RECON64BIT7 wrote...
The only real issue I have is the star child coming out of no where. However, this is such a little problem and in no way is the game automatically bad to me because of it. People are calling "ME3 biggest let down of the year" All because of the ending? Which wasn't even that bad to me.
Really, there are only two basic things wrong with the endings.
1.
The Presentation/Execution. The entire concept of Priority: Earth seems a bit ridiculous, having a bunch of people just charge straight at a Reaper, blow it up, and then jump in a magic elevator beam to the Citadel. I mean, before you get to that part, it's pretty cool--you touch down to take over the other shuttle (they only sent one shuttle of dudes to take out a Reaper? Seriously? Are they really
that short on manpower that they couldn't send a small army?) and you go and kill an ass-load of husks, survive against waves of abominations, etc. The meet-up with the crew is done fairly well, but the turret in the middle is just stupid. After the Conduit run, it really seems like someone hit the E-brake in the car while driving 60 mph. Everything is building up, and up, and up--and then right when we're expecting something
big, it all comes screeching to a halt.
The dream-like quality post-Conduit run has a large following of people that out-right reject the fact that anything we experience actually happens. The Star Child is a being barely alluded to, and there is no way to refute what he says; Shepard spent more time questioning Anderson's decision to stay on Earth than he did deciding the fate of the galaxy.
Several large questions are not just left un-answered, but actually brought up during the end sequence. "In Arrival, when a Relay blew up, the entire system it was in died. I just blew up every single Relay. There is no evidence in-game anywhere to suggest a Relay can explode and
not kill everyone. Did I just blow up the galaxy?" "I've spent the entire game playing as a Paragon, and arguing against Controlling the Reapers. I just got done convincing TIM to commit suicide, because his attempt to Control the Reapers ended with him Indoctrinated. Why is Control being presented as a blue (Paragon) option?" "How does this even work? Destroy will kill all Synthetic life--how can it tell? Does this mean VIs also? Why are the geth specifically slated for destruction? What about EDI?" "How can Synthesis even work? I'm not very knowledgeable when it comes to Biology, but I'm pretty sure DNA doesn't work that way. How will people even live after they've been Synthesized? What's going to keep people from building new Synthetics that rebel and kill everything even after they become part-robot?"
Then there's the complaints about the Star Child itself. "The Star Child says that Organics building Synthetics that rebel and kill off all Organic life is the Problem. It specifically states that the created will
always rebel against their creators. In order to fix this problem, the Star Child creates Reapers to harvest select Organics and turn them into Reapers. What is keeping the Reapers from rebelling and killing all organic life? Isn't the Star Child using the stated problem as his solution to the problem?" "Why is the Star Child even talking to Shepard? He's the leader of the enemy, the self-proclaimed Controller of the Reapers. Shepard is bleeding out, and will be dead soon. Is he just there to taunt Shepard?" I could keep going on, but won't.
2.
The Actual Endings. If we ignore all of the problems with the endings, the way they're presented, and the actual execution (these things can be fixed with EC DLC), I still have significant
moral problems with the endings. Shepard is given three options: Destroy, Control, and Synthesis.
Destroy: Genocide. Shepard knowingly, willingly, avoidably chooses to destroy (at the least) all geth. If the geth are alive at this point, they're his allies, and willingly working with him. He would have helped to bring them to full self-awareness, and become individuals capable of growth and being alive. He then decides to kill them all just to kill the Reapers, even though there are other options. EDI will die as well. "All synthetic life" is vague enough that we can't know more than that, but it seems likely that there are other AI out there that'll be killed.
Control: Shepard adopts the plan that TIM championed, after killing TIM for championing the plan. The Reapers appear to be sentient; Control will forcibly strip away their ability to choose, their ability to think for themselves. The fact that the Star Child has undoubtably been doing this for a billion years or so does not change how reprehensibly evil it is to do this to even one person, let alone all the thousands (or more) Reapers in existance. This is, of course, even assuming that Shepard will be able to give more than one command to the Reapers. After all, he disintegrates, then we see the Reapers leave. If he only has time for one command, then the Reapers
will be back.
Synthesis: By the almighty Bacon this one is ridiculous. The concept alone is stupid. The ramifications are mind-boggling. It's easy to think that people will starve to death before they figure out how to , like, live. Every molecule in their bodies are changed near instantly; how many of them are going to be driven mad just from that alone? If we assume that it's actually possible and actually does what it claims (which is doubtful/impossible according to everything we know in our universe or ME's universe), it still doesn't solve the problem of Synthetics rebelling against the creators and killing all life in the galaxy. It's a power created by mad scientists with no regard for individual life, and that gods themselves would think long and hard before employing. After all, the Star Child is akin to a god (lower-case, not capital), and he has spent at least a billion years
not employing this option.
Retour en haut
