256 réponses à ce sujet

[StarcloudSWG]

Here's another thought.

What is the goal of the Mass Effect story, from start to finish?
What do Spectres do and why do they do it?

The answer, simply is that Spectres defend against and stop threats to galactic civilisation; that's why they were created, to be the special agents that head off threats before they blow up into greater instability.

What about the Reapers? you say. Isn't the goal of the story to stop the Reapers?

To which I counter, "Why is it important to stop the Reapers?" First, they're alien monsters that destroy sapient life, but just as importantly, they're the biggest possible threat to galactic civilization ever.

Stopping the Reapers is a task that must be accomplished, but it is not the goal for which Shepard strives. If the Reapers were willing to cooexist with galactic civilization, there would be no need to stop them.

The goal of the Mass Effect story is, therefore, to save galactic civilization from the Reapers. Ultimately, we're forced by Casey Hudson's decisions to *destroy galactic civilization* to stop the Reapers. No matter what we do, then, in the end, Shepard FAILS.

And forcing the main character to fail is NOT how you end a trilogy.

[StarcloudSWG]

Added another link.

[Adamantium93]

I would most humbly submit this thread social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10606289/1#10610573
As a dissection and discrediting of the arguments that call the ending "Philosophical" or "Insightful"

[StarcloudSWG]

It's a little brief, but decent.

[StarcloudSWG]

Pushing this thread up to the top again. Everyone keeps linking to the threads contained in the original post by themselves, I figure it's time.

[StarcloudSWG]

Pushing it to the top again, asking for more good critiques of the ending. Hopefully the subject line change will get more people reading and discussing.

[StarcloudSWG]

Pushing this to the top again. I see these threads, these articles linked over and over again by themselves. It would be nice if someone could help keep this compilation of all those links near the top, for people to read.

[StarcloudSWG]

Pushing this again. Has anyone come across another good thread to add?

[StarcloudSWG]

Early morning push.

[recentio]

I've been looking for some of these. Thanks for gathering them all in one place, OP.

[Johcande XX]

bump to keep on front page.

[Mighty_BOB_cnc]

I think you might already have every one of these in the OP, but just in case...

• On the betrayal of hope in Mass Effect 3's endings
• Why you enjoy art and the one problem with Mass Effect 3
• All That Matters is the Ending, Part 2: Mass Effect 3
• Musings of a Screenwriter: The Ending Thread
• An interesting post from the Penny Arcade forums.
• My thoughts on the ending as a writing/literature teacher and retail veteran....
• Why I Hold the Line - Words From a Literature Grad Student
• In Depth Thematic Analysis of ME3 Ending pt 1: the Frankenstein Complex
• Mass Effect Three- A Study of Shell Games (Warning: Long. And Wordy.)
• A credentialed literature major, and his take on the ending.
• "maintain[ing] the ... artistic integrity of the original story" =...
• My open letter to ME3 writers
• Colour-coding morality: the inherent problems of 'choice' in Mass Effect

-edit- See also: This behemoth. http://social.biowar...5/index/9851623

Modifié par Mighty_BOB_cnc, 26 mars 2012 - 06:27 .

[StarcloudSWG]

Added one of the links, still looking through the others. I'm pretty sure I have all but two of them.

[StarcloudSWG]

Shoving this thread back up to the top.

[JaylaClark]

Honestly, the best thing I've read so far would be two professional review magazines making clear note of the ending. I mean, PCGamer did give it a full 93, but it described the ending as 'satisfying in some parts, nonsensical in others, and (paraphrasing from here) ultimately just too simplistic". And after all the praise lavished on the rest of the game, I get the feeling this would've been PCG's first 100 if not for the ending.

[N-Seven]

Without reading them...are there any positive reviews of the endings? To be fair, you should probably include them, if you can find any.

[StarcloudSWG]

There are no positive critiques of the ending that I can find. To be fair, if I could find one, I would include it. However, with the way the ending violates just about every rule of good storytelling there is except for the most basic "An ending exists," I doubt very much that I will be able to find one.

And simply saying "I liked the ending" is not good enough for a critique. It has to address how the ending fits the themes actually presented in the story, and the ending to Mass Effect 3 simply doesn't.

[Lietuvis]

The game itself is amazing and is well made, everything seems awesome.. i think they should have ended at part where anderson dies and it would be an epic ending.

[gecko360]

Nice! My link is in there too! My critique was "the end is arbitrary" but I reposted it as "the star-child is arbitrary and inconsistent, therefore the ending is also". It's pretty in depth and logically consistent; check it out.

Thanks for compiling all these links in one place.

[elessarz]

How about this one?

social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/9811596

[StarcloudSWG]

That's a good one. I'm adding it.

[StarcloudSWG]

Another point I'd like to make is this:

The Crucible is, effectively, a giant capacitor and focusing device for dark energy.

Dark energy affects mass and inertia, nothing else.

So how does sticking a capacitor and focusing lens make Synthesis possible as an ending? Mass effect fields, dark energy, does not and cannot create synthetic implants in living beings. You cannot get from one to the other no matter how hard you try to justify it.

The answer therefore is that Synthesis is a false ending. Shepard commits suicide in the process of destroying the Mass Relays, and the only reason that the Reapers leave Earth is because with the relay network destroyed, they realize that they don't need to wipe out sapient races; galactic civilization is now destroyed and they can pick off worlds at their leisure.

Control, too, is a false ending. The Catalyst already controls the Reapers. Shepard committing suicide to 'upload' into the Citadel's systems is a sadistic move on the part of the Catalyst. The reason the Reapers leave Earth, then, is the same as above.

The only real choice, then, is to destroy the Reapers. But how does shooting one bank of hardware do that? The answer must be that the Reapers themselves are networked through that hardware, and that destroying that piece of equipment severs the ties between them. And, since that would mean they're suddenly uncontrolled synthetics, the Catalyst must have installed self-destruct mechanisms that activate in the case of lost communication.

But. Hold on. Why is the Crucible needed? Answer: It is only needed to fire the beam that destroys the Mass Relay network. That's right. Bioware gave you a giant gun to destroy galactic civilization with, and there is NO way to avoid using it.

[StarcloudSWG]

Punting this to the top so that more people have a chance to see it.

[StarcloudSWG]

Pushing this to the top again. More people are linking to the individual excellent posts. Here's a compilation of them all.

[StarcloudSWG]

Shoving this back to the top, hopefully more people will read and discuss.