858 réponses à ce sujet

[Alent]

MassEffecter132 wrote...

Master Che wrote...

*pushes article aside*

If I have to be convinced that the ending is acceptable, then it probably wasn't that good of an ending.

This

Double this.

[TheFinalDoctor]

GAMMARAYBURST wrote...
Nope, applying the kardeshev scale does not suddenly make the ending any better. It does nothing at all, actually, except partially label the levels of technology that are present in the game.

This.

Also, I find it kind of disturbing that the author basicly says, when we get advanced enough tech, that means we no longer have the right to self determination, and that theoretical physicist are basically already thinking like te reapers. 

[LucasShark]

Ariq wrote...

Too many assumptions unsupported by the narrative of the game. Several straw man arguments. Admits and then dismisses without explanation a lengthy number of problems.

This was the worst bit of the essay, though emblematic of the whole thing:

The ending discards important philosophies and themes
It does, but it doesn’t do so without very good reason. Unfortunately, Bioware assumes familiarity with some rather esoteric concepts. I explain these concepts in the “scientific basis” section.

Um. Ok. What are those very good reasons? And which of them excuses the necessity of narrative cohesion?

*crickets*

Science?

*more crickets*

Look, there's science at the top of the page! Science!

*even more crickets*

So, yeah. Pretty much sums up his whole essay.

There's gold in them thar paragraphs... I kind of zined after the first few, but yes: that just doesn't really get answered.

[sp0ck 06]

TreguardD wrote...

All right. I'll play. Let's take a snip:

"Peace with Geth proved that Synthetics will not always destroy Organics."

From the article:
Catalyst: You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want, including the geth, and most of the technology you rely on. Even you are partly synthetic.
Shepard: But the Reapers will be destroyed?
Catalyst: Yes, but the peace won’t last. Soon your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back.
Shepard: Maybe.


What part of we do not want to destroy the Geth do you not understand? They have just as much to Self Determination as we do. That's the *point*.

... let's try another:

From the article: "The ending is very strongly foreshadowed throughout the whole series, but to see it, you need to be aware of the some of the rather esoteric theories and hypotheses in astrobiology being discussed in the past few years by the likes of Michio Kaku and Stephen Hawking. Bioware may have been able to make the ending more poignant and emotional if it had elaborated on the concepts for the people who aren’t aware of them.

What? So you're saying the basic precept wasn't *Free Will* - the basic concept for Mass Effect 1 it was... something by the hack Hawking?

Come on. Gene Roddenberry had more influence in Mass Effect.

From the article:

"SETI senior astronomer explained a couple years ago that if we discover life, it will most likely be synthetic, "

For one: This presupposes that AI can actually exist. I'm not convinced. This is the Mass Effect universe so we'll give it a pass.

"An interesting side effect of the extinction cycle is that all the civilizations are in lock step. Everyone, except the Reapers, are Type 0 or Type I. "

Except they're not. Asari hit space and colonization thousands of years before we did. Or, to put it another way... the Quarrians have been *trapped* in Space long before we were able to explore it.

There's others I could I whack on, but I'll settle for these. This article isn't just a different point of view. It is just bad.

It isn't about not wanting to destroy the Geth, it was more if you want to destroy the Reapers the Geth will also be destroyed.

The author was saying all civilizations in the Mass Effect universe were EITHER type 0 or type 1.  Not all one or the other at the same time, necessarily.

[solarom]

beyondsolo wrote...
And here is where it all collapses. Type II organic life would be able to create even more powerful machine life than anyone before them (the Reapers are proof of that, if only for the machine part). We can speculate that life this powerful doesn't need machine life anymore and therefore the threat is over (at least in this galaxy). That's also why there is a destroy-option. Further, the Mass Effect civilization is so heavily dependent on machines and pseudo-intelligent software (which, as seen in ME1, can gain consciousness on their own [EDI, the AI in the Citadel computers]), that the threat is not over for another few centuries. The Catalyst should not be surrendering.
Therefore, it makes no sense that no option offered to Shepard includes surrendering to the Reapers and having them make a human Reaper in order to continue the cycle. That would have been the true decision on Type II-level.

I won't quote the whole thing, but I really enjoyed reading your post. Indeed, if the whole point of the ending was to make a complete paradigm shift, why do the options adhere to the old paradigm? Nicely argued.

Modifié par solarom, 19 avril 2012 - 08:54 .

[LucasShark]

TheFinalDoctor wrote...

GAMMARAYBURST wrote...
Nope, applying the kardeshev scale does not suddenly make the ending any better. It does nothing at all, actually, except partially label the levels of technology that are present in the game.

This.

Also, I find it kind of disturbing that the author basicly says, when we get advanced enough tech, that means we no longer have the right to self determination, and that theoretical physicist are basically already thinking like te reapers. 

Funny how the Geth, a race of AI's believe in self determination but this author doesn't... and is talking about AI's killing us off... vicious circle?

[Sireniankyle1]

Alent wrote...

MassEffecter132 wrote...

Master Che wrote...

*pushes article aside*

If I have to be convinced that the ending is acceptable, then it probably wasn't that good of an ending.

This

Double this.

Triple this

[Troglyte]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

 If you hated/disliked/didn't understand/were let down by the ending, read this editorial.

http://galacticpillo...ffect-3-ending/

It really might make you look differently at not just the ending but the whole of ME3.  If you want to love the conclusion to the series but just can't, please give this a read.  It's long but worth it.  

I couldn't click the link so I didn't read it. Ending still sucked, 90% agree, join us and learn how to make a link work.

[2papercuts]

Argument is logically jumpy and assumptive, making it ineffective. Also apparently contradicts himself?

I love how is explanation for synthesis is to bring up another plot hole.

[macrocarl]

Good article! Also it's really the only theory I've read that attempts to read the ending literally without resulting in just chalking it up as rushed or whatever. I mean, the end sequence is explained that way but at least the choices are thought about and taken into consideration.

[balance5050]

TheFinalDoctor wrote...

GAMMARAYBURST wrote...
Nope, applying the kardeshev scale does not suddenly make the ending any better. It does nothing at all, actually, except partially label the levels of technology that are present in the game.

This.

Also, I find it kind of disturbing that the author basicly says, when we get advanced enough tech, that means we no longer have the right to self determination, and that theoretical physicist are basically already thinking like te reapers. 

This^

Also the author literally says this:

"Shepard isn’t going to suffocate in the Catalyst area; there’s no reason at all not to suppose that the room has windows."

Modifié par balance5050, 19 avril 2012 - 09:04 .

[jakal66]

Retakers and ppl that hate the ending just won't change their minds.Their fight is futile as they said and made sure we understood that they WON'T change the ending.
So If I were you I wouldn't even try to show them anything, they are blinded by anger and frustration.And when i say blinded I don't mean they don't see or understand the ending I just mean they won't change their minds untill they get what they want which will be...never.
It'll take time for them to realize and then make up their minds about what to do.They know they will probably be disappointed with the Ending DLC but they are waiting to see what is it all about.
When summer comes they will rage some more untill they come to terms with the idea that "THAT" is what they've got.Then they will chose either to continue playing, give it up alltoghether, move on, accept it or stay in the forums writing "what if the ending" threads untill the end of times.

But no, you won't change their minds.

I have no issues with these guys, it just seems they suffer too much for just a game, even if the game is ME.I just have accepted what coming.And I won't let a crappy ending ruin the other 99% of the trillogy which has brought me more happyness than disappointment.The ride weighs more than just the last 5 minutes.I'll take the free closure and try to enjoy it as much as I can.And if I don't well, i'll just be happy for the hundreds of hours this franchise gave me.And playing the MP too....

[lillitheris]

Oh, if you – pro-enders especially – spent half the time helping actually trying to come up with plausible ending clarification as you do on these fantastical explanations, there might be a chance they could actually get included and we'd all be happy.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

 If you hated/disliked/didn't understand/were let down by the ending, read this editorial.

http://galacticpillo...ffect-3-ending/

It really might make you look differently at not just the ending but the whole of ME3.  If you want to love the conclusion to the series but just can't, please give this a read.  It's long but worth it.  

Okay, I read your editorial. You make some good points. I'll give you that, and you're right that you sense a "but" coming, and this kind of summarizes my feelings about the entire game.

Here's a wall of text:

* I'm gathering the duct child, the shuttle child, and the dream child was to represent the ones left behind. But was it really necessary? There was enough going on. The player's character's origin did play a role in this. Earthborn, colonist, or spacer would have been relevant in the impact. Just seeing the destruction was enough for me.

* The nightmare sequences. These could easily have been made into cutscenes, especially since you had no choice as to when they occurred or your actions during them. First playthrough was like what am I supposed to do (I'd been playing Skyrim so I wanted to explore the area, then figured out I had to follow the kid and watch him burn). Then they went all Stanley Kubrick on the last one. Cutscene.

* Okay I can understand the existence of the Crucible as a type III Civ tech now.

* One thing I did find interesting is the Geth. I've played ME3 three times with playthroughs from ME1->2. I've always felt it necessary to destroy the Geth. Something about letting Legion upload the reaper code doesn't sit right. The peace won't last. I don't think the Quarians are going to take well to their Geth masters in 20 yrs should the reapers lose the war. I think the Geth will end up making the Quarians as dependent upon them as possible. I start remembering a conversation from Mordin Solus about the Collectors. One thing replaced by tech, then another replaced by tech, then another replaced by tech, finally all tech, more like husks. Killing them is doing them a favor. The Geth do not understand morals. They have no philosophy, only logic. Now people think that wiping them out is genocide. I look at is as self-preservation.

* I wasn't playing on auto pilot. They had told us "multi-player isn't required for single player". That's a half-truth. You could get the same result if you had a iPhone or iPad, but then you had to buy an Apple product. Mass Effect has always been a single player game, The multi-player or iOS apps should not have affected the EMS. The EMS determines if you get all the endings. This is not fair to those living in areas without broadband connections -- yes most of the USA is a third world nation.

* In all the endings you die, and the mass relays are destroyed no matter how hard you worked to get the galaxy united, no matter what choices you made in the previous games. I knew this was the end of Shepard's story. I can live with that, but like you said for the green ending why couldn't Shepard have gotten a body and dropped that in the stream? There was a feeling of loss of control of Shepard in the endings. The Catalyst's dialog was very poorly written. I don't know what Hudson and Walters were thinking, but it was very banal. Every portion of the game had undergone peer review by the rest of the writing team except for the ending. Why? I'm guessing they were afraid of another leak? or criticism? But I do think it needed to have more effort behind it. The endings are basically ripped right out of Deus Ex Human Revolution or pretty much any of the Deus Ex series.

* Control - Taggart - Illuminati - whatever. How is Shepard going to control the Reapers after Shepard is dead? This has always bothered me. And while some people played a paragon Shepard, what about the Shepard who say purged the Feros colony and executed Shiala (she was indoctrinated), executed Rana Thanoptis (also indoctrinated), shoved random eclipse merc out window, murdered Blue Suns mechanic (Archangel mission), executed the Batarians holding Daniel (Mordin mission), made Jack execute Aresh, sent Thax the info, took bribe from Pitney For, did dirty work for Helena Blake, executed 10th St Reds gang guy right in front of C-Sec, let the council die? Would you really want this Shepard Controlling the Reapers?

* Synthesis - Sarif Industries - Saren. The unity of flesh and steel. The strengths of both. The weakness of neither. All scientific advancement due to overcoming limitations. Can't move rock, so invent wheel. Can't lift rock so invent pulley. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement. No culture. I also don't see a way of doing this without space magic either. There is Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle that one has to overcome when doing this rewrite. It is therefore impossible and a steaming pile, but it is a pretty color of green. It does save EDI and make Joker's unhealthy attraction more appropriate and gets him away from his pr0n collection. This is the only ending where the type of food and water isn't going to be critical.

* Destroy - Darrow. Yes, this sort of sets the galaxy back to about the 21st Century doesn't it? What about all the alien ships stranded in the Sol system? They're saying everyone is going to be able to get home, but in how long a couple centuries? Some settle on earth? Asari, Krogan and Humans on Earth? Genophage-free Krogan on Earth now make the Asari and Humans extinct and likely blow up the place.

In all endings people are saying they need to rebuild the relays, but first the need is going to be to rebuild the infrastructure on earth: food, water, shelter, manufacturing base, tranportation, all that stuff that's been destroyed, and the economy that's been decimated. This occurs in all endings. This is the biggest gripe of all. No one gets home. Everyone is stuck. There really was no need to destroy the relays.

What made it so maddening is that Bioware left everything with no hope. They left it with no hope for the future. I'm not talking about game installments. Even with a bleak ending you want to leave the player with a glimmer of hope. Even Gears of War 3 left the ending with a glimmer of hope. "We have tomorrow, Marcus. We have tomorrow."

And so 10,000 years in the future (that's the date in the file .bik) Buzz Aldrin is telling the child a tale about "The Shepard". And so my character has now been deified and is being worshipped by primitive savages.

* The bottom line is that if the game lived up to the pre-release hype of the previous month, and the reviews in the media (I'm sure they just played the first couple hours and made the decision), and met the promises made to gamers in the previous months by Casey Hudson and others from Bioware I would have no problem. It didn't.

And honestly, if the final battle for earth in any way resembled the cinematic trailer that was released in February, that part of the game could have played like Gears of War 3 with no role playing, and had ONE ending so long as the ending was an epic ending that left you feeling "hell yeah!" and then with the epilog just telling about how the battle turned against the reapers and they were defeated on every world over the next couple of decades. And Shepard? Shepard, while leading the assault on blah blah blah was severely injured, awarded the medal of blah blah blah highest honor, and retired to blah blah blah with blah blah blah where (s)he lived out her/his remaining years.... The End.

[masseffectfan94]

Well it didnt change my mind but thanks for trying to help.

[jakal66]

lillitheris wrote...

Oh, if you – pro-enders especially – spent half the time helping actually trying to come up with plausible ending clarification as you do on these fantastical explanations, there might be a chance they could actually get included and we'd all be happy.

Dude that's your plroblem I don't have to justify anything, just like I don't push my belief on you.Difference is I just accepted what was said in regards the changing of the endings, if you like it or not, think it's art or not really doesn't affect me.You want to complain yourselves to death go right ahead.

I play the game for myself not for the forums, you make your own conclusion.Again I just got the message that thatywon't change the ending and some people here still think this is viable.
I never said I loved it nor hated it,or that it was art or not.I'm just not outraged like some people here.

Modifié par jakal66, 19 avril 2012 - 09:32 .

[KingNothing125]

Interesting perspective, though I have to throw sections 3.7, 3.15 and 4.0 right out because they're just bad.

I was unfamiliar with these Type 0/I/II/III civilization categories, but a problem pops up early on and remains unexplained throughout their analysis.

How does a series of Type I civilizations create Type III technology?

[Vasparian]

jakal66 wrote...

Retakers and ppl that hate the ending just won't change their minds.Their fight is futile as they said and made sure we understood that they WON'T change the ending.
So If I were you I wouldn't even try to show them anything, they are blinded by anger and frustration.And when i say blinded I don't mean they don't see or understand the ending I just mean they won't change their minds untill they get what they want which will be...never.
.I'll take the free closure and try to enjoy it as much as I can.And if I don't well, i'll just be happy for the hundreds of hours this franchise gave me.And playing the MP too....

You don't understand the ending either. Don't try and play the "YOU DON'T GET IT" card.... Doing that just makes you look dumber for doing it. It's just typical. YOU are the gamer bioware is now targeting. The gamer that is all about PEW PEW.. and not about the story. Bioware used to be about the story. Now bioware is about SHOOOOOOT PEW PEW and gamers like you.

[Sesshaku]

Challenge accepted.


*reads it, sees nothing that we already figured out*


Pay your money loser. Ending suc#

[Nobrandminda]

The article seems to forget that Mass Effect is a work of fiction.  Real world concepts only apply if they are supported by the narrative.  

The only "rules" that apply to a fictional universe are the ones that are established in the narrative.  This is especially true in a science fiction or fantasy story where the laws of the real world may not apply.  Our idea of what is "normal" in this universe is shaped by the narrative.  

For example, if the main character of your series has an artificial lifeform as a crew member, and peacefully ends a war between a synthetic race and an organic race, that tells the audience that organic life and synthetic life can peacefully coexist.  That is the "rule" for the fictional universe.  As far as the audience is concerned, EDI and the Geth are typical examples of synthetic life because that is what the narrative tells them.

The audence will be confused, and rightfully so, when they are later told that "the created will always rebel against the creators."  In other words, synthetic life will inevitably destroy organic life if it is allowed to.  While there may be a real world concept to support this notion, the narrative argues against it.  

That's the problem with the ending.  It isn't consistant with the rest of the story, and the fact that it's consistant with real life speculative science doesn't matter.

Modifié par Nobrandminda, 19 avril 2012 - 09:48 .

[Peranor]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

 If you hated/disliked/didn't understand/were let down by the ending, read this editorial.

http://galacticpillo...ffect-3-ending/

It really might make you look differently at not just the ending but the whole of ME3.  If you want to love the conclusion to the series but just can't, please give this a read.  It's long but worth it.  

Okay, I read your editorial. You make some good points. I'll give you that, and you're right that you sense a "but" coming, and this kind of summarizes my feelings about the entire game.

Here's a wall of text:

* I'm gathering the duct child, the shuttle child, and the dream child was to represent the ones left behind. But was it really necessary? There was enough going on. The player's character's origin did play a role in this. Earthborn, colonist, or spacer would have been relevant in the impact. Just seeing the destruction was enough for me. 

* The nightmare sequences. These could easily have been made into cutscenes, especially since you had no choice as to when they occurred or your actions during them. First playthrough was like what am I supposed to do (I'd been playing Skyrim so I wanted to explore the area, then figured out I had to follow the kid and watch him burn). Then they went all Stanley Kubrick on the last one. Cutscene.

* Okay I can understand the existence of the Crucible as a type III Civ tech now. 

* One thing I did find interesting is the Geth. I've played ME3 three times with playthroughs from ME1->2. I've always felt it necessary to destroy the Geth. Something about letting Legion upload the reaper code doesn't sit right. The peace won't last. I don't think the Quarians are going to take well to their Geth masters in 20 yrs should the reapers lose the war. I think the Geth will end up making the Quarians as dependent upon them as possible. I start remembering a conversation from Mordin Solus about the Collectors. One thing replaced by tech, then another replaced by tech, then another replaced by tech, finally all tech, more like husks. Killing them is doing them a favor. The Geth do not understand morals. They have no philosophy, only logic. Now people think that wiping them out is genocide. I look at is as self-preservation. 

* I wasn't playing on auto pilot. They had told us "multi-player isn't required for single player". That's a half-truth. You could get the same result if you had a iPhone or iPad, but then you had to buy an Apple product. Mass Effect has always been a single player game, The multi-player or iOS apps should not have affected the EMS. The EMS determines if you get all the endings. This is not fair to those living in areas without broadband connections -- yes most of the USA is a third world nation. 

* In all the endings you die, and the mass relays are destroyed no matter how hard you worked to get the galaxy united, no matter what choices you made in the previous games. I knew this was the end of Shepard's story. I can live with that, but like you said for the green ending why couldn't Shepard have gotten a body and dropped that in the stream? There was a feeling of loss of control of Shepard in the endings. The Catalyst's dialog was very poorly written. I don't know what Hudson and Walters were thinking, but it was very banal. Every portion of the game had undergone peer review by the rest of the writing team except for the ending. Why? I'm guessing they were afraid of another leak? or criticism? But I do think it needed to have more effort behind it. The endings are basically ripped right out of Deus Ex Human Revolution or pretty much any of the Deus Ex series. 

* Control - Taggart - Illuminati - whatever. How is Shepard going to control the Reapers after Shepard is dead? This has always bothered me. And while some people played a paragon Shepard, what about the Shepard who say purged the Feros colony and executed Shiala (she was indoctrinated), executed Rana Thanoptis (also indoctrinated), shoved random eclipse merc out window, murdered Blue Suns mechanic (Archangel mission), executed the Batarians holding Daniel (Mordin mission), made Jack execute Aresh, sent Thax the info, took bribe from Pitney For, did dirty work for Helena Blake, executed 10th St Reds gang guy right in front of C-Sec, let the council die? Would you really want this Shepard Controlling the Reapers? 

* Synthesis - Sarif Industries - Saren. The unity of flesh and steel. The strengths of both. The weakness of neither. All scientific advancement due to overcoming limitations. Can't move rock, so invent wheel. Can't lift rock so invent pulley. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement. No culture. I also don't see a way of doing this without space magic either. There is Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle that one has to overcome when doing this rewrite. It is therefore impossible and a steaming pile, but it is a pretty color of green. It does save EDI and make Joker's unhealthy attraction more appropriate and gets him away from his pr0n collection. This is the only ending where the type of food and water isn't going to be critical.

* Destroy - Darrow. Yes, this sort of sets the galaxy back to about the 21st Century doesn't it? What about all the alien ships stranded in the Sol system? They're saying everyone is going to be able to get home, but in how long a couple centuries? Some settle on earth? Asari, Krogan and Humans on Earth? Genophage-free Krogan on Earth now make the Asari and Humans extinct and likely blow up the place. 

In all endings people are saying they need to rebuild the relays, but first the need is going to be to rebuild the infrastructure on earth: food, water, shelter, manufacturing base, tranportation, all that stuff that's been destroyed, and the economy that's been decimated. This occurs in all endings. This is the biggest gripe of all. No one gets home. Everyone is stuck. There really was no need to destroy the relays. 

What made it so maddening is that Bioware left everything with no hope. They left it with no hope for the future. I'm not talking about game installments. Even with a bleak ending you want to leave the player with a glimmer of hope. Even Gears of War 3 left the ending with a glimmer of hope. "We have tomorrow, Marcus. We have tomorrow."

And so 10,000 years in the future (that's the date in the file .bik) Buzz Aldrin is telling the child a tale about "The Shepard". And so my character has now been deified and is being worshipped by primitive savages.

* The bottom line is that if the game lived up to the pre-release hype of the previous month, and the reviews in the media (I'm sure they just played the first couple hours and made the decision), and met the promises made to gamers in the previous months by Casey Hudson and others from Bioware I would have no problem. It didn't. 

And honestly, if the final battle for earth in any way resembled the cinematic trailer that was released in February, that part of the game could have played like Gears of War 3 with no role playing, and had ONE ending so long as the ending was an epic ending that left you feeling "hell yeah!" and then with the epilog just telling about how the battle turned against the reapers and they were defeated on every world over the next couple of decades. And Shepard? Shepard, while leading the assault on blah blah blah was severely injured, awarded the medal of blah blah blah highest honor, and retired to blah blah blah with blah blah blah where (s)he lived out her/his remaining years.... The End.

A wall of text indeed 
But well worth the read. I agree with you!

[jakal66]

Vasparian wrote...

jakal66 wrote...

Retakers and ppl that hate the ending just won't change their minds.Their fight is futile as they said and made sure we understood that they WON'T change the ending.
So If I were you I wouldn't even try to show them anything, they are blinded by anger and frustration.And when i say blinded I don't mean they don't see or understand the ending I just mean they won't change their minds untill they get what they want which will be...never.
.I'll take the free closure and try to enjoy it as much as I can.And if I don't well, i'll just be happy for the hundreds of hours this franchise gave me.And playing the MP too....

You don't understand the ending either. Don't try and play the "YOU DON'T GET IT" card.... Doing that just makes you look dumber for doing it. It's just typical. YOU are the gamer bioware is now targeting. The gamer that is all about PEW PEW.. and not about the story. Bioware used to be about the story. Now bioware is about SHOOOOOOT PEW PEW and gamers like you.

I originally wrote a resonse too harsh but you know you don't even deserve that.

Modifié par jakal66, 19 avril 2012 - 10:00 .

[sistersafetypin]

ppeters77 wrote...

Stopped reading after:
"The ending is very strongly foreshadowed throughout the whole series"

Can't be, the original ending was supposed to be built on dark energy. Also the label "esoteric" bothers me, especially when used in combination with a tech-heavy sci-fi scenario.

This. Just because you want to believe Bioware didn't truly f_ck up spectacularly doesn't make it so. They did, and no amount of literary wrangling will change that

[Wulfram]

The argument that the whole of ME3 is closure doesn't work, because the ending makes all that fairly irrelevant. I've united the galaxy, but now it's fragmented into a thousand pieces because there are no relays. I've got Tali back her homeworld, but now she's stuck 30 years from home at best. I've brought hope to Tuchanka - but now Wrex is stuck on Earth and won't get back for years, in which time the place is likely to fall apart.

You could argue that the whole technological singularity thing, or the controlled reapers, means you can make new mass relays, but in such a case it does so by changing the galaxy so dramatically that it also invalidates all the "closure" I've been getting for the rest of the game anyway.

Also, even if your article did make people like the ending, any ending which requires reading such a long document and/or being up to date with latest trendy speculations in science fiction to enjoy is a really bad ending.

Modifié par Wulfram, 19 avril 2012 - 10:06 .

[Ircasha]

lillitheris wrote...

Yeah, we get it. We're not too dumb to understand what they changed their story to attempt to say at the last minute. That's not the problem with the ending. Sorry.

This is listed in the pro-ending compendium, by the way. You might find other interesting reading there.

No, the article does not change my mind.  While well reasoned, it does not change the fact that the current ending is poorly written, full of plot holes, and a dramatic departure from the themes of 99% of the rest of the series.  Its simply someone filling in the gaps of the story with things that make sense to them.  Its a well written spin on the "you're too stupid to get it" cliche of so many geek arguments.

I'm also getting a bit tired of the failed 'this is art' analogy.  The ME series is not a painting, book, or movie.  It is something that is new in many respects.  One of the defining characteristics of the game series is choice.  It doesn't matter that this is, in fact, an illusion.  By convincing the player they have a say in what happens in the story, you have set yourself up for a very strong reaction when you take away that illusion.  This was one of the key selling points of the series and what, I think, made it so successful.  By stomping all over that illusion in the last five minutes of the game, they reminded everyone of the sad little man behind the curtain,