239 réponses à ce sujet

[Shermos]

Lord Aesir wrote...

I can fully understand why one might not be completly satisfied with the endings.  I count myself amongst those that where content with them for the most part.

What I cannot understand and find frustrating is the sheer hysteria and outrage expressed on these boards towards the endings.  I can understand claiming you were mislead by the idea of every choice allowing you to construct your ending.  Some of you might have been dissapointed that it translated into the war asset system, but I hardly think claiming bioware knowingly attempted to outright decieve you is merited.  Consider also that the level of control you had in the ending of Mass Effect 3 was greater than the previous two games.  In Mass Effect we had a single choice between two alternatives, saving or killing the council.  In Mass Effect 2 we had a similar choice between destroying or saving the Collector Base.  In Mass Effect 3 we had three choices, really, this is a repeat of what Bioware has been doing all along.  If choice was your complaint you should have brought it up in Mass Effect.

Others complain about the tragic nature of the endings.  Really, I would have been more dissapointed by the presence of a happy rainbows and sunshine ending.  A magic button that annihilated the Reapers and nothing else would have rendered the Crucible an even worse Deus Ex Machina then it already is.  It is the inevitable nature of each ending that makes them work as tragedy and reinforces the idea that the Reapers can't be defeated without sacrifice, which Shepard isn't immune to.  A "Happy" ending renders them simple mistakes that could have been avoided.

Some complaints focus on the Normandy's portion of the ending.  Admittedly, this is the one portion I wish they had done differently, but I really don't think this scene matters very much.  The point is that your crew is alive and kicking, having survived the Reaper war and now they can help rebuild.

That brings me to my last point, some have focused off the incorrect assertion that the allied fleet is stranded in Sol and that this will lead to a war over resources.  This is simply untrue.  First of all, they still have FTL.  It may take years, decades for the quarians and geth, but all of them can return home.  Their ships will just need expanded fuel reserves and possibly the equipment to refine fuel.  No doubt the quarians can help with that, and the crucible brought with it the galaxy's finest engineers.  There will be no food shortage.  The Reapers focused on population centers, so it stands to reason that most of the Earth's farmland is intact.  The quarians have giant agri-ships for this purpose as well and could probably feed both themselves and the turians given that they left the civilians at home.  The geth don't need food.  The turians would think of something if the quarians aren't there I suppose.  The high casualties of the fleet and the reduced population of the earth actually helps in this regard.  As for raw materials, they have an entire solar system and lots of wreckage to salvage from, they'll be fine.  Actually a scenario I plan on using for a post-ME3 fanfiction is the allied fleet harvesting advanced FTL tech from Reaper corpses (They did cruise in from dark space after all), but that's just a single wild possibility.  The point is that they are far from doomed, it's just going to take them awhile to get home.

Also, the galaxy isn't destroyed.  The energy of the relays was coopted into the benign (Unless you chose destruction) energy wave of the crucible rather than exploding outward and obliterating star systems, hence why the color of the "Explosions" changed with each ending.

I'm just trying to express why the outrage has me flustered.  Offer your two cents at your leisure.

QFT. I don't think people would be happy with the endings no matter what Bioware did. What annoys me most is the idea that the Galaxy is doomed because of the endings. It's not. All you need is a little imagination. Bioware can easily come up with a back story for a sequel to the trilogy. It'll just need to be set a few hundred or a thousand years after ME3, when the Galaxy has rebuilt itself, and a new Galactic civilization is evolving. I can easily imagine a future game with a Star Trek: The next Generation feel to it. I'd rather Bioware didn't do a prequel.

One little nit pick. I really hate the view that the Crucible is a Dues Ex Machina plot device. It's very clearly not to anyone who knows their science fiction. The Catalyst Shep meets on the Citadel is much closer to a Dues Ex, as is Vigel in ME1. 

[Heimdall]

gallenger wrote...

I just don't get why they didn't copy the ending from Free space 2. Crucible ought to have been a system destroying bomb (mass relay). Good shepard dets. the bomb on Earth - paragon shep sticks around to help evac civilians and etc, and probably dies doing so. Renegade shep sets up the bomb and gets out of dodge woosh goes the Charon relay, earth, and the citadel.  The same could be repeated whereever the Reaper appear in forces too large to combat conventionally - it would make for a bleak heart breaking ending (homeworlds going up in super-nova flames) but also have heroic stories to tell and lots to sort out in any future games + who knows how many repears would be out there.  No need for god children or space magic :/  

So much more simple + tons of open space for more games and DLC lol. I don't get it :/

Because it would be anticlimatic if the Crucible was just a big bomb that they wouldn't even need since they could just crash asteroids into the mass relays and achieve the same effect?

[sedrikhcain]

Lord Aesir wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

I can fully understand why one might not be completly satisfied with the endings.  I count myself amongst those that where content with them for the most part.

That brings me to my last point, some have focused off the incorrect assertion that the allied fleet is stranded in Sol and that this will lead to a war over resources.  This is simply untrue.  First of all, they still have FTL.  It may take years, decades for the quarians and geth, but all of them can return home.  Their ships will just need expanded fuel reserves and possibly the equipment to refine fuel.  No doubt the quarians can help with that, and the crucible brought with it the galaxy's finest engineers.  There will be no food shortage.  The Reapers focused on population centers, so it stands to reason that most of the Earth's farmland is intact.  The quarians have giant agri-ships for this purpose as well and could probably feed both themselves and the turians given that they left the civilians at home.  The geth don't need food.  The turians would think of something if the quarians aren't there I suppose.  The high casualties of the fleet and the reduced population of the earth actually helps in this regard.  As for raw materials, they have an entire solar system and lots of wreckage to salvage from, they'll be fine.  Actually a scenario I plan on using for a post-ME3 fanfiction is the allied fleet harvesting advanced FTL tech from Reaper corpses (They did cruise in from dark space after all), but that's just a single wild possibility.  The point is that they are far from doomed, it's just going to take them awhile to get home.

Also, the galaxy isn't destroyed.  The energy of the relays was coopted into the benign (Unless you chose destruction) energy wave of the crucible rather than exploding outward and obliterating star systems, hence why the color of the "Explosions" changed with each ending.

I'm just trying to express why the outrage has me flustered.  Offer your two cents at your leisure.

First of all, I chose destruction, so how do you incorporate that into your theory? But aside from that, I still say the Milky Way is forever changed -- or at least it's changed for a few hundred thousand years until we can either rebuild the mass relays or replace them with something else that does the same thing. Interstellar travel is now far too time-consuming to be in any way practical  -- or even possible for 95% of the population (the non-super rich or non-military. That pushes the entire galaxy back into the isolated era that existed before interstellar travel. There are stories you could tell about the various worlds and people in that state but the nature of the galaxy as one community is gone now, and it ain't coming back. That means the types of stories you could tell are all different now. Think about it, how would any of the stories in 1 2 or 3 be in any way possible without the Mass Relays? Just as a for instance, the idea of chaces or races against time like the one at the end of ME1 ar laughable because Saren and Shepard would be old and decrepit by the time they finished their journeys. And there can be no equivalent to the Citadel, where you had people from every place shuttling back and forth between their home worlds and a galactic hub.

Sorry but I don't see it. 

My theory?  Honestly, all I'm cautioning against is misinterpretation.  The destruction ending is the only one that can screw over the fleet sice you have potentially critically damaged all ships.  However, some people actlike that is the inevitable result of every ending.  Space travel may take years now, but it is still possible, colonies require more commitment but their still possible.  Personally I think the Asari are going to turn out new mass relays in under a century drawing on Prothean data from Ilos.  I fully expect a time skip to the next game in the series.

The Asari are going to turn out mass relays in under a century? They've have thousands of years to study them, with the help of the Salarians and everyone else, and they're not even close. Now they're going to figure it out in under a century, based on prothean data on ilos, even though communications, trade and information exchange and travel in the galaxy has been crippled, if not outright destroyed? Please clue me in on how that makes sense.


btw, I'm not saying the galaxy ends and everyone is doomed. I'm saying the galactic community simply cannot exist the way it did with the mass relays, so the galaxy cannot be the same. Obviously, if you think they'll be able to reconstruct them in under a century, you wouldn't see that but I don't understand how it'd be possible in 10,000 years under the circumstances, let alone 100.

Modifié par sedrikhcain, 23 mars 2012 - 12:54 .

[Heimdall]

Shermos wrote...

QFT. I don't think people would be happy with the endings no matter what Bioware did. What annoys me most is the idea that the Galaxy is doomed because of the endings. It's not. All you need is a little imagination. Bioware can easily come up with a back story for a sequel to the trilogy. It'll just need to be set a few hundred or a thousand years after ME3, when the Galaxy has rebuilt itself, and a new Galactic civilization is evolving. I can easily imagine a future game with a Star Trek: The next Generation feel to it. I'd rather Bioware didn't do a prequel.

That's actually what I expect them to do and that's why I believe they made the endings a bit appocalyptic.  In a few centuries they'll probably create Mass Relays themselves using Prothean data from Ilos.  The appocalyptic part gives them a few centuries for the reprocussions of Shepard's actions to play themselves out and for all paths to reach a point of similariy.  So, the next game doesn't have to worry about importing Shepard's choices.  Logistically, they couldn't keep doing that anyway.

[furryrage59]

The ending to a trilogy/3 games is quite important.

A poor ending that makes no sense can unravel everything before it, add passionate fans who love the game and you get a lot of upset people.

[Heimdall]

sedrikhcain wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

sedrikhcain wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

I can fully understand why one might not be completly satisfied with the endings.  I count myself amongst those that where content with them for the most part.

That brings me to my last point, some have focused off the incorrect assertion that the allied fleet is stranded in Sol and that this will lead to a war over resources.  This is simply untrue.  First of all, they still have FTL.  It may take years, decades for the quarians and geth, but all of them can return home.  Their ships will just need expanded fuel reserves and possibly the equipment to refine fuel.  No doubt the quarians can help with that, and the crucible brought with it the galaxy's finest engineers.  There will be no food shortage.  The Reapers focused on population centers, so it stands to reason that most of the Earth's farmland is intact.  The quarians have giant agri-ships for this purpose as well and could probably feed both themselves and the turians given that they left the civilians at home.  The geth don't need food.  The turians would think of something if the quarians aren't there I suppose.  The high casualties of the fleet and the reduced population of the earth actually helps in this regard.  As for raw materials, they have an entire solar system and lots of wreckage to salvage from, they'll be fine.  Actually a scenario I plan on using for a post-ME3 fanfiction is the allied fleet harvesting advanced FTL tech from Reaper corpses (They did cruise in from dark space after all), but that's just a single wild possibility.  The point is that they are far from doomed, it's just going to take them awhile to get home.

Also, the galaxy isn't destroyed.  The energy of the relays was coopted into the benign (Unless you chose destruction) energy wave of the crucible rather than exploding outward and obliterating star systems, hence why the color of the "Explosions" changed with each ending.

I'm just trying to express why the outrage has me flustered.  Offer your two cents at your leisure.

First of all, I chose destruction, so how do you incorporate that into your theory? But aside from that, I still say the Milky Way is forever changed -- or at least it's changed for a few hundred thousand years until we can either rebuild the mass relays or replace them with something else that does the same thing. Interstellar travel is now far too time-consuming to be in any way practical  -- or even possible for 95% of the population (the non-super rich or non-military. That pushes the entire galaxy back into the isolated era that existed before interstellar travel. There are stories you could tell about the various worlds and people in that state but the nature of the galaxy as one community is gone now, and it ain't coming back. That means the types of stories you could tell are all different now. Think about it, how would any of the stories in 1 2 or 3 be in any way possible without the Mass Relays? Just as a for instance, the idea of chaces or races against time like the one at the end of ME1 ar laughable because Saren and Shepard would be old and decrepit by the time they finished their journeys. And there can be no equivalent to the Citadel, where you had people from every place shuttling back and forth between their home worlds and a galactic hub.

Sorry but I don't see it. 

My theory?  Honestly, all I'm cautioning against is misinterpretation.  The destruction ending is the only one that can screw over the fleet sice you have potentially critically damaged all ships.  However, some people actlike that is the inevitable result of every ending.  Space travel may take years now, but it is still possible, colonies require more commitment but their still possible.  Personally I think the Asari are going to turn out new mass relays in under a century drawing on Prothean data from Ilos.  I fully expect a time skip to the next game in the series.

The Asari are going to turn out mass relays in under a century? They've have thousands of years to study them, with the help of the Salarians and everyone else, and they're not even close. Now they're going to figure it out in under a century, based on prothean data on ilos, even though communications, trade and information exchange and travel in the galaxy has been crippled, if not outright destroyed? Please clue me in on how that makes sense.


btw, I'm not saying the galaxy ends and everyone is doomed. I'm saying the galactic community simply cannot exist the way it did with the mass relays, so the galaxy cannot be the same. Obviously, if you think they'll be able to reconstruct them in under a century, you wouldn't see that but I don't understand how it'd be possible in 10,000 years under the circumstances, let alone 100.

Oh I don't know... perhaps because the Protheans actrually managed to build a working mass relay?  And the current races have the capacity to understand Prothean designs.  As you said, space travel is greatly... I don't want to say crippled because it is still very possible (And the comm network hasn't been destroyed) but you get the idea.  So if anything more resources will be thrown at creating Mass Relays than ever before.  It may become something of an arms race between the major species, I only say Asari because they're slightly more advanced than the others.  If they still have the conduit, either end of it, they can take it apart and study it as they never could the Reaper's mass relays.  So yes, I believe it is perfectly plausible for there to be new mass relays in a handful of centuries.

I know the galaxy isn't the same, but I think it is a temporary condition.  Not unlike a "Great Collapse" or whatnot that happens in some settings only for a new, but suprisingly similar, civilization to rise from the ashes.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 23 mars 2012 - 01:24 .

[Heimdall]

furryrage59 wrote...

The ending to a trilogy/3 games is quite important.

A poor ending that makes no sense can unravel everything before it, add passionate fans who love the game and you get a lot of upset people.

I don't think they make no sense.

[Shermos]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Shermos wrote...

QFT. I don't think people would be happy with the endings no matter what Bioware did. What annoys me most is the idea that the Galaxy is doomed because of the endings. It's not. All you need is a little imagination. Bioware can easily come up with a back story for a sequel to the trilogy. It'll just need to be set a few hundred or a thousand years after ME3, when the Galaxy has rebuilt itself, and a new Galactic civilization is evolving. I can easily imagine a future game with a Star Trek: The next Generation feel to it. I'd rather Bioware didn't do a prequel.

That's actually what I expect them to do and that's why I believe they made the endings a bit appocalyptic.  In a few centuries they'll probably create Mass Relays themselves using Prothean data from Ilos.  The appocalyptic part gives them a few centuries for the reprocussions of Shepard's actions to play themselves out and for all paths to reach a point of similariy.  So, the next game doesn't have to worry about importing Shepard's choices.  Logistically, they couldn't keep doing that anyway.

Agreed. They'll have to decide on a Canon. It makes taking the prequel route easier, but it won't be as fulfilling imo. Good luck Bioware .

Modifié par Shermos, 23 mars 2012 - 01:17 .

[XqctaX]

all i see is biased SPECULATION about how things might be this and that, and how to interpet things to devalue peoples opinion that the endings are: 1 bad 2, not even close in any way to what was advertised just weeks b4 release.

if you liked the endings, good for you. but any amount or rethoric och biased speculations wont change the facts and plotholes in and about the endings and they way there were advertised.

[Heimdall]

Shermos wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

Shermos wrote...

QFT. I don't think people would be happy with the endings no matter what Bioware did. What annoys me most is the idea that the Galaxy is doomed because of the endings. It's not. All you need is a little imagination. Bioware can easily come up with a back story for a sequel to the trilogy. It'll just need to be set a few hundred or a thousand years after ME3, when the Galaxy has rebuilt itself, and a new Galactic civilization is evolving. I can easily imagine a future game with a Star Trek: The next Generation feel to it. I'd rather Bioware didn't do a prequel.

That's actually what I expect them to do and that's why I believe they made the endings a bit appocalyptic.  In a few centuries they'll probably create Mass Relays themselves using Prothean data from Ilos.  The appocalyptic part gives them a few centuries for the reprocussions of Shepard's actions to play themselves out and for all paths to reach a point of similariy.  So, the next game doesn't have to worry about importing Shepard's choices.  Logistically, they couldn't keep doing that anyway.

Agreed. They'll have to decide on a Canon. It makes taking
the prequel route easier, but it won't be as fulfilling imo. Good luck Bioware
.

Well, not canon persay.  That's not what I'm suggesting.  I'm only suggesting that the reprocussions of Shepard's actions can play out in the isolated home systems before the galactic community comes together again.  So maybe you'll be able to select a few historic options at the beginning of the game that mostly just affect some expository dialogue, but leave everything in a similar state, a fresh slate for a new game.

[Heimdall]

XqctaX wrote...

all i see is biased SPECULATION about how things might be this and that, and how to interpet things to devalue peoples opinion that the endings are: 1 bad 2, not even close in any way to what was advertised just weeks b4 release.

if you liked the endings, good for you. but any amount or rethoric och biased speculations wont change the facts and plotholes in and about the endings and they way there were advertised.

Did you read my post?  I was only trying to dispell common misconceptions and assumptions regarding appocalyptic consequences of the endings and explain that the reaction to its non-reactivity was disproportionate and nothing new from Bioware.

Modifié par Lord Aesir, 23 mars 2012 - 01:25 .

[Bobrzy]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Because many people are extremely invested in the series. They don't want to see it end on such an incoherent note. If this was any other game, the majority would **** on the ending and forget about the game. Since ME has such a huge fanbase, they want to come back to play the games over and over again.

This is impossible for many at the moment, because the ending is really, really unusually bad.

This.

[HolmesLovesGuinness]

1. The ending is simply out of character with the rest of the story - it's as if at the end of Star Wars, right before Luke is about to blow up the Death Star, he discovers the Death Star is actually calling all the shots (in the form of a glowing annoying Ewok), listens to a few long winded moments of existential exposition, and.... well, you get the point.

2. The final act (IMHO) was rushed, sloppy and not particularly well done. Quite honestly it just felt like they pulled it out of their **** at the last minute, and purposefully made it vague and open to interpretation (the better to defend it as 'artistic'). My opinion, but to me it came across as the low-cost quick and dirty solution. There were many great moments in the game - the ending was not one of them, and it just soured the rest of the story (and certainly does not add any replay value - to me).

[Heimdall]

HolmesLovesGuinness wrote...

1. The ending is simply out of character with the rest of the story - it's as if at the end of Star Wars, right before Luke is about to blow up the Death Star, he discovers the Death Star is actually calling all the shots (in the form of a glowing annoying Ewok), listens to a few long winded moments of existential exposition, and.... well, you get the point.

2. The final act (IMHO) was rushed, sloppy and not particularly well done. Quite honestly it just felt like they pulled it out of their **** at the last minute, and purposefully made it vague and open to interpretation (the better to defend it as 'artistic'). My opinion, but to me it came across as the low-cost quick and dirty solution. There were many great moments in the game - the ending was not one of them, and it just soured the rest of the story (and certainly does not add any replay value - to me).

Just curious, what do you define as the "last act"?

[GoddessLunatic]

If you liked the endings, fine. But a great number of people did not, that's just a fact. Me included. What I'm fighting for is a solution that will make both sides happy, which in my opinion is a DLC. People can skip it if they liked the ending, people who want it can pay for it. Simple. But arguing that nothing should be done just because you don't share the opinion that the ending wasn't what it should be is unfair.

[HolmesLovesGuinness]

@ Lord Aesir: The moment you step into the glowing beam to the Citadel. Granted, they pulled off some great emotional moments during those last 15 min or so, but again, once Casper started talking and introduced you to doors ABC I was dumb-founded. It felt like a cop-out to me - again my opinion, but the fact that they have publicly stated the ending was changed relatively last minute says to me that this was not exactly what they had in mind since day one.

Let me ask you then - do you feel like the ending was in character with the overall tone established in 99% of the rest of the series? Do you think that this is actually the sort of ending that most people wanted to see? What has me scratching my head is why BW decided to go this route, when everything up to that moment was so pitch-perfect in terms of classic popcorn escapist story telling, only to eschew all the 'good feelings' they had worked so hard to build up for something vauge, existential and (for most folks) fairly depressing? Either they were just not in touch with the majority of their audience (again, my opinion) or this was just a ruse to create drama / interest ahead of DLC that gives alternate endings. I dunno.

Modifié par HolmesLovesGuinness, 23 mars 2012 - 02:03 .

[Heimdall]

GoddessLunatic wrote...

If you liked the endings, fine. But a great number of people did not, that's just a fact. Me included. What I'm fighting for is a solution that will make both sides happy, which in my opinion is a DLC. People can skip it if they liked the ending, people who want it can pay for it. Simple. But arguing that nothing should be done just because you don't share the opinion that the ending wasn't what it should be is unfair.

GoddessLunatic, if you are going to post in a thread I'd appreciate it if you read the original post.  I never said the endings were perfect or that no additions should be made.  I don't think there should be any new endings, but that is not the point of this thread and I never argued that nothing should be done.

[MDT1]

Why are such discussions always in the no spoiler section?
But ok, the next star is at least 4,2 lightyears away from earth.
Why would a "bening" explosion still be able to damage an alliance frigat over such a distance in EVERY ending?

The problem is people always claim we shouldn't rip everything apart and go into such detail, but then Bioware themselfs state the ending makes no sense so we could speculate...

[Heimdall]

HolmesLovesGuinness wrote...

@ Lord Aesir: The moment you step into the glowing beam to the Citadel. Granted, they pulled off some great emotional moments during those last 15 min or so, but again, once Casper started talking and introduced you to doors ABC I was dumb-founded. It felt like a cop-out to me - again my opinion, but the fact that they have publicly stated the ending was changed relatively last minute says to me that this was not exactly what they had in mind since day one.

Let me ask you then - do you feel like the ending was in character with the overall tone established in 99% of the rest of the series? Do you think that this is actually the sort of ending that most people wanted to see? What has me scratching my head is why BW decided to go this route, when everything up to that moment was so pitch-perfect in terms of classic popcorn escapist story telling, only to eschew all the 'good feelings' they had worked so hard to build up for something vauge, existential and (for most folks) fairly depressing? Either they were just not in touch with the majority of their audience (again, my opinion) or this was just a ruse to create drama / interest ahead of DLC that gives alternate endings. I dunno.

Frankly, I don't think consistency of tone has ever been a strong point for this series.  I feel there is a massive gap in tone between ME1 and ME2, the former being very 'good feelings' while the latter seemed to fit in an awkward position between 'good feelings' and attempting to be dark and dire.  I felt ME3 did a better job at the dark and dire part, so I wasn't expecting a happy ending, indeed I was partially hoping for an inevitable tragic sacrifice.  I recall being split as to whether or not I actually wanted the option of a happy ending.  Did the existential dark scifi fit into that tone?  I'd say partially.  Then again, at the time I had just finished reading Halo: Primordium, which is basically existential dark depressing scifi from cover to cover and I enjoyed it.  Incidently, it was about a human that had been converted into an AI.  I think they were just at a loss as to how to end it in a way that would be memorable and not cliche while also definitively ending Shepard's story.

[Heimdall]

MDT1 wrote...

Why are such discussions always in the no spoiler section?
But ok, the next star is at least 4,2 lightyears away from earth.
Why would a "bening" explosion still be able to damage an alliance frigat over such a distance in EVERY ending?

The problem is people always claim we shouldn't rip everything apart and go into such detail, but then Bioware themselfs state the ending makes no sense so we could speculate...

...What?

[Pride Demon]

Not to be a spoil-sport (to avoid saying worse things), but the sheer amount of spoilers in this thread is painful, considering this is the no spoiler section of the forum...

But to properly answer, I don't have any actual problem with the endings, but to borrow from Legion, I'm a bit "conflicted" on them...
The critic in my mind commends BioWare for the cinematic and emotional experience, for avoiding a "press button, good guys win, bad guys lose" situation, a "splash of reality" as someone wrote in the forum, and for using the (generally overlooked) idea that there's often no place for the hero in the world he/she strives to create, he/she reaches his/her goal and steps aside (one way or the other)...
On the other hand the romantic in my heart screams "Are you MAD? If I want to see such a painful situation and sacrifices, I'll read a newspaper! Keep you bittersweet ending, give me my sugar dose every day!"...

So I really don't know, I actually somehow liked the endings, so I guess saying I'm disappointed would be wrong.
Indeed, the ending didn't disappoint me, it only... I don't know... broke my heart, I guess (not afraid to say a few, or several, man tears may have been shed, the music may of may not have helped)... I don't believe I ever felt such emotional engagement, I'm generally pretty collected as a person, but I guess if it was planned, it's a testament to BioWare's ability to create emotional situation and compelling characters, which would mean that, at least for me, the endings worked as intended...

Sorry for giving only a cursory explanation, but I'm trying to stay spoiler free in my posts, don't know if I achieved that... :/

[MDT1]

Lord Aesir wrote...

MDT1 wrote...

Why are such discussions always in the no spoiler section?
But ok, the next star is at least 4,2 lightyears away from earth.
Why would a "bening" explosion still be able to damage an alliance frigat over such a distance in EVERY ending?

The problem is people always claim we shouldn't rip everything apart and go into such detail, but then Bioware themselfs state the ending makes no sense so we could speculate...

...What?

What?

[Heimdall]

Pride Demon wrote...

Not to be a spoil-sport (to avoid saying worse things), but the sheer amount of spoilers in this thread is painful, considering this is the no spoiler section of the forum...

But to properly answer, I don't have any actual problem with the endings, but to borrow from Legion, I'm a bit "conflicted" on them...
The critic in my mind commends BioWare for the cinematic and emotional experience, for avoiding a "press button, good guys win, bad guys lose" situation, a "splash of reality" as someone wrote in the forum, and for using the (generally overlooked) idea that there's often no place for the hero in the world he/she strives to create, he/she reaches his/her goal and steps aside (one way or the other)...
On the other hand the romantic in my heart screams "Are you MAD? If I want to see such a painful situation and sacrifices, I'll read a newspaper! Keep you bittersweet ending, give me my sugar dose every day!"...

So I really don't know, I actually somehow liked the endings, so I guess saying I'm disappointed would be wrong.
Indeed, the ending didn't disappoint me, it only... I don't know... broke my heart, I guess (not afraid to say a few, or several, man tears may have been shed, the music may of may not have helped)... I don't believe I ever felt such emotional engagement, I'm generally pretty collected as a person, but I guess if it was planned, it's a testament to BioWare's ability to create emotional situation and compelling characters, which would mean that, at least for me, the endings worked as intended...

Sorry for giving only a cursory explanation, but I'm trying to stay spoiler free in my posts, don't know if I achieved that... :/

This might actually deserve to be in the spoiler section, but i created the thread before i registered my copy of the game, so I just posted it here.  I understand what you mean.by conflicting feelings.  I felt conflicted about whether I wanted a happy resolution or a tragic sacrifice before I got to the ending.  After though, I found I prefered tragic sacrifice.

[Heimdall]

MDT1 wrote...

Lord Aesir wrote...

MDT1 wrote...

Why are such discussions always in the no spoiler section?
But ok, the next star is at least 4,2 lightyears away from earth.
Why would a "bening" explosion still be able to damage an alliance frigat over such a distance in EVERY ending?

The problem is people always claim we shouldn't rip everything apart and go into such detail, but then Bioware themselfs state the ending makes no sense so we could speculate...

...What?

What?

I don't really understand what you said.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

Lord Aesir wrote...

Texansamurai wrote...

I think my biggest objection with the ending is that with the missing components that make Mass effect, Mass effect are now gone. This makes it hard to have EU(Expanded Universe) fan content or stories.

It would be like Starwars suddenly without the force. Would there still be jedi/sith

Same can be applied to ME 3. Will such and such ever return home. Can you still have alliances between species in isolation? Who knows its hard to tell.

I actually thought that was a good stroke.  The relays were part of the Reapers' scheme to control organic development.  By destroying them and the Citadel you force the organic species to break free of the path set forth by the Reapers.

you actually genocide all the solar syste-
oh wait who cares, not fanatics anyway!

also no spoilers allowed here remember?