laughable once the kid came on the scene. 

The ending is also very much like someone took the endings from a bunch of other games and stories and tried to mash them together. 

Shepard's will was completely gone as was his/her brain.  Shepard just toddles off to make some magical choice that is extremely naive-no gullible, since it relies on the word of the guy/thing that's is killing people.  It's moronic.  A person who is just giving up makes such a choice, not a person who fights against the pain and tells the kid to stop messing around, reveal himself, and refuses to just go along to get it over.

"Star kid, how can I control the reapers if I'm dead?"
"Star kid, I reunited the Geth and the Quarian so synthetics aren't posing a threat-so synthetics and organics don't have to fight."
"Star kid, why must people be killed to keep from possibly being killed?"
"Star kid, how can you possibly magically make a new DNA by shooting out a green laser beam and what is my energy being used for?  This seems way too magical and not in accordance with any law of physics or any known logic in existence."
"Star kid, if I destroy all synthetics, just what exactly does that mean?  You said it, I am partly synthetic so will I die or will just the synthetic parts of me be destroyed?  And what will that mean for all the people (like a lot of the galaxy) with synthetic implants-will they die?  Or what about the other synthetic parts and AIs used in all the tech across the galaxy?  EDI and the Geth, my friends, why do they have to die?  They've been helping organics."
"Star kid, why should I trust you?  I have a feeling you created the plans for the Crucible and there's a lot of rotting bodies sitting in your living room.  You said you aren't killing people, but they are dead.  Why should I believe you want to help me, when you've been doing your best to kill me and people I care about?"
"Harbinger, is that you?  Seriously, I know you aren't a kid-that's just something you magically pulled from my thoughts, because advanced AIs or whatever you are, are able to read minds.  Tell me who you really are."
"Star kid, you don't make any sense.  What have you been drinking?  Oh wait, never mind, I know.  People goo."
"Star kid, I'm so glad you want to be friends.  Let's forget the trillions of people you've killed because of the nonsense you read in a fortune you pulled out of a cookie.  Just point me in the direction of the thing that'll kill me without explaining why I should believe anything you say.  I just <3 you, and since you are such a good guy and all, I'll just kill myself for you."

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 07 juin 2012 - 04:46 .

[Sireniankyle1]

LOL Bioware got us. They said they were listening. Not taking our ideas into consideration. This is the last time I let them troll me.

[K. S. Black]

Oh man, from the moment I started the game I didn't want to stop playing it, everything was exceptional, though I did notice a few small things graphic wise like Anderson's face and sometimes being able to walk in objects as well as a part where on Horizon when I had the death mask on, it would randomly disappear as well as my Shepard's eyelids, and not having as many dialogue choices (Sometimes I would accidentally press the button to speak to a crew member not knowing they weren't done talking.), but I looked passed all those little things and saw the story as a whole was an epic conclusion to the Mass Effect trilogy... until the end. When I first got to the Catalyst (Star Child) I felt confused at the concept of the reapers "harvesting" organic life to stop organics being killed off by synthetic life. When the three options were given to me, I thought none of them really sound good so I chose the destroy option (even though I was full paragon) knowing this was my original plan from the start. When I saw the Normandy exploding, I quickly reset the game, thinking I messed up on the end, but I noticed it for the control option as well, so I just let it play out. After all of it, I have more questions than answers: What about the massive fleet stranded on Earth? If going by what Arrival told us about the destruction of a mass relay, doesn't that mean all the systems are wiped out? Why was Joker running away from the battle and with the crew who I thought was dead when running to the Conduit?! In the end it seemed like almost none of my choices really mattered through out the entire trilogy. I can't wait to see if this extended cut dlc will fix a lot of these plot holes or not.