4048 réponses à ce sujet

[ClixWizard]

I'd like to thank Bioware for giving us fans something that was easier to swallow than the original ending. Was it the ending that I wanted? No. But it's something that I can sort of accept now.

I still don't agree with the decision to keep the Star Child in the game at all, and I feel like that was the most out of place part of the whole game.

I feel that the fourth ending was sort of done in spite too. Yeah, we asked for an ending that let us refuse the original endings, so you give us that? It felt like an "F you for not picking A, B or C."

The new endings better explained some of the gaping plot holes, but still didn't give all the closure I would have liked for the individual squad mates.

While I'm sure that the Mass Effect series will continue, I still feel that this is where I get off the fanboy train. I don't think that the future of the franchise will hold any special place in my heart like the original games, as the ending has sort of poisoned my love for the series.

I wish the crew at Bioware well, and hope that they make a learning experience of all that has transpired since Mass Effect 3 released.

[Redbelle]

3DandBeyond wrote...

The problem is in many ways since the EC solidifies their belief that the ending concept and the kid's logic were sound, it makes it far worse in my opinion.

We also clearly get to see that they intended Shepard to be an unfeeling,merely intelligent god.  And we see that they fully intended that Synthesis be what the star kid wants all along.  And we clearly see that they didn't give a rat's behind for anyone that wanted something a bit happier in an ending-like at least seeing that Shepard knows his/her friends and LI made it and vice versa.

They also added detail and more ridiculous excuses for why the kid does what he does.  They give some explanation for his own creation that is really messed up when he explains who he is now.  He was created by creators that he disposed of by turning them into a reaper and he is the combined intelligence of all reapers.  So, what the heck was he to begin with if right now he is the reapers.  Oh, and he controls them, too.  Ok, whatever.  It's easy to see why they gave the job of explaining all this to a kid.  Only the most childish would think there's some way to explain this and make it seem plausible.

Created still will always rebel against the creator.  BS.  Created will thus destroy the creator.  BS.  The quarians created the geth and tried to destroy them-oh, but that's forgotten.  The quarian and geth problem was resolved one way or another, but that, one of the most important things people wanted to have addressed, was ignored.  Now, we also have the added garbage of chaos and order.  Chaos is a natural state of being and furthers evolution.  Order is an unnatural state of being.  Consider that in nature there is no such thing as true symmetry and randomness brings about advancement.  But the kid is anti-evolution.  We get that.  He's the one who's worried about something.  He says that synthetics will naturally evolve and then surpass their creators and want to destroy them.  BS.  So, in his opinion synthetics are the real problem, but he goes after organics to put them into synthetics.  Tell me when this starts to make sense.

Then, when shown that the reapers are causing conflict, which means he is causing conflict, he makes the brilliant statement that the reapers don't care about war and that they are like a cleansing fire doing only what they are meant to do.  Ok, ME1 and 2 never existed.  I get that now.  Sovereign and Harbinger both knew what they were doing in hurting and destroying people, but oh no, now they were just acting on instinct or on remote control.  Ok, but since the kid clearly knows there's a difference between what a brainless fire does and what war and conflict are and he controls the reapers, then he is causing war and conflict and is not acting on remote control.  He is not a cleansing fire and he controls the reapers.  It would be like a firebug with a blow torch who keeps setting a fire and then says that the fire is just doing what it's meant to do.

This is incredibly childish.  The EC has succeeded in making many things far worse.

I think the issue with the ending as a whole, and something the ECDLC was unable to overcome, was that it had to be made to the constraints that was placed upon it by the original ending. It had to have a GC becasue CH wrote in a GC and it was already coded. They had to have a conduit and a missle in your eye reaper battle and a TIM/Anderson encounter, etc etc.

Now imagine what would have happened if CH had not been allowed to write anything without the input of his writing team around the table. Someone would have done a Harrison Ford and paraphrased his 'You can write this <ahem> but you can't say it'.

As it stands the ECDLC has to stand on the foundations of the original ending. And whle I agree it is a far superior effort for such little deviation from the original. It should have been a much better effort from the start with every writer feeding the pot. The only possible reason I can think of that this didn't happen was that BW were pushed for time and had to divide the jobs up into smaller groups. Either that, or someone felt it was time to deliver their vision and msg of what ME was about right at the end.

[KrAzY WiSh]

ClixWizard wrote...

I'd like to thank Bioware for giving us fans something that was easier to swallow than the original ending. Was it the ending that I wanted? No. But it's something that I can sort of accept now.

I still don't agree with the decision to keep the Star Child in the game at all, and I feel like that was the most out of place part of the whole game.

I feel that the fourth ending was sort of done in spite too. Yeah, we asked for an ending that let us refuse the original endings, so you give us that? It felt like an "F you for not picking A, B or C."

The new endings better explained some of the gaping plot holes, but still didn't give all the closure I would have liked for the individual squad mates.

While I'm sure that the Mass Effect series will continue, I still feel that this is where I get off the fanboy train. I don't think that the future of the franchise will hold any special place in my heart like the original games, as the ending has sort of poisoned my love for the series.

I wish the crew at Bioware well, and hope that they make a learning experience of all that has transpired since Mass Effect 3 released.

Thats pretty much how i feel too.

[Benchpress610]

KrAzY WiSh wrote...

ClixWizard wrote...

I'd like to thank Bioware for giving us fans something that was easier to swallow than the original ending. Was it the ending that I wanted? No. But it's something that I can sort of accept now.

I still don't agree with the decision to keep the Star Child in the game at all, and I feel like that was the most out of place part of the whole game.

I feel that the fourth ending was sort of done in spite too. Yeah, we asked for an ending that let us refuse the original endings, so you give us that? It felt like an "F you for not picking A, B or C."

The new endings better explained some of the gaping plot holes, but still didn't give all the closure I would have liked for the individual squad mates.

While I'm sure that the Mass Effect series will continue, I still feel that this is where I get off the fanboy train. I don't think that the future of the franchise will hold any special place in my heart like the original games, as the ending has sort of poisoned my love for the series.

I wish the crew at Bioware well, and hope that they make a learning experience of all that has transpired since Mass Effect 3 released.

Thats pretty much how i feel too.

Same here…I appreciate the effort but, as ClixWizard very well put it, “the ending has sort of poisoned my love for the series”. I can’t un-see what I’ve seen and un-feel what I’ve felt. There is only one chance to make a first impression, and unfortunately, that chance came and went. I’m deeply disappointed because I did love this dammed game.
 

Modifié par Benchpress610, 07 juillet 2012 - 12:51 .

[Peebuddy]

After playing Mass Effect 3 I felt that it will never amount to what it could have been in terms of the ending. I believed that the Indoctrination Theory was the only true ending for me. But after playing the extended cut DLC the true fan and believer in me erased any doubt I had left. Thank you Bioware team for listening to the community and giving us what we desperately needed. Here is a video that I believe embodies what Mass Effect really represented. It is a video by Genol3oost on YouTube called Remember Me. If you are a true ME fan I recommend watching it. It was done by one of the best ME fan video trailer maker saying thanks and goodbye to a wonderful game.

[Zorky.be]

The future of Mass effect got better with those endings explained better but I still think you should also have hinted more into the indoctrination theory its the most well explained ending before you made this one :þ

[Khemi]

"Thank you Bioware", kinda. The EC closed some of the worst plotholes and this time around I even tolerated the Catalyst a bit better. To me the EC (more or less) worked _because_ of the Catalyst's insane logic, not in spite of it. It was now completely obvious to my Shepard that he was dealing with a very broken machine. Even accepting the choices as true in the Catalyst's mind, this ruled out galaxy-wide Synthesis with madness incarnate. The Control option so eagerly endorsed by several cycles of indoctrinated was easy to dismiss as much too dangerous. So "destroy" it was and good riddance.

Thanks for apparently fixing the MP EMS issue.

On another level, I no longer shudder hearing the words "Mass Effect", but I have been burned: The next Bioware product I buy will be something a friend has played through and endorsed. But hey, at least I believe I will buy one.

[BlueStorm83]

Khemi wrote...

"Thank you Bioware", kinda. The EC closed some of the worst plotholes and this time around I even tolerated the Catalyst a bit better. To me the EC (more or less) worked _because_ of the Catalyst's insane logic, not in spite of it. It was now completely obvious to my Shepard that he was dealing with a very broken machine. Even accepting the choices as true in the Catalyst's mind, this ruled out galaxy-wide Synthesis with madness incarnate. The Control option so eagerly endorsed by several cycles of indoctrinated was easy to dismiss as much too dangerous. So "destroy" it was and good riddance.

Thanks for apparently fixing the MP EMS issue.

On another level, I no longer shudder hearing the words "Mass Effect", but I have been burned: The next Bioware product I buy will be something a friend has played through and endorsed. But hey, at least I believe I will buy one.

---  Mass Effect 3 is the best argument for buying used games at half price that I've ever heard.

[tek427]

cainsrazor wrote...

 I feel obligated to provide my personal opinion about the EC since I am a passionate fan of the series and provided initial feedback regarding the ending of ME3. Here is a brief personal introduction:

Age: 33
female
Played all three ME games.
1st BioWare game played: KOTOR

I have to admit that BioWare did some good things for closure/explanations. I guess I will never be satisfied if hologram kid is not omitted completely and if we are not given options to choose shepard's fate. However, that is only my respectful and humble opinion. 

Nevertheless, the control ending made Shepard into a Reaper or some ambivalent entity and the synthesis was too damn weird. The destroy was the most logical and realistic choice. I still got the breathing scene. But even that doesn't make sense. The Citadel was extremely damaged (clearly not destroyed) but one would assume its artificial atmosphere ceased to exist after the explosion. Shepard should be dead. Or did he divinely fall back onto earth, avoiding being incinerated by re-entry? He should be dead. Or, did he never leave London and the scenes with TIM, Anderson, hologram child, and possibly the "paradise" scene all happened in his mind? Was the Catalyst lying regarding killing all synthetics? We are not shown EDI or any geth dying. There are so many questions still unanswered in the destroy option, but I am hopeful that with time and new stories in the ME universe, we will have them answered. 

PROS:
Clarification on how Shepard's crew mates ended up on the Normandy.
Clarification on why Joker fled the SolSystem. BTW, I am sorry, but Garrus and Ashley (or whoever is the love interest) would NEVER agree to leave Shepard, regardless if ordered by Admiral Hackett. 
Clarification that the mass relays did not blow up (further clarifying space travel is still possible).
Clarification that the Citadel did not blow up.
Clarification that all of Shepard's allies (turians, quarians, etc.) we're not stranded or starved to death.

CONS (just still questions I have):
Why did the stargazer say one day they will be able to travel to the stars when it is clear that the mass relays were not destroyed and the Normandy was up and running? Did I misinterpret this?

The Catalyst is the most confusing thing. He tells Shepard he was created  himself, so why do I have a feeling he is trying to rebel against HIS creators by using the Reapers? Is there a war between the Gods/Creators and the Catalyst is just a small part of this war? He is very illusive about who created him or about anything in the past cycles. Why doesn't Shepard consider this?

Why is Shepard so darn special? The Catalyst says that they already controlled TIM, but why doesn't Shepard think for one second, that HE is trying to be controlled by the Catalyst? Why doesn't Shepard consider this? 

Why did the Catalyst take the form of the little boy? Obviously they knew about Shepard's dreams/past experiences with the boy. (Which brings me to mention Shepard's dream sequences. This was not explained/clarified. I don't want to discuss the indoctrination theory because that is a huge topic to cover. I would love for the IT to be true, but again, that is my humble opinion). The Catalyst chose to manifest himself through the kid because he knew that would make Shepard more vulnerable, naive, and susceptible to cave in and become submissive. Why doesn't Shepard consider the symbolic representation of the hologram child? 

I appreciate the closure and epilogue of some of the characters. The stills make me want more and I can only hope for bigger and better stories. "just one more story."--stargazer.

I will always feel heartbroken because my male Shepard and Ashley were one of my favorite aspects of the entire trilogy. It hurts to see Ashley, once again, being alone and heart broken. However, with the destroy ending, I felt as if Ashley was hopeful and had a feeling that Shepard was really alive. After Shepard's death in ME2, why have Ashley go through this pain again? It was as if I went through this heartbreak as well. This is one of the happy endings I would have loved. I know it is not a soap opera, but I would have loved for them to marry, have little spectre babies (one of the boys named Kaidan or Anderson), and live a long and happy life they deserve. But that is just the romantic and female part of me.

With that said, I wish the players were given the options to choose a perfect and happy ending (a future with the love interest, Reapers destroyed) or an ending in utter destruction (end of earth, human species, death of Shepard). To me, that follows the Paragon and Renegade theme. Or, we could of had an in-between ending of some destruction/happiness with great cost and sacrifice. These were the endings I was hoping for; not an ending with a hologram child (DEUS EX MACHINA). 

But the message I got from BioWare is that organics will always be at war with synthetics (it is inevitable). It just sounds too much like Battlestar Galactica (this has happened before and will happen again).  I wonder, will organics create synthetics again, knowing the cycle?  I appreciated Shepard's response to the Catalyst's statement regarding the consequences of the destroy option. Shepard says, "maybe." That gave me hope and further convinced me that the destroy option was the best and logical choice. I am disappointed with Walters' brave new world ending. There is no denying this because Geoff Kneighly provided a scanned photo of Walters' outline/sketch in his own handwriting of the ending in the app, The Final Days of Mass Effect 3. I am disappointed with Walters in this sense. However, I applaud you BioWare for listening to the fans (even those who are rude, immature, and insensitive douchebags). I know you cannot satisfy everyone. But I don't think there a lot of game developers out there who truly respect and listen to their fans. Do not be discouraged or frustrated with us too much for too long because there are many of us, such as myself, who are passionate and respectful when it comes to games like ME. Thank you for your hard work. Please keep listening to your fans, even if there are some bad apples. 

I completely agree. I understand how Bioware kept Shepard's breathing scene up to interpretation, but I would've liked a brief scene with Shepard fufiling his/her promise to Liara in having "little blue babies," even if it's just another slide. We got to see krogan babies after all. But I guess that's where fanart/fanfiction comes in.

[ElionD]

The more I play the extended cut DLC the more I love it. Thank you very much Bioware for this. You're back to your roots.

[KiganMatsuei]

ElionD wrote...

The more I play the extended cut DLC the more I love it. Thank you very much Bioware for this. You're back to your roots.

Happy that you like it so much. As to the "back to your roots" comment...

Not really. Not at all. Their roots run much deeper into quality storytelling than this EC offers. This is a half-made bandaid that makes things a little better, but still leaves way too many holes and problems.

Such as: We still don't have the faintest idea WHY the Catalyst looks identical to that dead human kid. Among all the Catalyst's flawed explanations, its appearance is the thing that makes the least amount of sense.

Yet they felt that wasn't worth addressing. Just as they felt we deserved a big "F you" for the reject ending by having it throw away everything we worked for and kill everyone. 

They also made the Catalyst say that no more would be lost than already had been if we chose Destroy, yet the Geth and EDI still die.

And of course, the big one that we STILL don't have the opportunity for a happy ending for Shepard. A breath in some random rubble = uncertainty. But apparently it is too much to ask for the chance to work hard and have Shepard reunite with LI and Normandy crew.

And they throw it all behind those two words we are all sick to death of hearing - artistic integrity.

Which presently translates to both a lack of integrity and a possible hatred for Shepard.

This is NOT Bioware's roots. Not by a long shot.

Modifié par KiganMatsuei, 07 juillet 2012 - 04:44 .

[freeakura]

ME 3 ending *fresh* perspective
 
I just finished ME 3 for the first time, the DLC ending was loaded so my experience is not clouded by the original finale. I chosen the Rejection ending, for the simple fact that each alternative choice presented horrid compromise.
In Control ending Shepherd loses humanity, loses himself, he sacrifices himself at the cost of his own peril.
The Synthesis sounded superficially nice, until you realized that what is unique and interesting in each species, in each person is their complexity of their individuality.
In Destroy ending you would sacrifice synthetic that are conscience and self aware. Legion’s question was so poignant “Does he have a soul?” or is he worth it? On the par with organics.
 
All of the choices except the rejection ending represent horrid moral compromise for the Sheppard destroying his honorable character or himself.
 
 

[3DandBeyond]

KiganMatsuei wrote...

ElionD wrote...

The more I play the extended cut DLC the more I love it. Thank you very much Bioware for this. You're back to your roots.

Happy that you like it so much. As to the "back to your roots" comment...

Not really. Not at all. Their roots run much deeper into quality storytelling than this EC offers. This is a half-made bandaid that makes things a little better, but still leaves way too many holes and problems.

Such as: We still don't have the faintest idea WHY the Catalyst looks identical to that dead human kid. Among all the Catalyst's flawed explanations, its appearance is the thing that makes the least amount of sense.

Yet they felt that wasn't worth addressing. Just as they felt we deserved a big "F you" for the reject ending by having it throw away everything we worked for and kill everyone. 

They also made the Catalyst say that no more would be lost than already had been if we chose Destroy, yet the Geth and EDI still die.

And of course, the big one that we STILL don't have the opportunity for a happy ending for Shepard. A breath in some random rubble = uncertainty. But apparently it is too much to ask for the chance to work hard and have Shepard reunite with LI and Normandy crew.

And they throw it all behind those two words we are all sick to death of hearing - artistic integrity.

Which presently translates to both a lack of integrity and a possible hatred for Shepard.

This is NOT Bioware's roots. Not by a long shot.

They are only back to their roots if you never played ME1 or ME2 before and if you ignore things done in ME3 since nowhere in the ending are you actually allowed to refute the idiot kid's assertion that organics and synthetics are doomed to conflict.

And one of the stupidest things he says directly conflicts 2 reapers-Sovereign and Harbinger.  They knew they were hurting and destroying people, but the kid asserts that the reapers don't know  or care about war or conflict.  He says they are merely acting like a cleansing fire doing what they were meant to do.  It ignores ME1 and 2.  But furthermore, he controls the reapers and he knows about war and conflict, because he makes the distinction.  I will say it again, the kid then is like a firebug with a blowtorch who keeps lighting things on fire and then says the blowtorch is only doing what it was meant to do.

Bioware's roots were planted firmly in great truly intelligent story telling.  In the end, I tend to agree it's like they hate Shepard.  And in a game you don't want to be told that people are too stupid to learn on their own or be self-reliant (control-godhood and synthesis-molestation) or that in order to become self-reliant they must commit genocide, leaving the hero of 100 hours of play a headless torso in a pile of rubble.  Or, have players pick the FU ending.  This is a game but it was only fun before the ending.  Apparently someone wanted to force their unhappiness and idea of the futility of life on the rest of us.

[3DandBeyond]

freeakura wrote...

ME 3 ending *fresh* perspective
 
I just finished ME 3 for the first time, the DLC ending was loaded so my experience is not clouded by the original finale. I chosen the Rejection ending, for the simple fact that each alternative choice presented horrid compromise.
In Control ending Shepherd loses humanity, loses himself, he sacrifices himself at the cost of his own peril.
The Synthesis sounded superficially nice, until you realized that what is unique and interesting in each species, in each person is their complexity of their individuality.
In Destroy ending you would sacrifice synthetic that are conscience and self aware. Legion’s question was so poignant “Does he have a soul?” or is he worth it? On the par with organics.
 
All of the choices except the rejection ending represent horrid moral compromise for the Sheppard destroying his honorable character or himself.
 
 

Unfortunately, rejection (awesome speech) was thrown in there as a middle finger to players who didn't like any of the choices.  People repeatedly said if Shepard made a choice without at least asking a question (the case in the first set of choices), then Shepard was really spineless and not Shepard.  And people wanted at least some reall attempt at a fight with the reapers-a kind of unconventional conventional fight, even if it meant a loss, but with the possibility of some type of victory.  The writers created this because they thought their original ending was fantastic and rejection is now saying, "fine don't like our endings. Game over."  I agree with you it is the only one that allows Shepard to fully remain Shepard-intact character.  The problem is it's just suicidal-they actually rewrote scenes with Hackett just so this would be suicidal.  He originally says things like if they can't find the catalyst they will fight as hard as they can, and in other places he is really positive about all the forces they've gathered.

[VettoRyouzou]

While I am happy at all there hard work... going to be that guy... still didn't like it.

[BrianAA777]

Just a quick post to say I loved the Extended Cut additions. Though I enjoyed the original ending, the EC adds even more great stuff. Some of the still shots (slides) were a little too cheesy but that's about my only complaint. I'd give it a perfect score as a reviewer. Favorite parts: memorial scene, EDI's voiceover.

[ChopyChopZ]

I agree with ClixWizard about everything. I really only appreciated that one scene involving Your LI and that's all really.

[TimTheGreek]

Well i dont appreciate any of this. The ending is just as it should have been in the beginning, instead of giving us a half-bottom ending, There is still no happy ending and the option to decline the options is just a spit in the face .

[Selvec_Darkon]

When doing the endings again today, I noticed something very flawed, sneaky and underhanded about the Synthsis ending. I finally caught the Catalyst slip up.

The catalyst tries to trick sheperd into doing Synthsis. At one point during the conversation, the catalyst says that "all life will be connected to us". Earlier, the catalyst also said that they control the reapers, and that they are the collective intelligence of all the reapers, that the citadel and the reapers are part of it.

Thus, Synthsis is a trick for control. It is the ideal solution according to the catalyst, because it allows the catalyst to control all life, synthetic and organic. This way he can prevent war, but in the same way it prevents true understanding, as he is removing what makes organic life organic.

The Catalyst is also synthetic itself, and it said that synthetics always seek to understand organics. This is another attempt at trying to understand by merging all organic life with the catalyst. Except, that removes freedom, the very concept thats trying to be understood.

[Voodoo2015]

I say only one thing. Why a child? Ok two thing. And why a child who followed Shepard throughout ME3?

[Redbelle]

Voodoo2015 wrote...

I say only one thing. Why a child? Ok two thing. And why a child who followed Shepard throughout ME3?

It's psychological dreamscape stalking. Like Inception only with Reapers.

[Redbelle]

TimTheGreek wrote...

Well i dont appreciate any of this. The ending is just as it should have been in the beginning, instead of giving us a half-bottom ending, There is still no happy ending and the option to decline the options is just a spit in the face .

The orginal ending lacked many of the cohesive plot threads to tie one event to another, i.e. how your squaddies got on Normandy and how Hackett knew Shep was on the Citadel.......... ok that last one still needs some thinking about, but at least the ECDLC resulted in a better story flow.

[Selvec_Darkon]

Redbelle wrote...

Voodoo2015 wrote...

I say only one thing. Why a child? Ok two thing. And why a child who followed Shepard throughout ME3?

It's psychological dreamscape stalking. Like Inception only with Reapers.

I'd actually chalk it up to the old "Manifestation of innocene" thing. Catalyst probably probed Shepereds mind and appeared as the figure he's most logically less likely to harm and listen to.

[rogue gook]

I know I'm late but just played through the ECDLC. Overall, I liked it. What people need to remember is a few things. First, the "starchild" is a synthetic. People who argue that his solution isn't much of a solution is pointing out the obvious. It's a synthetic's solution, not an organic's. As a synthetic, ergo as an unnatural entity, it would be prone to an orderly outcome and would reject the natural entropy of the universe. So of course it's solution would be that of integrating organics into a hybrid-but-mostly-synthetic being.

Secondly, people who reject the choices altogether are being selfish and idiotic. They forget how powerful each individual reaper is, and more importantly, how many there are. To think you can go on fighting using conventional means and maybe less than conventional tactics and strategies is pure idiocy. Of course you'll lose. You're given options to end this once and for all. Now, granted, a couple of those options aren't really options (in my opinion destroy is the only good solution). Going back to the "starchild" being synthetic, I decided it was irredeemable. It had to be destroyed, and since the reapers are controlled by it, or at least extensions of its logic, they too are irredeemable. The reapers needed to go, period. And since conventional fighting couldn't win the war, I had no choice but to go with an option presented to me. To go off on a slight tangent, anyone who would argue that the galaxy had a fighting chance needs to take a look at their forces again. A massive coalition was organized to fight on the tiniest fraction of the entire battlefield, and they still had their butts handed to them. That fleet at Earth was a massive undertaking, with militaries around the galaxy pouring resources into it. The reapers weren't so concentrated. Taking a look at the galactic map just before going to Earth, you'll see they occupied the entire galaxy. There isn't a chance to win that fight.

So to recap: "starchild", and therefore the reapers, are irredeemable synthetics hellbent on the logic that their solution (synthetic solution) is the only way and are pretty much a godly force that can't be stopped. Destroy option was the only way.

But the destroy option is just my opinion.

Going back to the ECDLC itself, it was much better given the constraints that team had to work with (i.e. keep the original ending just expand it). It gave a lot of closure, and while you're LI being the one to tell joker to gtfo isn't the best choice of character, I can overlook that. At least for me, the content gave me what I wanted: a little more of a proper ending. I saw some of the consequences of my actions, some things were explained and portrayed, and the scene of putting the Shepherds plague on the wall was fitting (this trilogy was bound to be a tragedy from the get go, no question Shepherd would die).

The only gripe I have is something to a lot of fiction writers world-wide. Stop rushing your endings! Do it properly in the first place!

edited because I apparently can't spell 

Modifié par rogue gook, 07 juillet 2012 - 11:20 .

[chevyguy87]

 @ClixWizard
I raise my morning cup of coffee to you sir or madam, for detailing most of my issues with the EC.

I shall now type a brief rant. 

After watching the 4 scenarios play out on youtube after a long bout of impatience, I now refuse to complete the game. I still do not feel any of the endings match the high bar set by the rest of the trilogy. The revisions and explanation I feel should have been there originally. I still despise the fact that even if I do everything right in the game save everyone possible and am basically a Saint, I still see Shepard die in three of the four endings and get the breath scene at the end of Destroy. Which still makes no goddamned sense. Is seeing her live THAT much of a problem?

The fact that they kept the child completely buries the trilogy and takes the rules of Mass Effect lore with it. The child just doesn't fit at all. if they retconned him, it would have at least started making some sense because his character is the source of all the ending problems. I do however give my kudos to the team for taking the time to work on the EC, but it still does not live up to the previous two games. I did not feel like a hero at the end like I did in ME1 &ME2, instead I felt like a puppet being controlled by the child.

Shame though since the trilogy up until the final moments in ME3 was pure genius, well executed and enjoyable. But they let the story drive right off the side of a cliff by keep the child and giving us the Synthesis option (which i completely despise and am disgusted by it). I now have a sour taste in my mouth regarding Mass Effect, which is sad because it was my favorite game series, but seeing how they handled the end of Shepard's story, I will be avoiding any future ME related DLC and games unless they provide something to do with L.I reunions or something of the sort, because I'm going to need more then aloe vera to remove the burn I received from ME3.