4048 réponses à ce sujet

[sonicchaos]

CuseGirl wrote...

Fnordamatic wrote...
Yeah I think some of the retconning was very awkward, and it seems that way because shoehorning elements into a story in order to fix errors/oversights after-the-fact will always appear that way.

The Normandy coming down and picking up your squadmates in particular I found tantamount to an admission of error (but due to Bioware's insistence on 'artistic integrity' I don't think they would ever admit that this was just a mistake originally). The fact that the Normandy is able to swoop down and hover around long enough to pick everyone up and have a chat, while a Reaper is right there, is an indicator of this forced/shoehorning effect. It seems implausible because it wasn't a part of the original flow of events, and yet they had to do something to fix the confusion.

Omg....I wrote a crude review the EC on another site, first thing I had to touch on was the Swooping Normandy. That's how I will refer to it until the end of time lollll. What's funny is ME-2's codex is VERY clear about the Swooping Normandy's landing capabilities (or lack thereof) and why we have the Space Roach Shuttle. So that scene is just as comical as Joker abandoning the fight and crash landing on the jungle planet. But they had to fix it somehow because one could argue the Joker/Crash scene is worse than the Starchild convo.

Proof that they don't actually pay atention. If they would have taken the time to read most of the logical and plot-hole filling feedbacks from the community, lots of things would have been different from the begining of the game. But that makes you think how come they don't pay atention to what they write in parallel. It's weird. So many feedbacks, so many fan fictions, so many theories, so much potential to look for in the world outside the box, they just choose to ignore all that and go with the artistic flow. One great example is Tali's face. That proves it all. They don't actually listen. We tell them where the flaw is and there one comes and tell us what the content is all about. We know what the content holds, Bioware, we're here to help you understand how we think about it and why we think like that, so you can make more better products in the future. Or you can just stick to the "Artistic Integrity". I guess that works too, as long as it works.

[Alkasyn]

Fnordamatic wrote...

Yeah I think some of the retconning was very awkward, and it seems that way because shoehorning elements into a story in order to fix errors/oversights after-the-fact will always appear that way.

The Normandy coming down and picking up your squadmates in particular I found tantamount to an admission of error (but due to Bioware's insistence on 'artistic integrity' I don't think they would ever admit that this was just a mistake originally). The fact that the Normandy is able to swoop down and hover around long enough to pick everyone up and have a chat, while a Reaper is right there, is an indicator of this forced/shoehorning effect. It seems implausible because it wasn't a part of the original flow of events, and yet they had to do something to fix the confusion.

My thughts exactly. Some of the things have been fixed by the Extended Cut, but it also introduced many other plotholes or logical fallacies, like the Normandy landing on Earth during the last push - if landing next to the beam to pick up 2 dudes was no problem, why didn't the Normandy drop off a squad of Krogan Berserkers who could enter the beam and mop up whatever awaited at the other side of the beam?

EDIT: Oh, and the synthesis ending is pretty creepy, even if it's considered to be the "best" ending. Everyone's glowing green and this gives them insight into all the knowledge of the world? Seems like I became the ultimate dictator, even worse than in the Control ending.

Modifié par Alkasyn, 27 juin 2012 - 11:20 .

[Fnordamatic]

CuseGirl wrote...

Fnordamatic wrote...
Yeah I think some of the retconning was very awkward, and it seems that way because shoehorning elements into a story in order to fix errors/oversights after-the-fact will always appear that way.

The Normandy coming down and picking up your squadmates in particular I found tantamount to an admission of error (but due to Bioware's insistence on 'artistic integrity' I don't think they would ever admit that this was just a mistake originally). The fact that the Normandy is able to swoop down and hover around long enough to pick everyone up and have a chat, while a Reaper is right there, is an indicator of this forced/shoehorning effect. It seems implausible because it wasn't a part of the original flow of events, and yet they had to do something to fix the confusion.

Omg....I wrote a crude review the EC on another site, first thing I had to touch on was the Swooping Normandy. That's how I will refer to it until the end of time lollll. What's funny is ME-2's codex is VERY clear about the Swooping Normandy's landing capabilities (or lack thereof) and why we have the Space Roach Shuttle. So that scene is just as comical as Joker abandoning the fight and crash landing on the jungle planet. But they had to fix it somehow because one could argue the Joker/Crash scene is worse than the Starchild convo.

Hey while we're on the subject... Maybe I missed something, but how did the rest of the crew get back on the Normany anyway? You see them putting up that plaque on the wall, on the green planet, and then take off... and they're all there, even though they were all spread out on the battlefield. So Joker must have zoomed around London picking everyone up in the middle of a gigantic warzone.

[babachewie]

DeadlyDodo wrote...

DashRunner92 wrote...

babachewie wrote...

DeadlyDodo wrote...

babachewie wrote...

DashRunner92 wrote...

babachewie wrote...

DeadlyDodo wrote...

babachewie wrote...
 Jesus I can't believe people still dont understand even in the orginal ending the relays didnt destroy the systems, because the Mass Effect fields were altered to do no harm when the Crucible fired into them. It clearly shows that when the shockwave hits Earth. but of course they had add scenes where the same happens to Thessia and the other planets for people like you who couldnt figure that out. Seems like you still didnt. 

This. Brakes. Lore.

You don't just go 'altering Mass Effect Fields' it's far too convenient and retarded, its like making the protagonist of a story stumble across a murder weapon in the middle of a crime-scene in the middle of the floor where none of the police or anywhere else have bothered to look, even though it was right infront of all of them the whole time.

Really? The writers of a something not real that they made up can't make a fake machine to alter it. Also your analogy doesn't tmake any sense. So better luck next time. 

You are aware that the laws of physics still apply to Mass Effect fields and the entire ME universe? They can't be altered. Science-Fiction, not Fantasy. 

the Laws of Physics also doesnt allow you to travel faster than light either but they do. So suspend your disbelief for awhile and you'll enjoy some things a little more 

There are many vaugely plausible theories about how we could potentially travel faster than light, one of the most interesting is actually not to travel faster than light but to raise the speed of light within a given area of space, this, according to Einstein's theories, is achieved through the E=mc^2 equation where E is energy, m is mass and c is the speed of light. If you increase the energy you increase the speed of light. How to pump energy into a pocket of space or a tunnel is a whole nother question. Point is there are many such ideas as to how we might do it, we just don't know enough yet. 

Also Mass Effect fields most likely operate through manipulation of 0 (zero) point energy (so called because its present even at 0 kelvin which would traditionally be assumed to mean there is no energy left) 0 point energy is thought by many to be linked to gravitic fields etc, i.e. perhaps it's interaction with matter is what causes the 'effects of mass' interestingly this possibility is hinted at by the fact that it is 'element zero' that allows manipulation of 'Mass Effect' fields.

I could go on... 

Dont bother. I wouldnt want you to keep wasting your time copying and pasting something you probably found on google. 

Which shows you clearly don't know what you're talking because instead of making a counter-argument, you tell him that he's copying and pasting. Which, by the way, even if he was, doesn't make any difference on the fact that he's still right.

I officially love you.

Yeah I'll just counter an argument that wasnt even fully understood by the person who used it because he copied and pasted to make himself seem smarter than what he really is. Also using words like "most likely" and "theory" means its not proven. Which is bacially the whole argument. You all think you know without a shadow of a doubt that the relays cant be altered and you try to use real science as basis for your reasoning. When in fact if you use real science you'd probably find a lot of things in Mass Effect that can't be done. Same with Star Wars, Star Trek, BSG. Hell even Back to the damn Future made up a Jigawatt so they travel in time. So get over it. Science "Fiction" isnt bounded by realty.It can be altered and changed to suit whatever need to the creator neeeds to tell a story.

[forthary]

Fnordamatic wrote...

Hey while we're on the subject... Maybe I missed something, but how did the rest of the crew get back on the Normany anyway? You see them putting up that plaque on the wall, on the green planet, and then take off... and they're all there, even though they were all spread out on the battlefield. So Joker must have zoomed around London picking everyone up in the middle of a gigantic warzone.

One flaw I noticed with the EC is things seemed to be out of cronological order.  The perception of time is greatly flawed.  How long did it take to fix the normandy?  How long was Shepard trapped on the citadel or earth?  When did they meet up at the memorial wall?  Some things do not make sense.

[element eater]

TullyAckland wrote...
  

• You may notice that in the “Shepard lives” ending, the love interest hesitates to place Shepard’s name on the wall, and instead looks up as though deep in thought. This is meant to suggest that the love interest is not ready to believe Shepard is dead, and the final scene reveals they are correct. As the Normandy lifts off, there is hope that the love interest and Shepard will again be together.

The problem is thats all u get hope, you said there will be no more content so we just have to hope they got back togethor and never get any confirmation? thats just depressing i realy just needed something even if it had just been a shepard vo when he woke up saying said LI's name or a slide after the credits, realy just anything would have done. Then i could say yes they got back togethor in the end and ME was a great experiance from start to finish. As it is im just stuck in limbo and as you said yourself its never going to be resolved for me. 

[Hrtz]

forthary wrote...

One flaw I noticed with the EC is things seemed to be out of cronological order.  The perception of time is greatly flawed.  How long did it take to fix the normandy?  How long was Shepard trapped on the citadel or earth?  When did they meet up at the memorial wall?  Some things do not make sense.

Don't ask for sense! We should be lucky we got even this after original disaster endings!
Long live EC! Long live Bioware! ...and hopefully they will never make this mistake again!

[DeadlyDodo]

babachewie wrote...
Yeah I'll just counter an argument that wasnt even fully understood by the person who used it because he copied and pasted to make himself seem smarter than what he really is. Also using words like "most likely" and "theory" means its not proven. Which is bacially the whole argument. You all think you know without a shadow of a doubt that the relays cant be altered and you try to use real science as basis for your reasoning. When in fact if you use real science you'd probably find a lot of things in Mass Effect that can't be done. Same with Star Wars, Star Trek, BSG. Hell even Back to the damn Future made up a Jigawatt so they travel in time. So get over it. Science "Fiction" isnt bounded by realty.It can be altered and changed to suit whatever need to the creator neeeds to tell a story.

Actually read the forum please, I already posted to explain where the knowledge was from, also the point is that physics does not say 'faster than light travel is impossible' it merely says 'with our current knowledge we cannot achieve faster than light travel'.

This is enough to counter your point, ergo you are wrong. 

To reiterate my knowledge comes from 2 years of a physics degree which, due to a change in life circumstances, I had to leave. 

Also stop being an idiot, if that is even possible. There are huge differences between Fiction, Science Fiction and Science Fantasy and then Fantasy.

Fiction is a story based in the real world, or one very similar to it, but in which the content is 'made up'

Science Fiction is a story based in the real world, or one very similar to it, but involving futuristic plausible technologies and perhaps set in an extrapolated version of our universe in the future or far future.

 Science Fantasy is a mix of Science fiction and outright fantasy and generally set in entirely different universes which have entirely different rules (but each still has to remain consistent with its own rules for it to make sense) but incorporating some extrapolations of modern technology etc to fulfill the 'Science' part.

Finally Fantasy is pure fantasy, like Lord of the Rings, these are universes where nothing HAS to match up to the real one, however, for them to make sense and be properly appreciated, unless they are complete weird-out books, they have to obey and follow their own rules. Lord of the Rings is a great example of this, it is a fantasy with clearly defined history, back-story, abilities and rules and they are, generally speaking, followed very well.

Please pause for a second, stop trying to argue with charisma alone, especially in the face of overwhelming logic and reason and just admit you might be wrong, it's easy and painless.

[monkspider]

I saw on Reddit that Michael Gamble has gone on record saying that the next cycle ends up using the crucible to win anyway if you choose the refusal ending. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

[coatsworth]

monkspider wrote...

I saw on Reddit that Michael Gamble has gone on record saying that the next cycle ends up using the crucible to win anyway if you choose the refusal ending. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

They do win in the next cycle but using the crucible is unknown but probable.

[Hrtz]

monkspider wrote...

I saw on Reddit that Michael Gamble has gone on record saying that the next cycle ends up using the crucible to win anyway if you choose the refusal ending. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

I believe so... this is the text between Stargazer and Child after you shot godchild:

Stargazer: They fought terrible war so we
wouldn't have to.

Child: And that's why we have peace?

Stargazer: Yes. Without everything they
accomplished, without information they passed down, we too would be threatened.

Modifié par Hrtz, 27 juin 2012 - 11:57 .

[FIN-Olmi]

Love the EC but there is one thing, that would have been good if it were done differently. Now you get a flashback of Shepards love interest instead of getting a picture of Liara everytime. It would have been good that if Tali was romanced, then the LI flashback upon using the crucible would have shown her demasked. Those not interested in that romance option and don't care about the subject would not care of the "loss". And all the more or less creepy tali fans would have got what they wanted.

ps. Besides. Hasn't bioware teased us enough with quarian faces. Tali's picture with sun/light blocking it partly and then the side picture of maskless quarians in the synthesis ending. If not altering the EC's LI flashback, then atleast some kind of alternate apparence pack with clear glass or something

Modifié par FIN-Olmi, 28 juin 2012 - 12:07 .

[Sidney]

monkspider wrote...

I saw on Reddit that Michael Gamble has gone on record saying that the next cycle ends up using the crucible to win anyway if you choose the refusal ending. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

That was the impression I got from the post credits scene now with an alien instead of buzz aldrin.

[Mikozilla]

So, just finished my first play through of the EC ending. I feel... slightly better. I guess. One of my main complaints about the ending was the holes in the plot and the lack of closure. I got my closure for the most part, but where they tried to fix the holes.. They in turn created more. I've already seen people bringing this up, so I won't ramble on about it too much. But it just shows how very flawed the original ending was, proving the point of those of us who did take issue with it. The fact that they had to explain things like how your squadmates got away is a perfect example, and like others stated, having the Normandy land and take them away was just silly. Necessary, but silly. Which is the problem with those fixes. The added scenes seem almost jumbled when mixed with the original ending. Like, Garrus (on Earth with me & also my LI) being seriously injured and taken away, but then totally healthy when he gets off the ship after it crash lands on the green planet.

In somes ways it opened up more questions too, whether or not they'll ever be answered or it is just up to the fans to contemplate, I don't know. Who did create this AI that controls the Reapers? Apparently, we don't know them and there isn't time to talk about it. This just opens up a whole new topic. Who knows, maybe Bioware will be adding DLC related to this.

Lastly, not a huge thing, but as I chose Destroy for my first re-play through (as it's my favorite option).. Bioware had to flash EDI's face and make me feel like an ****, but then I didn't even see her name on the memorial. Nor did I see Joker mourn her. If you are making this the extended ending that is supposed to cover all bases, little things like that would help.

Oh, and I will likely never choose the option, but after hearing all the fuss I watched the "Refusal" end.. And I can really see how people look at it as a personal response from Bioware. It may not be, but it was still rather poorly done, IMO.

Modifié par Mikozilla, 28 juin 2012 - 12:15 .

[atalair]

Ec was AMAZING.in my opinion its the end that the mass effect trilogy deserves.

high EMS destroy Ftw

[babachewie]

DeadlyDodo wrote...

babachewie wrote...
Yeah I'll just counter an argument that wasnt even fully understood by the person who used it because he copied and pasted to make himself seem smarter than what he really is. Also using words like "most likely" and "theory" means its not proven. Which is bacially the whole argument. You all think you know without a shadow of a doubt that the relays cant be altered and you try to use real science as basis for your reasoning. When in fact if you use real science you'd probably find a lot of things in Mass Effect that can't be done. Same with Star Wars, Star Trek, BSG. Hell even Back to the damn Future made up a Jigawatt so they travel in time. So get over it. Science "Fiction" isnt bounded by realty.It can be altered and changed to suit whatever need to the creator neeeds to tell a story.

Actually read the forum please, I already posted to explain where the knowledge was from, also the point is that physics does not say 'faster than light travel is impossible' it merely says 'with our current knowledge we cannot achieve faster than light travel'.

This is enough to counter your point, ergo you are wrong. 

To reiterate my knowledge comes from 2 years of a physics degree which, due to a change in life circumstances, I had to leave. 

Also stop being an idiot, if that is even possible. There are huge differences between Fiction, Science Fiction and Science Fantasy and then Fantasy.

Fiction is a story based in the real world, or one very similar to it, but in which the content is 'made up'

Science Fiction is a story based in the real world, or one very similar to it, but involving futuristic plausible technologies and perhaps set in an extrapolated version of our universe in the future or far future.

 Science Fantasy is a mix of Science fiction and outright fantasy and generally set in entirely different universes which have entirely different rules (but each still has to remain consistent with its own rules for it to make sense) but incorporating some extrapolations of modern technology etc to fulfill the 'Science' part.

Finally Fantasy is pure fantasy, like Lord of the Rings, these are universes where nothing HAS to match up to the real one, however, for them to make sense and be properly appreciated, unless they are complete weird-out books, they have to obey and follow their own rules. Lord of the Rings is a great example of this, it is a fantasy with clearly defined history, back-story, abilities and rules and they are, generally speaking, followed very well.

Please pause for a second, stop trying to argue with charisma alone, especially in the face of overwhelming logic and reason and just admit you might be wrong, it's easy and painless.

Really? You probably couldnt get your degree from the life circumstnace that you dont know what your talking about.  Probably got caught plagiarizing. Science fantasy science fiction. Who gives a crap? Its all made up for the most part. Again...jigawatt.  To say that the creator of a made up device, even if based on plausibilty, can't delve into the inplausible to tell a story is retarded.  Its a fictional universe. Mass Effect Fields can be altered according to the creators of that universe. To argue that point and tell them thery're wrong and know more about it when you didnt have anything do with its creation or direction is....just dumb, but what do I care. I enjoyed it. Alot of people did and more do now because of the EC. I guess you dont get to be apart of our special club 

Modifié par babachewie, 28 juin 2012 - 12:23 .

[Colintastic]

TullyAckland wrote...

KPickens wrote...

TullyAckland wrote...

• A memorial scene was added, partly to show a close bond between Shepard and the love interest. The scene is variable, and if Shepard has a love interest in a given playthrough, it will be that character who places Shepard’s name on the memorial wall.

So does this mean Miranda was supposed to put Shepard's name on the wall after continuing the romance with her from ME2?  Because she didn't...

[*]

Miranda is not on the Normandy, as you well know.

[*]
[*]
[*]But she could have been...  She was down on Earth, but for some unknown, unexplained reason (read: developer laziness) was elsewhere.  After her mission there is absolutely no reason why she shouldn't join the team as a squadie. In the apocolyptic battle for all of organic kind, there is NO way anyone is going to care that a former cerberus officer is onboard an alliance ship. 

[CuseGirl]

Mikozilla wrote...
So, just finished my first play through of the EC ending. I feel... slightly better. I guess. One of my main complaints about the ending was the holes in the plot and the lack of closure. I got my closure for the most part, but where they tried to fix the holes.. They in turn created more. I've already seen people bringing this up, so I won't ramble on about it too much. But it just shows how very flawed the original ending was, proving the point of those of us who did take issue with it. The fact that they had to explain things like how your squadmates got away is a perfect example, and like others stated, having the Normandy land and take them away was just silly. Necessary, but silly. Which is the problem with those fixes. The added scenes seem almost jumbled when mixed with the original ending. Like, Garrus (on Earth with me & also my LI) being seriously injured and taken away, but then totally healthy when he gets off the ship after it crash lands on the green planet.

In somes ways it opened up more questions too, whether or not they'll ever be answered or it is just up to the fans to contemplate, I don't know. Who did create this AI that controls the Reapers? Apparently, we don't know them and there isn't time to talk about it. This just opens up a whole new topic. Who knows, maybe Bioware will be adding DLC related to this.

Lastly, not a huge thing, but as I chose Destroy for my first re-play through (as it's my favorite option).. Bioware had to flash EDI's face and make me feel like an ****, but then I didn't even see her name on the memorial. Nor did I see Joker mourn her. If you are making this the extended ending that is supposed to cover all bases, little things like that would help.

Oh, and I will likely never choose the option, but after hearing all the fuss I watched the "Refusal" end.. And I can really see how people look at it as a personal response from Bioware. It may not be, but it was still rather poorly done, IMO.

You got EDI's face too after picking destroy? I could not understand that at all. And maybe you missed it, but EDI's name is shown on the Memorial wall if you pick destroy.

[Decklun]

I believe the EC was an improvement over Bioware's released ending; it was far more dramatic, gave far more emotional release, and fixed three of the glaring plot holes (Evac, Joker's Retreat, and Relay Destruction).

I believe the EC failed to live up to the consistent quality of the previous ME narrative, and was for me personally, disappointing.

I believe the claim to "artistic integrity" is a clear cop-out. The only artist who maintained his integrity in this situation was Drew Karpyshyn who left Bioware after his original artistic vision for the ending was leaked and then he was told to change it. That was the original ending, and while I don't think it was necessarily better, I believe this and the seeds of Bioware's experimenting with a possible "Indoctrination" conclusion (They had played around with it but didn't think they could make it work from a game design perspective) are the reason for the fragments scattered throughout the game showing glimpses of what might have been. Hints and allusions which have sprouted many of the fan-made theories and endings. This would also explain why the original ending felt incomplete and poorly established; because it was simply rushed, and unfortunately the leads on the ME team decided posturing "Artistic Integrity" was a better decision than simply saying "We needed more time."

I believe the EC directly reinforces this notion, and was made to shave a square peg so as to fit it into a round hole.

I believe the Mass Effect universe is still an amazing universe, with amazing characters, but it is marred by a weak ending, and giving writers time to construct a strong, consistent, coherent ending is paramount to a franchise being remembered well.

I believe Bioware missed an opportunity to make gaming history with a classic ending that could have gone down in the annals of gaming, but instead has compromised that opportunity and forged a moment of infamy that will forever be seen as a lesson from which other developers will learn from.

Again, I think the endings are far better in their current form, but I cannot shake the feeling that this journey has been tantamount to an enthralling, consuming, unforgettable five year journey with a lover only to have that person act completely inconsistently to everything they've previously established and then throw the entire relationship away.

I want to end with I look forward to future Mass Effect content, but to be completely honest this whole affair really hurt, Bioware. The literary inconsistencies, the illogical and irrational deus ex machina, the "James T. Kirk" option (Refusal, that is) being treated as the failure option (*Harbinger scolds Shepard. Camera pans out. Shepard is alone and embarrassed. Fade to black.*), the mishandling and mistreatment of Bioware's biggest and most passionate endorsers, and the failure to explore a groundbreaking and history-making opportunity all contribute to a disappointment, weariness, and a perplexed wonderment at how we could've ended up here after how far we'd come.

Modifié par Decklun, 28 juin 2012 - 12:37 .

[Salaya]

I've just completed the extended cut.

I'm extremely disappointed. Maybe is my fault, since I didn't read any posts about the DLC... but this "extended cut" is nothing more than a deeper sinking in the terrible mess that ME3 ending is.

The problem wasn't the lack of explanation. The problem was the ending as itself. I couldn't believe Starchild still exists as the essential part of the end! The same childish logic and arguments, but even worse, since we now have "deeper" kwnoledge of it.

So, the only alternative to the starchild is defeat? Really? I shoot him... and defeat? As I said, extremely disappointing.

The extra scenes are good, but also simple. The same for the epilogue. Personally, I didn't give importance to the LI, so I could have passed without that scene. The problem is, all the DLC seems to adrees this issue. Sigh.

After this, and the DA2 fiasco, I think I'm done with your games.

[El Mito]

babachewie wrote...

DeadlyDodo wrote...

babachewie wrote...
Yeah I'll just counter an argument that wasnt even fully understood by the person who used it because he copied and pasted to make himself seem smarter than what he really is. Also using words like "most likely" and "theory" means its not proven. Which is bacially the whole argument. You all think you know without a shadow of a doubt that the relays cant be altered and you try to use real science as basis for your reasoning. When in fact if you use real science you'd probably find a lot of things in Mass Effect that can't be done. Same with Star Wars, Star Trek, BSG. Hell even Back to the damn Future made up a Jigawatt so they travel in time. So get over it. Science "Fiction" isnt bounded by realty.It can be altered and changed to suit whatever need to the creator neeeds to tell a story.

Actually read the forum please, I already posted to explain where the knowledge was from, also the point is that physics does not say 'faster than light travel is impossible' it merely says 'with our current knowledge we cannot achieve faster than light travel'.

This is enough to counter your point, ergo you are wrong. 

To reiterate my knowledge comes from 2 years of a physics degree which, due to a change in life circumstances, I had to leave. 

Also stop being an idiot, if that is even possible. There are huge differences between Fiction, Science Fiction and Science Fantasy and then Fantasy.

Fiction is a story based in the real world, or one very similar to it, but in which the content is 'made up'

Science Fiction is a story based in the real world, or one very similar to it, but involving futuristic plausible technologies and perhaps set in an extrapolated version of our universe in the future or far future.

 Science Fantasy is a mix of Science fiction and outright fantasy and generally set in entirely different universes which have entirely different rules (but each still has to remain consistent with its own rules for it to make sense) but incorporating some extrapolations of modern technology etc to fulfill the 'Science' part.

Finally Fantasy is pure fantasy, like Lord of the Rings, these are universes where nothing HAS to match up to the real one, however, for them to make sense and be properly appreciated, unless they are complete weird-out books, they have to obey and follow their own rules. Lord of the Rings is a great example of this, it is a fantasy with clearly defined history, back-story, abilities and rules and they are, generally speaking, followed very well.

Please pause for a second, stop trying to argue with charisma alone, especially in the face of overwhelming logic and reason and just admit you might be wrong, it's easy and painless.

Really? You probably couldnt get your degree from the life circumstnace that you dont know what your talking about.  Probably got caught plagiarizing. Science fantasy science fiction. Who gives a crap? Its all made up for the most part. Again...jigawatt.  To say that the creator of a made up device, even if based on plausibilty, can't delve into the inplausible to tell a story is retarded.  Its a fictional universe. Mass Effect Fields can be altered according to the creators of that universe. To argue that point and tell them thery're wrong and know more about it when you didnt have anything do with its creation or direction is....just dumb, but what do I care. I enjoyed it. Alot of people did and more do now because of the EC. I guess you dont get to be apart of our special club 

There are no words to describe the stupidity of this post.

[Levi1988]

To all you fking dick head ****s at Bioware, I would just like to say "**** you! **** you very much!" for completely ****ing the ending of this franchise even worse than you did the first time around. Hope all you ****suckers burn in the lowest ****ing levels of hell. I'll never buy another one your goddamned games ever again, and all your previous games I own are going back to gamestop immediately. Again, **** YOU!

[Miekkas]

I don't suppose that a dev could confirm this but...could Shepard be technically considered alive in the Control Ending to the fact that the Star Child Catalyst notes Shepard's memories and thoughts will be transferred with his/her consciousness when they are made the Catalyst? Could Shepard in theory pull an EDI and have a body made for his/herself?

[Belisarius09]

I'm so happy that they fixed the ending.

My first time through, my biggest feelings were confusion, in the weeks that followed my confusion turned to anger and disappointment.

EC has answered my questions, its explained how my squadmates got to the normandy, how the galaxy isn't completely destroyed, how the normandy isnt forever stranded on some planet.

Also the ec has given us a bitter-sweet ending. We can reject the catalyst, reapers win but Liara's time capsule was buried giving hope for the future. Thats something I called for dozens of times on BSN over the past several months, I can't help but think one of the game devs saw one of my posts.

Anyways the EC has left me pleased, and content when i had previously been frustrated and disappointed.

Now i'm sad as its finally hitting home that its all really over. Goodbye Shepard, may you someday be reunited with Ashe and Garrus. fingers crossed. I can lay you to rest now.

Props to Bioware salvaging what I thought was beyond saving.

Thank You for this.