I'm not finished reading the entire piece, but thus far I like what I'm reading. I'm one of those that wasn't a huge fan of the ending, but I haven't been particularly vocal about it because I presumed that maybe part of the story was just lost on me (major reason, for me anyway, why the clarification DLC is something I'm looking forward to).
Thus far his explanation of the ending, while still acknowledging existing plot holes throughout the game(s), while providing insight into scientific themes that were previously unknown to me sheds more light on the ending. I still don't find the endings good or satisfying, but it definitely gave me something to chew on.
Thanks for the link!
I challenge those who hate the ending to read this
Débuté par
sp0ck 06
, avril 19 2012 04:04
Retour en haut
#52
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:30
Aurvant
-
- Members
- 372 messages
Not a bad article, but it doesn't change my mind about the endings.
If Bioware was attempting to go off in to a more esoteric direction with the finale then it should have been much much longer and the conversation with the catalyst should have been far more informative then it was.
I cannot, however, abide the terrible explanation that the catalyst gives Shepard as a reason for The Reapers. If the Reapers were anything else, it might have made some sort of sense. However, because the Reapers are giant sentient machines themselves...it comes off as a pretty stupid excuse. Even if The Reapers were billions of races all puréed up in to some organic life shake that gives the Reapers intelligence, it's not a noble or positive experience. The reapers are essentially eradicating ALL diversity in the races they destroy and are forcing galactic conformity by means of GENOCIDE.
The Catalyst tries REAL HARD to make it seem like he's a noble entity with good intentions. However, this just goes against everything we know about the reapers.
If Bioware was attempting to go off in to a more esoteric direction with the finale then it should have been much much longer and the conversation with the catalyst should have been far more informative then it was.
I cannot, however, abide the terrible explanation that the catalyst gives Shepard as a reason for The Reapers. If the Reapers were anything else, it might have made some sort of sense. However, because the Reapers are giant sentient machines themselves...it comes off as a pretty stupid excuse. Even if The Reapers were billions of races all puréed up in to some organic life shake that gives the Reapers intelligence, it's not a noble or positive experience. The reapers are essentially eradicating ALL diversity in the races they destroy and are forcing galactic conformity by means of GENOCIDE.
The Catalyst tries REAL HARD to make it seem like he's a noble entity with good intentions. However, this just goes against everything we know about the reapers.
#53
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:30
AcesRedd
-
- Members
- 293 messages
sp0ck 06 wrote...
Spectre-00N7 wrote...
Can't tell if the op thinks we don't understand what the ending was trying to be about or just wants to give us something to read.
Just something to read.
But it seems most people are so firmly entrenched in their hated of the ending that it was a pointless endeavor. Oh well.
The problem is that every other day there's a new pretentious a-hole who wants to EXPLAIN the ending and tries to use a variety of language to make sure we don't feel insulted, while pretty much telling us how stupid we are for not understanding what they understand.
#54
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:31
Subguy614
-
- Members
- 834 messages
Article's author is simply doing his own head cannon on the ending.
Example: Type 1 civs leapfrog Type II and create a Type III device without ever knowing what they're making.
HUH????
Example: Type 1 civs leapfrog Type II and create a Type III device without ever knowing what they're making.
HUH????
#55
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:31
daftPirate
-
- Members
- 887 messages
MattFini wrote...
daftPirate wrote...
MattFini wrote...
When you have to start referencing the work/theories of astrobiologists as a means of suggesting this was ALWAYS the intended direction of the series, you have absolutely failed.
Those who hated the ending do the same though, when explaining all the reasons the galaxy is now doomed. I doubt, though, that this was always the intended destination.
Not really. They're using in-game evidence to support their theories, such as the Arrival instance to suggest WHY the relay issue at the end is bad for the galaxy.
Sure, that's might not be what BioWare meant, but there's nothing in the game to suggest otherwise.
If the article in question had been culled from in-game codexes or something, I'd be okay with it. But it's just a bunch of pointless hot air.
The whole Relay destruction thing I get, even though I dont agree. I'm more referring to people going into the astrophysics of what happens to the Citadel when it appears to exlpode above earth, and all that about Eezo poisoning, etc. Kinda like the Deathstar going off above Endor.
#56
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:31
ahandsomeshark
-
- Members
- 3 250 messages
I read it, but like the author itself says in order for bioware to have thought this was a proper ending they must have assumed the fan base has some familiarity with these concepts. Which makes no sense. Especially since mass effect is a specific type of speculative science fiction which has always attempted to explicitly explain the science behind their speculations (i.e how eezo and mass effects work). So why all of a sudden would we think that they abandoned that to go with an ending where there's no scientific explanations (just theories) in or even out of the game? Along with that it's pretty much been debunked by the writers themselves that any sort of long-term outline existed so it's unlikely that any of the foreshadowing mentioned in the article is more than coincidence.
Basically to accept the authors theory as put forth you have to accept the idea that bioware DID have a long-game plan for the story and just opted not to foreshadow it. Which makes no sense within the context of what we know about bioware, including specific statements they have made themselves and the ways they set up the first game.
But most importantly the author puts this assertion forth:
"Otherwise life throughout the galaxy is in as much danger of extinction as we are here on earth."
and earlier implies that the danger of extinction would be from synthetics, but at NO point in the rest of that section, or even the rest of the paper does he/she ever give any justification for this assumption, which is kind of what his entire argument is based on. Without giving some sort of explanation as to why he's making that statement/assumption I don't see how any of the rest of his argument can be relevant.
Basically to accept the authors theory as put forth you have to accept the idea that bioware DID have a long-game plan for the story and just opted not to foreshadow it. Which makes no sense within the context of what we know about bioware, including specific statements they have made themselves and the ways they set up the first game.
But most importantly the author puts this assertion forth:
"Otherwise life throughout the galaxy is in as much danger of extinction as we are here on earth."
and earlier implies that the danger of extinction would be from synthetics, but at NO point in the rest of that section, or even the rest of the paper does he/she ever give any justification for this assumption, which is kind of what his entire argument is based on. Without giving some sort of explanation as to why he's making that statement/assumption I don't see how any of the rest of his argument can be relevant.
#57
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:32
tjmax
-
- Members
- 494 messages
If you have to write a book to try to explain the ending... then the ending did not make sense. Writing a book about how the ending of a story does make sense... is the biggest proof that it doesn't.
#58
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:32
TheMerchantMan
-
- Members
- 331 messages
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.
Oh, of course the reason I didn't like the endings was because I couldn't possibly comprehend the complex astrophysics that the ending plays with, it's impossible that despite being familiar with the complexities of technological signularities, Drake's Equation, and the Kardeshev Scale I still hated the ending.
I don't appreciate being treated as a moron. Which this editorial does to those who disliked the game.
Further it's rather clear that the writer doesn't understand the game, the concerns of those who disagree with him, and heck, he outright manufacturers things to support his argument.
His control is good argument, rests on the notion that the Illusive Man did not need the crucible or catalyst to control the Reapers, yet it is explicitly stated in game that he did. Indeed, that is why he attempted to steal the data.
#59
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:32
leapingmonkeys
-
- Members
- 529 messages
sp0ck 06 wrote...
MattFini wrote...
When you have to start referencing the work/theories of astrobiologists as a means of suggesting this was ALWAYS the intended direction of the series, you have absolutely failed.
Why? Its a game about space faring civilizations and galactic cycles of evolution and extinction. Astrobiology seems relevant.
Actually, no, its not. It was originally going to be about dark energy, then there was a power shift within Bioware and new people tacked on a different ending.
Sorry, neither you nor the article change anything. The game is not satisfying as a game experience and it fails to deliver on the promises made for the game (such as reflecting past decisions).
#60
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:32
Spectre-00N7
-
- Members
- 758 messages
sp0ck 06 wrote...
Just something to read.
But it seems most people are so firmly entrenched in their hated of the ending that it was a pointless endeavor. Oh well.
Meh, it was an okay read, would have been better if it used more in-game material.
#61
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:33
pfellahX
-
- Members
- 169 messages
sp0ck 06 wrote...
Of course you shouldn't have to read lengthy third party explanations to appreciate the ending. The author doesn't claim the ending as it stands is in any way good and points out all the plot holes and mistakes made.
But the fact is, this is the ending we got. This article illustrates how the ending is conceptually sound and doesn't abandon logic or reason. If you just want to love to hate on the game and the ending, fine. But if you want to try and improve your perception of it, read it and you might be of a different mindset.
Old Me: They probably screwed up the ending because they rushed it.
New Me: They probably screwed the ending up because they rushed it, but they may have screwed it up because they read A Brief History of Time one too many times and wanted their ending to be an intellectual circle-jerk that would alienate anyone who played the game to... you know... have fun.
I've seen the light!
sp0ck 06 wrote...
Just something to read.
But it seems most people are so firmly entrenched in their hated of the ending that it was a pointless endeavor. Oh well. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/andy.png[/smilie]
Yeah... has nothing to do with original author's really thinly veiled assumption that anyone who didn't "get it" must be stupid. That wouldn't bother anyone!
Modifié par pfellahX, 19 avril 2012 - 04:36 .
#62
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:33
ahandsomeshark
-
- Members
- 3 250 messages
also there is no source provided for "Supposing it’ll take humanity another 1,000 years to develop AI and for humanity to be rendered obsolete" I read the linked articles around it and none referenced humanity becoming obsolete.
#63
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:35
TODD9999
-
- Members
- 455 messages
I'll admit to not reading every word, but even in my skimming I encountered several errors. There is a lot of "headcanon" and general poor explanation in that article.
One quick example - on the Mass Relay Explosions, the author says that there could have been a different kind of explosion (uncontrolled asteroid impact vs. controlled demolition), and that showing the explosions as visible on a galactic scale was an error on BioWare's part. Unfortunately, this is purely conjecture. No one and no thing in game says the explosions are different. The detonations on galactic scale are not presented as being, say, a holodisplay on a flagship or something - it's the view from way far away. We were shown what we were shown, and we were told what we were told. If BioWare intended it to be interpreted differently, they should have given us additional information to allow that ("clarifying" it, if you will). Until and unless they do, what we see is what we see, and interpreting it in other ways is headcanon. Handwaving it as "They made a mistake in the cinematic" is silly - they showed us exactly what they wanted to show us (they were satisfied with the ending and didn't realize we'd want more information, right?).
In response to the ending discarding themes, the author gives some crap about the Kardashev scale and Drake equation. Uh, okay. What does that have to do with the themes throughout the game of unifying diverse elements and defying certain odds to come out victorious? In a way, that defense is similar to the ending - it doesn't directly tackle the issues I care about, instead making some highfalutin' philosophical statement that gives no emotional nor intellectual satisfaction and has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
So, well, thanks for sharing, but this article leaves me completely unconvinced.
One quick example - on the Mass Relay Explosions, the author says that there could have been a different kind of explosion (uncontrolled asteroid impact vs. controlled demolition), and that showing the explosions as visible on a galactic scale was an error on BioWare's part. Unfortunately, this is purely conjecture. No one and no thing in game says the explosions are different. The detonations on galactic scale are not presented as being, say, a holodisplay on a flagship or something - it's the view from way far away. We were shown what we were shown, and we were told what we were told. If BioWare intended it to be interpreted differently, they should have given us additional information to allow that ("clarifying" it, if you will). Until and unless they do, what we see is what we see, and interpreting it in other ways is headcanon. Handwaving it as "They made a mistake in the cinematic" is silly - they showed us exactly what they wanted to show us (they were satisfied with the ending and didn't realize we'd want more information, right?).
In response to the ending discarding themes, the author gives some crap about the Kardashev scale and Drake equation. Uh, okay. What does that have to do with the themes throughout the game of unifying diverse elements and defying certain odds to come out victorious? In a way, that defense is similar to the ending - it doesn't directly tackle the issues I care about, instead making some highfalutin' philosophical statement that gives no emotional nor intellectual satisfaction and has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
So, well, thanks for sharing, but this article leaves me completely unconvinced.
#64
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:35
LucasShark
-
- Members
- 3 894 messages
Myrmedus wrote...
sp0ck 06 wrote...
MattFini wrote...
When you have to start referencing the work/theories of astrobiologists as a means of suggesting this was ALWAYS the intended direction of the series, you have absolutely failed.
Why? Its a game about space faring civilizations and galactic cycles of evolution and extinction. Astrobiology seems relevant.
Because less than 1% of your playerbase will know about astrobiology.
The purpose of art is to convey complex and meaningful themes, ideas and statements to people without them needing specialist or otherwise high level knowledge. If the story requires you to know about the topic astrobiology to understand its message then it's not done a very good job, even if it incorporates concepts from astrobiology.
Also, even if on a scientific level it can function, on a thematic/narrative level the ending still fails. Even if the message conveyed and the conclusion itself are OK, the means in which it is delivered to the player/viewer is poor, and in an entertainment media this is vital.
This is entertainment not science. If you want take the option of going over into science, which I fully condone, then you need to make it intelligible to more than 1% of your playerbase. It would be like requiring knowledge of Super String Theory and the M-11 Theory in order to understand a game's story - I'm sure it'd go down a storm.
Even the dimmest, or at least I thought, even the dimmest of writers knows you have to weave this kind of plot-essential exposition into the narrative, not plop it on at the end. Yes: ME has always had a codex to fill in detail, but you never HAD to read it at all to appreciate and follow the story. That said: not even the codex justifies the craptastic ending.
#65
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:36
Naugi
-
- Members
- 499 messages
Unless that article tells me what happened to my squad on the ground, what the hell the Normandy is doing fleeing from the system, why they left me, where the hell that planet is supposed to be, what my chances of getting back with my LI are, what happens to the galaxy, the fleets, the mass relays and the people I cared about for 3 games, then its not gonna make any difference ...
As I know it cant possibly do any of the above, I'll just skip it
As I know it cant possibly do any of the above, I'll just skip it
#66
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:36
ahandsomeshark
-
- Members
- 3 250 messages
M.Erik.Sal wrote...
This is stuff you can find explained fully on TVTropes for goodness sake.
sad but true. I think I've learned as much from visiting sci-fi books/shows/movies tv tropes pages as I have after like 14 years of education.
#67
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:36
NM_Che56
-
- Members
- 6 739 messages
Analogy:
Parents: Jimmy...Bobby, for Christmas, I'm going to give you each the most amazing gift! If you do all of the things you're supposed to do this year, then this gift will blow your mind! If you don't, you'll still get a gift, but it won't be as spectacular! You can do these tasks however you wish, but know that it will change the type of gift you'll get on Christmas day. It will still be amazing, though!
Jimmy: Thanks! *does everything and then some*
Bobby: Cool! *does everything and then some*
...Christmas Day
Parents; Jimmy...Bobby...since you both did everything that was asked of you, we're going to give you the gift we promised each of you...but one more thing. Do you like Ginger Bread, Peanut Butter or Chocolate Chip Cookies?
Jimmy: Chocolate Chip
Bobby: Peanut Butter
Parents: OK! Here you go!
Jimmy: *opens a present with red paper*, it's a toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Bobby; *opens a present with blue paper*, it's the same toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Parents: Imagine what this could be and what you could do with it?! The gift is YOUR IMAGINATION!
...Christmas ruined.
Parents: Jimmy...Bobby, for Christmas, I'm going to give you each the most amazing gift! If you do all of the things you're supposed to do this year, then this gift will blow your mind! If you don't, you'll still get a gift, but it won't be as spectacular! You can do these tasks however you wish, but know that it will change the type of gift you'll get on Christmas day. It will still be amazing, though!
Jimmy: Thanks! *does everything and then some*
Bobby: Cool! *does everything and then some*
...Christmas Day
Parents; Jimmy...Bobby...since you both did everything that was asked of you, we're going to give you the gift we promised each of you...but one more thing. Do you like Ginger Bread, Peanut Butter or Chocolate Chip Cookies?
Jimmy: Chocolate Chip
Bobby: Peanut Butter
Parents: OK! Here you go!
Jimmy: *opens a present with red paper*, it's a toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Bobby; *opens a present with blue paper*, it's the same toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Parents: Imagine what this could be and what you could do with it?! The gift is YOUR IMAGINATION!
...Christmas ruined.
Modifié par Master Che, 19 avril 2012 - 04:37 .
#68
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:38
BattleVisor
-
- Members
- 410 messages
''Javik has a Jamaican accent. ''
Its actually nigerian. Just highlighting one of many nonsensical points he made, he's just a sympathiser.
The ending is garbage, and will always be garbage. If they dont change it, I really do think Bioware should stop making games (after Dragon age III of course, which also might be a failure.)
I mean Dragon Age II wasnt amazing, but it was acceptable. I have the opinion the DA just got a few things wrong, and it was under-developed, but on a whole a solid good game.
The mass effect III ending is unforgivable.
Its actually nigerian. Just highlighting one of many nonsensical points he made, he's just a sympathiser.
The ending is garbage, and will always be garbage. If they dont change it, I really do think Bioware should stop making games (after Dragon age III of course, which also might be a failure.)
I mean Dragon Age II wasnt amazing, but it was acceptable. I have the opinion the DA just got a few things wrong, and it was under-developed, but on a whole a solid good game.
The mass effect III ending is unforgivable.
#69
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:39
wright1978
-
- Members
- 8 110 messages
I tried reading that tripe but it is just a pitiful attempt to rationalise away the endings. The endings are a trainwreck full of plotholes and railroading, character assassination of Shephard and the utterly appalling introduction of the starbrat.
#70
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:40
Headcount
-
- Members
- 408 messages
I'm tired of excuses to cover the ending to a game which is clearly rushed to meet a deadline and failed horribly. What is wrong in having a little payoff in the end after investing yourself in time (Over hundreds hours)and money (close to $300.00)? I just wanted to be entertained and to be able to walk away from ME3 ending with a smile and thinking, "Worth everything second." Instead, I was left staring at my TV screen going WTF. If you can't understand why we are upset sp0ck you are just trolling.
#71
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:40
bmwcrazy
-
- Members
- 3 622 messages
Just finished reading it. Nothing to see here, it's just full of speculations.
It is obviously a pretty f***ing bad ending if anyone has to read through lengthy articles like that in order to make sense and understand it.
It is obviously a pretty f***ing bad ending if anyone has to read through lengthy articles like that in order to make sense and understand it.
Modifié par bmwcrazy, 19 avril 2012 - 04:41 .
#72
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:42
FTR GROG
-
- Members
- 27 messages
I feel like op is shoving this down our throats kinda of how people depict IT of doing.
#73
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:42
RusselShep
-
- Members
- 11 messages
Relevence does not constitute a central focus. The series had black holes in it...black holes are featured prominently in sci-fi, maybe they were the actual basis of the ending! Maybe the catalyst was scared that the black hole at the center of the galaxy was going to suck everyone up, and had to stop them for their own good!sp0ck 06 wrote...
MattFini wrote...
When you have to start referencing the work/theories of astrobiologists as a means of suggesting this was ALWAYS the intended direction of the series, you have absolutely failed.
Why? Its a game about space faring civilizations and galactic cycles of evolution and extinction. Astrobiology seems relevant.
No. Astrobiology, like black holes, may be "relevant", but in a series spanning 100+ hours of playtime, there are very few sci-fi topics that aren't. Don't confuse a controvertial, and certainly interesting topic for the central focus of the Mass Effect storyline.
Also, I appreciate your civil tone throughout this thread. I happen to have already read the article you presented, and while I did find it enlightening I only think it applies to the series if you look at ME as an example of hard sci-fi (and even then, it draws a ton of assumptions.) I personally like Mass Effect as a space opera, for the characters, choices, and player impact. No amount of "explaining" or "clarification" will fix the ending for me.
#74
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:42
BattleVisor
-
- Members
- 410 messages
[quote]Master Che wrote... [/quote]
I'll change the analogy slightly and add to it
Analogy:
Parents: Jimmy...Bobby, for Christmas, I'm going to give you each the most amazing gift! If you do all of the things you're supposed to do this year, then this gift will blow your mind! If you don't, you'll still get a gift, but it won't be as spectacular! You can do these tasks however you wish, but know that it will change the type of gift you'll get on Christmas day. It will still be amazing, though!
Jimmy: Thanks! *does everything (though diffferently to Bobby) and then some*
Bobby: Cool! *does everything (though differently to Jimmy) and then some*
Betty: Sure. *Does the bare mininum
...Christmas Day
Parents; Jimmy...Bobby. Betty..since you both did everything that was asked of you, we're going to give you the gift we promised each of you...but one more thing. Do you like Ginger Bread, Peanut Butter or Chocolate Chip Cookies?
Jimmy: Chocolate Chip
Bobby: Peanut Butter
Betty: Ginger Bread
Parents: OK! Here you go!
Jimmy: *opens a present with red paper*, it's a toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Bobby; *opens a present with blue paper*, it's the same toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Betty:
*opens a present with green paper*, it's the same toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Parents: Imagine what this could be and what you could do with it?! The gift is YOUR IMAGINATION!
...Christmas ruined.[/quote]
I'll change the analogy slightly and add to it
Analogy:
Parents: Jimmy...Bobby, for Christmas, I'm going to give you each the most amazing gift! If you do all of the things you're supposed to do this year, then this gift will blow your mind! If you don't, you'll still get a gift, but it won't be as spectacular! You can do these tasks however you wish, but know that it will change the type of gift you'll get on Christmas day. It will still be amazing, though!
Jimmy: Thanks! *does everything (though diffferently to Bobby) and then some*
Bobby: Cool! *does everything (though differently to Jimmy) and then some*
Betty: Sure. *Does the bare mininum
...Christmas Day
Parents; Jimmy...Bobby. Betty..since you both did everything that was asked of you, we're going to give you the gift we promised each of you...but one more thing. Do you like Ginger Bread, Peanut Butter or Chocolate Chip Cookies?
Jimmy: Chocolate Chip
Bobby: Peanut Butter
Betty: Ginger Bread
Parents: OK! Here you go!
Jimmy: *opens a present with red paper*, it's a toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Bobby; *opens a present with blue paper*, it's the same toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Betty:
*opens a present with green paper*, it's the same toy with a bunch of missing pieces.
Parents: Imagine what this could be and what you could do with it?! The gift is YOUR IMAGINATION!
...Christmas ruined.[/quote]
#75
Posté 19 avril 2012 - 04:43
sp0ck 06
-
- Members
- 1 318 messages
Master Che wrote...
sp0ck 06,
No one wants to guess or theorize as to what happened at the end or afterwards. We want to know. We did not pay $50-$79 on this just to imagine an ending. We wanted to see the conclusion. This isn't a conclusion. It is speculation of a conclusion. This is not what we were promised.
I'm not disputing that. I agree we did not see the conclusion. That doesn't mean the ending was objectively bad. I just means Bioware did a terrible job of presenting it and screwed up in not showing us any kind of aftermath.
A lot of people have rightfully pointed out the endings are all the same, just different colored explosions. This is true in that basically the same cinematic plays with a different color. But the endings are drastically different. We just aren't shown any of the consequences.
It was a colossal screw-up on Bioware's part, because they had an ending that was going to be controversial no matter what, but tipped the balance to the nth degree of negative reaction when they failed to include any closure, no epilogue, no look back on the players choices, no explanation of what happened, and then compounded all that by having the final cutscene raise more questions than it answers.
I'm just trying to shed a little bit of positive light on it.
