I am terribly sorry I could not read all of your text. I have some reading difficulties with too much text in one spot, and if you manage to divide it up into paragraphs I could at least read it in turns, but I agree much with what you have written.
I am not opposed to the three choices Shepard have to make in the ending, but opposed to the fact that there are too many gaps after the choice has been made. I want an extended epilogue that brings closure to the best Sci Fi story in history ever told.
Great writers know that it doesn't really matter if your book/movie/game is really good or really bad - as long as it has a good ending, then every misstake up to that point will be forgiven. That is why it is crucial to bring closure to the mass of fans that have required it.
I'd happily pay for a ending DLC, that is optional to those who wants it. Heck, I'm now a Xbox Live Gold member ONLY because of ME3 multiplayer, and that really hurts my wallet already...
The Best Defense of the Ending I have seen
Débuté par
Taes
, mars 20 2012 07:06
Retour en haut
#102
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 09:48
Shallyah
-
- Members
- 1 357 messages
First of all, I am going to say that I respect this OP's post. Despite the unreadable format in which his message come, I can see a lot of work put into expressing his point of view.
Reading further, what I see is all speculation. "Perhaps this happened, perhaps that happened, and maybe then that other thing happened...".
But it all comes to say nothing, really. I posted earlier in another thread that if I want to grasp at straws, I'll think that my Shepard, who survived with the destroy ending, managed to get on his feet, climbed on a FTL-ready ship and tracked the Normandy's signature, which wouldn't have gotten that far in the few seconds it had to escape, to eventually land on the mysterious planet, find Tali, and build her the house he had promised her to rebuild whatever they could in relative happiness.
But that is more my wishful thinking than anything else. There is no evidence of anything. There is really nothing that indicates which is the fate of Shepard and all the people that he knew and especially those he grew to care for and love. The only thing that is more grievous for a person than seeing a loved one die, is finding that they are gone, and not knowing what could have happened to them. I've seen through the media numerous unfortunate real cases of people who had their kids snatched, and they're desperate in such degree that they rather know that their loved ones have passed away than keeping hanging eternally on that eroding edge of uncertainty imagining the worst.
And that eroding edge of uncertainty is what Mass Effect 3 delivered to us.
Reading further, what I see is all speculation. "Perhaps this happened, perhaps that happened, and maybe then that other thing happened...".
But it all comes to say nothing, really. I posted earlier in another thread that if I want to grasp at straws, I'll think that my Shepard, who survived with the destroy ending, managed to get on his feet, climbed on a FTL-ready ship and tracked the Normandy's signature, which wouldn't have gotten that far in the few seconds it had to escape, to eventually land on the mysterious planet, find Tali, and build her the house he had promised her to rebuild whatever they could in relative happiness.
But that is more my wishful thinking than anything else. There is no evidence of anything. There is really nothing that indicates which is the fate of Shepard and all the people that he knew and especially those he grew to care for and love. The only thing that is more grievous for a person than seeing a loved one die, is finding that they are gone, and not knowing what could have happened to them. I've seen through the media numerous unfortunate real cases of people who had their kids snatched, and they're desperate in such degree that they rather know that their loved ones have passed away than keeping hanging eternally on that eroding edge of uncertainty imagining the worst.
And that eroding edge of uncertainty is what Mass Effect 3 delivered to us.
Modifié par Shallyah, 20 mars 2012 - 09:52 .
#103
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 09:51
Darthlawsuit
-
- Members
- 633 messages
Nice and Biased. Ignoring all of the major complaints and plot holes in the series. Just the way fox news likes it, I think they may have found a new job.
#104
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 09:53
AmaraDark
-
- Members
- 76 messages
Skyblade012 on page 4 does an ---excellent-- breakdown and refutation of these arguments, so I recommend the OP and those who follow read it.
My biggie is the plot holes, and how the ending flies in the face of everything you've done over the course of three games.
The ending (all three of them) does renders all of your work moot. No mass relays means untold billions are going to die. Palaven, Thessia and Earth have no way to receive humanitarian aid for reconstruction. The people of Ilum and Omega are going to starve. The fleets trapped in the Sol system are going to starve (Taurians and Quarians in particular) from lack of supplies.
No one is going to care about the colonies you saved, the races you united - no one can contact each other. All the time spent arguing with Javik that the Protheans greatest and fatal mistake was in their lack of diversity, their suppression of other races - if you take the Destroy ending, you just destroyed 50% of the diversity of the universe and nulled all your work to bring the Quarians and Geth together. Not to mention breaking Joker's heart by killing EDI.
Synergy ending, you are basically taking away everyone's ability to decide, their choice, their own destiny by -forcing the entire universe- to become half synthetic or half organic. The idea of removing free will on that extensive of a level, your name should be a curse throughout history, not a hero.
Control ending, you just admitted that TIM was right. You are doing exactly what Cerb. and the Illusive Man wanted, after having fought him for most of three games and especially ME3.
This is of course assuming destroying the Mass Relays didn't blow up the star systems - I've seen arguments for and against, but the simple fact is ----We Don't Know---- because Bioware couldn't be bothered to show us.
My biggie is the plot holes, and how the ending flies in the face of everything you've done over the course of three games.
The ending (all three of them) does renders all of your work moot. No mass relays means untold billions are going to die. Palaven, Thessia and Earth have no way to receive humanitarian aid for reconstruction. The people of Ilum and Omega are going to starve. The fleets trapped in the Sol system are going to starve (Taurians and Quarians in particular) from lack of supplies.
No one is going to care about the colonies you saved, the races you united - no one can contact each other. All the time spent arguing with Javik that the Protheans greatest and fatal mistake was in their lack of diversity, their suppression of other races - if you take the Destroy ending, you just destroyed 50% of the diversity of the universe and nulled all your work to bring the Quarians and Geth together. Not to mention breaking Joker's heart by killing EDI.
Synergy ending, you are basically taking away everyone's ability to decide, their choice, their own destiny by -forcing the entire universe- to become half synthetic or half organic. The idea of removing free will on that extensive of a level, your name should be a curse throughout history, not a hero.
Control ending, you just admitted that TIM was right. You are doing exactly what Cerb. and the Illusive Man wanted, after having fought him for most of three games and especially ME3.
This is of course assuming destroying the Mass Relays didn't blow up the star systems - I've seen arguments for and against, but the simple fact is ----We Don't Know---- because Bioware couldn't be bothered to show us.
#105
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 09:54
Skyblade012
-
- Members
- 1 336 messages
Post split due to formatting errors.
[quote]Taes wrote...
Obvious foreshadowing through the game hinted at Shepard’s death and by extension the player also dies. The ending continues a story that was never just about Shepard, but the fates of all races and synthetics in the Mass Effect universe. I won’t go into more detail about how Shepard was ultimately the vehicle of a much larger story, but know that the ending was achieved thanks to plot cohesion in three games. Now I shall give my evidence in support of the ending’s brilliance:
The ending was a very gratifying final nod at the symbolism of Shepard. [/quote]
Ha, no. Shepard as a character never gives in to anyone. She always forges her own path, stays true to her own decisions, and does not take "no" for an answer. Until the end of the game, when she suddenly capitulates with the enemy of all life just because he's shiny and doesn't use logic.
[quote]No one really talks about why Shepard was chosen as the name of our protagonist. It doesn’t take a genius to figure it out either. Shepard’s name is an intentional play on what a Shepard is; through her actions Shepard led and united others under one common mission and ultimately delivered them to a brighter future (we hope).[/quote]
You are thinking of "Shepherd". "Shepard" was chosen because it was the name of the first US astronaut in space. They are not the same thing.
Oh, and the unity thing? Yeah, thrown out the window, as the godchild's argument is that unity, teamwork, and tolerance is impossible, and Shepard just blindly follows it.
[quote]Shepard first was the leader of humanity in ME1, and then the leader of a group of unlikely allies in ME2…in ME3 Shepard led galaxies to rise up against the Reapers. Did you catch the scene after the credits though? The child in the scene referred to our commander as “The Shepard.” Considering that Shepard made a God-like decision at the end of ME3, Shepard being revered as quite omnipotent makes sense. Depending on what ending you chose Shepard became either the leader of the Reapers, the leader of an entirely new species that is synthetic and organic, or Shepard delivered the organic races into a time of peace much like herding sheep to safer pastures.[/quote]
Again, Shepard's tacit agreement with the godchild that unity, tolerance, and teamwork don't work destroy Shepard as a character, specifically because UNITY IS WHAT SHEPARD WORKS TO ACHIEVE IN EVERY GAME.
[quote] 2. The ending is open to interpretation and leaves the plot ripe for expanding in future games. Though Shepard was informed of the immediate results of her actions, the sonic boom-like impact her choice has on all life in space will be felt for centuries. We don’t know how the future will be though; what will happen when the cycle starts again if you chose the right path? How does controlling the Reapers change things for humanity if you chose the left? What will a generation of synthetic-organic hybrids be like if you chose the path straight ahead? Consider how far into the future that scene after the credits was. What was really going on in that moment? Were the grandfather and child completely organic? How advanced is space travel again? The glimpse of the future was purposefully vague so that players can determine for themselves what exactly was going on.[/quote]
Um, speculation. Yay? I really don't see your point here. Leaving things open does not argue for quality at all.
[quote]3. The end game decision had no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ choice. There was no red or blue text to tell you how to respond.[/quote]
Just red and blue explosions.
[quote]There was no dialogue wheel to show which choice was the paragon move or which was a renegade ending. Bioware created a moment where you could ponder the pros and cons of your choices without wondering how this might affect any preconceived notions someone had about doing a ‘paragon-only’ play through or getting just renegade points.[/quote]
Um, yay for them? In case you hadn't noticed, Paragon/Renegade points basically didn't matter in ME3 anyway, since the Reputation score was the convincing modifier, rather than P/R values.
And, frankly, most of their good moral decisions in the past had you thinking in terms of the decision, rather than the points, anyway. Destroy/rewrite anyone?
Except that there it was well established why those were the only options, when the option EVERYONE wants to take in ME3, of just telling the godchild to get stuffed, is sadly missing.
[quote]Shepard’s humanity and own uncertainty in ME3 is one of the central themes to the narrative, and when Shepard is reduced to a broken soldier with only a pistol the game pulls at how the players would respond to that abrupt turn of events. Regardless of how people felt about the ending, I doubt anyone can say they didn’t hesitate in choosing a decision without some serious thought first.[/quote]
Those thoughts being "why can't I just blow this station up, take the Catalyst with it, getting rid of the driving intelligence of the Reapers while sparing the Mass Relays, thus providing a win-win scenario?"
[quote]4. A masterful narrative shift occurs, making this not an ending but a new beginning.[/quote]
If by that you mean "sudden about-face that discards every narrative theme, character trait, and plot point that came before it", then you are technically correct, but it was more "clunky as hell" than "masterful".
[quote] The way the ending was planned could not have been acted out more brilliantly.[/quote]
Yes, it really, really could have.
[quote]The Reaper beam rips through the charging group of ragtag survivors as they attempt to make an all-out footrace to the beam. Players watch this happen and get the first jolt of panic when they realize Shepard for the first time will not be okay. The controls, no matter how forcefully you hit the buttons, simply direct a limping commander towards their goal. Shepard sluggishly lifts an arm to shoot a pistol at oncoming husks and staggers into the Citadel. I cannot be the only one who wanted to scream at Shepard to shake it off and sprint ahead to find Anderson, but that is exactly what we are supposed to feel. It is obvious in this moment that Shepard’s story is ending as she struggles to point her gun at the Illusive Man and falls onto the controls of the Citadel shutters.[/quote]
Shepard's story is still going fine. This is still the ultimate expression of Shepard. Destroyed, beaten down, torn apart, still Shepard chooses her path and sticks through it, even though Death itself looms before her. Nothing stands in her way, nothing can turn her away. Not even a Reaper. THAT is the ultimate expression of Shepard as a character.
[quote] When the Catalyst begins to speak, the change from Shepard’s story to one that is about just the Mass Effect universe begins.[/quote]
The story at the ending has NOTHING to do with Mass Effect.
[quote]Shepard has little time to speak to the Catalyst before prompted with a decision; she is confused and suddenly seems small when confronted with a vastly superior AI and an opportunity to rewrite destiny appears in the form of three paths leading to her ultimate demise.[/quote]
Yet more bull****. Shepard faced down a vastly superior AI when she met Sovereign and Harbinger, and didn't "feel small" then. The entire point of Shepard as a character is that she never backs down to anyone. Shepard doesn't let anyone impose their answers or morality on her. This is why so many players ****ed when they were forced to work with Cerberus. Shepard does not let others control her path, and forcing it in so blatantly and painfully at the end just ruined the character.
[quote]I didn’t feel like I was even playing Shepard in those moments; I felt like I was playing God and that to give someone that responsibility seemed unfair.[/quote]
Funny, if I was playing God, I could choose to just eliminate the godchild and his horrible logic and everything would be fine.
I didn't feel like I was playing Shepard, no, because Shepard's response to such bull**** as the child feeds us is "screw you, get the hell out of our galaxy, take your damn Reapers with you, or I will end you here and now, shiny god-powers or not".
[quote]Through this entire process Shepard has been filled with the hope and support of everyone she rallies…would anyone support her now as she changes the fates of all organic and synthetic life?[/quote]
Whether they support her or not doesn't matter because, for the first time ever, Shepard has no choice in the matter.
[/quote] As we watch Shepard die, the ending doesn’t just stop there…it continues the story as we see Joker and the squad crash land on an unknown planet. Seeing them climb out and simply take in a new world that appears unsullied by technology is like a clean slate or a breath of fresh air. Playing Shepard feels like a first-person narrative even though players of video games are always viewers of a story…this definitive switch to being an observer of uncontrollable events is Bioware’s way of saying “but wait, there’s more.” After the credits ended I felt an even greater sense of new beginnings when an unknown child looks up at the universe Shepard once navigated and hopes that maybe they too can become a hero.[/quote]
Hero? According to the godchild ending, Shepard did literally nothing except be in the right place at the right time. Shepard has no choice or free will. And causing the deaths of trillions is not exactly "hero" material.
[quote] 5. Foreshadowing and clever story decisions lead to the final, encompassing theme that has always been present in each game: Space is full of infinite possibility.[/quote]
Ha ha ha ha ha. Wa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Oh, man. That's awesome.
First, that wasn't the theme of any of the games. Second, the ending proves that space isn't full of any possibilities at all. Whatever you do, none of it matters, nothing changes, and your very free will is thrown away while you are forced to believe and follow the broken logic of a bad computer god.
[quote] Mass Effect isn’t as cut and dry of a trilogy as many might think it is. Sure, we are largely invested in Shepard’s story to a point where we forget that everything happening is larger than life. Most heroes in video games save the world; Bioware best gives a representation of what it is like to save an entire universe.[/quote]
I see you've bought into the godchild's bunk that "complete and utter devastation = saving".
[quote]Taes wrote...
Obvious foreshadowing through the game hinted at Shepard’s death and by extension the player also dies. The ending continues a story that was never just about Shepard, but the fates of all races and synthetics in the Mass Effect universe. I won’t go into more detail about how Shepard was ultimately the vehicle of a much larger story, but know that the ending was achieved thanks to plot cohesion in three games. Now I shall give my evidence in support of the ending’s brilliance:
The ending was a very gratifying final nod at the symbolism of Shepard. [/quote]
Ha, no. Shepard as a character never gives in to anyone. She always forges her own path, stays true to her own decisions, and does not take "no" for an answer. Until the end of the game, when she suddenly capitulates with the enemy of all life just because he's shiny and doesn't use logic.
[quote]No one really talks about why Shepard was chosen as the name of our protagonist. It doesn’t take a genius to figure it out either. Shepard’s name is an intentional play on what a Shepard is; through her actions Shepard led and united others under one common mission and ultimately delivered them to a brighter future (we hope).[/quote]
You are thinking of "Shepherd". "Shepard" was chosen because it was the name of the first US astronaut in space. They are not the same thing.
Oh, and the unity thing? Yeah, thrown out the window, as the godchild's argument is that unity, teamwork, and tolerance is impossible, and Shepard just blindly follows it.
[quote]Shepard first was the leader of humanity in ME1, and then the leader of a group of unlikely allies in ME2…in ME3 Shepard led galaxies to rise up against the Reapers. Did you catch the scene after the credits though? The child in the scene referred to our commander as “The Shepard.” Considering that Shepard made a God-like decision at the end of ME3, Shepard being revered as quite omnipotent makes sense. Depending on what ending you chose Shepard became either the leader of the Reapers, the leader of an entirely new species that is synthetic and organic, or Shepard delivered the organic races into a time of peace much like herding sheep to safer pastures.[/quote]
Again, Shepard's tacit agreement with the godchild that unity, tolerance, and teamwork don't work destroy Shepard as a character, specifically because UNITY IS WHAT SHEPARD WORKS TO ACHIEVE IN EVERY GAME.
[quote] 2. The ending is open to interpretation and leaves the plot ripe for expanding in future games. Though Shepard was informed of the immediate results of her actions, the sonic boom-like impact her choice has on all life in space will be felt for centuries. We don’t know how the future will be though; what will happen when the cycle starts again if you chose the right path? How does controlling the Reapers change things for humanity if you chose the left? What will a generation of synthetic-organic hybrids be like if you chose the path straight ahead? Consider how far into the future that scene after the credits was. What was really going on in that moment? Were the grandfather and child completely organic? How advanced is space travel again? The glimpse of the future was purposefully vague so that players can determine for themselves what exactly was going on.[/quote]
Um, speculation. Yay? I really don't see your point here. Leaving things open does not argue for quality at all.
[quote]3. The end game decision had no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ choice. There was no red or blue text to tell you how to respond.[/quote]
Just red and blue explosions.
[quote]There was no dialogue wheel to show which choice was the paragon move or which was a renegade ending. Bioware created a moment where you could ponder the pros and cons of your choices without wondering how this might affect any preconceived notions someone had about doing a ‘paragon-only’ play through or getting just renegade points.[/quote]
Um, yay for them? In case you hadn't noticed, Paragon/Renegade points basically didn't matter in ME3 anyway, since the Reputation score was the convincing modifier, rather than P/R values.
And, frankly, most of their good moral decisions in the past had you thinking in terms of the decision, rather than the points, anyway. Destroy/rewrite anyone?
Except that there it was well established why those were the only options, when the option EVERYONE wants to take in ME3, of just telling the godchild to get stuffed, is sadly missing.
[quote]Shepard’s humanity and own uncertainty in ME3 is one of the central themes to the narrative, and when Shepard is reduced to a broken soldier with only a pistol the game pulls at how the players would respond to that abrupt turn of events. Regardless of how people felt about the ending, I doubt anyone can say they didn’t hesitate in choosing a decision without some serious thought first.[/quote]
Those thoughts being "why can't I just blow this station up, take the Catalyst with it, getting rid of the driving intelligence of the Reapers while sparing the Mass Relays, thus providing a win-win scenario?"
[quote]4. A masterful narrative shift occurs, making this not an ending but a new beginning.[/quote]
If by that you mean "sudden about-face that discards every narrative theme, character trait, and plot point that came before it", then you are technically correct, but it was more "clunky as hell" than "masterful".
[quote] The way the ending was planned could not have been acted out more brilliantly.[/quote]
Yes, it really, really could have.
[quote]The Reaper beam rips through the charging group of ragtag survivors as they attempt to make an all-out footrace to the beam. Players watch this happen and get the first jolt of panic when they realize Shepard for the first time will not be okay. The controls, no matter how forcefully you hit the buttons, simply direct a limping commander towards their goal. Shepard sluggishly lifts an arm to shoot a pistol at oncoming husks and staggers into the Citadel. I cannot be the only one who wanted to scream at Shepard to shake it off and sprint ahead to find Anderson, but that is exactly what we are supposed to feel. It is obvious in this moment that Shepard’s story is ending as she struggles to point her gun at the Illusive Man and falls onto the controls of the Citadel shutters.[/quote]
Shepard's story is still going fine. This is still the ultimate expression of Shepard. Destroyed, beaten down, torn apart, still Shepard chooses her path and sticks through it, even though Death itself looms before her. Nothing stands in her way, nothing can turn her away. Not even a Reaper. THAT is the ultimate expression of Shepard as a character.
[quote] When the Catalyst begins to speak, the change from Shepard’s story to one that is about just the Mass Effect universe begins.[/quote]
The story at the ending has NOTHING to do with Mass Effect.
[quote]Shepard has little time to speak to the Catalyst before prompted with a decision; she is confused and suddenly seems small when confronted with a vastly superior AI and an opportunity to rewrite destiny appears in the form of three paths leading to her ultimate demise.[/quote]
Yet more bull****. Shepard faced down a vastly superior AI when she met Sovereign and Harbinger, and didn't "feel small" then. The entire point of Shepard as a character is that she never backs down to anyone. Shepard doesn't let anyone impose their answers or morality on her. This is why so many players ****ed when they were forced to work with Cerberus. Shepard does not let others control her path, and forcing it in so blatantly and painfully at the end just ruined the character.
[quote]I didn’t feel like I was even playing Shepard in those moments; I felt like I was playing God and that to give someone that responsibility seemed unfair.[/quote]
Funny, if I was playing God, I could choose to just eliminate the godchild and his horrible logic and everything would be fine.
I didn't feel like I was playing Shepard, no, because Shepard's response to such bull**** as the child feeds us is "screw you, get the hell out of our galaxy, take your damn Reapers with you, or I will end you here and now, shiny god-powers or not".
[quote]Through this entire process Shepard has been filled with the hope and support of everyone she rallies…would anyone support her now as she changes the fates of all organic and synthetic life?[/quote]
Whether they support her or not doesn't matter because, for the first time ever, Shepard has no choice in the matter.
[/quote] As we watch Shepard die, the ending doesn’t just stop there…it continues the story as we see Joker and the squad crash land on an unknown planet. Seeing them climb out and simply take in a new world that appears unsullied by technology is like a clean slate or a breath of fresh air. Playing Shepard feels like a first-person narrative even though players of video games are always viewers of a story…this definitive switch to being an observer of uncontrollable events is Bioware’s way of saying “but wait, there’s more.” After the credits ended I felt an even greater sense of new beginnings when an unknown child looks up at the universe Shepard once navigated and hopes that maybe they too can become a hero.[/quote]
Hero? According to the godchild ending, Shepard did literally nothing except be in the right place at the right time. Shepard has no choice or free will. And causing the deaths of trillions is not exactly "hero" material.
[quote] 5. Foreshadowing and clever story decisions lead to the final, encompassing theme that has always been present in each game: Space is full of infinite possibility.[/quote]
Ha ha ha ha ha. Wa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Oh, man. That's awesome.
First, that wasn't the theme of any of the games. Second, the ending proves that space isn't full of any possibilities at all. Whatever you do, none of it matters, nothing changes, and your very free will is thrown away while you are forced to believe and follow the broken logic of a bad computer god.
[quote] Mass Effect isn’t as cut and dry of a trilogy as many might think it is. Sure, we are largely invested in Shepard’s story to a point where we forget that everything happening is larger than life. Most heroes in video games save the world; Bioware best gives a representation of what it is like to save an entire universe.[/quote]
I see you've bought into the godchild's bunk that "complete and utter devastation = saving".
#106
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 09:56
DarkBladeX98
-
- Members
- 632 messages
I read all of it. Yes I did.
You have some legitimate points, however most of which is based on what the Reapers tell us.The information the Protheans learned could've been BS from the Reapers that ended their cycle. The StarChild could've easily BSd us, considering Shepard doesn't get to witness what happens firsthand.
The Reapers don't have to tell us anything.
I for one do not feel comfortable destroying or resetting an entire universe I had come to love.
I realize that your choices allow you to arrive at the final choice, but I still believe they should have some impact on the final choices. Any way you cut the cake, you still get to pick RGB.
Also, in a game about freedom of choice, I was really upset with how I was forced to run on foot straight at Harbinger, saying to myself the whole way "this game is going to kill me in a WWII-like Soviet charge."
And I did notice one thing you didn't mention- Shepard breathing in space with no helmet
How did Joker crash land without EDI and after being consumed by the relay energy? Are they in another dimension? Are they dead? Is there any legitimate proof? No, sadly, there is not.
In the words of Shepard, "I think we'd rather keep our own form."
Yes I expected Shepard to die. I accepted this.
I did not expect to totally screw over the galaxy. Yes, we broke the cycle, ended the Reapers.
However, there are no relays, and there isn't any proof that they didn't kill the systems they were in.
We were fighting the whole time to save the galaxy, when really we just pushed a large reset button.
I also find it incredibly hard to believe the Reapers are supposedly "saving us" by turning all their victims into husks, brutes, and ravagers.
You can't tell me that they are trying to help us.
OP, you do realize that the Reapers are synthetics, and they might be taking out advanced civilizations just to hold them down, keep us from advancing and conquering them. Their so called cycles may have resulted in synthetics almost conquering their civilization, but they never even allowed any following civilizations to try. We may have been able to maintain our synthetics, overthrow the Reapers. Keep our Mass Relays. Hell, if they'd let us, we could advance and make our own.
Everything they do is based on an assumption that is not proven, because the Reapers never let civilization advance far enough to find out.
"You're taking away our future, without a future we have no hope. Without hope, we might as well be machines, programmed to do what we're told."
You have some legitimate points, however most of which is based on what the Reapers tell us.The information the Protheans learned could've been BS from the Reapers that ended their cycle. The StarChild could've easily BSd us, considering Shepard doesn't get to witness what happens firsthand.
The Reapers don't have to tell us anything.
I for one do not feel comfortable destroying or resetting an entire universe I had come to love.
I realize that your choices allow you to arrive at the final choice, but I still believe they should have some impact on the final choices. Any way you cut the cake, you still get to pick RGB.
Also, in a game about freedom of choice, I was really upset with how I was forced to run on foot straight at Harbinger, saying to myself the whole way "this game is going to kill me in a WWII-like Soviet charge."
And I did notice one thing you didn't mention- Shepard breathing in space with no helmet
How did Joker crash land without EDI and after being consumed by the relay energy? Are they in another dimension? Are they dead? Is there any legitimate proof? No, sadly, there is not.
In the words of Shepard, "I think we'd rather keep our own form."
Yes I expected Shepard to die. I accepted this.
I did not expect to totally screw over the galaxy. Yes, we broke the cycle, ended the Reapers.
However, there are no relays, and there isn't any proof that they didn't kill the systems they were in.
We were fighting the whole time to save the galaxy, when really we just pushed a large reset button.
I also find it incredibly hard to believe the Reapers are supposedly "saving us" by turning all their victims into husks, brutes, and ravagers.
You can't tell me that they are trying to help us.
OP, you do realize that the Reapers are synthetics, and they might be taking out advanced civilizations just to hold them down, keep us from advancing and conquering them. Their so called cycles may have resulted in synthetics almost conquering their civilization, but they never even allowed any following civilizations to try. We may have been able to maintain our synthetics, overthrow the Reapers. Keep our Mass Relays. Hell, if they'd let us, we could advance and make our own.
Everything they do is based on an assumption that is not proven, because the Reapers never let civilization advance far enough to find out.
"You're taking away our future, without a future we have no hope. Without hope, we might as well be machines, programmed to do what we're told."
#107
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 09:59
Paparob
-
- Members
- 498 messages
I'll admit, emotionally the endings work for me. The problem is when I think about them critically and the promises made pre-release it all falls flat. If I could not think I would probably love them.
(This isn't a dig at anyone who likes the endings at all, the fact reminds though for me the more I think about them the more I dislike them.)
(This isn't a dig at anyone who likes the endings at all, the fact reminds though for me the more I think about them the more I dislike them.)
#108
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:02
wrdnshprd
-
- Members
- 624 messages
Syrellaris wrote...
<snip>
I disagree. Specially on the points of them lying. They didnt lie. Having read the the ops opening post and ofcourse finished the game myself, I found that a lot of points are explainable. A lot of your open plot holes from ME1 and 2 were closed in those games already, whatever was still left, got quickly closed off in ME3.
ME3 created 1 or 2 new plotholes that leave a mystery behind. Which are really only the Joker flies in a Relay and crash lands and the information behind the catalyst. If you call that lying..well so be it. I don't.
Also they have given you different endings. Not perse in the cutscenes though and they never said it would be a cutscene ending that is different. Depending on your EMS scores and choices your ending will be different in the choices you can make nd the cutscenes change to reflect those ending choices.
That the choices are not up to your liking that is a whole different matter and is frankly an opinion, not fact. and here again, bioware did not Lie.
I am not completely defending the ending as there are things I would love to see different, but a lot of the ending does make sense.
ok.. then explain these quotes:
"...This will result in a story that diverges into widly different conclusions based on players actions in first two chapters."
Casey Hudson
im assuming you would consider the above staement true because of the war assets system. all that does is give you a gauge into exactly how many of the RGB choices you get (either 1, maybe 2, or all three). explain how that is "wildy different".
"How
could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
than be forced into bespoke ending that everyone gets?"
Mike Gamble
again, you can point to the war assets system regarding this statement.. however, its not really based on the choices you made.. its whether you do the side quests or not in ME3. its got absolutely NOTHING to do with how you role-play your shepard character through the 3 games. saving the rachni queen in ME1 or 3 for example, or sparing the geth in 3 have ZERO impact on the final outcome.
"Pretty much everything that people want to see wrapped up, or be given answers to, will be."
Ray Muzyka
explain how the rest of my party got magically teleported to the normandy during the rush to the conduit?
how do the other races get home from earth?
what about the other crew members on the normandy? we only see three of them. what happened to the rest?
and im sure there are other questions people can come up with. so how can you call that quote a true statement?
"It´s
not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where you can
say how many endings there are or wether you got ending A, B or C."
Casey Hudson
again, you can point to the war asset system here.. but, again, that argument is flawed.. all that system does is determine if you get access to all three endings, or maybe 1 or 2. so how is that 'not in any way' like the traditional game endings.
Modifié par wrdnshprd, 20 mars 2012 - 10:03 .
#109
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:03
darknessmyown
-
- Members
- 180 messages
#110
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:09
brummyuk19
-
- Members
- 257 messages
Stanley Woo wrote...
I have removed all of the "too long didn't read" posts and posts calling for formatting. If I had wanted to remove this thread entirely, I would have locked it or removed it, not announced to all and sundry that I was removing it while leaving it open.Renew81 wrote...
This thread is brand new , and just because some people arent reading it , doesnt mean nobody will
this isnt spam this is somebody's opinion about the ending and why they like it..
i dont agree with it but that doesnt mean i will not take the time to read it also if you classify
this thread now as spam by just the few post that are made.. i dont think that fair.. give
both sides a chance.
EDIT: When I started removing posts, my previous announcement was the first post on page 4. Now, without all the spam, the thread is less than one page
Funny how you don't lock this thread for being so poorly contructed. Who wants to read a wall of text that long with no paragraphs to seperate it? It doesn't start discussion, it just gets people annoyed. All the posts we have of people expressing their opinion on the horrid endings have been well thought out and put together. The ones that are trying to defend the endings, less so, but that doesn't seem to bother you at all.
#111
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:10
Xandurpein
-
- Members
- 3 045 messages
Ultimately what made the narrative in the Mass Effect games, prior to the ending in ME3, so compelling was the intensly personal relationships your Shepard formed with various characters. It was through the eyes of all these wonderfully crafted charcters that you came to understand the Mass Effect universe. The ending rips me from this intensely personal level to an abstract level where I have until then had so emotional investment at all.
The OP writes in passing about the tragic fact that the Geth will be annihilated by the destroy option, but then thinks this is fine, because someone will soon build new synthetic life. I mean no disrepsect, but that is simply a point of view I emphatically reject. We're talking the death of a whole race of innovcent sapient beings! This is when abstraction becomes arrogant and dehumanizing. I, and by extension my Shepard, cannot accept such a point of view, and yet that is the only point of view the Starchild offers.
After reading the OP and other defenders of the ending, I can understand why people who enjoy this abstract way of looking at Shepard's choices and what they mean, can find that the ending is enjoyable, even if it's in many ways poorly exectued. I am however still unable to in any way relate to that abstract and impersonal view. To me the story in the game was always an intensely personal one, even if the goal was to save the Galaxy. From my personal level all I can see is my Shepard being forced by a capricious and evil God to become the instrument of untold misery. The villain forces me to play his game and gets the last laugh on me. A bleak ending indeed.
The OP writes in passing about the tragic fact that the Geth will be annihilated by the destroy option, but then thinks this is fine, because someone will soon build new synthetic life. I mean no disrepsect, but that is simply a point of view I emphatically reject. We're talking the death of a whole race of innovcent sapient beings! This is when abstraction becomes arrogant and dehumanizing. I, and by extension my Shepard, cannot accept such a point of view, and yet that is the only point of view the Starchild offers.
After reading the OP and other defenders of the ending, I can understand why people who enjoy this abstract way of looking at Shepard's choices and what they mean, can find that the ending is enjoyable, even if it's in many ways poorly exectued. I am however still unable to in any way relate to that abstract and impersonal view. To me the story in the game was always an intensely personal one, even if the goal was to save the Galaxy. From my personal level all I can see is my Shepard being forced by a capricious and evil God to become the instrument of untold misery. The villain forces me to play his game and gets the last laugh on me. A bleak ending indeed.
Modifié par Xandurpein, 20 mars 2012 - 10:11 .
#112
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:11
CyanidPontifex
-
- Members
- 333 messages
I've attempted to break up the OP's text into something readable. Please note that these do not mirror my own thoughts:
Taes wrote...
First of all, the following obviously has spoilers for the ending of Mass Effect 3. You’ve been warned.
It seems the popular thing to do on the internet recently is to sound in on Mass Effect’s ending. The controversy that has now resulted in not just fundraising petitions but also legal action has ruffled the feathers of fans, “fans” and trolls alike. Many scoff in disbelief that I am in the camp that actually regards the ending as one of the best video game endings in recent history.
The following are statements that I have read from those who oppose the endings. They are common opinions circulating around the ‘net, and I decided to examine each before giving my own reasons in support of Bioware’s story choices:
1. "The ending does not reflect the choices Shepard made through the course of three games.”
It is entirely accurate to make this statement: the end of the game presents you with three choices and those choices do not change no matter what you do before that point. However, this final choice was not supposed to be about what Shepard has done in the past…it was about what Shepard is going to do right now. Shepard held the fate of all known organic and synthetic life in her hands (which is how I view the pistol symbolism…Shepard either lays it down to embrace synthetics or shoots it to oppose them). The reason this choice was so difficult and felt so weighted is because not only was there no paragon option, but the choice ultimately was made based on what the player’s moral code was. Let me put this into context by using my endgame as an example:
I had played as a paragon Shepard for three games, uniting galaxies and uplifting the hope and spirits of everyone. I hated Cerberus and I hated the Illusive Man’s ideas of controlling Reapers. At the end of the game, staring down those choices, I had to sit and think about which one was right. I knew that the Reaper threat would be stopped, Shepard would die and the relays would be destroyed. In theory this choice will have the same immediate outcomes, but Shepard is ultimately rewriting generations of life in the future! This choice is bigger than one individual can truly comprehend no matter how epic of a hero they were previously. The way I played Shepard reflected her desire for free will and her hope that organic life’s ability to control their destiny will prevail. With those morals in mind, I chose the option to destroy synthetic life and not break the cycle permanently. I reasoned this as the best option because now Shepard once again gave humanity and other civilizations a chance to fight like she did. While destroying synthetics was a hard pill to swallow (the Geth and EDI make that choice bittersweet), I was confident like the Catalyst was that synthetic life would rise once again, but hopefully this time chaos would not occur.
So you see this ending was not about where Shepard has been, or even about what happens ten minutes after Shepard makes her decision. It is about what kind of person Shepard, and by extension the player, is. This choice actually represents what the role-playing genre of video games should be all about: the player must make an excruciatingly hard decision that changes the direction of the game entirely…in this case it changes the canon of the Mass Effect universe in potentially three very different ways. Mass Effect 4 (if set in the future after Shepard dies) cannot ignore Shepard’s choice; either we will see the Reaper cycle beginning again, Reapers being controlled in some form, or all life will now be a synthetic-organic hybrid made to resemble Shepard. Those are three very different outcomes…we just don’t get to see that future because we were looking at the universe through Shepard’s eyes and her story came to a very dramatic end.
There is also another, much less long-winded reason why Shepard’s choices were not going to reflect the end game. Shepard’s choice reflected the journey she took; yes Shepard got to destroy the Reapers, but how did she do it? Did she resolve the turian/krogan conflict peacefully? Were the geth destroyed, or were the quarians? If Shepard didn’t make the choices she made in Mass Effect 3’s build-up to the climax at the end, Shepard couldn’t have even GOTTEN to Earth to take it back. The game did an excellent job of showing cause and effect and tying up loose ends from the previous two installments. I never went into the end of the game expecting whether I saved the Rachni or not to be the ultimate decision-maker in how this finished.
2. “The ending makes no sense and has too many large plot holes!”
The ending makes perfect sense; after the mission on Thessia we learned that there is some greater AI controlling the Reapers. A master plan akin to the theory of intelligent design has been in motion since way, way before the current events in the game. Basically, this AI has been preserving space by controlling the organics that cause chaos in the form of space discovery and creating synthetics while allowing simpler organic races to develop. In Mass Effect 1 and 2, Shepard showed the Reapers that humans were not a simple race…perhaps we could argue that the attention humanity got from them really was all Shepard’s fault (along with those who discovered the mass effect technology in the first place). Fans arguing against the plausibility of this Catalyst plot seem to believe the point of all of this needed to be explained. What these fans do not realize though, is that explaining this would be akin to trying to answer questions about life beyond Earth and if there is a God…it is too big of a concept to just give some dialogue about. The Catalyst and intelligent design are similar concepts that are largely open to interpretation of the individual playing Shepard…for Bioware to create a story and universe that makes players question their own humanity and reason for existing in space is nothing short of magnificent.
Now, I’ll examine the plot holes that many fans are pointing out:
In the ending cinematic, several things are shown including the Normandy jumping through a relay, the mass relays being destroyed, and Shepard’s squad landing on an unknown planet. The first question people have been asking is why was the Normandy in a relay jump? The Normandy was holding the front lines with the rest of the naval fleets flying about above Earth. We see the Crucible activated and charging up to fire…I can only assume that the following happened:
-Fleets were told to retreat for fear of being destroyed by the Crucible…no one knew what exactly it would do beyond destroy the Reapers somehow.
-Joker was escaping in fear of the Crucible’s power like everyone else. The Normandy had Hackett still on board and I’m guessing he gave commands to retreat from the Crucible after it activated. I realize this is hypothetical and we can’t possibly know what Joker was doing, but unfortunately this was not explained.
Another issue fans have is how could the Normandy have picked up the two squad mates that were with Shepard before she entered the beam? Again, here are some points to consider:
-There could have been time for the Normandy to land and get them to safety.
-However Cortez managed to make it out, the other squad mates possibly did the same thing…maybe there was a shuttle they used or maybe the Normandy itself landed on Earth. We don’t know how long it took for Shepard to make it to the Citadel controls and activate the Crucible. I personally have difficulty in believing the Normandy landed that close to the beam to pick up people, but again it is not a plot hole exactly because there could easily have been an explanation.
Finally, there is the matter of the mass relays exploding. These relays are said to wipe out star systems when destroyed as discussed in the Arrival DLC. We know though the relays did not explode in a predictable manner since they were destroyed not by brute force, but by the Crucible. Some unknown that no one could account for is the reason Joker and the squad survived…again, I know that this seems like a threadbare explanation, but it is one nonetheless. Much like everyone else I would love for Bioware to comment on these particular parts of the ending, but unlike everyone else I am not calling it a plot hole until the ending is proven to contradict canonized information which so far there is no evidence to support or refute anything that occurred.
3. “The last message telling people to play DLC and multiplayer cheapens the experience and is a shameless attempt to get more money out of us!”
Mass Effect 2 had amazing DLC…from new characters to bridging the gap between ME2 and 3, it greatly added to the experience of the storyline. No one complained when ME2’s ending came with an option to keep playing to experience DLC or to start a new game plus. Bioware wants people to remember that though the story of Shepard has ended, Mass Effect as a whole has not. DLC will come and probably expand an already rich story with new missions. Multiplayer’s influence on the end game is something I haven’t seen for myself yet and personally I want to make that happen. I also estimate that if Bioware even has a vague idea for a Mass Effect 4, eventually DLC like the Arrival will bridge some transition. Bioware has provided excellent reasons for fans to keep playing Mass Effect even after the story has ended…it isn’t a crime for them to want to remind you of that. They deserve to try and make profit off of the highly successful game that they have devoted a lot of time and effort on.
4. “The ending makes everything that happened in three games irrelevant!”
This is perhaps the argument that makes the least bit of sense. Over the span of three games Shepard discovered the Reapers, the origin of mass relays, the truth behind the Citadel, and that there is a cycle that purges all organic life for reasons unknown (until ME3 that is). In order for Shepard to even have gotten to the end of the trilogy, the following had to have happened: -The fight against Saren-Project Lazarus and the suicide mission-Uniting the races to take back Earth If even one of those failed, Shepard would have never gotten to the beam. That is pretty obvious. I realize though that more people harbor feelings of irrelevance because they spent all this time getting invested in a character and didn’t see any pay off in the form of a “happy” ending. Obvious foreshadowing through the game hinted at Shepard’s death and by extension the player also dies. The ending continues a story that was never just about Shepard, but the fates of all races and synthetics in the Mass Effect universe. I won’t go into more detail about how Shepard was ultimately the vehicle of a much larger story, but know that the ending was achieved thanks to plot cohesion in three games.
Now I shall give my evidence in support of the ending’s brilliance:
1. The ending was a very gratifying final nod at the symbolism of Shepard.
No one really talks about why Shepard was chosen as the name of our protagonist. It doesn’t take a genius to figure it out either. Shepard’s name is an intentional play on what a Shepard is; through her actions Shepard led and united others under one common mission and ultimately delivered them to a brighter future (we hope). Shepard first was the leader of humanity in ME1, and then the leader of a group of unlikely allies in ME2…in ME3 Shepard led galaxies to rise up against the Reapers. Did you catch the scene after the credits though? The child in the scene referred to our commander as “The Shepard.” Considering that Shepard made a God-like decision at the end of ME3, Shepard being revered as quite omnipotent makes sense. Depending on what ending you chose Shepard became either the leader of the Reapers, the leader of an entirely new species that is synthetic and organic, or Shepard delivered the organic races into a time of peace much like herding sheep to safer pastures.
2. The ending is open to interpretation and leaves the plot ripe for expanding in future games.
Though Shepard was informed of the immediate results of her actions, the sonic boom-like impact her choice has on all life in space will be felt for centuries. We don’t know how the future will be though; what will happen when the cycle starts again if you chose the right path? How does controlling the Reapers change things for humanity if you chose the left? What will a generation of synthetic-organic hybrids be like if you chose the path straight ahead? Consider how far into the future that scene after the credits was. What was really going on in that moment? Were the grandfather and child completely organic? How advanced is space travel again? The glimpse of the future was purposefully vague so that players can determine for themselves what exactly was going on.
3. The end game decision had no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ choice.
There was no red or blue text to tell you how to respond. There was no dialogue wheel to show which choice was the paragon move or which was a renegade ending. Bioware created a moment where you could ponder the pros and cons of your choices without wondering how this might affect any preconceived notions someone had about doing a ‘paragon-only’ play through or getting just renegade points. Shepard’s humanity and own uncertainty in ME3 is one of the central themes to the narrative, and when Shepard is reduced to a broken soldier with only a pistol the game pulls at how the players would respond to that abrupt turn of events. Regardless of how people felt about the ending, I doubt anyone can say they didn’t hesitate in choosing a decision without some serious thought first.
4. A masterful narrative shift occurs, making this not an ending but a new beginning.
The way the ending was planned could not have been acted out more brilliantly. The Reaper beam rips through the charging group of ragtag survivors as they attempt to make an all-out footrace to the beam. Players watch this happen and get the first jolt of panic when they realize Shepard for the first time will not be okay. The controls, no matter how forcefully you hit the buttons, simply direct a limping commander towards their goal. Shepard sluggishly lifts an arm to shoot a pistol at oncoming husks and staggers into the Citadel. I cannot be the only one who wanted to scream at Shepard to shake it off and sprint ahead to find Anderson, but that is exactly what we are supposed to feel. It is obvious in this moment that Shepard’s story is ending as she struggles to point her gun at the Illusive Man and falls onto the controls of the Citadel shutters. When the Catalyst begins to speak, the change from Shepard’s story to one that is about just the Mass Effect universe begins. Shepard has little time to speak to the Catalyst before prompted with a decision; she is confused and suddenly seems small when confronted with a vastly superior AI and an opportunity to rewrite destiny appears in the form of three paths leading to her ultimate demise. I didn’t feel like I was even playing Shepard in those moments; I felt like I was playing God and that to give someone that responsibility seemed unfair. Through this entire process Shepard has been filled with the hope and support of everyone she rallies…would anyone support her now as she changes the fates of all organic and synthetic life? As we watch Shepard die, the ending doesn’t just stop there…it continues the story as we see Joker and the squad crash land on an unknown planet. Seeing them climb out and simply take in a new world that appears unsullied by technology is like a clean slate or a breath of fresh air. Playing Shepard feels like a first-person narrative even though players of video games are always viewers of a story…this definitive switch to being an observer of uncontrollable events is Bioware’s way of saying “but wait, there’s more.” After the credits ended I felt an even greater sense of new beginnings when an unknown child looks up at the universe Shepard once navigated and hopes that maybe they too can become a hero.
5. Foreshadowing and clever story decisions lead to the final, encompassing theme that has always been present in each game: Space is full of infinite possibility.
Mass Effect isn’t as cut and dry of a trilogy as many might think it is. Sure, we are largely invested in Shepard’s story to a point where we forget that everything happening is larger than life. Most heroes in video games save the world; Bioware best gives a representation of what it is like to save an entire universe. In Mass Effect 1, we learn that humans are still pretty new to the intergalactic exploration thing. As a result, humanity seems like the kid eating glue in a room full of gifted kindergarteners. However thanks to the heroism of Commander Shepard, it is humanity that discovers the Protheans (who were vastly superior to all races existing today) and that they were wiped out by the Reapers (who everyone regarded as a folk tale). We also learn (though it really doesn’t sink in until now) that the Reapers believe it is their job to eliminate all organic life (again, we don’t know why until ME3). Shepard spends the entire game trying to tell people that this enemy is bigger than Saren, and even at the beginning of Mass Effect 2 it is obvious no one still really understands the scope of these events. In ME2 though, we learn that not even Shepard could have prepared for the information dropped on the universe thanks to a high-stakes mission aided by Cerberus. The Protheans were not the only ones controlled by the Reapers; the geth and collectors all felt the indoctrination of these synthetic foes. We see how the Reapers work, and we see that this suicide mission is really only a small victory in what is soon to be an all-out war spanning star systems.
Mass Effect 3 plot is larger than any previous game; it is quite literally a massive war that is affecting everything in its path. Even beyond the grand scale of the Reaper attack, we learn that even the Reapers are part of someone else’s master plan for all life in space. It is a plan no one can comprehend, not even Shepard. We learn at the very end that not only was the Illusive Man right, but Shepard’s belief in choosing her own destiny might be just wishful thinking. The ending draws in so many theoretical and hypothetical thoughts it makes sorting through the information a little difficult, but I don’t believe this is a result of vague storytelling…I think Bioware intentionally created a situation where the player is supposed to be confused. I don’t think anyone has gone their entire life without asking one of the following questions: -Is there life out there in space besides Earth?-Is there a God, or a master plan? Is this all some intelligent design at work?-What is the value of a life?-Do we control our destiny?-Are there alternate realities? All of these questions are central themes that all float around the largest theme of Mass Effect: space is ****ing big and will always be an unknown. Did anyone catch EDI’s dialogue about 1+1=3? She actually does a great job pondering the existence of parallel universes and alternate timelines. Shepard doesn’t know what to say to the AI and neither would I if someone dropped that information on me.
EDI and the geth are two examples of weighing in on what constitute life, and what it means to be alive. The Illusive Man’s goal to control the Reapers seemed flawed and evil ever since ME2, but in ME3 we have to ask ourselves in the very end if really he was right all along: the Reapers indoctrinate organics to allow lesser races evolve and this technically keeps them alive. Certainly controlling the Reapers would advance humanity, too. Even Saren’s thought process may have some valid points since he was really just an example of indoctrination before The Illusive Man. The exploration in the Cerberus base also brings up quite an interesting moment where Shepard questions if she is already indoctrinated as a result of project Lazarus. I began to wonder the same thing, especially after seeing the Catalyst and after the Catalyst comments on how synthetics have made Shepard’s entire journey possible. There is a great theory about this that I won’t elaborate upon (look it up on the internet…you’re bound to find it) but it is another possibility that is left open to player interpretation as a result of a wonderfully thought-provoking ending. There it is…seven pages of Word document about just the ending of one of my favorite games (and I didn’t even get into any of the indoctrination theories circulating around). I respect the opinions of others, and I would love to participate in healthy discussion about why others liked or disliked the endings.
That being said, I have one final message I wish to deliver directly to the vocal minority viciously attacking Bioware: please, please stop.
While certainly vocalizing a view point and desiring for commentary from Casey Hudson and the creative team behind him is a harmless want, there is a right and wrong way to go about it. I would love to see more expansion in the form of DLC (particularly an interactive epilogue) on the events at the end of Mass Effect 3 because I welcome more detailed information on my favorite game universe. Those that are trying to take legal action because they didn’t like the creative choices someone made in an art form ultimately are taking us back to a time where freedom of expression was not allowed, especially if a majority of a population disagreed with it. This is not the first time you may disagree with how a story ends, and it won’t be the last; unfortunately changing endings to satisfy your selfishness is the biggest slap in the face anyone could deliver to art mediums and storytelling in previously unconventional forms like video games. Lord knows there are things I dislike in Mass Effect…Liara’s entire character is one of them. That doesn’t mean I want Liara removed from the games and replaced with some other asari. Let’s show some tolerance, everyone, and move on from this.
#113
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:13
Teacher50
-
- Members
- 261 messages
Wow... jumped over here and looked at that massive wall of block text and the opening lines and thought to myself, I'm not going through that torture whether it's a valid point or not. Writers who want to get a point across must use at least a minimum of structure.
And it simply brought me back to the ending of the game... hello.
And it simply brought me back to the ending of the game... hello.
#114
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:18
Myrmedus
-
- Members
- 1 760 messages
Let me explain to you, also, why the ending is poor from a literary standpoint:
There have been so many of these threads that I don't want to go into a full essay about all the reasons the ending was poor but one of the most glaring is as follows:
When you write a story, you typically include themes within it. These themes may shift slightly as the narrative goes on, or new themes may be introduced, but generally any changes are a slow process, and usually done to affect the reader/viewer/player in an illuminating way, or develop/evolve the plot forwards.
The issue with the ending in Mass Effect 3 is that the logic touted by the Catalyst, and thus the three ending options available, are a direct conflict with the evolution of the narrative's "organic-synthetic" theme.
- In ME1, an adversity is established between the two lifeforms.
- However, as soon as ME2, olive branches are built within the story, as early as the introduction to EDI. This trend continues with Legion and there is potential for this theme of antagonism to begin to shift.
- Once we're in ME3, the shift is in full flow and can culminate completely in the Geth-Quarian alliance.
- Once we reach the end of ME3, the theme is completely reset to 0 as if we're still playing ME1. That evolution, that growth, is completely destroyed.
This is not good story-telling.
The climax should always align with the themes developed and presented at the time of the climax. There are small cases where a contrast can be made for dramatic effect but they must be very well handled and not the prime theme (ie. the theme about which the main plot revolves). Challenging the prime theme set-up with your own narrative challenges the integrity of the narrative itself, and to do this at the end of a story is literary suicide.
There have been so many of these threads that I don't want to go into a full essay about all the reasons the ending was poor but one of the most glaring is as follows:
When you write a story, you typically include themes within it. These themes may shift slightly as the narrative goes on, or new themes may be introduced, but generally any changes are a slow process, and usually done to affect the reader/viewer/player in an illuminating way, or develop/evolve the plot forwards.
The issue with the ending in Mass Effect 3 is that the logic touted by the Catalyst, and thus the three ending options available, are a direct conflict with the evolution of the narrative's "organic-synthetic" theme.
- In ME1, an adversity is established between the two lifeforms.
- However, as soon as ME2, olive branches are built within the story, as early as the introduction to EDI. This trend continues with Legion and there is potential for this theme of antagonism to begin to shift.
- Once we're in ME3, the shift is in full flow and can culminate completely in the Geth-Quarian alliance.
- Once we reach the end of ME3, the theme is completely reset to 0 as if we're still playing ME1. That evolution, that growth, is completely destroyed.
This is not good story-telling.
The climax should always align with the themes developed and presented at the time of the climax. There are small cases where a contrast can be made for dramatic effect but they must be very well handled and not the prime theme (ie. the theme about which the main plot revolves). Challenging the prime theme set-up with your own narrative challenges the integrity of the narrative itself, and to do this at the end of a story is literary suicide.
Modifié par Myrmedus, 20 mars 2012 - 10:18 .
#115
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:19
Su13perfitz
-
- Members
- 149 messages
The shift in narrative is actually very bad. When people do something they expect consequences for their actions and get frustrated when nothing happens. The sudden twist at the end removes the players from the consequences so we are left with frustration which is what people get when they expect a response, and get nothing. Also the moral choices were not very hard. I played renegade almost all the way and united geth/quarian and stopped genophage. At the end I picked the blue explosion because the only people hurt were the reapers and I still could give even them a measure of freedom. They gain nothing by not wrapping up these characters in character driven story. They could still wrap it up explain how everything and why/who this godchild and still be able to make ME4. Also the old man telling us the story at the end was an unwelcome twist it unlike in DA:2 where you knew from the start it was told by the dwarf.
#116
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:20
Coolfaec
-
- Members
- 418 messages
Why does everyone hate the ending so much?
I loved Deus Ex!
I loved Deus Ex!
#117
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:22
2484Stryker
-
- Members
- 1 526 messages
Sorry, OP, I really tried reading it, but I need paragraphs & indentations...
#118
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:23
Krushiev01
-
- Members
- 81 messages
OP, while I respect the fact that you enjoyed the endings and that you and many others like the speculation...
...I, and many others did not sign up for a "Headcannon ending."
I really don't know how to put it any other way, sorry.
...I, and many others did not sign up for a "Headcannon ending."
I really don't know how to put it any other way, sorry.
#119
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:24
starscreamerx31
-
- Members
- 493 messages
Hmmm alot of fill in the gaps in your self. I could have saw a movie for that.
#120
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:24
tersidre
-
- Members
- 77 messages
sorry bro i really do want to read that but i get a head ache mid way through that first block can you break it up please
#121
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:27
Coolfaec
-
- Members
- 418 messages
tersidre wrote...
sorry bro i really do want to read that but i get a head ache mid way through that first block can you break it up please
2484Stryker wrote...
Sorry, OP, I really tried reading it, but I need paragraphs & indentations...
I MEAN: THE PHILOSOPHICAL SYMBOLISM BEHIND THIS ENDING WAS REVOLUTIONARY. WHAT A DISTINGUISHED AND SOPHISTICATED WAY TO END THE SERIES.
#122
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:37
FOX216BC
-
- Members
- 967 messages
"The Best Defense of the Ending I have seen"The fact that some think the ending needs to be defended only shows even more that it was terrible ending.
This reply took me 2 minutes, who long did it took to finish that defense page.
This reply took me 2 minutes, who long did it took to finish that defense page.
#123
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:39
alx119
-
- Members
- 1 177 messages
Wow, must have felt good letting it all out! xDSkyblade012 wrote...
Post split due to formatting errors.
*snip*
#124
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:54
Kulthar Drax
-
- Members
- 251 messages
Firstly, while I respect that the person the OP quoted has their own opinion on the endings (I still disagree with it, however), that was a horrible wall of text. Seriously, thanks to CyanidPontifex for at least attempting to clean it up a little. That said...
3. The end game decision had no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ choice.
There was no red or blue text to tell you how to respond. There was no
dialogue wheel to show which choice was the paragon move or which was a
renegade ending. Bioware created a moment where you could ponder the
pros and cons of your choices without wondering how this might affect
any preconceived notions someone had about doing a ‘paragon-only’ play
through or getting just renegade points. Shepard’s humanity and own
uncertainty in ME3 is one of the central themes to the narrative, and
when Shepard is reduced to a broken soldier with only a pistol the game
pulls at how the players would respond to that abrupt turn of events.
Regardless of how people felt about the ending, I doubt anyone can say
they didn’t hesitate in choosing a decision without some serious thought
first.
Yeah, totally no colour decision to help you "choose". That's why one ending was lit up with a red glowing light, one was lit up with a blue glowing light and the middle one lit up with a green glowing light from the beam. And in this instance, the control decision happened to be listed as blue, the destroy decision as red and the synthesis decision as green. Oh, and all three endings were effectively stolen from 2000's Deus Ex.
4. A masterful narrative shift occurs, making this not an ending but a new beginning.
The way the ending was planned could not have been acted out more
brilliantly. The Reaper beam rips through the charging group of ragtag
survivors as they attempt to make an all-out footrace to the beam.
Players watch this happen and get the first jolt of panic when they
realize Shepard for the first time will not be okay. The controls, no
matter how forcefully you hit the buttons, simply direct a limping
commander towards their goal. Shepard sluggishly lifts an arm to shoot a
pistol at oncoming husks and staggers into the Citadel. I cannot be the
only one who wanted to scream at Shepard to shake it off and sprint
ahead to find Anderson, but that is exactly what we are supposed to
feel. It is obvious in this moment that Shepard’s story is ending as she
struggles to point her gun at the Illusive Man and falls onto the
controls of the Citadel shutters. When the Catalyst begins to speak, the
change from Shepard’s story to one that is about just the Mass Effect
universe begins. Shepard has little time to speak to the Catalyst before
prompted with a decision; she is confused and suddenly seems small when
confronted with a vastly superior AI and an opportunity to rewrite
destiny appears in the form of three paths leading to her ultimate
demise. I didn’t feel like I was even playing Shepard in those moments; I
felt like I was playing God and that to give someone that
responsibility seemed unfair. Through this entire process Shepard has
been filled with the hope and support of everyone she rallies…would
anyone support her now as she changes the fates of all organic and
synthetic life? As we watch Shepard die, the ending doesn’t just stop
there…it continues the story as we see Joker and the squad crash land on
an unknown planet. Seeing them climb out and simply take in a new world
that appears unsullied by technology is like a clean slate or a breath
of fresh air. Playing Shepard feels like a first-person narrative even
though players of video games are always viewers of a story…this
definitive switch to being an observer of uncontrollable events is
Bioware’s way of saying “but wait, there’s more.” After the credits
ended I felt an even greater sense of new beginnings when an unknown
child looks up at the universe Shepard once navigated and hopes that
maybe they too can become a hero.
I was nowhere near the beam (literally nowhere near it whatsoever and would never have been touched in the slightest), yet I still got the white flash. Totally awesome storytelling and lack of control right there.
As for the Normandy crashing, I understand why you thought that, and I would have thought that too...but ONLY if it made sense! What was the Normandy doing away from the final battle with the galaxy at stake? Your crewmates, including the ones in your squad in the race to the citadel beam (who can also die there and STILL appear in the end cutscenes) appear on the Normandy with Joker. What gives? You're to tell us they just abandoned Shepard in the final moments. Meh. It is just so frustratingly annoying, all the plotholes and just overall narrative suicide.
In the end, the plain fact of the matter is that the ending is riddled with deus/diabolus ex machinas, plotholes and errors, regardless of whether you liked it or not.
3. The end game decision had no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ choice.
There was no red or blue text to tell you how to respond. There was no
dialogue wheel to show which choice was the paragon move or which was a
renegade ending. Bioware created a moment where you could ponder the
pros and cons of your choices without wondering how this might affect
any preconceived notions someone had about doing a ‘paragon-only’ play
through or getting just renegade points. Shepard’s humanity and own
uncertainty in ME3 is one of the central themes to the narrative, and
when Shepard is reduced to a broken soldier with only a pistol the game
pulls at how the players would respond to that abrupt turn of events.
Regardless of how people felt about the ending, I doubt anyone can say
they didn’t hesitate in choosing a decision without some serious thought
first.
Yeah, totally no colour decision to help you "choose". That's why one ending was lit up with a red glowing light, one was lit up with a blue glowing light and the middle one lit up with a green glowing light from the beam. And in this instance, the control decision happened to be listed as blue, the destroy decision as red and the synthesis decision as green. Oh, and all three endings were effectively stolen from 2000's Deus Ex.
4. A masterful narrative shift occurs, making this not an ending but a new beginning.
The way the ending was planned could not have been acted out more
brilliantly. The Reaper beam rips through the charging group of ragtag
survivors as they attempt to make an all-out footrace to the beam.
Players watch this happen and get the first jolt of panic when they
realize Shepard for the first time will not be okay. The controls, no
matter how forcefully you hit the buttons, simply direct a limping
commander towards their goal. Shepard sluggishly lifts an arm to shoot a
pistol at oncoming husks and staggers into the Citadel. I cannot be the
only one who wanted to scream at Shepard to shake it off and sprint
ahead to find Anderson, but that is exactly what we are supposed to
feel. It is obvious in this moment that Shepard’s story is ending as she
struggles to point her gun at the Illusive Man and falls onto the
controls of the Citadel shutters. When the Catalyst begins to speak, the
change from Shepard’s story to one that is about just the Mass Effect
universe begins. Shepard has little time to speak to the Catalyst before
prompted with a decision; she is confused and suddenly seems small when
confronted with a vastly superior AI and an opportunity to rewrite
destiny appears in the form of three paths leading to her ultimate
demise. I didn’t feel like I was even playing Shepard in those moments; I
felt like I was playing God and that to give someone that
responsibility seemed unfair. Through this entire process Shepard has
been filled with the hope and support of everyone she rallies…would
anyone support her now as she changes the fates of all organic and
synthetic life? As we watch Shepard die, the ending doesn’t just stop
there…it continues the story as we see Joker and the squad crash land on
an unknown planet. Seeing them climb out and simply take in a new world
that appears unsullied by technology is like a clean slate or a breath
of fresh air. Playing Shepard feels like a first-person narrative even
though players of video games are always viewers of a story…this
definitive switch to being an observer of uncontrollable events is
Bioware’s way of saying “but wait, there’s more.” After the credits
ended I felt an even greater sense of new beginnings when an unknown
child looks up at the universe Shepard once navigated and hopes that
maybe they too can become a hero.
I was nowhere near the beam (literally nowhere near it whatsoever and would never have been touched in the slightest), yet I still got the white flash. Totally awesome storytelling and lack of control right there.
As for the Normandy crashing, I understand why you thought that, and I would have thought that too...but ONLY if it made sense! What was the Normandy doing away from the final battle with the galaxy at stake? Your crewmates, including the ones in your squad in the race to the citadel beam (who can also die there and STILL appear in the end cutscenes) appear on the Normandy with Joker. What gives? You're to tell us they just abandoned Shepard in the final moments. Meh. It is just so frustratingly annoying, all the plotholes and just overall narrative suicide.
In the end, the plain fact of the matter is that the ending is riddled with deus/diabolus ex machinas, plotholes and errors, regardless of whether you liked it or not.
#125
Posté 20 mars 2012 - 10:59
Lennyoh
-
- Members
- 127 messages
whydoyouwanttoknow wrote...
There's no defence of the ending because it goes against the advertising for the game. They advertised the game, and spoke about the game, in regards to the ending, in only the days and weeks before release, that the ending would be determined by our actions throughout the series.
You can't defend false advertising.
You basically hit the nail with this. I think that the reason most of us (I know that this is my main reason) are upset about the ending is because we were lied to straight to our faces about how our choices will matter and how they will make a difference in the ending of the game. We were also told it wouldn't do something like Lost where you have more questions than answers which again was just a lie. Bottom line is that Bioware kept making false advertisement and went against all their promises on having past choices matter.
