4048 réponses à ce sujet

[BlueStorm83]

--- Fun exercise! Play the London mission again, get to the odd scene where Harby doesn't blow up the Normandy when they come down to save your squadmates... and refuse to pick a dialogue choice. Put the controller down and go get a Sammich. See how long Harbinger will politely stand there and allow the Normandy Road Crew to try and patch that pothole that the Mass Effect 3 Truck just lost a tire in.

[Captain McBuck]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Rheinwer wrote...

I'm still not convinced about "destroy" ending.

ME3 wiki quote: "If the Destroy ending was chosen and the player has a high enough EMS rating, however, the Commander's name is not actually shown to be placed on the wall. This, coupled with the cutscene of Shepard breathing in the rubble, leaves the Commander's final fate open to suggestion."

I know that ME is an artwork but c'mon... we are not in gallery where we can guess what the artist "wanted to say". I understand... but this is a game and in my opinion the players should be 100% sure if Shepard really dies or not.

Well, I do think whether or not people at BW or in this community want to admit it, the fact that there is no real "wow" ending will have an impact on the success of DLC and any future projects.  What I mean is there's no real heart pounding moment followed by that "we did it!"  If you take a look at sites (and I have viewed a lot of them) where the Leviathan DLC is being announced, previewed, and the trailer for it is being shown, most comments indicate even people that are ok with the EC have moved on and don't care.  There's no payoff at the end of the game.  Once you play it at most 4 times (the ending and not the game because replaying the game doesn't really impact the choices), to play the different versions, there's really no reason to play through again.  And many are just playing to the end once and going to youtube to see the others.  Had there been one "we did it" possible ending that resulted from really trying hard and being challenged, replayability and DLC would have meant something.

I contrast this with other action only games I've played (not CoD or the like) where you really are challenged and must work hard, strategize, and all.  When you finish (beat) the game you feel like you accomplished something.  You don't get that sense it ME3, because none of the choices are really satisfactory and not what you were working to accomplish in the game.  Destroy, maybe, but not at that cost.  What did Shepard say to Dr. Chakwas and what is the mantra that soldiers everywhere repeat and mean?  No one left behind.  So, it's not ok to leave 1 person behind even if you must risk 50 to save that person, but it is ok to decide to kill billions of people and one close friend, to leave them behind?

None of the endings are satisfying "we did it" moments because every one of us (if we're honest) expected a huge cataclysmic fight with the reapers.  A fight where the stakes were survival, sacrifice, victory, or annihilation on our terms.  What we got was a conversation with a see through boy where we get to listen to why he's been destroying the galaxy every 50k years.  And he gets to tell us how he will let us stop it.  If we get Leviathan, we get to hear him talk more and still offer us ways to make him stop, in a conversation.

Thoughts on what the ending would be: A fight with reapers where our decisions will matter and determine the outcome-our decisions based on our views.

What it turned out to be: A conversation with a crazed AI where we get to choose from choices he offers us that are all based in part on things we rejected and predicated on his warped fatalistic view.

DLC in ME2 was fine, because it could be played even after completing the Collector base and if played before it rounded out the whole experience, an experience that you could repeat time and again because the ending fed the same internal need for payoff/reward that we get when we win a game.  ME3 does not feed that at all, so DLC leading up to the same outcome is pointless.  Absent a win ending, there's no final reward.  We read books for that final moment, to feel we've done something.  We play games to win and should always have a chance to do that.

Agreed. I mean ME3 was overall an enjoyable experiance but its pretty clear where content was either cut for time, disc space or  held back for Future DLC.. To me DLC should be about after a game is done, developers go back to the white board and go "you know what would be cool...if we could do this" not release two thirds of a game and go "well lets hold this section of content back so we cab make an extra 10 bucks!". All the contect for ME3 Includng From Ashes, Leviathon and Omega or whatever else they held back -should- have been on the disc. I realise DLC sales makes them a -f**kton- of cash but they can do that with the MP packs and shizzle,  this is the end of the Trilogy there won't be any post ending DLC, no Bridging Content for a ME4, the big kiss of to Shep and her crew  so you should be packing in as much content as you can into the release game, especially with the endings the way they are as a "Fixed point in time" where they will always end one of 4 ways and that makes any DLC post-game completely pointless.

Take out the talking nightlight and you restore 90% of the Narative Coherence: - There are several Solutions to use without the Glowstick. make what the Crucible does based off Sheps personality and dialog choices through the game.

2) For Control
 - - - Tell EDI to use Crucible to 'Asssume Direct Control' of the Reapers
- - - If you supported TIM through the game  give him the chance to go for it, sacrifice himself for humanity finding redeption in death
3) For Synthatis
- - - Expand on the dialog with Tali about how the Geth are helping her people (if you made peace on Ranoch)
- - - Add some more dialog with Donnally, Adams and Chakwas debating Synthetic life etc
- - - Find Data on Sanctuary that lists how its posable
- --  if you got Joker and EDI together
4) For Destroy
- - - You could use your convosations with EDI, Hackett, Anderson, if you went against  TIM
- - - If you made peace with the Geth you have the option of wiping out just the Reapers or All Synthetic life.

Use the War Assets to dictate how successful or not these options, How many reapers are controled or Bonded, or Destroyed. How damaged the Relays and Citidel are again based on EMS (with High EMS they just shut down, Low EMS they might explode with really low EMS they Go Nova Arival Style). And;  give shep the chance to live in every ending or die depending on EMS and war assets  maybe Shep Lives but Anderson dies, or maybe Anderson lives and shep dies, or maybe they both die or both live depending on choices and dialog.

[MKfighter89]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--- Fun exercise! Play the London mission again, get to the odd scene where Harby doesn't blow up the Normandy when they come down to save your squadmates... and refuse to pick a dialogue choice. Put the controller down and go get a Sammich. See how long Harbinger will politely stand there and allow the Normandy Road Crew to try and patch that pothole that the Mass Effect 3 Truck just lost a tire in.

LOL, I got your point. Close some plotholes and make others.

[BlueStorm83]

--- Yeah, that hit me today, that there was a dialogue choice in it, so the time Harbinger neglects the biggest target in his direct field of vision could actually be REALLY long. Sure, in gameplay we get that magical delay in reality for every dialogue choice, but at such a huge, pivotal moment like that, it would have been better if it happened really, really fast without any player input.

Of course, when Sovereign is about to destroy the Destiny Ascension in ME1, we can sit there drinking a soda and not reply to Joker for 6 hours too, but at least there, Ol' Nazara was actually actively attacking the biggest, and most important, target. Not shooting individual doods whilst an attack vessel, one that actually already killed a reaper (Pew pew, Rannoch Reaper TOAST!) is chillin' out. Scene would have made more sense if the squaddies were messed up, and Shep put them on a damaged Mako that had lost its weapons, and told the driver to take them back to the Normandy.

[3DandBeyond]

Ha, never thought about making Harby wait.  I so long for the ME2 days when if you delayed getting right to the Collector's base at the point the crew was taken, you lost at least half the crew.  Don't get me wrong, I'd be totally pissed if Harby shot and destroyed the Normandy or killed my crewmates, but really people that think death is so relevant should wonder why waiting to talk has no effect.

What I find is funny is all the conventional (imagination and unconventional is what is meant) fight discussions that end with the idea that a big boss fight would be too video gamey. That's hilarious considering this is what? A video game. What would one expect it to be like? And I don't see a lot of people advocating one big boss fight. In fact, what I mostly see is either some context for making what is now an artificially inserted choice or more natural "non-choice" endings that result from decisions made along the way, success in doing what you were tasked with doing, and your personality as well as decisions being made on the fly at the end.

But, what's really funny is people don't like a big boss fight, but are perfectly fine with a boss conversation. I agree that is not at all video gamey.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 06 août 2012 - 01:20 .

[Iakus]

Eh I don't care one way or the other if a final boss fight is considered "too video gamey"

What bugs me is that an ending which shows the hero triumphing over adversity is now considered such.

[sdinc009]

Captain McBuck wrote...

So Open question, given that most of us at least seem to agree on the faults of the EC to some greater or lesser degree in essence we see what went wrong - What would you like to see in an ending, specifically? If you could tear up the old ending entirely or rework most of the "original footage" or drop things to the cutting room floor, or,Assume Direct Control of Casey Hudsons Harbinger style and make him write any ending you wanted...what would you have in it?

Honestly, this is so rediculously simple that I can't believe they screwed it up so bad. First and foremost, GET RID OF THE STARKID!! Removing that thing fixes 95% of the ending. Next, include a boss fight with Harbinger. Third, there needs to be the ability to have a true "Victory" ending, this is a game and as such there should be the ability to win. Now to address the narrative, all that retard logic that gets spewed fromthe Catalyst is gone and is replaced with a final battle between the Reapers and the Victory fleet. The Reapers remain a mystery so to exemplefy them as a monstrous antagonist. EMS finally gets shown as the forces that are gathered get their screen time and have impacts on what occurs in the battle. They even are helpful in the final battle with Harbinger. Then, the final ending is has a broad spectrum based upon the EMS and choices made. No need to insert some philosophical nonsense or add a plot point that was already resolved in the narrative a few missions back. Just final battle and resolution. SIMPLE.

[TGiNcRySiS]

sdinc009 wrote...

Captain McBuck wrote...

So Open question, given that most of us at least seem to agree on the faults of the EC to some greater or lesser degree in essence we see what went wrong - What would you like to see in an ending, specifically? If you could tear up the old ending entirely or rework most of the "original footage" or drop things to the cutting room floor, or,Assume Direct Control of Casey Hudsons Harbinger style and make him write any ending you wanted...what would you have in it?

Honestly, this is so rediculously simple that I can't believe they screwed it up so bad. First and foremost, GET RID OF THE STARKID!! Removing that thing fixes 95% of the ending. Next, include a boss fight with Harbinger. Third, there needs to be the ability to have a true "Victory" ending, this is a game and as such there should be the ability to win. Now to address the narrative, all that retard logic that gets spewed fromthe Catalyst is gone and is replaced with a final battle between the Reapers and the Victory fleet. The Reapers remain a mystery so to exemplefy them as a monstrous antagonist. EMS finally gets shown as the forces that are gathered get their screen time and have impacts on what occurs in the battle. They even are helpful in the final battle with Harbinger. Then, the final ending is has a broad spectrum based upon the EMS and choices made. No need to insert some philosophical nonsense or add a plot point that was already resolved in the narrative a few missions back. Just final battle and resolution. SIMPLE.

Ah yes.  This is exactly what I like to hear.  A complete victory ending.  Why can't we have that?  This goes back to what I said earlier in this thread.  They wanted to get rhe game out quick.  This is why we have a 4 choice ending.  They didn't want to take the extra time to tie everything together and give you a bunch of different endings based on choices you made.  This was the easier route to get the game out.  Artistic Integrity?  You are trying to sell ice cubes to eskimos Bioware.

[BlueStorm83]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Ha, never thought about making Harby wait.  I so long for the ME2 days when if you delayed getting right to the Collector's base at the point the crew was taken, you lost at least half the crew.  Don't get me wrong, I'd be totally pissed if Harby shot and destroyed the Normandy or killed my crewmates, but really people that think death is so relevant should wonder why waiting to talk has no effect.

What I find is funny is all the conventional (imagination and unconventional is what is meant) fight discussions that end with the idea that a big boss fight would be too video gamey. That's hilarious considering this is what? A video game. What would one expect it to be like? And I don't see a lot of people advocating one big boss fight. In fact, what I mostly see is either some context for making what is now an artificially inserted choice or more natural "non-choice" endings that result from decisions made along the way, success in doing what you were tasked with doing, and your personality as well as decisions being made on the fly at the end.

But, what's really funny is people don't like a big boss fight, but are perfectly fine with a boss conversation. I agree that is not at all video gamey.

---  I'd like the end of the game to have had what ME1 had: A Boss conversation/fight.  I talked Saren out of the first boss fight; he shot himself.  But in a Boss Conversation, I'd like to have WAY more than 6 dialogue choices.  I'd like to really, REALLY have to consider what I'm about to say, and if I screw it up, then I have to fight an extra fight, or he'd be stronger than usual, or whatever.

And yeah, I HATE whem I buy a Video Game and play a Video Game, you know, because I love my Video Games, and then it ends like a Video Game.

[Ranger Jack Walker]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--- Fun exercise! Play the London mission again, get to the odd scene where Harby doesn't blow up the Normandy when they come down to save your squadmates... and refuse to pick a dialogue choice. Put the controller down and go get a Sammich. See how long Harbinger will politely stand there and allow the Normandy Road Crew to try and patch that pothole that the Mass Effect 3 Truck just lost a tire in.

How is that any different than any other conversation in any ME game (or any game with a conversation system) where you just stand around and don't reply and the person you're talking doesn't react in the least bit?

It's called Gameplay and Story segregation.

[Ksandor]

sdinc009 wrote...

Captain McBuck wrote...

So Open question, given that most of us at least seem to agree on the faults of the EC to some greater or lesser degree in essence we see what went wrong - What would you like to see in an ending, specifically? If you could tear up the old ending entirely or rework most of the "original footage" or drop things to the cutting room floor, or,Assume Direct Control of Casey Hudsons Harbinger style and make him write any ending you wanted...what would you have in it?

Honestly, this is so rediculously simple that I can't believe they screwed it up so bad. First and foremost, GET RID OF THE STARKID!! Removing that thing fixes 95% of the ending. Next, include a boss fight with Harbinger. Third, there needs to be the ability to have a true "Victory" ending, this is a game and as such there should be the ability to win. Now to address the narrative, all that retard logic that gets spewed fromthe Catalyst is gone and is replaced with a final battle between the Reapers and the Victory fleet. The Reapers remain a mystery so to exemplefy them as a monstrous antagonist. EMS finally gets shown as the forces that are gathered get their screen time and have impacts on what occurs in the battle. They even are helpful in the final battle with Harbinger. Then, the final ending is has a broad spectrum based upon the EMS and choices made. No need to insert some philosophical nonsense or add a plot point that was already resolved in the narrative a few missions back. Just final battle and resolution. SIMPLE.

If the developers were half as smart as they think they are... *sigh* If they had planned such an obvious and well thought ending from the start they would have enough budget to realize it. And if they discarded that idea at the last moment that is an organizational failure of the company which simply makes them incompetent.

I am playing ME3 again (third time, but never went beyond the Sanctuary mission) but I am "listening" the game for the first time, and only because EC DLC made the ending mildly tolerable (the original ending was so depressing that when I heard that in the forums I rushed thru the game. I did not listen the conversations or stop to appreciate ME3).

The game is great! If you truly listen the dialogs you see that they really worked hard to make this game and ME3 is full of great moments. It is such a shame that afer all that great teamwork and meticulous attention to details (except prologue animations) a company exec comes and forces a retarded ending at the last moment.

I really wonder how such a blunder can help sales or company reputation. You cut corners to decrease costs and increase sales. But this... Did this help sales? Why people who made this bad decision are still employed?

Maybe they say, "Lets fail 97 games out of 100 and succeed in only 3 games. No matter. Those 3 games will allow EA to profit, and screw the fans. We hate intelligent customers anyway". Yes this is the only logical explanation that could rationalize this mess.

Modifié par Ksandor, 07 août 2012 - 12:38 .

[sdinc009]

Ksandor wrote...

sdinc009 wrote...

Captain McBuck wrote...

So Open question, given that most of us at least seem to agree on the faults of the EC to some greater or lesser degree in essence we see what went wrong - What would you like to see in an ending, specifically? If you could tear up the old ending entirely or rework most of the "original footage" or drop things to the cutting room floor, or,Assume Direct Control of Casey Hudsons Harbinger style and make him write any ending you wanted...what would you have in it?

Honestly, this is so rediculously simple that I can't believe they screwed it up so bad. First and foremost, GET RID OF THE STARKID!! Removing that thing fixes 95% of the ending. Next, include a boss fight with Harbinger. Third, there needs to be the ability to have a true "Victory" ending, this is a game and as such there should be the ability to win. Now to address the narrative, all that retard logic that gets spewed fromthe Catalyst is gone and is replaced with a final battle between the Reapers and the Victory fleet. The Reapers remain a mystery so to exemplefy them as a monstrous antagonist. EMS finally gets shown as the forces that are gathered get their screen time and have impacts on what occurs in the battle. They even are helpful in the final battle with Harbinger. Then, the final ending is has a broad spectrum based upon the EMS and choices made. No need to insert some philosophical nonsense or add a plot point that was already resolved in the narrative a few missions back. Just final battle and resolution. SIMPLE.

If the developers were half as smart as they think they are... *sigh* If they had planned such an obvious and well thought ending from the start they would have enough budget to realize it. And if they discarded that idea at the last moment that is an organizational failure of the company which simply makes them incompetent.

I am playing ME3 again (third time, but never went beyond the Sanctuary mission) but I am "listening" the game for the first time, and only because EC DLC made the ending mildly tolerable (the original ending was so depressing that when I heard that in the forums I rushed thru the game. I did not listen the conversations or stop to appreciate ME3).

The game is great! If you truly listen the dialogs you see that they really worked hard to make this game and ME3 is full of great moments. It is such a shame that afer all that great teamwork and meticulous attention to details (except prologue animations) a company exec comes and forces a retarded ending at the last moment.

I really wonder how such a blunder can help sales or company reputation. You cut corners to decrease costs and increase sales. But this... Did this help sales? Why people who made this bad decision are still employed?

Maybe they say, "Lets fail 97 games out of 100 and succeed in only 3 games. No matter. Those 3 games will allow EA to profit, and screw the fans. We hate intelligent customers anyway". Yes this is the only logical explanation that could rationalize this mess.

That's the main thing I don't quite comprehend. The rest of the game was really great. How did it manage to take such a catastrophic turn in like the final 20 minutes? I've already written a better ending so WTF? I could pull that completely out of my ass but they couldn't!? Bioware has done such an amzing job so far it's almost incomprehensible that they could have F@#kup so badly. I guess that's mine and 95% of peoples main frustration with this whole thing is that 99% of the game is great and then instead of them bringing everything to a nice close at the end they just dive bomb it into the ground for no reason. Honestly, it's almost as if the whole development process was thrown out when the ending was created. I can't believe that the same team that created the rest of the ME 3 would sit through a storyboard meeting pertaining to the ending and say that it looks good.

[Doom of Haestorm]

*sigh*

You know, for any other game, I would just let it go. But this was Mass Effect. Shepard wasn't just any other character, he was OUR character. It wasn't just any old story, it was OUR story. Bioware had done so well at making us live in that universe. Then they ripped us right back out.

The fact that the most popular theory is that the whole ending was a lie only shows that Bioware has completely messed up. Sure, you want us to talk about the endings, but many don't even believe it happened!

I don't think I can play an ME game out of Commander Shepard's story arc. I don't think I could play a prequel either... damn 'artistic integrity'! What about the integrity of the story you just disregarded to death! Damn it!

[Iakus]

Doom of Haestorm wrote...

*sigh*

You know, for any other game, I would just let it go. But this was Mass Effect. Shepard wasn't just any other character, he was OUR character. It wasn't just any old story, it was OUR story. Bioware had done so well at making us live in that universe. Then they ripped us right back out.

The fact that the most popular theory is that the whole ending was a lie only shows that Bioware has completely messed up. Sure, you want us to talk about the endings, but many don't even believe it happened!

I don't think I can play an ME game out of Commander Shepard's story arc. I don't think I could play a prequel either... damn 'artistic integrity'! What about the integrity of the story you just disregarded to death! Damn it!

Bioware to "our" Shepards:  You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it

What the player wants or decides doesn't matter.  Bioware wanted a tragic end for SHepard, so that's what we got.

[sdinc009]

iakus wrote...

Doom of Haestorm wrote...

*sigh*

You know, for any other game, I would just let it go. But this was Mass Effect. Shepard wasn't just any other character, he was OUR character. It wasn't just any old story, it was OUR story. Bioware had done so well at making us live in that universe. Then they ripped us right back out.

The fact that the most popular theory is that the whole ending was a lie only shows that Bioware has completely messed up. Sure, you want us to talk about the endings, but many don't even believe it happened!

I don't think I can play an ME game out of Commander Shepard's story arc. I don't think I could play a prequel either... damn 'artistic integrity'! What about the integrity of the story you just disregarded to death! Damn it!

Bioware to "our" Shepards:  You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it

What the player wants or decides doesn't matter.  Bioware wanted a tragic end for SHepard, so that's what we got.

Except we didn't even get a tragic ending. Tragic endings can be good. They can be poignant, meaningful, and heartwrenchingly beautiful. This was just a broken story full of retard logic that makes every shout "WTF just happened!!".

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

I think it is humorous that the ME3 writers want to start single-player DLC with a story about the Reapers. The Reaper plotline is the worst plotline in the trilogy. First and foremost, it ends with the Star Child. The last-minute undeveloped Star Child with his silly contrived choices and bad temper.  Second, the Reaper plot is schizophrenic. Through the first two installments, they are evil machines enjoying the pain of their victims. "You are vermin." "This hurts you." etc. But in the end, they are just the creations of a silly AI. A manifestation of his "solution" to the "chaos." Third, of course, is that the "chaos" that the Star Child says he's avoiding is the battle between synthetics and organics. But your Shepard has been solving that problem for three games. 

So who cares about the Reaper storyline? Not me. It is a terrible storyline. Show me my Shepard alive at the end, or no ME3 DLC for this player.

Oh, and little comments that Leviathan will "affect" the ending won't do, unless it creates a path to winning the game with a surviving Shepard.

Modifié par PuppiesOfDeath2, 07 août 2012 - 03:40 .

[TGiNcRySiS]

PuppiesOfDeath2 wrote...


Oh, and little comments that Leviathan will "affect" the ending won't do, unless it creates a path to winning the game with a surviving Shepard.

YOU WILL NEVER GET THIS BECAUSE IT WILL TAKE AWAY FROM THE ARTISTIC INTEGRITY OF THE GAME.

They are fail and they know it and they don't care.  In fact I think they like the fact that so many fans are pissed off.  The fact that they even released EC is a testiment to them knowing they screwed up and don't give a crap.  Money made end of story and move on.  The fact the SWTOR is failing is just so awesome. 

Game developers and publishers need to be taught lessons. 

[Scottus4]

I haven't actually watched all of EC, but I saw the rejection ending on youtube.

Assuming Bioware is going forward with the franchise, rejection is non-canon anyways since Shepard has to succeed. Essentially, Bioware is rejecting the notion that the player can reject the choice. However, Bioware fails to acknowledge that if you were willing to reject the choice in the first place, you were willing to reject the consequences that Bioware arbitrarily decides to attempt to impose on you.

I honestly have no clue why Bioware even added the rejection option. It was basically just flipping off the fan base who wanted Bioware to fix the ending in the first place. Bioware didn't need to delay Leviathan for that... they could have just posted to the internet "Hey fans, **** you" and be done with it.

[TGiNcRySiS]

Scottus4 wrote...

I haven't actually watched all of EC, but I saw the rejection ending on youtube.

Assuming Bioware is going forward with the franchise, rejection is non-canon anyways since Shepard has to succeed. Essentially, Bioware is rejecting the notion that the player can reject the choice. However, Bioware fails to acknowledge that if you were willing to reject the choice in the first place, you were willing to reject the consequences that Bioware arbitrarily decides to attempt to impose on you.

I honestly have no clue why Bioware even added the rejection option. It was basically just flipping off the fan base who wanted Bioware to fix the ending in the first place. Bioware didn't need to delay Leviathan for that... they could have just posted to the internet "Hey fans, **** you" and be done with it.

+100000000000 on that last sentence.  Well put.

[ultimo21]

That extended cut felt like a bigger kick in the nuts. Still fun though. Wish shep could live to see the result of his/her accomplishments.

[Olympiclash]

My only real concern with the ending is the "God-Child" and, specifically, why it looks just like the kid at the beginning and in Shepard's visions/dreams. Has Bioware ever addressed this? If I'm supposed to believe it's just a big coincidence then...ugh...just...really?

[Iakus]

ultimo21 wrote...

That extended cut felt like a bigger kick in the nuts. Still fun though. Wish shep could live to see the result of his/her accomplishments.

Yeah.  Guess it's not considered artistic anymroe to show the hero's return.

[Scottus4]

I watched the other endings... I was glad to see two of my biggest disappointments with the ending remedied in EC. Still would have liked to see Starchild retconned out of existence and I honestly don't even know why rejection was included, but at least the ending is no longer holding me back from playing the SP.

Modifié par Scottus4, 08 août 2012 - 06:27 .

[3DandBeyond]

Ranger Jack Walker wrote...

BlueStorm83 wrote...

--- Fun exercise! Play the London mission again, get to the odd scene where Harby doesn't blow up the Normandy when they come down to save your squadmates... and refuse to pick a dialogue choice. Put the controller down and go get a Sammich. See how long Harbinger will politely stand there and allow the Normandy Road Crew to try and patch that pothole that the Mass Effect 3 Truck just lost a tire in.

How is that any different than any other conversation in any ME game (or any game with a conversation system) where you just stand around and don't reply and the person you're talking doesn't react in the least bit?

It's called Gameplay and Story segregation.

First off the idea that Harbinger would stop shooting and wait for Shep to kiss the friends goodbye and make babies and all is ridiculous to begin with, but then to have no "get your butt moving" timer even built in as Harby gets back from his coffee break is doubly ridiculous.  Consider the incredibly awful consequence of not being fast enough to get to the Collector's base in ME2.  It's just that some things are so out of place and rather laughable.

[3DandBeyond]

Olympiclash wrote...

My only real concern with the ending is the "God-Child" and, specifically, why it looks just like the kid at the beginning and in Shepard's visions/dreams. Has Bioware ever addressed this? If I'm supposed to believe it's just a big coincidence then...ugh...just...really?

Well I guess you're just supposed to get some idea that Shepard gave a real care about the kid in the beginning and see the star kid as relating to that.  Personally, I get the heavy handed meaning as we all do I'm sure-Shepard was soooooo tormented by the kid and all, the kid that made no sense, but then Shepard loses people that mattered and even shoots one of them and all Shepard could think about was the kid.  I see the star kid as a mind f***.