265 réponses à ce sujet

[Elishiaila]

K1llm1n1on wrote...
I feel like it's unfeasable to make a game that is pervasively about major choices changing outcomes, especially cumulatively over 3 games. I don't feel like that's what they were trying to do in ME3. That was more the case in 2, and 1 and 3 it seems less so.

That is what they have promised. And this is the key.

I think it is a bit more complex than this. As you will see it is linked to a DLC as well. As you know they have moved on party member from base game to a DLC. His presence is purely optional. And as most people believe Protheans were nice and kind, we our actual Prothean NPC proves otherwise. We see how they enslaved other races. At this point we can see a big problem. For people who don't have DLC: Protheans are good, their technology helps us. Reapers are evil.

For people who have DLC: Protheans would enslave us, and probably without reapers we wouldn't even exist. Reapers gave us crucible, gave us a chance, and somehow we should seek a way to survive and coexist. The Geth story shows more about coexistence options.

Imho if we would be able to show how we can coexist with Geth, nothing big would change. Catalyst could tell us that is why we have the control option. We have to replace the cycle programming for this coexistence. But sadly as I said the key issues are after this point.

[K1llm1n1on]

Lookout1390 wrote...

K1llm1n1on wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

I weep for you, OP

And that is why Bioware will continue to flourish, and we will be continued to be handed more ****.

The ending was absolutely terrible, any true fan of the series can see the massive plot holes that are just littered all over the place. Why would anyone accept that this is how it ends?

Are you telling me you have no questions or concerns about the ending?

Here's a hanky, Lookout, but save your tears- I am too far gone. I am the proverbial spilled milk.

My other posts in this thread reflect my doubts and concerns.
I accept this is how it ends because I have no choice- that's one of the things that I really like about the ending. It's hard to accept, it's unresolved, it raises questions. Good books do this, good art, and I like to see games doing it, too.
Yes, BioWare has made me suffer, but it's great that it has done that.

Is it too late...the rEApers have won....

This is exactly why I'm saying that no one is right or wrong here. I can see exactly how you are hghlighting parts of my post to show what's wrong with the ending, but I'm using those examples to show what's right with the ending.

This is all about differences of opinion. There is no empirical argument that the ending is bad or good, so we should just hash out why we like or hate it and forget about trying to erode each other's points, even each other's rights to have them.

[Geneaux486]

The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?

He's not the Citadel. You even ask him if he's the Citadel and he says "no", he just "lives there". The keepers probably interpreted his signal the same as Reaper signals.

Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.

There is not fallout from the Relays in every ending. Furthermore, we don't know who all evacuated the Citadel when the Reapers were coming, but yes, anyone who was still on it was more than likely dead.

The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age

Possible, but not guaranteed. Especially in the endings where the Reapers survive, and would more than likely start rebuilding Mass Relays to get themselves home.

Where did the Normandy land?

Some planet.

Why was joker running in the first place?

To outrun the giant shockwave.

Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?

If your EMS is low they do get killed by the beam. If not, the regain conciousness either before or after, and Joker probably picks them up to either get them out of the danger zone since there's no longer a point in fighting there or so they could fly to the Citadel to help Shepard. He had more than enough time to do so.

3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo?

 
Probably because as a regular cutscene Shepard would have not needed to reload the thing after spending all his shots, and the devs decided to make it interactive.

4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam?

What does his rank have to do with it?  He's leading ground forces, victory lies on the Citadel, and he hates sitting around and waiting.  Of course he'd go in.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 27 mars 2012 - 02:10 .

[K1llm1n1on]

Elishiaila wrote...

K1llm1n1on wrote...
I feel like it's unfeasable to make a game that is pervasively about major choices changing outcomes, especially cumulatively over 3 games. I don't feel like that's what they were trying to do in ME3. That was more the case in 2, and 1 and 3 it seems less so.

That is what they have promised. And this is the key.

I think it is a bit more complex than this. As you will see it is linked to a DLC as well. As you know they have moved on party member from base game to a DLC. His presence is purely optional. And as most people believe Protheans were nice and kind, we our actual Prothean NPC proves otherwise. We see how they enslaved other races. At this point we can see a big problem. For people who don't have DLC: Protheans are good, their technology helps us. Reapers are evil.

For people who have DLC: Protheans would enslave us, and probably without reapers we wouldn't even exist. Reapers gave us crucible, gave us a chance, and somehow we should seek a way to survive and coexist. The Geth story shows more about coexistence options.

Imho if we would be able to show how we can coexist with Geth, nothing big would change. Catalyst could tell us that is why we have the control option. We have to replace the cycle programming for this coexistence. But sadly as I said the key issues are after this point.

I agree with you on most of your post, and agree that the way this was handled wrankles.

The "That is what they promised" part I take issue with. Game devs are famous for over-promising on upcoming projects- Todd Howard, Peter Molyneaux, Muzyka, etc. Do you believe politicians' promises? They'll say anything to get you to support them.

[Cheviot]

James9749 wrote...

Cheviot wrote...

James9749 wrote...

Sirakou wrote...

I still cannot wrap my head around everyone saying the relay should have supernova'd. Yes, that happens when you smash an asteroid into it. But when a signal gets sent out from the Citadel, same "unknown" type of technology, its not going to react the same way.

If you smash a battery with a hammer, its going to be bad and messy. Dispose of battery properly, much more contained reaction. Why can't the same thing happen here?

Then why did the Normandy crash if it was a more contained explosion? In either case, whether you believe the Relay's go supernova and destroy a system, and hence would make the Normandy crash or desintigrate from the explosion and wipe out all galactic life that lived near the explosion, or if you believed it was more contained, and wouldn't destroy galactic civilization, then why would the Normandy crash if it was this "contained" explosion?
I'll continue my point of view in a latter post. I just wanted to reply to this guy.

Because it wasn't the explosion that damaged the Normandy, it was the collapse of the mass effect corridor it was in.

Our_Last_Scene wrote...
First page and already you got called a Bioware employee by the retake movement.

Has anyone called you a troll yet OP? I just skipped to the end after I saw that Bioware Employee thing.

No one's called the OP a troll, but I think someone who agreed with him was accused of being one, on page 2.

There is still the Blue explosion, which doesn't fit within this logic. You don't see the Citadel or the relay fire a beam, and it only takes control of the Reapers. I played the "control" ending, and the relays weren't shown being destroyed, yet they used the same Galactic explosions as Destroy and Synthesis, which wouldn't make sense. Even if it did make sense, the relays would still be intact, and the Normandy wouldn't be chased by the collapse of the Mass effect corridor because.... The relays are still intact.

You're right there is no beam (the blue shockwave reaches the relay instead), but the relay does still blow up (though not as violently as in other endings), and there are still beams passed between relays.  This may be because this is the only ending in which the Citadel  sticks around, so it can continue to broadcast the order, negating the need for the beam from Crucible to the first relay.

[K1llm1n1on]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?

He's not the Citadel. You even ask him if he's the Citadel and he says "no", he just "lives there". The keepers probably interpreted his signal the same as Reaper signals.

Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.

There is not fallout from the Relays in every ending. Furthermore, we don't know who all evacuated the Citadel when the Reapers were coming, but yes, anyone who was still on it was more than likely dead.

The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age

Possible, but not guaranteed. Especially in the endings where the Reapers survive, and would more than likely start rebuilding Mass Relays to get themselves home.

Where did the Normandy land?

Some planet.

Why was joker running in the first place?

To outrun the giant shockwave.

Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?

If your EMS is low they do get killed by the beam. If not, the regain conciousness either before or after, and Joker probably picks them up to either get them out of the danger zone since there's no longer a point in fighting there or so they could fly to the Citadel to help Shepard. He had more than enough time to do so.

3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo?

 
Probably because as a regular cutscene Shepard would have not needed to reload the thing after spending all his shots, and the devs decided to make it interactive.

4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam?

What does his rank have to do with it?  He's leading ground forces, victory lies on the Citadel, and he hates sitting around and waiting.  Of course he'd go in.

[James9749]

Geneaux486 wrote...

Why was joker running in the first place?

To outrun the giant shockwave.

Maybe I am missing something here, but why would Joker even be running away from the Shockwave if he was FIGHTING the Reapers with the rest of the fleet? When did he, and only he get the order to run away? Did he chicken out? Did Hacket give Joker an order. The point that the person was trying to make was him running away wasn't explained. No communication, no cut scene, no text explination, you are just supposed to accept that Joker was caught in a relay while they were exploding/releasing their signal? I don't buy it.

[Lookout1390]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?

He's not the Citadel. You even ask him if he's the Citadel and he says "no", he just "lives there". The keepers probably interpreted his signal the same as Reaper signals.

Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.

There is not fallout from the Relays in every ending. Furthermore, we don't know who all evacuated the Citadel when the Reapers were coming, but yes, anyone who was still on it was more than likely dead.

The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age

Possible, but not guaranteed. Especially in the endings where the Reapers survive, and would more than likely start rebuilding Mass Relays to get themselves home.

Where did the Normandy land?

Some planet.

Why was joker running in the first place?

To outrun the giant shockwave.

Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?

If your EMS is low they do get killed by the beam. If not, the regain conciousness either before or after, and Joker probably picks them up to either get them out of the danger zone since there's no longer a point in fighting there or so they could fly to the Citadel to help Shepard. He had more than enough time to do so.

3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo?

 
Probably because as a regular cutscene Shepard would have not needed to reload the thing after spending all his shots, and the devs decided to make it interactive.

4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam?

What does his rank have to do with it?  He's leading ground forces, victory lies on the Citadel, and he hates sitting around and waiting.  Of course he'd go in.

Ah, space magic...I get it now 

Thanks for clearing that up

[Geneaux486]

Lookout1390 wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?

He's not the Citadel. You even ask him if he's the Citadel and he says "no", he just "lives there". The keepers probably interpreted his signal the same as Reaper signals.

Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.

There is not fallout from the Relays in every ending. Furthermore, we don't know who all evacuated the Citadel when the Reapers were coming, but yes, anyone who was still on it was more than likely dead.

The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age

Possible, but not guaranteed. Especially in the endings where the Reapers survive, and would more than likely start rebuilding Mass Relays to get themselves home.

Where did the Normandy land?

Some planet.

Why was joker running in the first place?

To outrun the giant shockwave.

Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?

If your EMS is low they do get killed by the beam. If not, the regain conciousness either before or after, and Joker probably picks them up to either get them out of the danger zone since there's no longer a point in fighting there or so they could fly to the Citadel to help Shepard. He had more than enough time to do so.

3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo?

 
Probably because as a regular cutscene Shepard would have not needed to reload the thing after spending all his shots, and the devs decided to make it interactive.

4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam?

What does his rank have to do with it?  He's leading ground forces, victory lies on the Citadel, and he hates sitting around and waiting.  Of course he'd go in.

Ah, space magic...I get it now 

Thanks for clearing that up

You're a credit to the movement, hoss.

[DJBare]

K1llm1n1on wrote...
I agree with you on most of your post, and agree that the way this was handled wrankles.

The "That is what they promised" part I take issue with. Game devs are famous for over-promising on upcoming projects- Todd Howard, Peter Molyneaux, Muzyka, etc. Do you believe politicians' promises? They'll say anything to get you to support them.

The problem is, their statements were not combined with a bad finish to a 5 year series, the statement was "16 distinct endings" when in fact what we got was one ending with 3 distinct colours, yeah I can boil down to 16 endings if I take all the little niggly things into account, there is a difference between hype and outright misleading your "customers"

[Pee Jae]

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...

[quote]Lookout1390 wrote...

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...


[quote]The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?[/quote]

He's not the Citadel. You even ask him if he's the Citadel and he says "no", he just "lives there". The keepers probably interpreted his signal the same as Reaper signals.




[quote]Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.[/quote]

There is not fallout from the Relays in every ending. Furthermore, we don't know who all evacuated the Citadel when the Reapers were coming, but yes, anyone who was still on it was more than likely dead.




[quote]The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age[/quote]

Possible, but not guaranteed. Especially in the endings where the Reapers survive, and would more than likely start rebuilding Mass Relays to get themselves home.




[quote]Where did the Normandy land?[/quote]

Some planet.




[quote]Why was joker running in the first place?[/quote]

To outrun the giant shockwave.




[quote]Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?[/quote]

If your EMS is low they do get killed by the beam. If not, the regain conciousness either before or after, and Joker probably picks them up to either get them out of the danger zone since there's no longer a point in fighting there or so they could fly to the Citadel to help Shepard. He had more than enough time to do so.



[quote]3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo?[/quote]
 
Probably because as a regular cutscene Shepard would have not needed to reload the thing after spending all his shots, and the devs decided to make it interactive.



[quote]4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam? [/quote]

What does his rank have to do with it?  He's leading ground forces, victory lies on the Citadel, and he hates sitting around and waiting.  Of course he'd go in.[/quote]


Ah, space magic...I get it now 

Thanks for clearing that up

[/quote]

You're a credit to the movement, hoss.[/quote]

All of this? Speculation. See the problem yet?

[James9749]

Cheviot wrote...

James9749 wrote...

Cheviot wrote...

James9749 wrote...

Sirakou wrote...

I still cannot wrap my head around everyone saying the relay should have supernova'd. Yes, that happens when you smash an asteroid into it. But when a signal gets sent out from the Citadel, same "unknown" type of technology, its not going to react the same way.

If you smash a battery with a hammer, its going to be bad and messy. Dispose of battery properly, much more contained reaction. Why can't the same thing happen here?

Then why did the Normandy crash if it was a more contained explosion? In either case, whether you believe the Relay's go supernova and destroy a system, and hence would make the Normandy crash or desintigrate from the explosion and wipe out all galactic life that lived near the explosion, or if you believed it was more contained, and wouldn't destroy galactic civilization, then why would the Normandy crash if it was this "contained" explosion?
I'll continue my point of view in a latter post. I just wanted to reply to this guy.

Because it wasn't the explosion that damaged the Normandy, it was the collapse of the mass effect corridor it was in.

Our_Last_Scene wrote...
First page and already you got called a Bioware employee by the retake movement.

Has anyone called you a troll yet OP? I just skipped to the end after I saw that Bioware Employee thing.

No one's called the OP a troll, but I think someone who agreed with him was accused of being one, on page 2.

There is still the Blue explosion, which doesn't fit within this logic. You don't see the Citadel or the relay fire a beam, and it only takes control of the Reapers. I played the "control" ending, and the relays weren't shown being destroyed, yet they used the same Galactic explosions as Destroy and Synthesis, which wouldn't make sense. Even if it did make sense, the relays would still be intact, and the Normandy wouldn't be chased by the collapse of the Mass effect corridor because.... The relays are still intact.

You're right there is no beam (the blue shockwave reaches the relay instead), but the relay does still blow up (though not as violently as in other endings), and there are still beams passed between relays.  This may be because this is the only ending in which the Citadel  sticks around, so it can continue to broadcast the order, negating the need for the beam from Crucible to the first relay.

There's my point. Bioware didn't explain that. Everything said in this forum post is SPECULATION made by the fans. If Bioware meant it that way, they would have said something, or had an epologue, or a Codex entry that you could read. Everything said thus far ISN'T PROVEN. That's my personal problem with it. Bioware just left us in the dark, and this was to be the CONCLUSION of the series? I want a conclusion that, well, actually concludes the story.

[Lookout1390]

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...

[quote]Lookout1390 wrote...

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...


[quote]The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?[/quote]

He's not the Citadel. You even ask him if he's the Citadel and he says "no", he just "lives there". The keepers probably interpreted his signal the same as Reaper signals.




[quote]Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.[/quote]

There is not fallout from the Relays in every ending. Furthermore, we don't know who all evacuated the Citadel when the Reapers were coming, but yes, anyone who was still on it was more than likely dead.




[quote]The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age[/quote]

Possible, but not guaranteed. Especially in the endings where the Reapers survive, and would more than likely start rebuilding Mass Relays to get themselves home.




[quote]Where did the Normandy land?[/quote]

Some planet.




[quote]Why was joker running in the first place?[/quote]

To outrun the giant shockwave.




[quote]Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?[/quote]

If your EMS is low they do get killed by the beam. If not, the regain conciousness either before or after, and Joker probably picks them up to either get them out of the danger zone since there's no longer a point in fighting there or so they could fly to the Citadel to help Shepard. He had more than enough time to do so.



[quote]3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo?[/quote]
 
Probably because as a regular cutscene Shepard would have not needed to reload the thing after spending all his shots, and the devs decided to make it interactive.



[quote]4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam? [/quote]

What does his rank have to do with it?  He's leading ground forces, victory lies on the Citadel, and he hates sitting around and waiting.  Of course he'd go in.[/quote]


Ah, space magic...I get it now 

Thanks for clearing that up

[/quote]

You're a credit to the movement, hoss.[/quote]

I do what I can, troll #32459

[Geneaux486]

t_skwerl wrote...
All of this? Speculation. See the problem yet?

Even the parts where the stuff actually happened in front of our eyes in the actual game?  I definetely see a problem, but not the one you're seeing.

I do what I can, troll #32459

Hey, if you're good at it, why not.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 27 mars 2012 - 02:17 .

[K1llm1n1on]

fle6isnow wrote...

Electric Pig wrote...

Ugrh i'm so bored of these.

The plot holes and lack of closure need to be seen too.

The less you care about mass effect the more you like the ending.

blah blah blah whatever, your entitled to your opinion (your wrong opinion)

And I'm so bored of statements like yours.

Sigh, this is precisely why people don't like to post about liking the ending. We get so much hate, and so many assumptions are made about our intelligence, character, and how much of a fan we really are. Oh, you're not a REAL fan! Oh, you don't care about the ME universe! Oh, you're just trying to suck Bioware's wang! Oh, you're just delusional and trying to like a bad ending! Oh, no one smart could like all the plot holes! Oh, your opinion is wrong!

Thankfully in my ending thread (see sig) there wasn't this much vitriol, but... <_<

OP, I'm glad you liked the ending. I liked the ending too, for reasons that are somewhat overlapping with yours.

Missed this in all the posts.
My writing tends to polarize- I'm trying to minimize that to keep things constructive. You handled your topic nicely! It's a tough job but somebody has to do it!

[James9749]

[quote]t_skwerl wrote...

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...

[quote]Lookout1390 wrote...

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...


[quote]The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?[/quote]

He's not the Citadel. You even ask him if he's the Citadel and he says "no", he just "lives there". The keepers probably interpreted his signal the same as Reaper signals.




[quote]Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.[/quote]

There is not fallout from the Relays in every ending. Furthermore, we don't know who all evacuated the Citadel when the Reapers were coming, but yes, anyone who was still on it was more than likely dead.




[quote]The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age[/quote]

Possible, but not guaranteed. Especially in the endings where the Reapers survive, and would more than likely start rebuilding Mass Relays to get themselves home.




[quote]Where did the Normandy land?[/quote]

Some planet.




[quote]Why was joker running in the first place?[/quote]

To outrun the giant shockwave.




[quote]Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?[/quote]

If your EMS is low they do get killed by the beam. If not, the regain conciousness either before or after, and Joker probably picks them up to either get them out of the danger zone since there's no longer a point in fighting there or so they could fly to the Citadel to help Shepard. He had more than enough time to do so.



[quote]3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo?[/quote]
 
Probably because as a regular cutscene Shepard would have not needed to reload the thing after spending all his shots, and the devs decided to make it interactive.



[quote]4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam? [/quote]

What does his rank have to do with it?  He's leading ground forces, victory lies on the Citadel, and he hates sitting around and waiting.  Of course he'd go in.[/quote]


Ah, space magic...I get it now 

Thanks for clearing that up

[/quote]

You're a credit to the movement, hoss.[/quote]

All of this? Speculation. See the problem yet?

[/quote]

Wow, meager seconds ahead of me. You are good my dear sir:police:

Edit: about the Speculation bit.

Modifié par James9749, 27 mars 2012 - 02:18 .

[Pee Jae]

Geneaux486 wrote...

t_skwerl wrote...
All of this? Speculation. See the problem yet?

Even the parts where the stuff actually happened in front of our eyes in the actual game?  I definetely see a problem, but not the one you're seeing.

I do what I can, troll #32459

Hey, if you're good at it, why not.

"There's my point. Bioware didn't explain that. Everything said in this
forum post is SPECULATION made by the fans. If Bioware meant it that
way, they would have said something, or had an epologue, or a Codex
entry that you could read. Everything said thus far ISN'T PROVEN. That's
my personal problem with it. Bioware just left us in the dark, and this
was to be the CONCLUSION of the series? I want a conclusion that, well,
actually concludes the story."

[Lookout1390]

Geneaux486 wrote...

The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?

He's not the Citadel. You even ask him if he's the Citadel and he says "no", he just "lives there". The keepers probably interpreted his signal the same as Reaper signals.

Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.

There is not fallout from the Relays in every ending. Furthermore, we don't know who all evacuated the Citadel when the Reapers were coming, but yes, anyone who was still on it was more than likely dead.

The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age

Possible, but not guaranteed. Especially in the endings where the Reapers survive, and would more than likely start rebuilding Mass Relays to get themselves home.

Where did the Normandy land?

Some planet.

Why was joker running in the first place?

To outrun the giant shockwave.

Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?

If your EMS is low they do get killed by the beam. If not, the regain conciousness either before or after, and Joker probably picks them up to either get them out of the danger zone since there's no longer a point in fighting there or so they could fly to the Citadel to help Shepard. He had more than enough time to do so.

3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo?

 
Probably because as a regular cutscene Shepard would have not needed to reload the thing after spending all his shots, and the devs decided to make it interactive.

4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam?

What does his rank have to do with it?  He's leading ground forces, victory lies on the Citadel, and he hates sitting around and waiting.  Of course he'd go in.

Speculations

[Rekia]

I liked your post, very entertaining. I'm happy for you that you enjoyed the ending and can express it in more than just "ending is fine."

I noticed someone linked it earlier, but I do hope you take the time to read the "all that matters is the ending" blog that jm stevenson wrote. It pretty much sums up how most of us who were disappointed in the ending feel, but he manages to do it in a way that is much more eloquent and humorous than I would be able to.

Here is the link again in case you aren't sure which one I am refering to:

 http://jmstevenson.w...-mass-effect-3/

It's a good read.

[K1llm1n1on]

[quote]t_skwerl wrote...

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...

[quote]Lookout1390 wrote...

[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...


[quote]The Star-child himself is a plot-hole, what was the point of sovereign if the star-child was the citadel all along?[/quote]

He's not the Citadel. You even ask him if he's the Citadel and he says "no", he just "lives there". The keepers probably interpreted his signal the same as Reaper signals.




[quote]Everyone on the citadel is dead, so they are gone. The entire fleet you brought to earth is stranded, and will eventually die due to lack of resources, if they didn't die in the initial fallout of the Relays blowing up.[/quote]

There is not fallout from the Relays in every ending. Furthermore, we don't know who all evacuated the Citadel when the Reapers were coming, but yes, anyone who was still on it was more than likely dead.




[quote]The galaxy is thrown into a dark-age[/quote]

Possible, but not guaranteed. Especially in the endings where the Reapers survive, and would more than likely start rebuilding Mass Relays to get themselves home.




[quote]Where did the Normandy land?[/quote]

Some planet.




[quote]Why was joker running in the first place?[/quote]

To outrun the giant shockwave.




[quote]Garrus and Liara were with me, how did they get back on the Normandy? Did that giant laser just hit me and miss them and they decided to leave Shepard on the ground half-dead?[/quote]

If your EMS is low they do get killed by the beam. If not, the regain conciousness either before or after, and Joker probably picks them up to either get them out of the danger zone since there's no longer a point in fighting there or so they could fly to the Citadel to help Shepard. He had more than enough time to do so.



[quote]3) Why does the M-6 Carnfix have infinite ammo?[/quote]
 
Probably because as a regular cutscene Shepard would have not needed to reload the thing after spending all his shots, and the devs decided to make it interactive.



[quote]4) Why did Anderson (being an Admiral)  follow Shepard into the beam? [/quote]

What does his rank have to do with it?  He's leading ground forces, victory lies on the Citadel, and he hates sitting around and waiting.  Of course he'd go in.[/quote]


Ah, space magic...I get it now 

Thanks for clearing that up

[/quote]

You're a credit to the movement, hoss.[/quote]

All of this? Speculation. See the problem yet?

[/quote]
So I guess an ending that leaves room for interpretation is just all bad, then....

[James9749]

t_skwerl wrote...

Geneaux486 wrote...

t_skwerl wrote...
All of this? Speculation. See the problem yet?

Even the parts where the stuff actually happened in front of our eyes in the actual game?  I definetely see a problem, but not the one you're seeing.

I do what I can, troll #32459

Hey, if you're good at it, why not.

"There's my point. Bioware didn't explain that. Everything said in this
forum post is SPECULATION made by the fans. If Bioware meant it that
way, they would have said something, or had an epologue, or a Codex
entry that you could read. Everything said thus far ISN'T PROVEN. That's
my personal problem with it. Bioware just left us in the dark, and this
was to be the CONCLUSION of the series? I want a conclusion that, well,
actually concludes the story."

Thanks for copying me. At least someone will hear it eventually.

[K1llm1n1on]

Rekia wrote...

I liked your post, very entertaining. I'm happy for you that you enjoyed the ending and can express it in more than just "ending is fine."

I noticed someone linked it earlier, but I do hope you take the time to read the "all that matters is the ending" blog that jm stevenson wrote. It pretty much sums up how most of us who were disappointed in the ending feel, but he manages to do it in a way that is much more eloquent and humorous than I would be able to.

Here is the link again in case you aren't sure which one I am refering to:

 http://jmstevenson.w...-mass-effect-3/

It's a good read.

Thanks, someone did point me in that direction before, now I'll actually go look!

[Geneaux486]

"There's my point. Bioware didn't explain that. Everything said in this
forum post is SPECULATION made by the fans. If Bioware meant it that
way, they would have said something, or had an epologue, or a Codex
entry that you could read. Everything said thus far ISN'T PROVEN. That's
my personal problem with it. Bioware just left us in the dark, and this
was to be the CONCLUSION of the series? I want a conclusion that, well,
actually concludes the story."

Ironically saying that because Bioware didn't outright state it, it isn't true, is speculation in and of itself. The arguments I make are backed up with in-game evidence. *Some* of it is speculation, some is simple observation. Additionally- why am I even bothering, you're just going to write this off as speculation as well. Ah well, nothing wrong with occasional acts of futility.

Modifié par Geneaux486, 27 mars 2012 - 02:22 .

[Pee Jae]

Rather than go around in circles, I'll just link this too:

http://jmstevenson.w...-mass-effect-3/

While biased, thereby making my point for me, it nevertheless is a good read and hits the major points we're all trying to make.

[James9749]

Geneaux486 wrote...

"There's my point. Bioware didn't explain that. Everything said in this
forum post is SPECULATION made by the fans. If Bioware meant it that
way, they would have said something, or had an epologue, or a Codex
entry that you could read. Everything said thus far ISN'T PROVEN. That's
my personal problem with it. Bioware just left us in the dark, and this
was to be the CONCLUSION of the series? I want a conclusion that, well,
actually concludes the story."

Ironically saying that because Bioware didn't outright state it, it isn't true, is speculation in and of itself. The arguments I make are backed up with in-game evidence. *Some* of it is speculation, some is simple observation. Additionally- why am I even bothering, you're just going to write this off as speculation as well. Ah well, nothing wrong with occasional acts of futility.

Please, tell me what you think. Don't leave it mid-sentence. I'm just trying to understand all the opinons here.