I severely disliked the dialogue between my squadmates and me. Everytime I wanted to have a good discussion about them, the mission, or anything, we said about 2 lines to each other and it wasn't even in dialogue style. I liked being able to sit down and talk to others even if it was just Garrus talking about calibrations. The scene with Tali getting drunk (she was my LI) would have been 10X better if I could actually sit down with her and drink, but it the way it happened made it look very impersonal and rushed.
good point, you'd think they'd use the resources they saved on doing dialogue wheel conversations and put it into something like more dialogue or more quests.
I've completed a third play-through, taking the synthesis option this time, and I still like the ending. To me, there is a ton of options in the final act, and it encourages additional play-throughs. In the encounter with the Illusive Man, there are so many different ways that can play out. The entire game has a theme of sacrifice, and Bioware told us this would be the end of Shepard's story. I think it's very fitting that Shepard dies in two of the endings to save the galaxy. So many of the crew from ME2 die during the game to achieve their goals, that by the end of the game Shepard's death is practically expected. The conversations with the crew before the final fight are extremely well-done. I don't see why we need more after the current ending. While I'm very happy with the game as it is, I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out with the Extended Cut, while hoping it doesn't cheapen the existing ending.
Yeah I am calling bull**** on this.
A ton of options in the final act? Bull****. Maybe in ME2 were you get to assign various crew members to roles you have a few options. Guess my version of ME3 is broken since I didn't get those options with my war assets...
So many ways the Illusive Man encounter plays out? Bull****. Anderson gets shot once, (or maybe twice!!! oooh a different way it plays out!!!). Shepard gets shot. Illusive Man dies. God Child. Shepard dies. Relays destroyed. Space Magic! Again, it must be my version of ME3 because that happens in every one of my endings.
Shepard dies in 2 endings? Bull****. I survived the fight with Soveriegn in ME1 and survived the mission through the Omega 4 relay in ME2, bringing my entire squad and every member of the Normandy crew back alive.
So many ME2 squadmates die that Shepard's death was expected? Bull****. Mordin sacrificed himself to save the Krogan. Legion sacrificed himself to help the Geth take control of their own destiny. Thane sacrificed himself to save a Council Member. That is 3 by my count - one terminally ill, one in his last few years, and one a machine, yet ironically the most "alive" of them all. So 3 is "so many"? Bull****.
And as for the theme of sacrifice, those 3 sacrificed themselves to save lives - from 1 through to billions, yet that somehow correlates to an ending where Shepard sacrificed himself and multiple billions by destroying the relays? Bull****.
And let's see anyone explain how the ending "works" without contradicting the established lore of the ME universe evidenced by the first two games or without space magic.
I've completed a third play-through, taking the synthesis option this time, and I still like the ending. To me, there is a ton of options in the final act, and it encourages additional play-throughs. In the encounter with the Illusive Man, there are so many different ways that can play out. The entire game has a theme of sacrifice, and Bioware told us this would be the end of Shepard's story. I think it's very fitting that Shepard dies in two of the endings to save the galaxy. So many of the crew from ME2 die during the game to achieve their goals, that by the end of the game Shepard's death is practically expected. The conversations with the crew before the final fight are extremely well-done. I don't see why we need more after the current ending. While I'm very happy with the game as it is, I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out with the Extended Cut, while hoping it doesn't cheapen the existing ending.
Yeah I am calling bull**** on this.
A ton of options in the final act? Bull****. Maybe in ME2 were you get to assign various crew members to roles you have a few options. Guess my version of ME3 is broken since I didn't get those options with my war assets...
So many ways the Illusive Man encounter plays out? Bull****. Anderson gets shot once, (or maybe twice!!! oooh a different way it plays out!!!). Shepard gets shot. Illusive Man dies. God Child. Shepard dies. Relays destroyed. Space Magic! Again, it must be my version of ME3 because that happens in every one of my endings.
Shepard dies in 2 endings? Bull****. I survived the fight with Soveriegn in ME1 and survived the mission through the Omega 4 relay in ME2, bringing my entire squad and every member of the Normandy crew back alive.
So many ME2 squadmates die that Shepard's death was expected? Bull****. Mordin sacrificed himself to save the Krogan. Legion sacrificed himself to help the Geth take control of their own destiny. Thane sacrificed himself to save a Council Member. That is 3 by my count - one terminally ill, one in his last few years, and one a machine, yet ironically the most "alive" of them all. So 3 is "so many"? Bull****.
And as for the theme of sacrifice, those 3 sacrificed themselves to save lives - from 1 through to billions, yet that somehow correlates to an ending where Shepard sacrificed himself and multiple billions by destroying the relays? Bull****.
And let's see anyone explain how the ending "works" without contradicting the established lore of the ME universe evidenced by the first two games or without space magic.
Your points are valid but I'll give my opinions. In the final act there are different ways the Illusive Man dies, and Anderson may die or not. I like the scene with him and Shepard sitting together for the last time. The three endings give VERY different fates for life in the galaxy. The destruction of the relays is needed to propagte the energy from the crucible throughout the galaxy. Without that, the energy from the crucible can only propagate at the speed of light, and the galaxy is 100,000 light years wide... Nothing says the way the relays are destroyed will destroy organic life unless you decide to control the reapers. It's not a huge stretch to say the crucible is giving a controlled destruction of the relays, and not just blowing them up like Shepard did after ME2.
I'm sticking to my opinion that sacrifice is a forshadowed theme throughout the game. Probably at it's most blatant where Shepard can tell Garrus that he'll watch his back if he's up in the big bar in heaven and Garrus isn't yet. All of the crewmembers don't die, but many can. I did a playthrough where Thane survived the fight with Kai Lang, and I also thought after my first two playthroughs that Miranda always dies. So many of the main characters, even the Illusive Man, talk straight out about sacrifice.
To me the suprise about the ending was that Shepard even has a possibility of surviving. To me that lessens his actions. For him to hesitate or question the need of his sacrifice gives me an image of Wrex telling him to take his quad out of his purse and do what he needs to do to end this thing.
I do like your point about the established ME lore. In the first game it mentions that eezo can't cause teleportation, but then the Mako gets ported and in ME3 the banshees port around. It makes me say "Huh?" for a second, but in the end I still enjoy the storyline. I just think of how many sci-fi shows contradict themselves over the course of a single episode, let alone a series.
Thanks for sharing your input. I'm curious about what you would have wanted from the ending. For you, does Shepard need to live to make the game worth playing? How much time did you expect the ending to take with dialog after the end of the mission? Do we need to be shown exactly what each character does with their lives? Did you expect an ME4 that continues the story of the characters, or can amiguity still be satisfying? What would a satisfying ending have been for you?
The most important thing, is to have the option of a happy ending, i.e. being reunited with the LI and Shepards friends, and thinking about what they have achieved. ME3 is an excellent achievement in storytelling, but the franchise in danger of being severely damaged by the ending of ME3. In my playthrough, I wanted Tali to get her homeworld back and resolve the conflict between the Geth and Quarians. The scenes on Rannoch, especially after defeating the Reaper are wonderful and shows the ability of the development staff to generate an emotional reaction within the player, which is rare in any computer game. What Shepard and Tali talked about there would have been the perfect ending to the game (i.e. build a home on Rannoch). Instead, the conclusion of ME3 forced Shepard to kill himself, with his LI (somehow) transported onto the Normandy and onto some unknown planet. This means that Shepard and his LI would forever be apart, and his LI would never know his fate. I found the bleakness of the ending simply crushing and demoralising.
After all the time and effort the player has put into experiencing the game, getting involved with the storylines and learning about the characters, all of this seems to have been ripped away and the player forced into a conclusion that made little sense and contradicted everything we have learned about the Mass Effect Universe.
In my view, the extended-cut DLC must at least do the following...
1. Shepard must be able to have the option of surviving.
2. Reunification with his LI and have the opportunity to do what had been planned between the characters. Allow the player to keep the promises they made to their LI (e.g. Shepard builds home for Tali on Rannoch). After everything Shepard has been through in the past three games, Shepard needs to get something at the end, and not just more pain and death.
3. A chance to see remaining friends and what has become of them, e.g. Meet Garrus for drinks on beach (seeing Garrus in a Hawaiian shirt and shorts would be funny).
4. In general, a more positive outcome. The current ending of ME3 essentially had the player save the galaxy, which was supposed to be a good thing, but when it happened, I felt nothing. The focus was all on the loss of characters, and those who Shepard will never see again. This was just painful. I think that ME3 has gone too far in attempting to create a memorable end, because the amount of pain heaped on the player has become unpalatable and is overshadowing the whole experience of the ME series.
5. The 'Stargazer' part after the credits was interesting, but should be removed as it further damages the game because it confuses the 'time-frames', I.e, while playing the Mass Effect games, you believe that everything that happens is in the present. When the 'Stargazer' scene appears, you realise that everything that has just happened was in the past, and so all of the characters in the game must have died a long time ago. Essentially, this means that everyone is now dead from old age. This further adds to the players depression.
The most important thing, is to have the option of a happy ending, i.e. being reunited with the LI and Shepards friends, and thinking about what they have achieved. ME3 is an excellent achievement in storytelling, but the franchise in danger of being severely damaged by the ending of ME3. In my playthrough, I wanted Tali to get her homeworld back and resolve the conflict between the Geth and Quarians. The scenes on Rannoch, especially after defeating the Reaper are wonderful and shows the ability of the development staff to generate an emotional reaction within the player, which is rare in any computer game. What Shepard and Tali talked about there would have been the perfect ending to the game (i.e. build a home on Rannoch). Instead, the conclusion of ME3 forced Shepard to kill himself, with his LI (somehow) transported onto the Normandy and onto some unknown planet. This means that Shepard and his LI would forever be apart, and his LI would never know his fate. I found the bleakness of the ending simply crushing and demoralising.
After all the time and effort the player has put into experiencing the game, getting involved with the storylines and learning about the characters, all of this seems to have been ripped away and the player forced into a conclusion that made little sense and contradicted everything we have learned about the Mass Effect Universe.
In my view, the extended-cut DLC must at least do the following...
1. Shepard must be able to have the option of surviving.
2. Reunification with his LI and have the opportunity to do what had been planned between the characters. Allow the player to keep the promises they made to their LI (e.g. Shepard builds home for Tali on Rannoch). After everything Shepard has been through in the past three games, Shepard needs to get something at the end, and not just more pain and death.
3. A chance to see remaining friends and what has become of them, e.g. Meet Garrus for drinks on beach (seeing Garrus in a Hawaiian shirt and shorts would be funny).
4. In general, a more positive outcome. The current ending of ME3 essentially had the player save the galaxy, which was supposed to be a good thing, but when it happened, I felt nothing. The focus was all on the loss of characters, and those who Shepard will never see again. This was just painful. I think that ME3 has gone too far in attempting to create a memorable end, because the amount of pain heaped on the player has become unpalatable and is overshadowing the whole experience of the ME series.
5. The 'Stargazer' part after the credits was interesting, but should be removed as it further damages the game because it confuses the 'time-frames', I.e, while playing the Mass Effect games, you believe that everything that happens is in the present. When the 'Stargazer' scene appears, you realise that everything that has just happened was in the past, and so all of the characters in the game must have died a long time ago. Essentially, this means that everyone is now dead from old age. This further adds to the players depression.
Thanks, I saw that but re-read it carefully. Is this a unified stance of those who dislike the ending? To me it seems a little extreme. Is it OK that only certain ending choices let Sheppard live? Is it ever OK that he dies? To me it's OK. When he lives, he has to have scenes with the crew, and everyone has to be happy? That's the way it reads to me. Even the Stargazer part was objectionable? I liked it. It shows that no matter what, Shepard changed the universe, and life survived for a long time. It also validates any playthrough as "one of many legendary stories". It doesn't matter if Shep was male or female, blond or brunette, renegade or paragon. Any Shepard you choose to play is a legend across the galaxy. I wasn't depressed. Does this mean every game or move have to leave every viewer happy at the end? Mass Effect Recut: CareBears and Unicorns Forever? That wasn't the game I've enjoyed the last five years.
Thanks for the input. Sorry if I seem in any way harsh. I respect and appreciate any of the above opinions, and wanted to understand them better. I should back off this thread now since I don't want to seem argumentative, and I'm fine with people having different opinions than me.
rfachini wrote... Your points are valid but I'll give my opinions. In the final act there are different ways the Illusive Man dies, and Anderson may die or not. I like the scene with him and Shepard sitting together for the last time. The three endings give VERY different fates for life in the galaxy. The destruction of the relays is needed to propagte the energy from the crucible throughout the galaxy. Without that, the energy from the crucible can only propagate at the speed of light, and the galaxy is 100,000 light years wide... Nothing says the way the relays are destroyed will destroy organic life unless you decide to control the reapers. It's not a huge stretch to say the crucible is giving a controlled destruction of the relays, and not just blowing them up like Shepard did after ME2.
I'm sticking to my opinion that sacrifice is a forshadowed theme throughout the game. Probably at it's most blatant where Shepard can tell Garrus that he'll watch his back if he's up in the big bar in heaven and Garrus isn't yet. All of the crewmembers don't die, but many can. I did a playthrough where Thane survived the fight with Kai Lang, and I also thought after my first two playthroughs that Miranda always dies. So many of the main characters, even the Illusive Man, talk straight out about sacrifice.
To me the suprise about the ending was that Shepard even has a possibility of surviving. To me that lessens his actions. For him to hesitate or question the need of his sacrifice gives me an image of Wrex telling him to take his quad out of his purse and do what he needs to do to end this thing.
I do like your point about the established ME lore. In the first game it mentions that eezo can't cause teleportation, but then the Mako gets ported and in ME3 the banshees port around. It makes me say "Huh?" for a second, but in the end I still enjoy the storyline. I just think of how many sci-fi shows contradict themselves over the course of a single episode, let alone a series.
Thanks for sharing your input. I'm curious about what you would have wanted from the ending. For you, does Shepard need to live to make the game worth playing? How much time did you expect the ending to take with dialog after the end of the mission? Do we need to be shown exactly what each character does with their lives? Did you expect an ME4 that continues the story of the characters, or can amiguity still be satisfying? What would a satisfying ending have been for you?
What I want is nothing more than what we were promised all along - the endings to matter based on our choices throughout all 3 games, all questions to be answered, and for said endings to not break the established lore of the ME universe - none of which the current ending does.
You say the 3 endings have different outcomes for the galaxy? How? What are you basing that on? All that I see in all 3 cosmeticlly changed endings is the relays being destroyed and wiping out all life in those systems as established in ME2: The Arrival, Joker fleeing the battle and abandoning you, and squadmates (some of whom were with you on the ground and apparently killed as you got blasted by Harbinger (remember "All of Hammer has been wiped out, we didn't get anyone into the beam") appearing from the wreckage on that mysterious planet. There is nothing in the ending that tells you anything about what happens to the rest of the galaxy
Maybe you are right in the Crucible gives a controlled demolition that doesn't wipe out the system, but there is not a single scrap of evidence of that in the game - the only evidence points to the complete destruction of every system with a mass relay.
As for the Banshee teleportation, I just assumed it was a version of the Vanguard's charge.
And yes, many tv shows and movie sequels contradict/rewrite their own lore (One of the most blatant was Spiderman 3 and whole who killed Uncle Ben thing) - and that is why we call those shows/movies bad tv shows/movies with ****house writing.
Does the game have to have a happy ending? No but it should be an option - a reward for the time we put in over all three games. A reward for building alliances, keeping people alive, and for building a massive war asset warchest.
We were told right from the very start that Mass Effect was to be a trilogy. And so I didn't expect Mass Effect 4 to continue anything. And up until the whole beam sequence, I would slapped down the money on an ME4 preorder as soon as it was announced.
The ending doesn't work! And their are so many reasons why, I won't bother to repeat them, all I have to say at this point is I will Never buy another game from any one involved with Mass Effect 3!
I made an earlier post on this thread about why the ending fell flat for me and made a few suggestions. It’s still on my BSN blog: http://social.biowar...88/blog/212578/
But I think I overlooked something far more important.
It’s been remarked that Mass Effect 3’s central theme is sacrifice. And is it ever! I was devastated when I realized I’d sacrificed Grunt to save the Rachni Queen; and I was profoundly relieved when things worked out. I agonized over choosing whether or not to take the Salarian deal on Tuchanka. I was almost in tears when Thane died and I was so upset that I’d accidentally gotten Kelly Chambers killed, that I actually restarted my first play-through over it; over that minor a detail!
No game has ever reached me on such an emotional level before, and you’re quite right to be proud of it. It is precisely because of this, that fans are so angry. The fact that all of those brilliantly heart wrenching moments will go unremembered because of a mere ten minutes at the end of the game is an absolute tragedy.
No matter what people say specifically they didn’t like about the ending, the truth is it doesn’t work for one very simple reason:
There is no sacrifice without hope. A sacrifice without hope: is just loss.
When I finished this game, all I felt was loss. Every sacrifice I made – Earth for the Galaxy, the Geth or the Quarians, the Krogans or the Salarians, the new love for the old, etc, etc – was made in the hope for the future. There is no one who romanced Liara that didn’t hope to see those little blue babies. There is no one who romanced Tali who didn’t want to build her that house on Rannoch.
There is NO hope in Mass Effect 3’s ending. No matter what the player chooses Shepard dies (secret endings requiring multi-play don’t count.) No matter what, the Normandy crashes on some unknown planet. No matter the player’s sacrifices, the relays are destroyed; the very icon that makes the Mass Effect universe what it is is lost. In the end, none of the player’s sacrifices were worth it.
HOW can you expect anyone who’s grown to love these characters and this world over five years to be satisfied with that end? How could you be satisfied with it?
Clarity and closure just isn’t enough. You HAVE to give the players some hope. For nothing more than having enjoyed your story, you OWE them at least that much. You MUST CHANGE SOMETHING.
I made an earlier post on this thread about why the ending fell flat for me and made a few suggestions. It’s still on my BSN blog: http://social.biowar...88/blog/212578/
But I think I overlooked something far more important.
It’s been remarked that Mass Effect 3’s central theme is sacrifice. And is it ever! I was devastated when I realized I’d sacrificed Grunt to save the Rachni Queen; and I was profoundly relieved when things worked out. I agonized over choosing whether or not to take the Salarian deal on Tuchanka. I was almost in tears when Thane died and I was so upset that I’d accidentally gotten Kelly Chambers killed, that I actually restarted my first play-through over it; over that minor a detail!
No game has ever reached me on such an emotional level before, and you’re quite right to be proud of it. It is precisely because of this, that fans are so angry. The fact that all of those brilliantly heart wrenching moments will go unremembered because of a mere ten minutes at the end of the game is an absolute tragedy.
No matter what people say specifically they didn’t like about the ending, the truth is it doesn’t work for one very simple reason:
There is no sacrifice without hope. A sacrifice without hope: is just loss.
When I finished this game, all I felt was loss. Every sacrifice I made – Earth for the Galaxy, the Geth or the Quarians, the Krogans or the Salarians, the new love for the old, etc, etc – was made in the hope for the future. There is no one who romanced Liara that didn’t hope to see those little blue babies. There is no one who romanced Tali who didn’t want to build her that house on Rannoch.
There is NO hope in Mass Effect 3’s ending. No matter what the player chooses Shepard dies (secret endings requiring multi-play don’t count.) No matter what, the Normandy crashes on some unknown planet. No matter the player’s sacrifices, the relays are destroyed; the very icon that makes the Mass Effect universe what it is is lost. In the end it, none of the player’s sacrifices were worth it.
HOW can you expect anyone who’s grown to love these characters and this world over five years to be satisfied with that end? How could you be satisfied with it?
Clarity and closure just isn’t enough. You HAVE to give the players some hope. For nothing more than having enjoyed your story, you OWN them at least that much. You MUST CHANGE SOMETHING.
Even though I'm one of the people who was fine with the ending, this post did the best job so far of letting me understand why the ending disappointed some people so greatly. Thanks very much for explaining it so elegantly and so well.
I made an earlier post on this thread about why the ending fell flat for me and made a few suggestions. It’s still on my BSN blog: http://social.biowar...88/blog/212578/
But I think I overlooked something far more important.
It’s been remarked that Mass Effect 3’s central theme is sacrifice. And is it ever! I was devastated when I realized I’d sacrificed Grunt to save the Rachni Queen; and I was profoundly relieved when things worked out. I agonized over choosing whether or not to take the Salarian deal on Tuchanka. I was almost in tears when Thane died and I was so upset that I’d accidentally gotten Kelly Chambers killed, that I actually restarted my first play-through over it; over that minor a detail!
No game has ever reached me on such an emotional level before, and you’re quite right to be proud of it. It is precisely because of this, that fans are so angry. The fact that all of those brilliantly heart wrenching moments will go unremembered because of a mere ten minutes at the end of the game is an absolute tragedy.
No matter what people say specifically they didn’t like about the ending, the truth is it doesn’t work for one very simple reason:
There is no sacrifice without hope. A sacrifice without hope: is just loss.
When I finished this game, all I felt was loss. Every sacrifice I made – Earth for the Galaxy, the Geth or the Quarians, the Krogans or the Salarians, the new love for the old, etc, etc – was made in the hope for the future. There is no one who romanced Liara that didn’t hope to see those little blue babies. There is no one who romanced Tali who didn’t want to build her that house on Rannoch.
There is NO hope in Mass Effect 3’s ending. No matter what the player chooses Shepard dies (secret endings requiring multi-play don’t count.) No matter what, the Normandy crashes on some unknown planet. No matter the player’s sacrifices, the relays are destroyed; the very icon that makes the Mass Effect universe what it is is lost. In the end it, none of the player’s sacrifices were worth it.
HOW can you expect anyone who’s grown to love these characters and this world over five years to be satisfied with that end? How could you be satisfied with it?
Clarity and closure just isn’t enough. You HAVE to give the players some hope. For nothing more than having enjoyed your story, you OWN them at least that much. You MUST CHANGE SOMETHING.
Even though I'm one of the people who was fine with the ending, this post did the best job so far of letting me understand why the ending disappointed some people so greatly. Thanks very much for explaining it so elegantly and so well.
Thanks, I just hope there's someone at BioWare who actually is listening.
Hey, I just want to say I loved the entire Mass Effect series, and I think the Indoctrination Theory is perfect. I chose the synthesis ending at first, and I was quite disappointed. Then I read the Indoctrination Theory and it dawned on me. The Reapers got me. They used my own morals to get me to bend to their will.
During the entire series I have wanted to destroy the Reapers and at the last stretch, the last hope, they changed my mind with a simple color scheme, and a little star child. I was shocked. If this is the ending that Bioware had planned, well I applaud you. It was perfect.
I made an earlier post on this thread about why the ending fell flat for me and made a few suggestions. It’s still on my BSN blog: http://social.biowar...88/blog/212578/
But I think I overlooked something far more important.
It’s been remarked that Mass Effect 3’s central theme is sacrifice. And is it ever! I was devastated when I realized I’d sacrificed Grunt to save the Rachni Queen; and I was profoundly relieved when things worked out. I agonized over choosing whether or not to take the Salarian deal on Tuchanka. I was almost in tears when Thane died and I was so upset that I’d accidentally gotten Kelly Chambers killed, that I actually restarted my first play-through over it; over that minor a detail!
No game has ever reached me on such an emotional level before, and you’re quite right to be proud of it. It is precisely because of this, that fans are so angry. The fact that all of those brilliantly heart wrenching moments will go unremembered because of a mere ten minutes at the end of the game is an absolute tragedy.
No matter what people say specifically they didn’t like about the ending, the truth is it doesn’t work for one very simple reason:
There is no sacrifice without hope. A sacrifice without hope: is just loss.
When I finished this game, all I felt was loss. Every sacrifice I made – Earth for the Galaxy, the Geth or the Quarians, the Krogans or the Salarians, the new love for the old, etc, etc – was made in the hope for the future. There is no one who romanced Liara that didn’t hope to see those little blue babies. There is no one who romanced Tali who didn’t want to build her that house on Rannoch.
There is NO hope in Mass Effect 3’s ending. No matter what the player chooses Shepard dies (secret endings requiring multi-play don’t count.) No matter what, the Normandy crashes on some unknown planet. No matter the player’s sacrifices, the relays are destroyed; the very icon that makes the Mass Effect universe what it is is lost. In the end it, none of the player’s sacrifices were worth it.
HOW can you expect anyone who’s grown to love these characters and this world over five years to be satisfied with that end? How could you be satisfied with it?
Clarity and closure just isn’t enough. You HAVE to give the players some hope. For nothing more than having enjoyed your story, you OWN them at least that much. You MUST CHANGE SOMETHING.
Even though I'm one of the people who was fine with the ending, this post did the best job so far of letting me understand why the ending disappointed some people so greatly. Thanks very much for explaining it so elegantly and so well.
Thanks, I just hope there's someone at BioWare who actually is listening.
I really hope Bioware sees this aswell, and that more bioware fans see this too. because i think you are spot on 100%.
I have given it some further thought, if someone reads it along these hundreds of pages I dont know...
If the DLC is only going to be videos and such.. make it an interactive video that replaces the failed catalyst conversation and give us a proper speachcrafted vocal showdown with the catalyst with paragon and rengade interrupts. epic paragon/renegade speaches. The chance to deliver a differnt view from that given by the catalyst. Maybe even call it the worst war criminal in the history of the galaxy. Shake your tiny insignificant fist at it!!! more emotions plz.
I wouldn't say this if Ididnt think the rest of the game was too incredible to allow this last thing collapse what should have been the epic ending.
What should have been taken into account when craftign this ending is that it isn't just a firstperson shooter that hasn't had any playerinput or choices, it might have worked in a Halo, game, in fact this wouldprobably have shocked those players.. We get to choose? However as an interactive story and medium more is expected when it replaces the possibilty of an end boss fight. Add additional scenes to the catalyst conversation that allows a deeper more meaningful confrontation. Getting some additional closure will also be appreciated, but what realy grinds me is the storytelling at the end and lack of player interaction. Killing of all geth would be unfortunate for the ME universe but I'll leave that to you.
Maybe allow shepard to question the catalysts coice of taking the form of a child the reapers killed, makign it turn into a holo of the citadel instead...
As the last and much expected showdown with the reapers I expected something far deeper and meaningful to conclude "Shepards epic journey of playerinteractions and decisions"
Only real suggestion I have is that I wouldn't mind if the breathing scene at the end of the destory ending could be unlocked without multiplayer. Otherwise I enjoy the game as is. Promoting characters to try to get enough EMS for that feels artificial and boring.
The biggest issue I have with ME3 Endings is that they seem completely devoid of what the previous games used so well - the consequences of Shepard's choices affecting the game's universe. The way I see those Endings, they are obviously connected to the ME universe by their reference to specific past characters' views on the Reapers Threat subject, but they all seem to be the voices of people other than Shepard:1. We have the Illusive Man's Control the Reapers and using their technology for personal gain ME2 introduced way of addressing the Reaper's threat. 2. We have Saren's Synthesis of organic and synthetic life forms into hybrids for the sake of preserving current life cycle.3. We have the current cycle's annihilate the Reapers completely view of the Reapers (and past cycles too.) It is presented by Anderson on Citadel, but is expressed by practically every race in current Galaxy, both organic and synthetic.
Shepard's original outlook appears to be firmly grounded in the 3rd option of the necessity of destruction of the Reapers. And that would be fine, but this story has always been a Shepard's story as much as it was his companions' story. And the Endings did not include my Shepard's choices or what was going with my companions at all.By allowing EDI to develop personality and some kind of individual, biased way of thinking that could be summed up as "Free will", and by Legion's sacrifice to make Geth sentient we were presented with clear cut evidence that synthetic live as it is can evolve too in a way that's non threatning for the organic life at all. After the incident Geth and Quarians made peace and the Geth began to not only helping the Quarians, but fascilitate the latter's process of aclimatization to their old homeplanet, shortening the estimated time needed for Quarians to develop an immune system strong enough to allow them to live outside their suits by decades.So why, even though my Shepard was constantly fighting for peace between the organics and synthetics, all of the choices presented to me render Legion's sacrifice completely moot?If I go with the Sythesis Ending, it means Geth and Edi would gain organic qualities that the Geth were more or less given by the Legion's sacrifice anyway - Legion didn't have to die at all, his death was just pointless, and Edi seemed to obtain the "free will" more or less on her own anyway, too.
If you go with the extermination of entire synthetic life forms, than both Legion's sacrifice and EDI's development are also rendered pointless.The argument is that the (fans-favorite) Starchild says, highly ambiguously, that in time every synthetic life form will wipe the organic life form. Okay I have at least two arguments against it:1. Geth expressed no desire to wipe their creators even before Legion's individuality took hold of them. They were only fighting for survival, and before that they kept avoiding conflict as much as they could. The ones that did not do that were established as "heretics", machines twisted and turned against organics by the Reapers themselves, by introducing an error in their basic software's calculations. 2. The situation is very similar to the Krogans' one. - Here, also, we have a galaxy threatning race that, if a condition is met (curing the Genophage) can result in them outnumbering every other galactic population in what? decades? a century? They breed like fish, laying thousand eggs from one mating! And even though they perceived as a Galactic threat, even though Salarians threat with a refusal of alliance against the Reapers threat if the genophage is cured, Shepard, thanks to his past history with Wrex, Morin, Grunt, and most recently Eve, and his choices made throughout past 2 Mass Effects, can in the latest installment of the series cure the illness nonetheless, thus giving them a chance.
And we all know Shepard is highly persuasive and/or intimitating, nonetheless, first and foremost, he is also a talker and "an arguer" - he never resolve a conflict without making sure that there is an option he agrees with. Pressing situation not giving him time to think? Please, he talked to Saren when Sovereign was destroying the Citadel, he argued with the Illusive Man all the time, he even had time to decide whether or not to preserve the Collector's ship while running for his life. Why then, if I may ask, does he not argue with the Starchild and tries to point the holes in that Catalyst graphical overlay's logic as presented above? Why can't Shepard say that he is willing to take that chance as he always has? He takes one with Krogans anyway, he should somehow be able to take his chances with Geth too.
I mean, Shepard is always the first to argue, to try and find the solution he thinks is best, but here he is almost mute and presented with choices that in no way let me honor Legion's sacrifice or my attempt of uniting the Galaxy. If I were to choose the Control Ending, in which I can control the Reapers (by being dead), since Geth have part of the Reapers' programming incoroporated into theirs, would it also mean I am depriving Geth of their recently obtained free will?That's why I am dissatisfied with the presented Endings - they seem to neither reflect the Shepard's story, nor his/her companions, nor the lore of the what was previously established.
I also have a small issue with the way the Conduit is handled - for the entire 3rd installment of the series every species in the universe helps in building an ambiguous machine that pressumably can destroy the Reapers. It has been developed over generations of different cycles since it wasn't a Praetorians' invention - all that it does is it introduces a glitch in the Catalyst system that allows it to "think outside a box"? Geth and EDI achieved it by having a piece of Reaper's technology/software introduced to their systems ;/
And the worst thing happens when the Catalyst in the form of the child tells Shepard that it is they (Shepard) who has to make that choice. . . The entire Ending is the catalyst's Ending anyway, why allow Shepard to choose now? It's not like those options could satisfy the Shepard I know anyhow.
And I don't think the Endings are either bad or wrong, I just think they are lacking the acknowledgement of how both Shepard and the universe changed in those three games under the Player's guidances and with the choices they made throughout the course of the storyline. Those 3 Ending choices he can make could be very much presented to him at any random point of any of the games, because they are too detached from Shepard's storyline, or at least the way I see them.
And I wouldn't say no to a cinematic, freakishly powerful last boss fight too, to satiate my recently acquired FPS skills and needs thanks to the ME games.I loved every bit of ME3 as much, as I loved the past installment of ME series, or even more, but I just can't force myself to appreciate the Ending, even though I personally believe I owe Bioware's at least that much.
Alas, I can't wait for the Extended Cut storyline.
Hi rfachini, my post is actually addressed to the Moderator on page 1, who is asking players to provide constructive feedback and "suggested changes" to ME3, which is what I have done. But if you wish to discuss my post, then with reference to your reply...
rfachini wrote... Thanks, I saw that but re-read it carefully. Is this a unified stance of those who dislike the ending? To me it seems a little extreme.
I'm not sure why you thought I was refecting a 'unified stance', because I was expressing my opinions of what I would like to see (which is why my original post I said "In my view"). I also respect other peoples opinions, and how they want to play the game, which I why I also say things like "...have the option of..", or "have the opportunity" or "...a chance to...", in order to provide the choice for players to have different endings.
rfachini wrote... Is it OK that only certain ending choices let Sheppard live? Is it ever OK that he dies? To me it's OK. When he lives, he has to have scenes with the crew, and everyone has to be happy? That's the way it reads to me.
Yes. I'm not saying he should 'always live' in every option. I am all for providing choice to the player. If you are ok with your playthrough where he dies, I don't wish to take that away from you. My objection is that for my playthrough, all three options that I took, resulted in Shepards death (for some reason, the 'last breath' scene never appeared for me, even though I had full EMS. Maybe it was because I didn't play the multiplayer, or perhaps my 'paragon level' was too high for the renegade ending?). My objection is that throughout the ME series, there is an emphasis on being able to take a path where you can save each of your crew if you want to. I worked hard in doing this, as I wanted to get the best ending where as many of my crew would survive as possible. Note that even when a character dies, you also see the 'pay-off' of the sacrifice. For example, when Legion dies, you see the positive effect it has when the geth soldier walks up to you. When mordin dies, you see that you have just saved the krogan from extinction, etc. My objection, was that Shepards ending was supposed to be the way to save the galaxy. But I never felt any success from this. The focus was only on what the player is losing, the broken promises you made to your LI, and that your crew and LI have (for some reason) ran off and have found themselves on some random planet. My point is, that the ending did not portray any achievement in my efforts in keeping as many of my crew alive, or developing relationships with the characters.
rfachini wrote...Even the Stargazer part was objectionable? I liked it. It shows that no matter what, Shepard changed the universe, and life survived for a long time. It also validates any playthrough as "one of many legendary stories". It doesn't matter if Shep was male or female, blond or brunette, renegade or paragon. Any Shepard you choose to play is a legend across the galaxy. I wasn't depressed. Does this mean every game or move have to leave every viewer happy at the end? Mass Effect Recut: CareBears and Unicorns Forever? That wasn't the game I've enjoyed the last five years.
It was an interesting scene, but I felt it was out of place because it altered the time frame. I would assume that the two people at the end are on the same planet as where the Normandy crashed (based on the sky). But the fact that it changes the time frame so what you see there is now the present, and everything Shepard has done over the last three games, is all in the past, meaning all the crew are dead and the relationships I have developed results in nothing. This is why I feel the 'star-gazer' scene should not be there.
A few final general comments; Looking at this poll, http://social.biowar...8&poll_id=31420 At the time of writing, 84% of people agree with the statement that the 'Extended Cut DLC does not address the issue of the ME3 ending, and the ending must be changed". Even with using a large margin of error, this suggests the majority of players certainly have issue with the ending.
Here are a couple of videos which discuss why players don't like the ending. The following one has approximately 680,000 hits and is titled "Mass Effect 3's ending and why we hate it"
This one is titled "10 reasons why we hate Mass Effect 3's ending", and has approximately 540,000 hits.
Whilst I don't claim that each hit on the video is a person who hates the ending, what it does show is large numbers of people are interested in discussing the problems of ME3's ending. Correlating this with the sales figures which are approximately 1.3m in the US (Xbox, PS3, PC) during the last month (simply type in "Mass Effect 3 sales" into google for evidence), we see that there is a substantial proportion of people who have bought the game who are interested in looking at videos discussing the reasons why ME3 ending is hated. When I see things like this, clearly something has gone very wrong with the ending of ME3.
Aethgeir wrote... No game has ever reached me on such an emotional level before, and you’re quite right to be proud of it. It is precisely because of this, that fans are so angry. The fact that all of those brilliantly heart wrenching moments will go unremembered because of a mere ten minutes at the end of the game is an absolute tragedy.
No matter what people say specifically they didn’t like about the ending, the truth is it doesn’t work for one very simple reason:
There is no sacrifice without hope. A sacrifice without hope: is just loss. .
I feel the exact same way. The ending is just loss, pain, and broken promises to your LI.
Aethgeir wrote... When I finished this game, all I felt was loss. Every sacrifice I made – Earth for the Galaxy, the Geth or the Quarians, the Krogans or the Salarians, the new love for the old, etc, etc – was made in the hope for the future. There is no one who romanced Liara that didn’t hope to see those little blue babies. There is no one who romanced Tali who didn’t want to build her that house on Rannoch.
Exactly. The scenes with Tali throughout the game are so well written and heartfelt, and when you reach the ending, you realise you will never get to give her the house on Rannoch. I found this whole concept to be soul destroying.
Aethgeir wrote... There is NO hope in Mass Effect 3’s ending. No matter what the player chooses Shepard dies (secret endings requiring multi-play don’t count.) No matter what, the Normandy crashes on some unknown planet. No matter the player’s sacrifices, the relays are destroyed; the very icon that makes the Mass Effect universe what it is is lost. In the end, none of the player’s sacrifices were worth it.
HOW can you expect anyone who’s grown to love these characters and this world over five years to be satisfied with that end? How could you be satisfied with it?
Clarity and closure just isn’t enough. You HAVE to give the players some hope. For nothing more than having enjoyed your story, you OWE them at least that much. You MUST CHANGE SOMETHING.
Yes, after everything Shepard has been through, the players only option is to die and lose everything he has cared about? I understand the developers wanted to create a memorable ending, but the amount of loss experienced during the ending is just too much!
For me, the worse thing is that I want to play the game again, but I can't because the ending has made me associate pain with playing ME3. Is this what the developers wanted to achieve?
I feel like whatever I say here might get buried and unseen by the developers. And I don't blame them, there's a lot to go through. But still, here goes. =)
In terms of the ideas and themes explored in the ending, it's not entirely bad. In fact, having dwelled on the ending a bit, it's not entirely senseless. I can see how you were perhaps trying to explain life as a cycle, regulated and repeating, and in a way the destruction of the relays signifies the breaking of the cycle. But it's the execution of it that really bothered me. What the ending needed was to provide a cathartic moment, either happy or sad, it doesn't really matter. Personally, I'd prefer a bittersweet ending (I mean, the whole universe just went to hell, it's hardly going to be a positive one). But I wanted to feel the struggle, the emotion, and the impact of the decision I made and will make. I want to see the war assets working, fighting, dying, winning, losing. So much emotion was built up to the finale, from Virmire, through the suicide mission, through all your squadmates and friends dying, that I really wanted to feel something at the end.
Anyways, this is just my two cents worth. Developers, if you do read this, I appreciate the effort you have made over the years, and the effort you are making now, and any efforts you make in the future. Looking forward to the Extended Cut. =)
I made an earlier post on this thread about why the ending fell flat for me and made a few suggestions. It’s still on my BSN blog: http://social.biowar...88/blog/212578/
But I think I overlooked something far more important.
It’s been remarked that Mass Effect 3’s central theme is sacrifice. And is it ever! I was devastated when I realized I’d sacrificed Grunt to save the Rachni Queen; and I was profoundly relieved when things worked out. I agonized over choosing whether or not to take the Salarian deal on Tuchanka. I was almost in tears when Thane died and I was so upset that I’d accidentally gotten Kelly Chambers killed, that I actually restarted my first play-through over it; over that minor a detail!
No game has ever reached me on such an emotional level before, and you’re quite right to be proud of it. It is precisely because of this, that fans are so angry. The fact that all of those brilliantly heart wrenching moments will go unremembered because of a mere ten minutes at the end of the game is an absolute tragedy.
No matter what people say specifically they didn’t like about the ending, the truth is it doesn’t work for one very simple reason:
There is no sacrifice without hope. A sacrifice without hope: is just loss.
When I finished this game, all I felt was loss. Every sacrifice I made – Earth for the Galaxy, the Geth or the Quarians, the Krogans or the Salarians, the new love for the old, etc, etc – was made in the hope for the future. There is no one who romanced Liara that didn’t hope to see those little blue babies. There is no one who romanced Tali who didn’t want to build her that house on Rannoch.
There is NO hope in Mass Effect 3’s ending. No matter what the player chooses Shepard dies (secret endings requiring multi-play don’t count.) No matter what, the Normandy crashes on some unknown planet. No matter the player’s sacrifices, the relays are destroyed; the very icon that makes the Mass Effect universe what it is is lost. In the end it, none of the player’s sacrifices were worth it.
HOW can you expect anyone who’s grown to love these characters and this world over five years to be satisfied with that end? How could you be satisfied with it?
Clarity and closure just isn’t enough. You HAVE to give the players some hope. For nothing more than having enjoyed your story, you OWN them at least that much. You MUST CHANGE SOMETHING.
Even though I'm one of the people who was fine with the ending, this post did the best job so far of letting me understand why the ending disappointed some people so greatly. Thanks very much for explaining it so elegantly and so well.
Thanks, I just hope there's someone at BioWare who actually is listening.
I really hope Bioware sees this aswell, and that more bioware fans see this too. because i think you are spot on 100%.
well said. what really sucks about the whole situation is that i now have a hard time recommending the series because of how they ended it. i know i hold mass effect to a higher standard than any other game, but In my defense bioware themselves set that standard that i hold them too. your post explains a lot of our fustrations, but in a far more civil manner than many others have.
I made an earlier post on this thread about why the ending fell flat for me and made a few suggestions. It’s still on my BSN blog: http://social.biowar...88/blog/212578/
But I think I overlooked something far more important.
It’s been remarked that Mass Effect 3’s central theme is sacrifice. And is it ever! I was devastated when I realized I’d sacrificed Grunt to save the Rachni Queen; and I was profoundly relieved when things worked out. I agonized over choosing whether or not to take the Salarian deal on Tuchanka. I was almost in tears when Thane died and I was so upset that I’d accidentally gotten Kelly Chambers killed, that I actually restarted my first play-through over it; over that minor a detail!
No game has ever reached me on such an emotional level before, and you’re quite right to be proud of it. It is precisely because of this, that fans are so angry. The fact that all of those brilliantly heart wrenching moments will go unremembered because of a mere ten minutes at the end of the game is an absolute tragedy.
No matter what people say specifically they didn’t like about the ending, the truth is it doesn’t work for one very simple reason:
There is no sacrifice without hope. A sacrifice without hope: is just loss.
When I finished this game, all I felt was loss. Every sacrifice I made – Earth for the Galaxy, the Geth or the Quarians, the Krogans or the Salarians, the new love for the old, etc, etc – was made in the hope for the future. There is no one who romanced Liara that didn’t hope to see those little blue babies. There is no one who romanced Tali who didn’t want to build her that house on Rannoch.
There is NO hope in Mass Effect 3’s ending. No matter what the player chooses Shepard dies (secret endings requiring multi-play don’t count.) No matter what, the Normandy crashes on some unknown planet. No matter the player’s sacrifices, the relays are destroyed; the very icon that makes the Mass Effect universe what it is is lost. In the end it, none of the player’s sacrifices were worth it.
HOW can you expect anyone who’s grown to love these characters and this world over five years to be satisfied with that end? How could you be satisfied with it?
Clarity and closure just isn’t enough. You HAVE to give the players some hope. For nothing more than having enjoyed your story, you OWN them at least that much. You MUST CHANGE SOMETHING.
Even though I'm one of the people who was fine with the ending, this post did the best job so far of letting me understand why the ending disappointed some people so greatly. Thanks very much for explaining it so elegantly and so well.
Thanks, I just hope there's someone at BioWare who actually is listening.
I really hope Bioware sees this aswell, and that more bioware fans see this too. because i think you are spot on 100%.
well said. what really sucks about the whole situation is that i now have a hard time recommending the series because of how they ended it. i know i hold mass effect to a higher standard than any other game, but In my defense bioware themselves set that standard that i hold them too. your post explains a lot of our fustrations, but in a far more civil manner than many others have.
So true. The Mass Effect series is has been everything I could have dreamed of and more. Great characters, some loved, some hated, but still great. A great story where you are given a choices that reflect on who your character is and are followed with different consequences, some even unexpected. Plus aliens and spaceships! I'm a sucker for great sci fi drama.
I still reckon I'd recommend it if anybody asked me but I'd probably put a warning label on the ending. I wouldn't say it is overly bad but it wasn't that good ever. I get the whole sacrifice thing. Those kinds of endings hit me pretty hard but they also among the best in my opinion. I just don't think Shepard's own sacrifice was handled very well. They dropped this big decision on you, and then they don't bother going into to telling you how this decision affects everyone. The starchild made comments about "organic and synthetic life" in general but fighting for life in general wasn't what drove me to the end of the game, wasn't why I made the choices that I did. I did it for the characters I have come to know.
I cured the genophage, less for my need for the Krogan, but more to help two old friends (and one new one) with a huge problem that has been troubling them for most of their lives. If not for Legion I would have destroyed the Geth without a second's thought but instead I chose to help them. However, had I not been able to unite the Quarians and Geth, I probably would have reloaded the mission and killed them anyway to spare Tali the pain of losing her people. Those may not have been the best decisions to help me in the war effort but that's how I got through some difficult decisions.
I did not have that at the end of the game. They landed me this huge decision but ultimately I can't choose which one is best because I don't see how this affects the characters I've been fighting for the entire game. It makes the whole thing a bit impersonal and kind of pointless. Not to mention, Shepard's squad getting stranded in the Normandy crash does no credit to them. I can't see any of them leaving the battle of Earth, so why when they finally invent teleporter technology*, does Shepard's squad use it to board the Normandy, and not use it to get on the Citadel to assist Shepard?
* Because how else could they have suddenly disappeared from Shepard's side onto the Normandy in the middle of a warzone? You lose half your people trying to get on the planet in the first place.
Retour en haut
