1309 réponses à ce sujet

[saracen16]

savionen wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

savionen wrote...

saracen16 wrote...

And mine, too. I liked the fact that the ending was really involving, and forced you to think about your previous decisions in the game.

lol, how did it make you think about your previous decisions? None of them even mattered.

I'm deeply and gravely sorry, but what you and The Angry One are saying is entirely bull****. And I'll tell you why.

You're telling me the decisions to keep Kaidan or Ashley alive didn't matter? Or that Wrex survived, Mordin survived, Maelon's data was saved, leading to the genophage being cured, Eve still alive, Wrex promoting expansion while Eve, still alive, acts as a political balance to him? Where were you prior to the last 10 minutes of the game? You're telling me that rewriting the geth heretics didn't net me a bonus in geth fleet strength? That saving the Destiny Ascension didn't add to my war assets and subtract from some of them (i.e. Alliance fleets that got sacrificed)? That saving Jenna from Chora's Den, being nice to Conrad, acquiring ALL of Matriarch Dilinaga's writings in Mass Effect 1, and getting Gavin Hossle's data for him on Feros didn't help me catch that Cerberus spy in the docking area without killing Conrad AND netting me a war asset for the Crucible?

That not saving Kirrahe on Virmire and Thane in the Collector Mission lead to the Salarian councillor being executed and made convincing Kaidan or Ashley even more difficult than it was that Udina is a traitor? That having Legion and Tali alive as well as Admiral Zaal'Koris advocating for peace while the rest of the Quarians were told not to go against the Geth led to Commander Shepard having more leverage than, say, Han'Gerrel the warmongerer? That saving the Rachni queen on Noveria led to her being recaptured by the Reapers and thus freeing her netted me a war asset, whereas if I free her if she was killed on Noveria results in a significant decline in my war assets?

I could go on.

Go play the game again and then tell me that my decisions didn't matter.

You can get 4k+ or 5k+ war assets even if your entire crew from ME2 is dead, and you barely do anything in ME3. Infact, you only need 3k for Synthesis. I had 9k war assets at the end of ME3. I would have gotten the same ending if I didn't do nearly half of the game.

Everything that happens in ME3 is irrelevant to the ending and has no bearing on the ending, other than what you personally may choose. And even then, the 3 choices are basically the same since they are vague.

For Chrissakes, have a memory slightly longer than 10 ****ing minutes. The whole game IS the ending: the ending of EVERY SINGLE plot and sub-plot started in ME1, from the genophage to the Quarians to Conrad Verner. There is no humanly manner that ALL these choices can be shown in the last 10 minutes of the game except through the war assets: warriors for the war and scientists for the Crucible.

All 3 endings the mass relays are destroyed. All 3 endings Shepard "dies". All 3 endings the Reapers are "gone" but are still capable of coming back.

No. Here's my ending.

I synthesized organics and synthetics + cured the Krogan genophage + saved both Quarians and Geth + got Conrad Verner hooked up and actually making a difference + Khalisah helping out the war effort + wiping out the Rachni AFTER I saved them on Noveria + saving the council while convincing Kaidan not to stand in my way + ... the list goes on.

In life, the journey is just as important as the destination.

Modifié par saracen16, 19 mars 2012 - 07:16 .

[Vikali]

Cosmar wrote...

I generally don't pay much attention to people who are unable to back up their opinions. It's fine if people like the endings, but when all they can say is that "it's artistic" or something to back that opinion up, I tend to ignore them.

I like the endings and my expanation didn't include the word artistic once.

[The Angry One]

dfstone wrote...

Synergy was the entire plot line of ME1.

The METHOD used in the ME3 ending is what I'm talking about. Turning Shepard into goo to somehow change everything in the galaxy is magic.

[Almostfaceman]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Ambiguity, I'm not going to explain AGAIN why it's surrender. Read my posts.
Shepard does not challenge the kid's assertions once.

As for not explaining Joker's flight... that's a plot hole. It's not explained. He should be at the battle but he isn't. THAT'S WHY IT'S A PLOT HOLE.

I apologize, I was in the restroom.

You feel surrender means "not asking questions." which is absurd. It is not surrender. In a psychological sense, you miiiiight be able to call it that, but it would be entirely subjective.

Entirely.

And on Joker, I encourage you to take a look at the second paragraph of Wikipedia's page on plotholes. It sayes that stories can have unanswered questions, but a plothole is one that is essential to the games outcome. Joker is not essential.

No, not really. Shepard subject's himself and the entire galaxy to the opinion and choices of Starchild. That, is surrender. In both word and deed.

[savionen]

The Angry One wrote...

Lightice_av wrote...

Destroy and synthesis always end with the 100% likelihood that Earth will be devastated when the Citadel breaks up and impacts.

Nonsense. Apart from the fact that Earth was already devastated, the Citadel is breaking into tiny pieces in both endings. Nothing remotely enough to cause wider scale of destruction than the Reapers already have. Furthermore, it's filled with Eezo. Who knows where gravity flings that stuff.

The Citadel is 7 billion metric tons. Earth has been ruined, but still livable with aid.
The fallout from the Citadel's mass will cause a nuclear winter, tiny pieces or not. Moreover, breaking into tiny pieces is an outright lie. We see the wards start to buckle before the scene changes, but they are still largely intact.

Breaking up a large object into smaller pieces generally makes things worse on impact.... it spreads out the destruction, the mass is still close to the same. The only way to stop this would be to turn the Citadel into dust.

[Ryokun1989]

savionen wrote...

It doesn't directly destroy the Reapers. It sends out a pulse from the Mass Relays within the Milky Way, the Reapers don't live inside the Milky Way do they?


The Reapers are temporarily under Shepards control in the Control ending. God-kid even says it's a temporary solution.


In Synthesis, organic-synthetics can still create pure-synthetics, the main reason that organics were being killed.

Err, no... *destroy* is a temporary solution. Because someone will go and create new synthetics. Watch the ending again.

Speculating that there's more Reapers elsewhere who'll come back... now THAT makes no sense. The kid god made them. Why on earth would he give you that option and then hold back a bunch of reapers somewhere?

Synthesis implies that there'll no longer be distinction between organic and synthetic, so no they can't.

[Dimensio]

The Angry One wrote...

Persephone wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

Shiran wrote...

Well, it is already like that? Those who do not gather enough assets do not get option for best ending (green ending)

It is not the "best" ending at all, it is the most nonsensical.
And still destroys the galaxy.

According to you. You ask for respect, yet you sneer at anyone who likes the endings. Yeesh, LET THEM.

I called synthesis nonsensical. It is. It makes no sense. It uses magic to solve a problem that exists only in the mind of the Catalyst.
How is that sneering at those who like it? You can like it all you want. It still makes no sense.

Synthesis seems illogical to many players because no previous in-game event or conversation reasonably foreshadowed it.  Previously, "synthesis" was only addressed with Saren -- whose "synthesis" was explicitly a part of his indoctrination -- and with the soldiers of the Reapers -- whose "synthesis" was actually a repurposing them to the Reaper's ends, using the bodies as tech transport and augmentation after killing the host -- which provided no reason for the player to ever consider "synthesis" to be a laudible goal.  The Catylist's claim that synthesis is the "next step" of the evolution of life is therefore without any meaningful contextual basis.

Had the story of the game -- or, preferably, of the trilogy -- provided subtle hints, even hints that were not obvious until referenced in a single event at the conclusion of the story, that synthesis was the ultimate (and desirable) conclusion of the relationship between organic and non-organic intelligence, the choice would not have been so illogical.

[savionen]

@saracen

Okay. So the ending of the ending is terrible. Back to square one.

Modifié par savionen, 19 mars 2012 - 07:20 .

[dfstone]

The Angry One wrote...

dfstone wrote...

Synergy was the entire plot line of ME1.

The METHOD used in the ME3 ending is what I'm talking about. Turning Shepard into goo to somehow change everything in the galaxy is magic.

No more strange then how turning people into goo makes a Reaper (ME2).

[SnakeStrike8]

Diablos2525 wrote...

I am seriously so confused, how can people be so stupid? Have they not finished the game?

I do believe that it's unfair for us to call anyone 'stupid' for liking the endings. We cannot, in good faith, sit here and ask Bioware to change the endings according to our desires and our reasons (justified or not), and then at the same time turn around and insult people who enjoyed the endings for different reasons (again, justified or not).
If someone liked the endings, then it's better to ask them why rather than insult them for not agreeing with those of us who disliked the endings. Case in point:
One of my mates is an old time Mass Effect fan. He and I gifted each other PC copies of ME 1, and we've been playing all three games on launch day. He and I can debate Mass Effect's themes for hours at a time, and generally have hours of fun over the topic. We currently stand divided on the endings; I think they're ******, he thinks they're inspired, ostensibly because of the destruction of the relays. By removing the relays, he says, galactic civilization has been forced to develop new ways of long range travel, instead  of running to the Reapers and their tech for everything (as Legion pointed out in ME 2, how one acquires tech is as important as actually acquiring it). He even sees meaning in the fleeing Normandy; according to him, the Normandy running away represents the defeat of the overall fleet. Hackett, receiving no further communication from Shepard and seeing no effect from the Crucible-Catalyst combination, must have realized that the fleet was doomed, and ordered a general retreat, Normandy included. This doesn't explain how the ground crew got up there, but the point is that people can have perfectly valid reasons for appreciating the ending, and it's in our best interests to agree to disagree with them rather than sling mud in their direction.

[Shiran]

The Angry One wrote...

How does he know? Do YOU know if there's intelligent life in this galaxy right now?

I do. There is.

[Vikali]

dfstone wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

dfstone wrote...

Synergy was the entire plot line of ME1.

The METHOD used in the ME3 ending is what I'm talking about. Turning Shepard into goo to somehow change everything in the galaxy is magic.

No more strange then how turning people into goo makes a Reaper (ME2).

I just imagined a giant sludge reaper. LOL

[The Angry One]

saracen16 wrote...

I synthesized organics and synthetics + cured the Krogan genophage + saved both Quarians and Geth + got Conrad Verner hooked up and actually making a difference + Khalisah helping out the war effort + wiping out the Rachni AFTER I saved them on Noveria + saving the council while convincing Kaidan not to stand in my way + ... the list goes on.

In life, the journey is just as important as the destination.

Let's play negative nancy, aka "realist"

- You cured the Krogan so they will overpopulate their planet. Also, they're left without their leader, Wrex.
- You united the Quarians and Geth to strand them on the other side of the galaxy from Rannoch.
- Conrad Verner is dead. The Reapers killed everyone on the Citadel, or if they didn't, you did when you blew it up.
- Ditto Kalisha
- So much for the Rachni amounting to anything.
- The Council is also dead.

[savionen]

Ryokun1989 wrote...

savionen wrote...

It doesn't directly destroy the Reapers. It sends out a pulse from the Mass Relays within the Milky Way, the Reapers don't live inside the Milky Way do they?


The Reapers are temporarily under Shepards control in the Control ending. God-kid even says it's a temporary solution.


In Synthesis, organic-synthetics can still create pure-synthetics, the main reason that organics were being killed.

Err, no... *destroy* is a temporary solution. Because someone will go and create new synthetics. Watch the ending again.

Speculating that there's more Reapers elsewhere who'll come back... now THAT makes no sense. The kid god made them. Why on earth would he give you that option and then hold back a bunch of reapers somewhere?

Synthesis implies that there'll no longer be distinction between organic and synthetic, so no they can't.

You're just speculating different answers... too. How do you know that pure-synthetics can't be created anymore? All life becomes part synthetic-part organic, that doesn't mean that you can't change things, again.

Why would we believe that all Reapers are inside the Milky Way? The supernovas from the Mass Relays are what kill the Reapers.... they live in DARK SPACE. Are 100% of Reapers convinently standing next to Mass Relays? Half of what the kid says is BS. He says that Shepard will die in the Destroy ending but Shepard can still live.

[The Angry One]

Shiran wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

How does he know? Do YOU know if there's intelligent life in this galaxy right now?

I do. There is.

Evidence please.

[Ryokun1989]

greengoron89 wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Those are all, like I said, "why?" questions, not "lore inconsistencies."

I'll answer.

What it really boils down to for me at least is not necessarily "inconsistencies" in the literal sense, but simply more in how they handled the Reapers: it feels very "inconsistent" to build the Reapers up as Lovecraftian horrors, then come in at the last second with little-to-no foreshadowing with this earth-shattering revelation that sort of "neuters" the Reapers as villains and turns them into some kind of misunderstood benefactors/tools of a "god in the machine" (another issue I personally have with the ending).

In other words, it totally plays against expectation - which is, in this case, not a good thing. Building expectations over the course of three games and then going completely against those expectations at the last second is quite shock, and can have an extremely negative impact if done the wrong way - which it clearly has for a significant number of people.

So perhaps calling these "lore inconsistencies" is just a somewhat misrepresentative way of expressing disappointment in having one's expectations fail to be met.

Hope that makes sense.

Did you listen to Sovereign's speech in the first game?

[saracen16]

The Angry One wrote...

Ryokun1989 wrote...

The Angry One, you should have saved up more assets.

If you do that the pulse doesn't incinerate planets.

Sigh.
All endings destroy the relays.

But they don't necessarily destroy the star systems like the asteroid did in Arrival, which was more like detonating a rocket launcher that killed a person. A more apt analogy in this case would be what happens to a human's arm (but not to the human as a whole) after operating a Claymore shotgun that he wasn't trained for.

All endings strand the fleet.

1. The retreat order disproves this assertion...
2. ...and there is no chance that EVERY SINGLE LIVING THING in the galaxy went to Earth: they also have their own interests to protect.

Destroy and synthesis always end with the 100% likelihood that Earth will be devastated when the Citadel breaks up and impacts.

The Citadel was blown to smithereens, to tiny bits that are comparable to a meteor shower landing on Earth's surface: almost no harm comes of it.

But I notice you've repeated this same argument with others on the board, even though they've responded.

Talk about self-righteousness.

[K_Tabris]

Diablos2525 wrote...

I am seriously so confused, how can people be so stupid? Have they not finished the game?

EDIT: I'm wondering if all the people who finished the game first were mostly series fans, whereas now we are seeing a bunch of first time fans finishing the game weeks later?

The vocal minority comes out of the woodwork eventually.  Some people just like the dark, artistic stuff.  They are either too stupid to realize the ending was not a clever way of springboarding speculation.  Or they are too intellignet, and voer think everything anyway.  In either case, and ending liek this is perfect for those types.

[Somath Cegem]

The problem with the sweeping big picture ending is that Mass Effect has never been about the big picture it's been about focusing on the personal cost buried within that big picture, hell Mass Effect 2 spells out the best here.

www.youtube.com/watch

[dfstone]

KitePolaris wrote...

I just imagined a giant sludge reaper. LOL

Heh.  The game does leave a lot to the imagination.

Modifié par dfstone, 19 mars 2012 - 07:21 .

[piemanz]

Cosmar wrote...

I generally don't pay much attention to people who are unable to back up their opinions. It's fine if people like the endings, but when all they can say is that "it's artistic" or something to back that opinion up, I tend to ignore them.

Nice, you obvioulsy came to that conclusion by ignoring the other 30 odd pages in this thread

Thanks for the input.


*slow clap*

[Xeranx]

This thread is moving kind of fast, but can someone confirm if the developers actually came out and said that Joker did leave the Sol system?

[Ryokun1989]

savionen wrote...

You're just speculating different answers... too. How do you know that pure-synthetics can't be created anymore? All life becomes part synthetic-part organic, that doesn't mean that you can't change things, again.

Why would we believe that all Reapers are inside the Milky Way? The supernovas from the Mass Relays are what kill the Reapers.... they live in DARK SPACE. Are 100% of Reapers convinently standing next to Mass Relays? Half of what the kid says is BS. He says that Shepard will die in the Destroy ending but Shepard can still live.

... because the kid says so!
They're not supernovas! Look at the Earth! If you have enough assets, it's fine!
*facepalm*

[Ryokun1989]

Xeranx wrote...

This thread is moving kind of fast, but can someone confirm if the developers actually came out and said that Joker did leave the Sol system?

No, they didn't.

[Dimensio]

The Angry One wrote...

Shiran wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

How does he know? Do YOU know if there's intelligent life in this galaxy right now?

I do. There is.

Evidence please.

While not yet confirmed, some have identified the most likely location where intelligent life may exist in the Milky Way galaxy.