348 réponses à ce sujet

[Gigamantis]

wileydsp wrote...

Gigmantis,

My question to you is this: What did you make of the Quarian/Geth and EDI developments during the game. When you got to the end did you think of those occurrences and wonder if what the assertions being leveled for you were actually correct in their nature?

It seems you only want to argue about the construction of the endings in that they were different. I want to know what you feel about the actual dialogue and information you've already had at your disposal coming into that final section, and what did you think. Did you think of those developments with your characters as important at all to the end? When people say our choices didn't matter, I tend to think they are talking about those points.

I'm sorry, I don't want to discuss spoilers in this thread. 

I'll just tell you this; I had my own conceptions of all the characters, what they would do and what would happen once it came together in the end.  Some of my preconceptions were right and some apparently weren't, but my concept of the world is my own and nothing else.  I can disagree with some decisions made while still understanding those aren't my characters and it isn't my world.  

Wanting furthor explanation of many things is perfectly fine, and I expect future DLC to continue piecing things together for a long time.  They want a lot of potential ways to extend content. 

[o Ventus]

Gigamantis wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

Mike Gamble said himself that the ending choice would be more then "A, B, or C". ABC is EXACTLY what we got.

That depends on what went into deciding the ending. It isn't automatically ABC just because the most distinct endings are 3. There's technically more than 3 endings.

Orly?

"Destroy-Shepard dead" and "Destroy-Shepard gasps" aren't 2 separate entities. Tacking on 2 extra seconds of footage doesn't all of a sudden make it an entirely different ending.

How is it NOT ABC? They are all functionally identical. Show me actual evidence to the contrary.

Again you're talking about extent and they never promised you extent.  You got 3 separate distinct endings and more potential ones.  A lot may have gone into calculating those differences, even if you think the differences themselves aren't substantial. 

I'm not even talking about the immediate events. 

Let's analyze the differences.

#1- Reapers are gone, Shepard *spoiler*, Normandy is *spoiler*, Hammer+Sword are stranded in Sol

#2- Reapers are gone, Shepard *spoiler*, Normandy is *spoiler, Hammer+Sword are stranded in Sol

#3- Reapers are gone, Shepard *spoiler*, Normandy is *spoiler*, Hammer+Sword are stranded in Sol

Explain to me how these are different.

Modifié par o Ventus, 25 mars 2012 - 07:42 .

[XqctaX]

anorling wrote...

Ok! I'll be damned but I admit. I really wanted the game to end like this:


Goddamnit! That doesn't make me a bad person.
What have the world come to when we can't even be allowed to find a little happiness in the fiction we flee to to get away from all the evil, tragedy and despair that surrounds us in the real world?!
Give me my happy ending. I deserve it and so does the story itself!

 
al;

Modifié par XqctaX, 25 mars 2012 - 07:43 .

[Metalunatic]

anorling wrote...

What have the world come to when we can't even be allowed to find a little happiness in the fiction we flee to to get away from all the evil, tragedy and despair that surrounds us in the real world?!
Give me my happy ending. I deserve it and so does the story itself!

QFT, sir.

[wileydsp]

Gigamantis wrote...

wileydsp wrote...

Gigmantis,

My question to you is this: What did you make of the Quarian/Geth and EDI developments during the game. When you got to the end did you think of those occurrences and wonder if what the assertions being leveled for you were actually correct in their nature?

It seems you only want to argue about the construction of the endings in that they were different. I want to know what you feel about the actual dialogue and information you've already had at your disposal coming into that final section, and what did you think. Did you think of those developments with your characters as important at all to the end? When people say our choices didn't matter, I tend to think they are talking about those points.

I'm sorry, I don't want to discuss spoilers in this thread. 

I'll just tell you this; I had my own conceptions of all the characters, what they would do and what would happen once it came together in the end.  Some of my preconceptions were right and some apparently weren't, but my concept of the world is my own and nothing else.  I can disagree with some decisions made while still understanding those aren't my characters and it isn't my world.  

Wanting furthor explanation of many things is perfectly fine, and I expect future DLC to continue piecing things together for a long time.  They want a lot of potential ways to extend content. 

I'm also trying hard not to give spoilers with what I've written.  But, in a nutshell, I do agree with you that we all had our own ideas of all the characters and their actions.  It just seemed divergent to what we were given at the end and what they chose to highlight as important parts of the story.  I'm not going to discuss the choices themselves as some posters want to, I'm actually ok with the scope of each choice given, but I just don't see how there wasn't something that gave more weight to the developments with the characters and situations I question.  It seems like a missed opportunity. 

If the DLC does cover these things then that's all well and good.  I may not agree with BioWare for asking people to pay for the ability to have those questions covered. I don't believe that the main story should be cut in favor of simply adding DLC.  The story itself should be without question able to stand up on it's own without needing these types of things addressed.  The DLC should be focusing on adding to an already fully developed and completed story.  When I think of what makes me question things, I think those are too huge of points to overlook and ask people to pay for in the DLC sections.  It's a lot different to provide DLC for what I'm referring to, and having a player go through the "Omega" DLC.

Modifié par wileydsp, 25 mars 2012 - 07:48 .

[Gigamantis]

bigbade wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

bigbade wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

1.) Everything about any game is subject to change right up until the game goes into printing, and with the inclusion of 1st day patching even beyond that point.  6 months before release?  Absolutely.  

2.) I've already stated it will likely be pre-end content but it will tie up any loose ends left by the existing ending.  That's the only avenue you can take with "new" content when the entire game is effectively over.  

3.) DLC is tearing pages out of the middle and/or end of the book and reselling them.  Whether you like that concept or not that's what DLC is in every game you've ever played.  

1)  This is counting the 1-2 months for post-production and you're left with 4, you'd think an AAA title would drastically change directions with its much acclaimed project for the sake of artistic vision? Besides your #1 point was that we weren't lied to, we were. Period. 

2) Ok, go ahead and attempt to clear up the ending for me via a pre-end mission. 

3) DLC is adding pages to a complete book. Was overlord essential to me2's plot? Was Arrival? Remember me2 is about fighting collectors not stopping a reaper invasion. The ending doesn't allow for any post-dlc because in 2/3rds of them Shepard dies as do other parts of the ME universe. 

1.) You can't be lied to in development because nothing is promised in development.  They only tell you their goals at the time, which can and often do change.  I'm surprised I have to explain this in a forum full of people I assume have been gamers for a whle.

2.) That would involve spoilers, but it's very possible with good writers.  I'm not even a good writer.  

3.) Again, ME1 and ME2 were incomplete games by design because they're part of a trilogy.  Nothing but side-stories are completed in both games.  ME3 is EVERYTHING else and they can't close off EVERYTHING else if they want to continue making content.  

1) Of course you can be lied to, I can say right I think you're a wonderful, intelligent person who brings forth compelling arguments. I'm not promising it, mind you, I'm just saying it. It is a lie, I just lied to you, you were lied to. Simple as that.

2) If it's very possible I'd be glad to hear it, PM me or post them on the spoilers allowed forums.

3) ME1-2 are complete games. ME1 could even be standalone if it wanted to, in fact it was made with that in mind in case it didn't succeed. 
Goal of me1: stop saren, stop sovereign. Saren is stopped, Sovereign is stopped.
Goal of Me2: Stop collectors, learn their motives. Collectors stopped, motives learned.
Goal of Me3: Galactic resolution to reaper conflict, genophage, geth-quarian relations, earth: A break in continuation gets rid in one way or the other of the reaper threat, no conclusion on consequences of genophage, geth and quarians, or what happens to any of the civilizations after what the crucible does to the mass relays. 

ME3 is incomplete, and if you want to defend that by stating that its the only way for them to allow dlc then fine, it's just sad that we have to pay extra for a full game.

1.) Alright, if someone asks me if I have a dog right now my answer will be yes.  If I get rid of my dog in 2 months and that same person visits me in 3 months I won't have a dog.  Did I lie to them?  

2.) Of course it's possible.  There are 10's of uncreative and unsatisfying ways I could come up with off the top of my head to handle the problems people have, but I'm not going to list them here.  The point is that in a work of science fiction everything is explainable and if you have good writers it can be done well. 

3.) ME3 was never meant to be a standalone game like ME1 could've been, and ME2 left me with more questions than ME3 did.  The collectors were a supplemental issue to the main problems; literally none of the overlying problems in the world were addressed satisfactorily because there was more content planned.  There's more content planned for ME3 as well.

Modifié par Gigamantis, 25 mars 2012 - 07:52 .

[Richard 060]

Considering the weak assumption that 'synthetics are somehow guaranteed to bring about chaos and the total destruction of organics', along with the nonsense of some kind of pre-determined 'final evolution' of all organic/synthetic life (hint - evolution is a constant reaction to environmental changes. It's never 'pre-determined', and can never reach a 'final' stage, since the universe isn't 'destined' to wind up in some kind of fixed 'limbo' status quo)...


...then no - the endings AREN'T fine. They all hinge around a really weak, badly-written premise that holds as much water as a sieve. Anyone who actually THINKS when they enjoy a story (rather than blithely sitting back and letting the pretty images and background noise wash over them) would understand this - hence why such a backlash from players who can clearly spot bull**** when they see/hear it.

[Wynteryth]

Gigamantis - Have you read either of the two links that have been posted in response to your OP? If not, please do so.

Here they are, again, for you.

www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/3/

jmstevenson.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/


If, after reading those two very well thought out links, you can't understand why the ending is not "fine", then there is no hope for you.

Modifié par Wynteryth, 25 mars 2012 - 07:55 .

[Cyberstrike nTo]

I would love a fourth ending where Shepard stops the Reapers without destroying the galaxy but winds up in a coma and in the dream world is given a final choice by the Child:

1) Shepard lives and goes back to the real world and helps rebuild galactic civilization and new era of lasting peace begins.

2) Shepard stays in the coma. Galactic civilization is rebuilt but no lasting peace, the LI leaves after 5 years of waiting for Shepard to wake up because s/he has found someone else and moves on. Shepard has a tear running down her/his cheek after the farewell. 

3) Shepard dies and goes to Heaven but a new galactic dark age begins.

[Gigamantis]

Wynteryth wrote...

Gigamantis - Have you read either of the two links that have been posted in response to your OP? If not, please do so.

Here they are, again, for you.

www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/3/

jmstevenson.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/


If, after reading those two very well thought out links, you can't understand why the ending is not "fine", then there is no hope for you.

I've seen those and they're the same complaints I've been addressing here; just in esoteric fashion to avoid spoilers.  My points were outlined in the OP.  1) You weren't lied too.  2) You weren't entitled to a "happy ending."  3) Anything that would benefit from furthor explanation can and likely will be addressed in DLC; that's all DLC could be in a game that's ended.  

[Peranor]

Simotech wrote...

anorling wrote...

Ok! I'll be damned but I admit. I really wanted the game to end like this:


Goddamnit! That doesn't make me a bad person.
What have the world come to when we can't even be allowed to find a little happiness in the fiction we flee to to get away from all the evil, tragedy and despair that surrounds us in the real world?!
Give me my happy ending. I deserve it and so does the story itself!

+1000

Thank you Good to hear that at least someone agrees with me

I've been called childish for not buying in to the dark and grim so called "artistic" endings.
"If you are a grown up you have to like depressive stories. If you don't you are either childish or intellectually handicapped".
To hell with that i say!

A quote that i like:

C. S. Lewis wrote...

Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.

[o Ventus]

Gigamantis wrote...

Wynteryth wrote...

Gigamantis - Have you read either of the two links that have been posted in response to your OP? If not, please do so.

Here they are, again, for you.

www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/3/

jmstevenson.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/


If, after reading those two very well thought out links, you can't understand why the ending is not "fine", then there is no hope for you.

I've seen those and they're the same complaints I've been addressing here; just in esoteric fashion to avoid spoilers.  My points were outlined in the OP.  1) You weren't lied too.  2) You weren't entitled to a "happy ending."  3) Anything that would benefit from furthor explanation can and likely will be addressed in DLC; that's all DLC could be in a game that's ended.  

1. Yes, we were.

2. Not the point. Nice strawman.

3. Addressing the issue via DLC is scummy. When people pay $60+ ($80 in my case), they expect a full package, not 3/4 the package.

Modifié par o Ventus, 25 mars 2012 - 08:04 .

[Gigamantis]

o Ventus wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

Wynteryth wrote...

Gigamantis - Have you read either of the two links that have been posted in response to your OP? If not, please do so.

Here they are, again, for you.

www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/3/

jmstevenson.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/


If, after reading those two very well thought out links, you can't understand why the ending is not "fine", then there is no hope for you.

I've seen those and they're the same complaints I've been addressing here; just in esoteric fashion to avoid spoilers.  My points were outlined in the OP.  1) You weren't lied too.  2) You weren't entitled to a "happy ending."  3) Anything that would benefit from furthor explanation can and likely will be addressed in DLC; that's all DLC could be in a game that's ended.  

1. Yes, we were.

2. Not the point. Nice strawman.

3. Addressing the issue via DLC is scummy. When people pay $60+ ($80 in my case), they expect a full package, not 3/4 the package.

1.) No, you weren't

2.) It actually is the point for some people.  If that doesn't apply to you then you don't need to argue it.

3.) Technically the game is a trilogy, so to get the "full package," which includes all plot development and conclusion up to this point, you paid way more than $80.  

[bigbade]

Gigamantis wrote...

1.) Alright, if someone asks me if I have a dog right now my answer will be yes.  If I get rid of my dog in 2 months and that same person visits me in 3 months I won't have a dog.  Did I lie to them?  

2.) Of course it's possible.  There are 10's of uncreative and unsatisfying ways I could come up with off the top of my head to handle the problems people have, but I'm not going to list them here.  The point is that in a work of science fiction everything is explainable and if you have good writers it can be done well. 

3.) ME3 was never meant to be a standalone game like ME1 could've been, and ME2 left me with more questions than ME3 did.  The collectors were a supplemental issue to the main problems; literally none of the overlying problems in the world were addressed satisfactorily because there was more content planned.  There's more content planned for ME3 as well.

1) You're warping the question, that has nothing to do with a validating someting to someone and then instead of clarifying the changes which you knew were happening, kept quiet and led them to believe your initial statement.
 if someone asked you if they could see your dog in 3 months and you say yes, then get rid of your dog but never tell them that when they ask supplementary questions you are withholding the truth aka, a lie of omission.

2) In science fiction sure, but an answer that follows with mass effect's established lore and continuity? Still waiting for that PM/other thread. 

3) ME2 leaves you with the questions about the reaper plot, but the reaper invasion took a back seat to the threat at hand as the game was about the collectors abducting humans. What questions did me2 leave you with?

Modifié par bigbade, 25 mars 2012 - 08:10 .

[kalle90]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

I would love a fourth ending where Shepard stops the Reapers without destroying the galaxy but winds up in a coma and in the dream world is given a final choice by the Child:

1) Shepard lives and goes back to the real world and helps rebuild galactic civilization and new era of lasting peace begins.

2) Shepard stays in the coma. Galactic civilization is rebuilt but no lasting peace, the LI leaves after 5 years of waiting for Shepard to wake up because s/he has found someone else and moves on. Shepard has a tear running down her/his cheek after the farewell. 

3) Shepard dies and goes to Heaven but a new galactic dark age begins.

If we'd go down that road I'd love if some of the dead appeared. I was expecting to see Mordin, Zaeed and Miranda (atleast, there are plenty more who died) in those dreams either actively talking to them or just passively seeing images.

That would add a choice "Do I want to stay with these people or go there with those people"

If we're all hypothetical and dark energy theory was true I could even see an option that Shep is convinced harvesting is the only way but there is a way to move people's consciousness into the reapers or some other virtual world. "We are each a nation"

[o Ventus]

Gigamantis wrote...

3.) Technically the game is a trilogy, so to get the "full package," which includes all plot development and conclusion up to this point, you paid way more than $80.  

And this is the point where your credibility (What's left of it) evaporates away. The fallacies in this post are too obvious to ignore. There is no way you wrote this while sober. Not to mention you dodged the point of my original post.

Don't bother responding to me, I likely won't be returning here.

Modifié par o Ventus, 25 mars 2012 - 08:18 .

[Naqey]

"that depends" is such a nice phrase ...

[Tocquevillain]

o Ventus wrote...


The endings nullify every single choice you've made in the series up to that point. Who'd have guessed that the most important decision Shepard would have to make is "Red, green, or blue"?

This is clearly a lie, as many of the choices you make in the games have no conceivable way of impacting the ending. Can you elaborate on this point? No one who gripes about the endings explains this point but they mention it every chance they get.

[_ThePaSch_]

From an objective point of view, the ending was fine. There were three different endings, we weren't lied to because things changed in the meantime and there is always DLC to come. I get what you're saying.

Thing is, you don't play games objectively. You play them to get immersed into the game's universe, to be told a story. Of course the writers choose how to conclude the story, but once any sense of verisimilitude gets thrown overboard, which is the case in ME3's ending, the point of playing the game is gone. There's simply no immersion to be had if the story takes a complete irrational turn and changes everything the writers were going for in previous installments. Yes, there are three different endings, but they all play out exactly the same, save for a few colors and one single scene on Earth. No, we weren't lied to, but we also weren't told that they changed their views, and if you think about it as a business, they most likely did it on purpose. You don't tell your customers that your product just changed for the worse. "No ABC endings? Nah, we dismissed that. Sorry!" What impact would that possibly have on sales? Here's a hint: Not a good one.

Besides, objectivity does not exist, but that's an entirely different topic.

[Wynteryth]

Gigamantis wrote...

Wynteryth wrote...

Gigamantis - Have you read either of the two links that have been posted in response to your OP? If not, please do so.

Here they are, again, for you.

www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/3/

jmstevenson.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/


If, after reading those two very well thought out links, you can't understand why the ending is not "fine", then there is no hope for you.

I've seen those and they're the same complaints I've been addressing here; just in esoteric fashion to avoid spoilers.  My points were outlined in the OP.  1) You weren't lied too.  2) You weren't entitled to a "happy ending."  3) Anything that would benefit from furthor explanation can and likely will be addressed in DLC; that's all DLC could be in a game that's ended.  

*ROFLMAO* I'm sorry, but you clearly are delusional. Your OP and your title say that the ending was FINE.  Those two links CONTRADICT your claim that the ending was fine. 

[Gigamantis]

bigbade wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

1.) Alright, if someone asks me if I have a dog right now my answer will be yes.  If I get rid of my dog in 2 months and that same person visits me in 3 months I won't have a dog.  Did I lie to them?  

2.) Of course it's possible.  There are 10's of uncreative and unsatisfying ways I could come up with off the top of my head to handle the problems people have, but I'm not going to list them here.  The point is that in a work of science fiction everything is explainable and if you have good writers it can be done well. 

3.) ME3 was never meant to be a standalone game like ME1 could've been, and ME2 left me with more questions than ME3 did.  The collectors were a supplemental issue to the main problems; literally none of the overlying problems in the world were addressed satisfactorily because there was more content planned.  There's more content planned for ME3 as well.

1) You're warping the question, that has nothing to do with a validating someting to someone and then instead of clarifying the changes which you knew were happening, kept quiet and led them to believe your initial statement.
 if someone asked you if they could see your dog in 3 months and you say yes, then get rid of your dog but never tell them that when they ask supplementary questions you are withholding the truth aka, a lie of omission.

2) In science fiction sure, but an answer that follows with mass effect's established lore and continuity? Still waiting for that PM/other thread. 

3) ME2 leaves you with the questions about the reaper plot, but the reaper invasion took a back seat to the threat at hand as the game was about the collectors abducting humans. What questions did me2 leave you with?

1.) If it was true when they were asked it wasn't a lie.  If they were asked after the change and lied then it was a lie, but you have nothing indicating that happened.  You assuming they omitted information when asked is based on nothing. 

2.) Most of the problems people have are with conception of character behavior and motive, not physical or material impossibilities.  These kinds of things are easily addressed in writing, even with something as unsatisfying as a change in character or collective opinion.

3.) At the end of just ME2 I had questions about harbringer,  the shadow broker, the genophage and mainly the reapers.  The looming reaper threat was a GAPING plothole if we weren't assuming more content. 

[o Ventus]

Tocquevillain wrote...

o Ventus wrote...


The endings nullify every single choice you've made in the series up to that point. Who'd have guessed that the most important decision Shepard would have to make is "Red, green, or blue"?

This is clearly a lie, as many of the choices you make in the games have no conceivable way of impacting the ending. Can you elaborate on this point? No one who gripes about the endings explains this point but they mention it every chance they get.

Did you cure or sabotage the genophage? It doesn't matter. The krogan warriors that are serving with Hammer are stranded in Sol. As is made clear in ME2, there are no female krogan warriors, so they are going to die out.

Did you make peace between the quarians and geth? It doesn't matter. The quarians are stuck making food for 2 entire populations (which certainly can't last forever) and the geth may/may not exist anymore.

Those are just two examples.

edit: I'm not even being melodramatic. *Literally* everything you've done up until the final 5 or so minutes of the game is relegated as pointless in the coming era.

Modifié par o Ventus, 25 mars 2012 - 08:25 .

[Gigamantis]

Wynteryth wrote...

Gigamantis wrote...

Wynteryth wrote...

Gigamantis - Have you read either of the two links that have been posted in response to your OP? If not, please do so.

Here they are, again, for you.

www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/3/

jmstevenson.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/


If, after reading those two very well thought out links, you can't understand why the ending is not "fine", then there is no hope for you.

I've seen those and they're the same complaints I've been addressing here; just in esoteric fashion to avoid spoilers.  My points were outlined in the OP.  1) You weren't lied too.  2) You weren't entitled to a "happy ending."  3) Anything that would benefit from furthor explanation can and likely will be addressed in DLC; that's all DLC could be in a game that's ended.  

*ROFLMAO* I'm sorry, but you clearly are delusional. Your OP and your title say that the ending was FINE.  Those two links CONTRADICT your claim that the ending was fine. 

Those articles don't prove the ending isn't fine.  They complain about the same things I've addressed a lot in this thread.

[Naqey]

Gigamantis wrote...

1.) If it was true when they were asked it wasn't a lie.  If they were asked after the change and lied then it was a lie, but you have nothing indicating that happened.  You assuming they omitted information when asked is based on nothing. 

2.) Most of the problems people have are with conception of character behavior and motive, not physical or material impossibilities.  These kinds of things are easily addressed in writing, even with something as unsatisfying as a change in character or collective opinion.

3.) At the end of just ME2 I had questions about harbringer,  the shadow broker, the genophage and mainly the reapers.  The looming reaper threat was a GAPING plothole if we weren't assuming more content. 

3. really? the whole trilogy thing went right over your head, didnt it? 

btw the content that will be released for me 3 is subplot content that was cut from the script (like take back omega)

Modifié par Naqey, 25 mars 2012 - 08:28 .

[Wynteryth]

Tocquevillain wrote...

o Ventus wrote...


The endings nullify every single choice you've made in the series up to that point. Who'd have guessed that the most important decision Shepard would have to make is "Red, green, or blue"?

This is clearly a lie, as many of the choices you make in the games have no conceivable way of impacting the ending. Can you elaborate on this point? No one who gripes about the endings explains this point but they mention it every chance they get.

Actually, the butterfly effect says otherwise.  

However, to truly answer your question, people would have to go into spoilers.  Which can't be done here.