7055 réponses à ce sujet

[merylisk]

Actually nevermind.

Modifié par merylisk, 17 mars 2012 - 07:25 .

[DragonWyrd]

While I don't have a massive issue about the endings, or the game in general, that a lot of people have, there are some things that really did irk me, and I'm sure some of what I say has already been mirrored by the other posters.

First off - what happened with Joker? He became almost like a bit player, a side player now that EDI has a body. Much less interaction or comments from him compared to the second game. I honestly miss being able to stand behind him for a bit and hear random comments popping out of his mouth. Also, just the fact that it was set up for him to be able to romance EDI. I'm sorry but that's just not right. In ME2 he makes mention that "She's so my mom" and also how creepy it was that she stated that what they had was a symbiotic relationship. Next thing we know he's got a thing for EDI because she now has a body? It doesn't fly for me. Joker is considered one of the 'notable' people with OI, aka Osteogenesis Imperfecta otherwise known as Brittle Bone disease, and to basically pair him up with an artificial intelligence is sending the wrong signal to anyone who isn't considered 'normal'. He's been with Shepard since day one so why not allow that to culminate into a loving relationship? I don't buy the 'regs' excuse he gives Shep because otherwise he never would have left the Alliance and joined Cerberus.  Not to mention, he even says something about him being worried about him and EDI because he could break something just with over the clothes touching - so why pair him up with a body that's nothing but metal and circuitry when someone made of skin and bones, who would actually know how to be gentle, would be a better match?  Otherwise known as Shepard.

Secondly - while the way you handled Thane's death was beautiful, there should have been more interaction between him and Shepard prior to him dying, especially if he was romanced. I mean, c'mon, you can't even get the Paramour achievement to unlock with him. We should have been able to keep going back and visiting him in the hospital and have more than just the usual standard topics to talk to him about. Why couldn't he and Shep have taken a bit of a day trip, allowing him to get out and exercise a bit (which according to the notes in the Shadow Broker's base is what he needs for his lungs), and just spend time with each other?

Thirdly - Vega. You allow him to flirt with female Shep but you don't let him go any further? That's a letdown and a half. You can romance Allers (which I honestly find idiotic) but you can't romance Vega? He's one who I definitely don't see worrying about whether it's breaking regs or not. Between him and Joker, it seems as though most of my fanfiction centers around the characters we can't romance since it's the only way people can feel as if they're getting what BioWare won't give them.

Fourth in line is Cortez. I'm a bit disappointed in how this romance is playing out (and the lack of emails you get from him on the datapad app once you've initiated the romance with him in Purgatory). Whereas the other LI's will have interesting comments, some of them in regards to the romance between them (i.e. Kaidan's comment about "next time... wake me"), all you get is comments regarding the missions or the Kodiak or "Commander" "Sir" etc.

Next in line are the endings. More holes than swiss cheese and confusing enough that I sat there for a good 15 minutes scratching my head and wondering what just happened. Yes, once Harbinger starts attacking, afterward it all seems like a dream sequence which makes me wonder if it's all in my Shepard's head, especially when you hear that the entire team was lost and no one made it to the beam. How is it that Anderson, who supposedly got up to the Citadel after Shepard, reaches the console first? How did the Illusive Man just suddenly appear? How is it that no matter what ending you choose, the relays are destroyed therefore either killing everything in all those star systems (think back to Arrival and how the Alpha Relay's destruction destroyed that system) or leaving everyone stranded - which for the quarians and turians who cannot survive off of human food, if there's even enough of Earth left standing to even cultivate food, would be akin to a most painful death by starvation. Why weren't we allowed to have an ending where there was a chance of Shepard finally getting his/her "sunshine and bunnies" life that they'd been trying to give to everyone else by going after Saren, Sovereign, the heretics, the Collectors, the Reapers, etc.?

And now on to my biggest gripe. Multiplayer. We were told from the beginning that, while it would help with galactic readiness, it wouldn't harm us if we chose to play strictly single player. I call hax on that. When I'm stuck at 50% readiness because I'm not much of a multiplayer person and it halves my total strength therefore leaving me with no chance of my Shepard living, I have issues. Why should I be penalized, my game penalized, because I don't want to run around fighting 10 waves of hostiles just to increase my readiness by 4% each mission - if I'm lucky enough to survive all waves and get that 4%? Why should any of us feel as though we have to play multiplayer, or get ME: Infiltrator, or the ME3 Datapad (which actually I enjoy that because of the personal emails you get from those people whom you've 'unlocked') just to get a better readiness percentage score and therefore a chance at that 'secret' ending of seeing someone breathe for a second? That makes no sense to me.

Otherwise, this game was fantastic. I'd just like to see the issues I brought forth taken care of, or at least some sort of nod given that my thoughts were even noticed (though I doubt I'll get any kind of response). Even though I just lost my job, if these were fixed in some sort of DLC, I'd find some way to buy it just so I have a game I'm completely happy with.

Modifié par CeltWolf79, 17 mars 2012 - 07:27 .

[SavvyToli]

Assuming the indoctrination theory is correct and I truly believe it is then what Bioware needs to do is do what they do best. You seriously cant come this far in the end and just blow it away in our faces.

Everyone needs to see more, we need more answers to our questions we need closure. Maybe the only thing you need to do is add a dialogue after Shepard wakes up from his Indoctrination

On Earth Shepard wakes up and realizes that his nightmares were all caused by Harbinger himself. Assuming the Crucible works and does its job, the Normandy comes and does a pickup (with or without Shepard) and just provide closure on every aspect of the game starting from War Assets to what happens to our crew members and the rest of the galaxy.

No need to destroy the Mass Relays please there is no need.

[Sparbiter]

Depends, really.

The indoctrination theory has the easiest path: there are very few plot holes that you couldn't fill. However, it's been fleshed out pretty well, so I think you would need to use it to transition into a better ending.

I think that many, if not most, fans are going to want an ending closure before anything.

[Missy_MI]

At miminum, I'd like to see more closure for the characters I've come to love over the series.  It might sound selfish, but just knowing life continues in some form (old man and child telling stories) is not enough.  I need to know that Shepard's sacrifice counted for the characters she knows in this timeline - that they aren't all left dead or suffering, cut off from each other by the relay destruction.

Also, there are many unanswered questions that leave me frustrated instead of contemplative.  It's not clear why Joker is leaving.  Are we to assume the rest of the crew is on the ship?  Can that planet's atmosphere even support them all?  What happened to the people on the Citadel?  Even if the worst is true and they are all dead or reaped, it's the wondering that has kept me up at night in a bad way.

Ideally, make Indoctrination Theory true.  Let Shepard fight back against the corrupted Reaper code in her own brain as she did for the Geth Collective, wake up, have that cliche boss fight, and destroy the Reapers for good without killing the rest of synthetic life.  Maybe the Starchild is right and one day EDI or some geth will rise up and wipe out all organics, but there should be an option to take that chance.

Lastly, thank you for listening.  BioWare is one of the few companies holding the line, so to speak, for intricate story driven gameplay.  I'm a female gamer and when I play the Mass Effect series, I really feel like I fit into that universe as a woman and not a man with a different avatar and some pronoun replacements.  That is a huge thing and I appreciate it immensely.

I don't want to let up on the endings for fear the issue will be ignored, but I also hope your entire team is very proud of all your hard work on the Mass Effect series.  The majority of the third game is really fantastic.

[ECK mk2]

I had originally intended to post a lengthy review of the game here but the site (or my internet connection) timed out on me so I'm just going to put down the basics, probably for the best anyway.

First of all Great Game!. Loved the story, Characters were great, combat a lot better than I expected.

Until the end. Here are my problems with the ending.

1. Its very cliche. I often find it strange that people seem to think the ending to game was bittersweet or thought provoking. Really its an ending I've seen many times before, most recently in Battlestar Galactica. I was particularly dissapointed in the fact that Joker and pals managed to crash land on a "desert island" at the end. Not only did it make no sense but it was an immensely sugar coated conclusion. I would actually have preferred it if the Normandy had been destroyed rather than this. I had hoped for something more original from Bioware.

2. Despite having 16 endings the finale feel very forced. I think that this has lot to do with the absence of distinctive ending cutscenes and proper epilgoues. The options of controlling reapers vs destroying them vs synthesis should have been very different and appeared so on paper. However due to poor handling they appear to be all the same, which is a huge dissapointment. Then there is the simple fact that all the endings, even in the one is which Shepard "lives" are essentially bad endings, the equivalent of everyone dying in the Collector base. I understand that it makes sense for Shepard to die at the end of Mass Effect 3 and actually picked a choice that finished him off, much as it pained me to do it. Nor would defeating the Reapers be a picnic. But I really do feel that Mass Effect 3's finale offers very little choice regardless of which ending you pick. I would have enjoyed it much more if I felt that my choices across the series made a REAL discernable difference to how it worked out. It seems bewildering to me that having figured out how to do this in ME2 Bioware would not know how to do it in Mass Effect 3.

3. The endings to me did not feel like they belonged in a Mass Effect or even a Bioware title. They felt strongly out of place, which may explain why they felt so jarring. I feel the lack of Mass Effect gameplay elements is a big problem. Shepard always solved problems through a mix of combat, quick thinking and persuasion/intimidation. The finale however denies Shepard the ability to do any of these things, leaving him a rather passive figure. I think this is one of the major reasons why fans of the series are left unfulfilled by the ending. The finale would have benefited from the ability to debate with the god child or the precense of a boss battle with Harbinger or TIM, which could have provided a greater sense of closure for players. The sheer passivity of the ending is a major problem.

4. Finally there was the lack of a proper resolution. The ending ultimately produced more questions than answers. Introducing the god child right at the end was a mistake in my opinion. Had he been introduced sooner then gamers may well have been more comfortable with how he fits into the story. Instead he is included briefly at the last minute, meaning that he just confuses the picture. Then there is as I said earlier the sheer ambiguity of the ending. For a conclusion to a series, it certainly leaves a lot unsaid. As a result I can only feel that Mass Effect 3 does not really have an definitive ending. It would have been much better had the player been presented with 3 or 4 very definite resolutions. Perhaps some would have involved Shepard dying, maybe some could have been "happy", maybe one could have been an evil ending for major renegades. At least then there would be some certainty. What happens instead is a mess, a weird mixture of Shepard's sacrifice and an almost trivial and tacked on "happily ever after" for a few characters when so many others have died. Its little wonder that so many feel that it does not provide them with closure.

To conclude I feel the ending of Mass Effect 3 was not neccessarily bad, but rather that it was not as good as the game which built up to it. Had Mass Effect 3 been a passable affair, noone would be complaining about the ending. Its because it was so good that people are annoyed. Having achieved so much it seems that the devs stumbled at the last hurdle and as a fan of the series it is a terrible shame. I fear that it will be its ending which Mass Effect 3 will be remembered for not the great experience which game before it. I' m not even sure whether I will even be able to replay it. In short Mass Effect 3 deserves better, and I would happily pay to see the ending improved if not neccessarily rewritten.

Hope this helps,

ECK.

Edit: Ironed out some typos.

Modifié par ECK mk2, 17 mars 2012 - 10:06 .

[Spanking Machine]

The revalation that the Reapers were only acting to protect organic life from synthetics made no sense given everything we had learned about EDI and the Geth. Since the conclusion was entirely based on that concept, the choices given at the end just made no sense, and it felt like Sheperd just threw away his life and broke the backbone of galactic civilization for no good reason.

Also, the choices were way too dark to make the end of the game feel like any sort of victory. If you're forcing the player to martyr themselves you have to leave us with the feeling that we're doing it for a good cause, and none of the 3 endings give us that.

[Amratis]

I just read Casey Hudson's statement and I have to say that I am confused about one thing in particular. He mention's the word bittersweet, but I have to ask - just WHAT about those endings is bittersweet? I'm not sure he understands what the word means, and I'm not trying to be harsh when I say that.

They are just bitter, there is no sweet there, at all. None of the ending's make you feel uplifted or hopeful, they just leave you feeling like there's a cannonball in your stomach.

The God-child's "we kill you to stop synthetic's killing you" is utterly ridiculous. I can't believe you came up with that and thought it was OK to put in the game. But if that's what we have to work with then fair enough.
I would like there to be another choice at the end, or at least for the Destroy ending to be CHANGED.

The destroy ending should simply kill the Reaper's, that's IT. Why do the Mass Relay's have to be destroyed? It's such a terrible idea, its bleakness for the sake of bleakness.

And please, PLEASE, if you are going to change anything about the endings, either take out or explain how your squad-mates are magically back on board the Normandy and running away through the Relay?
It made NO sense, how did they get there? Why are they fleeing? Why would anyone be happy to see that that is where your Crew and LI end up? It's non-sensical!

When talking to friends before ME3 came out I said more than once that my definition of a happy ending would be simply if I could be with my LI at the end, in any location or circumstance, or to die together. Or at the very least for Shepard to die heroically but see their LI happy on Earth.
And I think that a lot of people felt the same about their LI's.

Why would you make such amazing characters for us to fall in love with, and then say "Ha! you thought you were going to end up with them? Suckers!" *grimdarkdeathcrashonrandomplanet*

It's just *facepalm*...change it, please.

[Mefistos989]

okay. Here it comes

1. Fix the journal. There is no way to know whether or not have I completed a quest. The whole thing remain static, so I have to go back to the citadel and ASK a person.. When I load a game I have no idea which quests I completed and which are semi-completed... Confused is the word.

2. Blue children. Enough said.

3. Indoctrination theory being correct. It makes sense and at the same time, you can be all like "It was planned from the beginning"

4. For the love of god, please change that stock photo of Tali. It is really offensive to her fans. You have created a LOT of great and memorable scenes and landscapes. We have faith in you.

5. Game is absolutely engaging and 9/10 material UNTIL the ending (elephant in the room didn't need to be mentioned). Quality hits the floor when God-child enters the stage.
The way this game ended makes me forget everything that is good about this franchise.
Include more options. Include "sunshine and flowers" ending and "reapers win" ending.

6. Normandy crash. Makes no sense. Nobody likes tossing their favourite characters on some planet in the middle of nowhere.

7. final mission. Make other crewmembers useful. Like suicide mission in ME2.

8. game needs more reaper presence moments. Some talks with Harbinger.

9. Normandy upgrades and ability to avoid/lower reaper presence.

10. Closure on characters and our choices. I was left with more questions than answers. And that is very bad, because.. well.. this is the end, no?

11. offline way to raise readiness( N7 missions?). Multiplayer has a big impact on this. People won't play it forever, you know...

I love ME franchise and I am pretty sure others do to. Make it happen Bioware, we believe in you. Until then, we hold the line.

[Myrmedus]

Dylan1572 wrote...

Reign Tsumiraki wrote...

 Ah, perfect! I already wrote up what I think would solve the problem...

*copypasta*

1.  Only change the ending starting from the last scene with Anderson/Shepard/TIM. Everything about the ending before that stays the same, with a few changes. 

2. Completely ignore the God-child-spirit. It conflicts and contradicts the "Protheans fooled the citadel" basis in ME1. This was important. Cut it out entirely.

3. Make several choices based off of war readiness, and how many assets went into the Crucible. Such as:

Very low: Launch a giant EMP burst that destroys all Reapers, AI, Citadel, Relays, most technology, ect, as well as sacrificing earth. Shepard dies. Normandy crashes, and everyone aboard dies.

Low: Same, but without damage to earth. Shepard dies. Normandy Crashes. Crew dies.

Medium-low: Burst that only destroys all AI. Shepard dies. Normandy Crashes, Crew dies.

Medium: Burst that destroys all AI in the Sol system, and the Reapers. This allows the Geth to live, but EDI dies. Saves the Relays, but not the citadel. Shepard dies. Normandy crashes, crew survives.

High-Medium: Releases a burst that disables the Reaper Shields across the galaxy, allowing the fleet to easily kill the rest(Reapers are weak without their shields, as ME1 shows. A single torpedo from the Normandy killed Sovereign without it's shields) Shepard lives. Normandy damaged, but does not crash, and the player is treated to a small cutscene of the Normandy and the fleet blowing up a few reapers. 

High: Sends out a burst attuned to the Reaper core (The Geth provide the information. They studied reapers, remember. If they are not available, the Quarians provide it, having researched the Reaper corpse on their planet) causing the Reapers' reactors to overload and die. However, the Reaper core just happens to be identical to the Core of the Citadel as well. The Citadel overloads and blows up. Shepard lives. Relays stay intact. Player is treated to a cutscene of the Reapers blowing up, troops on the ground rejoicing, as well as the Normandy picking him and Anderson's body up before Citadel explodes.


Very-high: Sends out a pulse that kills only Reapers. All tech stays intact. Shepard lives. Relays intact. Citadel intact. Player is treated to the cutscene above, minus the citadel explosion. 

In addition, the endings shown in the "original" game would be available. These would be available on the left side of the dialogue wheel, while the ones I have proposed would be on the right. Synthesis would be unlocked at the Very-High level, and Control would be unlocked at the High-Medium level. Destroy would be available no matter what.

To complete the Synthesis, Destroy, or Control ending, the player takes the elevator up to where the Original ending takes place. This way, they do not have to design an entirely new environment. The animations and flashbacks for these endings would stay the same. The only difference in the cutscene after this would be no Normandy crash.

The options of the three highest unlocked options would show up on the right of the wheel on the right side. For instance, someone who had Medium assets would get the option of killing all AI everywhere, all AI in the Sol system, or all technology everywhere without damage to earth.

The dialogue wheel would look like this, if someone had 100% of all assets.
                                Synthesis              Take down Sheilds
                                                __________/ 
                                               (                       )
                 Destroy    --------(                          ) ---Kill reapers, Destroy Citadel
                                               (                       )
                                                -----------------
                                               /                      
                                      Control                Kill all Reapers
4. Include a small, text and scene ending. Small clips of certain occations from the various decisions made will show. This will vary by ending.

EXAMPLE: Geth and Quarians rebuilding, all species rebuilding the invaded home planets, ect.

5. A small scene with Anderson and Shepard before Anderson dies, about what Shepard will do if the Crucible works. Shepard can then respond in a variety of ways depending on what options he is presented with because of the war assets claimed. Anderson then says the whole "I'm proud of you" spiel, wishes you luck, then dies.

EXAMPLE: 

Retiring and living in peace, finally, with LI(or alone, if that is the case).

Saying “This device will probably destroy the citadel and kill us, so it does not matter.”

Continue to pursue peace and justice as a Spectre.

Become a diplomat/politician and guide humanity

Ect.

6. Any teammates that were with you at the time you got shot by the reaper will run towards the teleport-beam and make it to the Citadel ahead of you, thinking that you died, and that they need to finish what you started. Upon arriving there, you meet up with them and get to the console. They also get manipulated by TIM, but only you are able to "break free" by shooting or talking down TIM. 



Anyway, that's my whole view on it. 


THIS WAY:  
Players can get the endings they want, the player can still sacrifice themselves to get the endings they want, the Devs can have the endings they want, and originally intended. The only thing this really cuts is the stupid spectral Ghost-child-God thing, which was ridiculous in the first place. 

How does this sound? I tried to address every concern and viewpoint, and combine them into one good ending that I think would please everyone. 

I think the guy who originally posted this has the right idea.

The only issue I have with this idea is that we've accused BW of the existing endings all being too similar yet the 3 new endings proposed here are essentially all: "Kill the Reapers" with varying degrees of collateral damage - would prefer a bit more variance to be honest.

[Olem]

A conclusion to the romances and friendships. An ending option that doesn't take out the mass relays and Citadel, and also lets Shepard live. Explaination or fix for why "my" Shepards best-bro Garrus and wifu Liara left Shep for dead near the beam.

Gameplaywise I'd like to see a Journal that updates so we don't need to look the objectives up on the Wiki or similar. On the PC version I'd like to see keyboard shortcuts for Journal and Squad.

I'd also like to see manual holstering being put back into combat areas, in some locations it would feel much more immersive. Shepard lowering his/her gun, which puts the camera into freemode would also suffice greatly.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the player should be able to completely remove Shepards helmet, not just in cutscenes.

Modifié par Olemguy, 17 mars 2012 - 07:36 .

[RedDude65]

 (This is my first time posting in my two or so years on BSN, so excuse any problems with this reply). I enjoyed ME3 greatly, and loved the experience--shooting cans with garrus and seeing Mordin go out with a bang (figuratively and literally). However, as predominately a soldier type player, I missed being able to carry a heavy weapon. I also found the missions on Thessia and London severely lacking any orchestral sound in the background. I felt awkward in London where it was just silent (I know this brings some intensity, but it destyroyed the atmosphere in my opinion). I also found the endings a bit lacking--they make literary sense, but not video game sense. It also was very awkward to end my experience with ME3 by having no boss fight, staring at shepard walking slowly, and a completely different feel from what the mass effect universe has always felt like--rational, warlike, and motivational. Instead I felt a shift of theme in the last five minutes that would surely make for a good story on its own, but it doesn't provide continuity through the game or trilogy.

To summarize, this is not my game, but I suggest changing and/or adding a new ending, adding background music to missions such as Thessia and London, adding heavy weapons that can be equiped in the loadout, and possibly more time with ME2 romances (garrus and tali not included).   

Modifié par RedDude65, 17 mars 2012 - 07:42 .

[LinkSnake1016]

I understand "they" wanted a BITTERSWEET ending and it depresses me. I feel like many people just want resolution but I'm being selfish and want a happy ending! My poor Shepard only had 2..3 months tops with Kaidan but fraternization got in the way, then 2 years of him morning her death, 6 months with her in Cerberus, 6 months with Alliance isolation/trials, Kaidans doubts and almost death before they said to hell with everything and actually decided to be with each other. I've had bitter for a long time and I feel like they want to make my Shepard a martyr. I fought like hell to be with Kaidan and "He's fighting like hell to hold me in his arms again"!

I've lost a lot of members of my team, who were friends almost family, to me and my Shepard! I hope you listen and I hope that for my Shepard and her Kaidan they can beat the odds! This story has mad me cry so much that my husband actually thought someone called me and told me someone died! I've laughed and gotten angry with my team.

Is it so wrong to want that happy ending? I agree that if Shepard were in anyway free the continue with serving the Alliance or the Council, society would make her. I can see them also using her as a Symbol to rebuild Earth and the galaxy and she'll never get rest (or peace with Kaidan). She'll be cursed (?) like Jon Grissom was and I don't want that for her. Also, as per similar situations between games her team broke apart due to outside sources (mostly Alliance and some self continuation of their old life) I understand the ending would need to prevent things like this or Shepard's story will never end b/c she won't have rest but I am begging for a way to make things possible. For her, for Kaidan, for her team, and selfishly for me and the fans.

For the story I've feel in love with and the characters of the game - I will Hold the Line for as long as it takes

[TSC_1]

First of all, thank you for asking for our thoughts on this matter. I’m happy to oblige, and I hope that we can come to a mutually satisfactory solution to the problem. Fair warning, though – this is going to be a long post.

Like most others here (and most others in general, I suspect), I am deeply disappointed in the ending of Mass Effect 3. It left me gutted and in a rut for about a week after I completed the game. That may sound extreme, it may sound like hyperbole… but it’s true. The Mass Effect universe and series are very close to my heart – I’ve played the previous games and DLC (all the DLC, in fact, for both games) for hundreds of hours. I’ve become deeply immersed in the wonderful world that Bioware has created, and deeply invested in the characters that populate it. To have all that emotional investment ripped away at the last moment is, frankly, devastating. I expect the best from Mass Effect and, until now, I’ve received the best from it.

Indeed, the first 99% of Mass Effect 3 also provided the best for me. I had some trepidation going in – I was a little worried that you might screw something up following the “Terminator Reaper” in Mass Effect 2 and the debacle that was Dragon Age 2 – but by the time that I got to Mordin’s death, all doubt was erased from my mind. That scene was sublime. It is by far the best written part of any Mass Effect game – and perhaps of any game that I’ve ever played. At that point, I felt that you had nailed it, that there was no way you could screw anything up with this game. And, until I reached the end, this belief that Bioware had executed the game perfectly was borne out. It was one hell of an achievement, and you should all be proud.

Which is what makes the ending that we received that much more painful. It would have been one thing for a bad game to end badly. But for an exceptional game to end that way? Disaster. It isn’t just bad to sully something so beautiful and wonderful; it’s profane. And you truly have desecrated something marvellous, here. The ending of Mass Effect 3 doesn’t just disappoint, it actively ruins the entire series. I’ll say that again, because it’s important: the ending of Mass Effect 3 is so bad, so crushing, that it ruins everything that came before. All the joy and all the wonder that I derived from playing these games is gone. I’ve played them over and over, and now I don’t think I’ll play them ever again if this isn’t rectified. If this is how the story ends, what’s the point? None of it matters one whit in the end. No closure, no victory, no Mass Effect universe.

So, what exactly is wrong with the ending? I go into much greater detail below, but what it boils down to is broken promises. Essentially, when you create a narrative work, certain promises (explicit or implicit) to the consumer of that work come through. In order to create a satisfying conclusion to your narrative, you need to fulfill those  promises. If they are left unfulfilled, or are actively broken, you will not provide satisfaction or closure to your audience. And, as I see it, that is exactly what happened with Mass Effect 3. Promises were made right from the beginning of Mass Effect 1. We expected a payoff by the end of the trilogy… and we didn’t get it.

What promises were made and broken in this case? Quite a few, in fact, but the four most important, to my mind, are the following:

- Player choice matters
- Shepard will be victorious
- Character interaction is central, and will be satisfactorily handled
- The Mass Effect universe is rational and possesses internally consistent science fictional laws

I would argue that these, as well as other promises being broken, is what scuttled the ending of the game. 

What Went Right With The Ending

Before I get to the details of what, exactly, is problematic about the ending of the game, I feel it’s a good idea to look at what is good about it. Not only do I want to commend the Bioware writers for what they did so right, I also want to look at why those things are right.

First, the entire London sequence is exceptionally well executed. The entire game was building up to the devastation that was taking place on Earth, and London paid off that promise. In spades. It was shocking to see what had become of the city, it felt like the battle to end all battles, and, as a result, the tension was nigh-unbearable. Moreover, player choice matters. Depending on how you handled Cortez, he lives or dies. Depending on how high your effective military strength is, your squad lives or dies. That’s what we expect in a Mass Effect game. Better still, the conversations with the crew before the final push were perfect. Incredible. The conversation with Liara as Shepard’s love interest was, well, perfect. The conversations, and the entire London mission, really made you feel what was at stake, and made it very clear that no character thought that they, or Shepard, would get out of this. The hopelessness of the situation, the desperation and fatalism, all of it was incredible. It created pressure and conflict – exactly what you want in a narrative work – in exactly the right ways. Keep this tension in mind – I discuss below how it ties into the disappointment we all felt.

Second, the conversation with Anderson just before he dies is one of the most moving things that I have experienced in a very, very long time. Again, the only word I can think to use to describe it is “perfect.” It’s so good, that I’d like to see the extended version, which was cut down for reasons that I can’t begin to imagine, restored so that this scene can be made longer. This is exactly the sort of closure that we want for every character in the game. Anderson completes the character arc that started back in the first moments of Mass Effect 1. The dialogue is meaningful and develops the relationship between him and Shepard. Which renders his death meaningful. Also, note that while Anderson’s death is undeniably sad (and I’ll admit I cried), it doesn’t leave the player depressed and unfulfilled in the same way that Shepard’s meaningless death does. Anderson’s death provides closure and catharsis. If you were going for a bittersweet ending, this is the bitter part. Shepard loses a commander, a friend, and a father-figure. This is the emotional impact that you want. You’ve nailed the bitter, you just screwed up the sweet.

What Went Wrong With The Ending

While the things that worked are wonderful, and you should be commended for writing them, they are, ultimately, overshadowed by what went disastrously wrong. To be blunt, everything following Anderson’s death is an absolute train wreck from a narrative standpoint. I’ll look at them one by one.

- The Starchild

To begin with, the Starchild is a deus ex machina – literally. It’s the pinnacle of lazy story writing. Especially since it’s introduced in exactly the worst way. It’s just thrown at us out of nowhere, with no explanation or foreshadowing. Not only is it a deus ex machina, it’s the very worst kind of deus ex machina.

Worse, what the Starchild says is utterly nonsensical. The given explanation for the Reapers’ motivations is totally illogical. They’re wiping out advanced organic life to prevent synthetics from wiping out advanced organic life? Madness. This is only made worse by the fact that this exact motivation for an unfathomable synthetic intelligence from beyond the edge of space wiping out all organic sentience has been done before. And done better. I strongly urge you to check out the Revelation Space series of books by Alastair Reynolds if you want to know what I’m talking about.

There’s also the problem that the Reapers’ motivation which was foreshadowed in Mass Effect 2 – namely attempting to prevent the galaxy’s destruction by dark energy – was entirely abandoned. It isn’t mentioned once in Mass Effect 3, and certainly has no place in its ending. It’s another broken promise to the player. And it’s one that especially stings given that it is a much, much better motivation for the Reapers. It has the virtue of actually making sense.

Finally, we get to the three choices that the Starchild offers to Shepard in the end. Leaving aside for the moment that fact that Shepard goes along with this, the choices themselves are terrible. Not only does it not makes sense that he would make them available at all (why not just kill Shepard and continue with his original plan – reaping?), the choices entirely break with the established tone and themes of the Mass Effect universe. I’ll go into more detail about this below, but right now I need to emphasize that this “pick one of three endings” is part of what really damages the ending.

This forced choice between three endings breaks one of the cardinal promises made by the Mass Effect series: player choices throughout the series have no real impact in the end. And not only do the choices made throughout the series mean nothing, the final choice also means nothing – all three endings are, essentially, the same.

- Shepard’s reaction to the Starchild

Worse than the Starchild himself, Shepard breaks entirely out of character when he or she meets him. We have been led to believe (promises, again) that Shepard is not the sort of person to meekly accept the authority of a deus ex machina god-child who is, in fact, controlling the enemy throughout the entire series. And there is no way that Shepard would go and make one of the choices offered – he or she would find another way. Or would at least argue. Why does Shepard accept the inevitability of conflict between synthetics and organics, when the entire thrust of the series has been to show otherwise? Why doesn’t Shepard reject the Starchild’s premises and demand an end to the butchery of the cycles? It simply doesn’t make sense given what we know about Shepard’s character.

- The three choices

I’ve already touched on this, but more needs to be said about the three choices offered to Shepard. The comparison to Deus Ex: Human Revolution has been made, and it’s a valid one. The “choose-your-ending-o-matic” machine didn’t work there, and it doesn’t work here. If anything, it’s worse in Mass Effect 3 because the entire point of the series has been to show that player choice matters. Presenting the endings in this way discards that entirely. It’s a broken promise.

There’s also a comparison to be made to the original Deus Ex – the endings in that game are literally exactly the same as the endings in Mass Effect 3. You can control the synthetics, destroy the synthetics, or become one with the synthetics. Now, those endings work in Deus Ex. They play into the themes of the game, and they fulfill the promises made to players. Not so with Mass Effect 3. The endings just don’t fit. We were sold a game, a series, and a universe where the outcome was to be defeat of the Reapers and restoration of order to galactic civilization. What we got was transhumanist themes which were never really part of Mass Effect and the destruction of galactic civilization. The foreshadowing throughout the entire series pointed to one thing, and the endings gave us another thing. Broken promises, again. The endings are entirely thematically inappropriate to Mass Effect.

Moreover, these endings break another of the major promises of the Mass Effect series: a rigid, logical consistency to the rules of the universe. You’ll see the endings referred to as “space magic” on these forums and around the internet for this very reason. All three outcomes break the rules that Mass Effect has set for itself. The synthesis ending is especially bad in this regard. “Poof, you’re all half synthetic now” is unacceptable, especially since there is nothing in the series up until the end to suggest that this is in any way possible or will in any way happen.

- The final outcomes of the three choices

Personally, this is where the ending really falls apart for me. It shows that the writers didn’t think through the consequences of their chosen endings. In short, all three endings result in the destruction of the Mass Effect fictional universe entirely.

First, it’s important to note that all three endings result in exactly the same outcome. Yes, there’s some faffing about with whether the Reapers are destroyed, the Reapers are controlled, or organic and synthetic life fuse. But, you know what? As huge as the implications of that should be… they don’t actually matter to the Mass Effect universe we know. See, because they are so thematically inconsistent with the rest of the series, and because they are not foreshadowed in any way, the player simply does not care about them. So they don’t matter. Which suggests that those things the player does care about do matter.

So what does the player care about?

In short, the player cares about the universe and the characters. These, unfortunately, are exactly what the endings all screw over in the end. In all three endings, Shepard dies (yes, in all three – that five second clip is a cop-out that changes nothing), the crew is stranded on some strange planet somewhere, and the mass relays are destroyed. The mass relays are the most important part, here. Without them, galactic civilization is destroyed – and, given that the Mass Effect fictional universe is built on that galactic civilization, the fictional universe is destroyed. The intellectual property is ruined. So if the universe that we’ve invested ourselves in to deeply is just – poof! – gone, why should we care? And you wonder why the player doesn’t like that.  

There’s also the niggling little bit about all those fleets being trapped in the Sol system with only one decimated planet providing food and resources for everyone. Except the Turians and Quarians, who are just going to starve. You’ve doomed Earth to eternal war and deprivation. And you’ve doomed those in the fleets to never seeing their homes again. So why does “saving” Earth matter?

Also, none of these outcomes provides any closure for characters. You strand them light-years away from Shepard, and we never hear from them again. We never hear what happens to them, and Shepard never gets the closure he or she needs with those characters. I understand you thought the closure came from the conversations with the crew in London, but it didn’t. That served to heighten the tension, not to provide the cathartic release needed. Worse, the way that you stranded the crew seems, well, almost spiteful. There are no fewer than four major plotholes introduced for the sole purpose of stranding the crew. When you need to discard all logic and break your universe for an outcome, you’re doing something wrong. The only reason to do that is if you really want to do something which doesn’t make sense if you follow the logic of the situation. It makes me wonder why you wanted to do this so badly, when leaving the crew on the ground and Joker in orbit makes so much more sense. The only reason I can think of is that you wanted to tweak the player’s emotions by keeping Shepard away from his friends and loved ones in order to achieve the vaunted “bittersweet” ending. Which is cheap and, yes, spiteful.

Finally, you remember how full of praise I am for the London sequence? All that conflict and tension that it created is masterful. Unfortunately, the outcome of any of the three choices destroys all that hard work. The only reason tension and conflict are good is because they can be released in a cathartic way later on. That we never get that catharsis cheapens the whole sequence. Another promise broken.

From the player’s point of view, because nothing is paid off – characters are abandoned, Earth is doomed to fire and strife, and the galactic civilization that Shepard has been fighting for will never again exist – Shepard fails. We played three whole games only to fail in the end. Why wouldn’t we be devastated and confused?

- The Stargazer

Again, this is something that is entirely out of place in the Mass Effect series. It clashes thematically. Worse, the dialogue is poorly written and poorly performed. And it’s not because Buzz Aldrin is bad at voice acting. It’s because the dialogue is entirely inappropriate for him. He’s a hard-as-nails fighter pilot. He just can’t deliver a line like “My Sweet.” It doesn’t work.

The scene also provides no closure at all. It’s worse than pointless – it makes the ending even more ambiguous, as hard as that is to believe. And I won’t even mention the fact that the background was pulled off the internet.

- The textbox

There’s not much to say here other than the fact that being kicked from such a disappointing ending to an advertisement for DLC that, given the ending, I have no interest in is entirely insulting.

How To Fix This

In a nutshell, you need to release DLC that will fix the end. That’s the only way to salvage this. My preference would be for you to tear out everything following Anderson’s death and replace it with something new. Anderson should still die – that’s the “bitter” in your “bittersweet” – and the extended dialogue of that scene should be restored. It’s just that powerful. Alternatively, if you want to keep everything you have, I’d accept a DLC that uses the “indoctrination theory” (I’m sure you’ve seen the thread) as an excuse to say everything following Shepard being hit by the Reaper beam was an indoctrination attempt, and that the real ending starts when he or she gets back up. It’s not my preferred way to go, since Anderson’s death would not actually have happened in that case, but it’s acceptable.

As to what the ending should contain, it should provide a number of endings which do not break the four cardinal promises of the Mass Effect series. The endings should range from “Reapers win” to “Shepard lives, reunites with his crew and love interest, and gets a medal.” They should take player decisions into account, Shepard should win (unlike in the current endings, where he fails), characters should be provided with closure, and the rules of the Mass Effect universe should not be broken. 

What it boils down to is that, in at least one ending, Shepard must live, the crew must live and not be stranded, and the mass relays must not be destroyed. The Reapers need to be stopped and no more plotholes can be introduced. The return of the dark energy motivation for the Reapers would also be appreciated. Also, the only thing that should be required to achieve any and all endings is the single player campaign. Right now, you need to play multiplayer or one of the various tie-ins in order to get your galactic readiness high enough for Shepard to live. That's not acceptable: the endings to the single player campaign must all be accessible through playing single player only.

Above all, the endings cannot be depressing like they are now. They can be bittersweet, they can even be sad. But they cannot break the promises made to the player throughout the series. Because what we have now is 90 hours of play where you ultimately fail to achieve what you actually care about. As I said, it’s depressing.

Conclusion

So that’s what I feel is right and wrong with the ending, and how I think you can fix it. But there’s still one question: why should you care? The answer is, and as sordid as this seems, money. We’re not just fans. We’re not just players. We’re your customers. And we’re dissatisfied. In fact, I’m exactly the sort of customer you want: I’m committed. You have your hooks into me. I own all the Mass Effect games, and all the DLC. I even pre-ordered the DDE of Mass Effect 3. I love the universe you have created, and I want to give you money for more. And you’re counting on that. You want to sell Mass Effect 3 DLC. You want to sell new games. But I can tell you that even I, the most dedicated of customers, will not be buying any of it. And this isn’t a threat or a boycott: it’s just a fact. I don’t see the point. Why would I buy DLC for a game that adds weapons or mid-game missions if I don’t ever want to play it again because the ending is so heinous? There’s no point to the games anymore, so why would I pay to add to them? This is a serious problem for a business.

The flip side is, of course, that if you do fix this, my wallet is open to you. Not only am I willing to pay good money for an ending fix – I’d be willing to pay the price of a full game for that DLC, actually – I’d have a reason to buy any future DLC and any future Mass Effect games. And since, as I said, you’ve got your hooks into me, I would buy all of that. Because I’d want to again.

And that’s really the crux of the matter. We want to love this game. We want to love Mass Effect. We want to buy more of it from you. But we need your help to do that.

Modifié par TSC_1, 17 mars 2012 - 08:05 .

[Windariah]

Alot of people have made alot of really long detailed lists on this thread.  I havent read them all, and I wont because I am trying very hard to stay away from people's theories of what could have/should've/must've happened. i dont want someone elses idea to become my canon, so I apologize now if this has already been stated.

Mass Effect 3 really only have one major issue.  Certainly  it has many, many things that can be improved upon when it comes to the ending, but only one, glaringly obvious issue is important. That issue is the most important because it trumps every other issue, every other decision, every other complaint.  It makes all of those issues non important.

In the end, nothing matters.  Through all three games, through 100 hours of gameplay, carefully crafted choices, joy, heartache and pain, in the end everyone gets the same options.

It doesnt matter who I saved, who I killed, what I gave Cerberus, what I gave the alliance.  It doesnt matter if I treated people with respect (Paragon) or with superiority (Renegade).  It doesnt matter if everyone died in the Collector Base, or if I joined with TIM at the end of the 2nd, or told him to take a hike. 

When it is all said and done, when the resolution of my struggle presents itself I am offered the same three choices everyone else has been offered.  And then, to add insult to injury, whichever of those 3 (colored) choices I choose... the galaxy ends up essentially exactly the same. 

I have no desire to replay the series because it doesnt matter in the end.  Its a wonderful game.  Emotional, heart wrenching, full of HARD choices, but when you get to the end you feel it was all for naught...it simply doesnt matter, and even if you did change your choices, the end result would remain the same.  That is what I would like to see fixed.

Modifié par Windariah, 17 mars 2012 - 07:35 .

[aapblok]

I would like to thank the developers for providing us with, arguably, one of the great franchises in sci fi. And for your time in seeking our help in resolving this "mass" issue, but I am very cynical, Bioware (prove me wrong, please).  
Based on the last 10 minutes of Mass Effect 3, this masterly crafted lore and gameplay is turned upside down. Going back, fans of this series dont really care for a happy ending (some do, but that reflects on how structred your ending was.) But we knew things would hit the fan in this finale and I am fine with that. What we want is closure, consequences, and choice in the ending (endings should resolve the questions we have, not create more and consequently kill the lore lol). As you know, Mass effect was built on these very notions back in 2007, but the last 10 minutes blew that up, literally. 

Here are my points, like the majority:   

- Your ending, whether you played Paragon/Renegade, throughout the series, doesn't matter - everything is the same, which hinders what Mass Effect is all about. 


- The decisions you made don't matter, such as saving the Rachni Queen, making alliances, and Geth and Quarians. However, this does "help" in getting the supposed perfect "ending", but this line of logic is a numbers game, and doesn't help in getting a proper ending or even a glimpse of a real fight.  


- Plot holes. There are some big issues here. Why did Harbringer have a cameo? Why is Joker going through a mass relay at the time of the crucible activation? Why isn't he fighting or defending like he's supposed to be? Why didnt he look for Shepard? This game is about friends and trust, so this part of the ending is inconsistent. - Destroying the mass relays strands pretty much those who came to fight on Earth, which is arguably everybody. Therefore, there is no way of returning home, to a degree - but the Quarians are pretty much extinct with this line of logic. And then you get the holes about Quarians and Turians can't eat human food. 


- What happens to my squad, crew, heck even Hackett? How does a part of my squad get back in the Normandy? What happens afterwards, like with Li and the future? Was the grandfather and grandchild people of this tropical planet? So then what? Are all synthetics really dead (sounds like genocide lol), so why is shepard somewhat alive? There was no closure. 


- Have real choices and discussion with this god-child if you are still set on this plot. But at the very least show me the consequense, not different colours. Make them different. We arent looking for a happy ending, just a proper ending that flows with the rest of the series, and can provide for some real flexibilty. It felt rushed. 


- The utter lack of creativity with the last ten mintues, even the "buy DLC slide was cheesy"  also, while honourable and funny, the Buzz Aldrin bit was out of place. 


- I support the indoctrination theory if things need to be restarted or a epilogue to clarify these issues. 

So yeah. 

Modifié par aapblok, 17 mars 2012 - 07:43 .

[Askanison666]

I didn't mind the fetch quests you can pick up just by listening to people talk, but I would have also liked to see some side quests that were more in depth. An example being rescuing the Elcor. Getting to see them with their VI controlled missile launchers would have been cool. Perhaps some missions similar to the loyalty missions from Mass Effect 2 or even more N7 missions that required specific members from the various games to complete.

The dialogue was solid overall. Having more choices would have been nice though since it did feel a bit like watching a movie.

Some clarification on the endings or additional endings would be cool. I loved the game until Shepard went up the elevator to talk to the Reaper Control AI. It seemed shoehorned in as most of the game allowed Shepard to at least gather information before having to decide anything.

I would like to say that I loved the game overall.

[oneyedjohn]

Just some kind of epilogue saying what happened to Sheperd, the crew, and the galaxy. How did our choices not only affect the battle, but the galaxy afterword.

a chance for a happy ending. I know its sappy, but I like happy endings.

and if the indotrination theory is true. have a chance to say "screw you" to the star child.

[ElectronicPostingInterface]

I'll echo others saying the journal is pretty unhelpful and that the ending is all bitter, no sweet.

Oh and yeah I forgot about this, but Stargazer voiced by Buzz Aldrin, ewww. Didn't like that all.

Modifié par PKchu, 17 mars 2012 - 07:37 .

[Myrmedus]

Ah yes, on additional quick thing: we need(ed) more characterization of the Reapers. We see them the most in ME3 yet for most of it they could've just been warships rather than sentient beings.

Modifié par Myrmedus, 17 mars 2012 - 07:37 .

[Babyberry]

A lot of the complaints and suggestions I have for Mass
Effect 3 have already been covered, but I think it’s important to add another
voice to the discussion just to be sure we are all heard.

I’m going to start with my critique leading up to the
ending, because I believe that some of the weaknesses start there.

To begin, when the Crucible was introduced in the very
beginning, I immediately though “Oh yeah, this is going to end disastrously.”
My first assumption was that the Crucible wasn’t going to work at all, or that
since no one knew what it would do, it would actually end up helping the
Reapers in the end in some way (which is funny, because I interpret the endings
as they are to be exactly that). I understood that the galaxy was desperate for
anything that could help them in their fight against the Reapers, so it made
sense to take a chance and build the Crucible. But I do feel there is a missed
opportunity to hint that things are not as they seem way before the player
reaches the end game.

The Catalyst was also something that confused me, but that’s
mainly because it was thrown in at the last minute. I almost feel as if this
was a missed opportunity for Shepard’s nemesis Harbinger to show up in some
way. But honestly, I can deal with this plot twist more than some of the other
issues I had.

War Assets were also an area that I think were not utilized
to their fullest potential and are very confusing for multiple reasons. I’m a
completionist when it comes to playing video games, so if that means spending
time scanning planets for items to help in the war effort, you better believe I
took the time to do that. So while it was nice to see my War Assets bar slowly
filling up, I was surprised to see that my Readiness stayed at 50%, even when I
knew I was reaching the end game. I had read articles online stating you wouldn’t
have to play the multiplayer to get the “Good” ending, but I didn’t want to
take that chance, so I got to the point where you are assaulting the Reapers at
Earth and played a ton of multiplayer to get my readiness to 100%. My concerns
with this is that nothing I did in the single player game touched my Readiness
rating, which makes no sense—nothing I did in the single player game got me
ready to take on the Reapers? I don’t think it should have been possible to get
to 100% just through the single player game alone, but as the player collects
War Assets the percentage should reflect it positively to some degree, and be a
permanent percentage increase.

The second part of the War Assets I had issues with is I
never visually saw all my work in a cumulative scene, or scenes throughout the
end game. For example, there is a side quest where a Salarian is looking for a
fossil of an extinct species so that the Krogan could use them as mounts on the
ground. When I turned in that quest, I totally expected a scene during the end
game where Krogans on these ancient animals mounts come rushing in to help me
in some way. Only that never happened—that didn’t happen with any[/i] of my War Assets.

I feel like the War Assets should have been used similarly
to how you used your crew in the suicide mission during Mass Effect 2. Maybe
nothing as complicated as choosing what part a particular War Asset takes in
the final battle, but something a lot simpler: As you take part in the final portion
of the game, your War Assets that you have collected can either buy you more
time to get to the Crucible/Citadel, or their actions during the final battle
help you once you tell the Star Child that you’re taking the fourth option
(more on this later). If you didn’t collect the War Assets, obviously that
would hinder you and lead you to a “Defeated” ending.

My point is that War Assets as they are now don’t matter—they
are an arbitrary number that just helps to vary the three “endings” we received
based on our final decision as Shepard.

Now on the endings. This was the most disappointing part of
the game for me. I was under the impression that there would be varied multiple
endings, dependent not only on your actions in the third game, but also on your
actions in the first and seconds. So instead when I discovered that there are
really only 6 slightly different endings only determined on you War Assets, it
felt like a slap to the face. There was no point in making any of the Paragon
decisions I made in any of my games. It didn’t matter that I got my entire crew
loyal to me in the second game and we all survived the suicide mission. It didn’t
matter that I scanned all the systems and collected all the items and rallied
all the troops in the third game. It didn’t even matter that I was able to get
the Turians and Krogan to cooperate, or the Quarians and the Geth to come to
peaceful terms—in the end, it came down to three decisions, and none of them
fit with the character I was playing Shepard as.

I feel that this video best captures what I mean about the
endings not being satisfactory: 
. The only time the scenes vary at all is if Earth is destroyed, if the Reapers
are destroyed, if they leave, or if they are synthesized with all life in the
galaxy. Every other scene in the three endings is exactly the same, save the
color of the relays blowing up.

I can’t fathom how these three endings could be enough
variety with the choices I made, even if I just take into consideration the
actions I took in the third game alone. To make it even more stark, I will go
through each ending and explain why it doesn’t make sense:

In the Destroy ending, the only choice you have is to
destroy all[/i] Synthetic life, including
the Geth and EDI. This threw into my face that the Geth were just a throwaway
species in the game. For two games, Legion played a huge part in helping
Shepard and his crew understand the Geth’s motivations, and when I was able to
unite the Quarians and Geth, I thought it proved that Synthetics had turned
into just another species in the galaxy and they deserve a chance to live. But
if the Star Child is to be believed, this is all a lie. But because of the way
the dialogue is handled in this scene (no dialogue wheel, no chance to explore
each option in detail), Shepard has to take what the Star Child says at face
value—which is not something I would have chosen for my Shepard, but I wasn’t
given the option to do that.

In the Control ending, I played my Shepard to believe that
the Reapers cannot be controlled, that in the end that option would lead to
Indoctrination, similar to Saren, Benezia, The Illusive Man, and countless
others in the series. It was my belief that attempting to control the Reapers
was not the way to end the war, because we had already seen so many people
think they could do that and fail. For my Shepard, this was not a viable option
and let the Reapers win.

In the Synthesize ending, this one made me the angriest. It
appears to be the best choice because everyone has a chance to “live” if the
player chooses it. But I felt it contradicted everything I had learned about
the galaxy and the different species living there. Throughout the entire
series, the player sees these new species, and they all have differences and
they all have rivalries or conflicts with other species because no one knows
how to get along. Then comes along my Shepard, and for three games he painstakingly
tries to understand these political and cultural differences, and attempts to
do something about it. I felt that most of the third game was very successful
in letting me see the payoff for all of this hard work—I united enemies and
forged new friendships. Before I beat the game, I saw that the galaxy was
divided into a multitude of different species, but we stood together and that
made us stronger than the Reapers.

But what the Synthesize ending does is tell the players that
the only way everyone in the galaxy can survive is if we are all functionally
the same. That our differences will never be overcome and the species in the
galaxy will never be able to function together in harmony unless they all carry
the same DNA information. Or something, because honestly this ending doesn’t
really make any sense. I don’t understand how the Mass Relays have the power to
change all life, Organic and Synthetic, at DNA level almost instantaneously.
This ending almost feels like this was an afterthought and not well planned
out.

In all endings, the Mass Relays are destroyed, although it
is left ambiguous if they explode in a similar way to the Mass Effect 2 DLC “The
Arrival” or if this is a different sort of destroy, so these particular
explosions won’t destroy the systems they are in. I understand that the Mass
Relays are Reaper technology, but why do they have to be destroyed? In the
Destroy ending, this makes more sense because I could understand that the
Crucible sends out some sort of signal that messes with anything that has
Reaper technology imbedded in it. It wouldn’t be the way I would want my Shepard
to save the galaxy, but it does make sense.

It does not make sense for the other endings, which leads me
to believe it was left in there because it was decided that all endings should
end in the same way—Mass Relays destroyed, the galactic fleet stranded in the
Sol system, sans the Normandy (which I am about to get to later). In the end,
destroying the Mass Relays in all ending seems as if it was there just to
create conflict, but now that the game is over and we as the players cannot
solve this conflict, we are left with no answers and we don’t see the outcome
of this conflict. We don’t know if the Turians and Quarians are going to
survive, since they need special food to live. We don’t know if the Quarians
will ever see their home planet again, even though there was a huge Priority
mission dedicated to taking it back. We don’t know if the Krogans will become a
threat again or if Wrex and Eva can unite them and bring them into a more manageable
glory. What was the narrative point in having my Shepard do all of this, if in
the end all the Mass Relays are going to be destroyed anyways?

It concerns me that my Shepard was shoeboxed into what
essentially is one ending; regardless of there being three, they all end the
same. His sacrifice for his friends, his people, his galaxy, it doesn’t matter
because everything is either destroyed by the Mass Relay explosions, everyone will
die due to starvation and riots, or they are marooned on a planet Somewhere Out
There (and we all know how well that ended up in Mass Effect 2 if you completed
Jacob’s Loyalty mission).

This leads me to the Normandy scene in the ending. It just
does not make sense at all. Was a retreat called? When was it called? Did Joker
make it to a Mass Relay before Shepard made his decision? The answer to these
questions really doesn’t matter because the way I played my game, there is no
way the Normandy would have retreated, regardless of orders. If there was even
a slim chance that Shepard was going to need the Normandy and her crew, she
would have stuck around. So again, this leads me to believe that a narrative
decision was made that in all endings, the Normandy was to be marooned on an Unknown
planet and that her descendants would be the ones that would pass Shepard’s
stories into legend. But it doesn’t make sense that in all endings this is the
thing that has to happen.

The Mass Effect series has always been about choice, so why
were we given so few choices in our endings? Was time a constraint? Was the
plan always to release DLC content that would continue the ending or change it
in some way?

So how can these issues be fixed? First, a narrative decision
has to be made: Is the Indoctrination Theory valid, or does another option need
to be added? There are plenty of hints that Shepard is indoctrinated in the
third game, so it’s not like the theory is invalid. But that’s not the only way
the ending could be fixed. Just adding a fourth option where Shepard goes “We’ll
take our chances” to the Star Child, and then your choices and War Assets then
play out into a variety of “Everyone Dies” to “Garrus and Shepard sitting on a
beach with some beers celebrating their hard victory”.

What I’m saying is there needs to be options, and the
framework is already there. The three endings already in game can remain as is,
but the fourth option (whether it’s Indoctrination or telling the Star Child
off) should lead to more than just one new ending. There should be a chance for
failure, there should be a chance to win by the skin of your teeth and with
heavy losses, and there should be a chance to win where everyone manages to survive
(yes, even Shepard).

I get that War Is Awful. I get that at the end of wars not
everyone survives. I get that sometimes things are damaged beyond repair. I get
that the hero of the stories sometimes have to die to save everyone. But why is
my only option for Shepard to die and doom everyone in the known galaxy to
death themselves? The Mass Effect series is about choice, and if I played my
Shepard right through all three games, why don’t I have the choice to have him
survive?

I know this was long, and I know I probably missed
something. But this is the bulk of my argument, and I hope it at least gives
everyone at Bioware something to at least think about.

Modifié par Babyberry, 17 mars 2012 - 07:38 .

[Myrmedus]

I think you need to update your web browser! xD

[ZeroCrewX]

Kittenpirate wrote...

I want my blue babies.

That is all.

This.

My Shepard fought so hard, made so many sacrifices along the way. I will not accept the Red Green Blue crap.

Holding the line.

On a side note, the ending suggestions :

Give us closure, this is the last chance guys... It will determine how any future Bioware or mass effect titles do...
So make it blow our minds. 

Of course I'm not saying it should all be roses and butterfies, an ending where its more depressing and impactful is alright with me, but dont force us on that, we worked so hard for all this to end in such a crappy way.

Also would like to say the most important thing of all : make. our. choices. matter. Not just untill the end, but after!

This is a game BASED on choice is it not? On the players making their own fate, their own story, give us exactly what you promised us so many times before it was released. 

Hell, use the profits from the sales if you have to, I dont think many people will be too happy to give Bioware MORE money after we were cheated like that...

My hope is with you Bioware that you'll suprise us all and blow our minds in a good way this time!

Modifié par ZeroCrewX, 17 mars 2012 - 07:39 .

[Babyberry]

Sorry, I edited my post so it reads correctly now!

[Soma.E-Pro]

1. Indoctrination Theory canonized with epic finale incorporating EMS to finish off the Reapers.

2. Epilogue displaying effects of your choices on squad mates and races throughout the galaxy.

3. Shepard survival as an option to live out life with LI.

Add these things and you have the greatest game of all time.