Bitterly dissapointed about many different things, but I shall keep it short. Many of you may dissagree with my opinions, but thats kewl. I love you all.
1. Refusal ending! Well.............. I would have liked to see a war at least rather than a nice pretty planet with Liara talking and a NEW Winter Song section!
2. Control Ending! Yeah....right..... because everyone knew that Shepherd integrated him/herself into the citadel and the reapers are good guys now? No matter how much the Reapers said, "Dudes..... were on your side now!" All those Civilizations would still be firing their guns at them and with the wordage from AI Sheperd in the end sequence she/he would have defended the reapers and started a war. In my opninion AI Shep sounded rather 'Control' freakish!
3. Destroy ending! Did the writers forget, once again, after so any fans said, "How can they 'Fix' the tech if they couldn't reproduce it in the first place, they mention this in the first game do the not? Mass Relays blow up, everyone stranded. Blah blah blah.....
4. Synthesis Ending! So every race are friends and they have all the knowledge they want and everything is happy and flowers! What about the part that people are kinda pissed off because they got their free will taken from them? Oh wait, guess that doesn't matter, it's just a game!
Ok, points made!
Won't be buying BioWare games on pre-order no more, not after this.
Oh wait... I have nother point!
5. I still think, although many think otherwise, Bittersweet SUCKS! Still want my house with Tali.
I iz sad!
I'm saving the Control Ending for my Renegade Shep, but in regards to your other points...
3) They're not stranded, at least not in the same way they were in the Original Cut. They would be confined to their own systems, as they jumped from Sol prior to the Crucible/Catalyst doing their thing. Also, the Mass Relays no longer blow up. Just the spinny innard falls apart. Presumably, that could be replaced. Maybe send out a keeper or two, then start firing them off into each system to fix them in turn.
4) Who said anything about losing free will? Their DNA becomes a synthetic/organic hybrid. I won't say my recollection is perfect, but I think that's something you are coloring it with. They have free will in my Shepard's universe!
Personally, I would wait until the DLC is released before coming to any conclusions. At this point it sure seems like Bioware is planning on using some DLC to figure things out. They said they have a bigger team and can spin DLC out faster, and I'm cautiously optimistic that there is some Post-Ending DLC that will give closure to all of this.
After all, Indoctrination Theory got several pieces of new supporting evidence in the Extended Cut. I'm willing to wait until all the single player DLC for ME3 comes out before judging the package as a whole. But that's just me.
I would like to have HOPE, like you do, but unfortunately, i'm all out of HOPE which they talk about in Mass Effect 3 so much to HOPE for a happy ending.
LOL hahahaha! Couldn't resist that.
Naa... really... I don't think BioWare have it in them to actually do anything good for this Franchise. They have broken their own gaming style by the endings not relating to what you have done ain all three games still and kinda wasted the story potential for prequels and sequels.
I'll always see a prequel as, "Why play it, the universe gets broken, " and any sequel as, "Why play it, it's not really Mass Effect anymore."
The Mass Effect series provided so much rich experiences in the story and the dialogue. The original game was never about how much you could shoot but how the story developed based off of your choices. You could dive into the experience as much as you wanted or as little. Both ME 1-2 are proof of that. If you did not care about someone or cared too much, ME1 introduce the challenge of choice, letting someone die in Ash/Kaidan or Shooting Rex. ME2 added a bit more of shooting and blowing stuff up, however they continued to embrace what made Mass Effect so successful, the ability to make your choices and game play matter and allow you to play how you saw fit. You could involve yourself in your ally’s stories or kill allies by not doing ally sub-missions that ultimately led to their deaths. Again your choices were the driving force behind the story.
The fact that ME3’s ending caused such an up roar should not anger or disappoint bioware writers/Devs etc. But give them prided that the first 2 ½ games provided was so rich that folks cared enough to be concerned when the history/tradition that was embraced in choice and consequences seemed to be abandoned in the final installment of the series and particularly in the last 10 minutes.
It has been argued time and time in the forums and will continue to be argued over. But one thing that cannot be argued is that the nature of choice was what brought the ME series to the blockbuster series that it is. The fact that they abandoned what engaged folks from the beginning is what is so frustrating in the ending of this series and even more frustrating is that an EC was added that did little to address this issue. .
The Mass Effect series provided so much rich experiences in the story and the dialogue. The original game was never about how much you could shoot but how the story developed based off of your choices. You could dive into the experience as much as you wanted or as little. Both ME 1-2 are proof of that. If you did not care about someone or cared too much, ME1 introduce the challenge of choice, letting someone die in Ash/Kaidan or Shooting Rex. ME2 added a bit more of shooting and blowing stuff up, however they continued to embrace what made Mass Effect so successful, the ability to make your choices and game play matter and allow you to play how you saw fit. You could involve yourself in your ally’s stories or kill allies by not doing ally sub-missions that ultimately led to their deaths. Again your choices were the driving force behind the story.
The fact that ME3’s ending caused such an up roar should not anger or disappoint bioware writers/Devs etc. But give them prided that the first 2 ½ games provided was so rich that folks cared enough to be concerned when the history/tradition that was embraced in choice and consequences seemed to be abandoned in the final installment of the series and particularly in the last 10 minutes.
It has been argued time and time in the forums and will continue to be argued over. But one thing that cannot be argued is that the nature of choice was what brought the ME series to the blockbuster series that it is. The fact that they abandoned what engaged folks from the beginning is what is so frustrating in the ending of this series and even more frustrating is that an EC was added that did little to address this issue. .
Agreed. Apart that I don't like ME2 'Boss' style of gameplay and the plot holes that came with it.
But totally with you on the EC. Also like to point out, I feel like the new ending, the rejection, felt more like BioWare were saying, "FU Fans, you don't like our endings, well, have this, Game Over Screen Ending!"
The Mass Effect series provided so much rich experiences in the story and the dialogue. The original game was never about how much you could shoot but how the story developed based off of your choices. You could dive into the experience as much as you wanted or as little. Both ME 1-2 are proof of that. If you did not care about someone or cared too much, ME1 introduce the challenge of choice, letting someone die in Ash/Kaidan or Shooting Rex. ME2 added a bit more of shooting and blowing stuff up, however they continued to embrace what made Mass Effect so successful, the ability to make your choices and game play matter and allow you to play how you saw fit. You could involve yourself in your ally’s stories or kill allies by not doing ally sub-missions that ultimately led to their deaths. Again your choices were the driving force behind the story.
The fact that ME3’s ending caused such an up roar should not anger or disappoint bioware writers/Devs etc. But give them prided that the first 2 ½ games provided was so rich that folks cared enough to be concerned when the history/tradition that was embraced in choice and consequences seemed to be abandoned in the final installment of the series and particularly in the last 10 minutes.
It has been argued time and time in the forums and will continue to be argued over. But one thing that cannot be argued is that the nature of choice was what brought the ME series to the blockbuster series that it is. The fact that they abandoned what engaged folks from the beginning is what is so frustrating in the ending of this series and even more frustrating is that an EC was added that did little to address this issue. .
The Mass Effect series provided so much rich experiences in the story and the dialogue. The original game was never about how much you could shoot but how the story developed based off of your choices. You could dive into the experience as much as you wanted or as little. Both ME 1-2 are proof of that. If you did not care about someone or cared too much, ME1 introduce the challenge of choice, letting someone die in Ash/Kaidan or Shooting Rex. ME2 added a bit more of shooting and blowing stuff up, however they continued to embrace what made Mass Effect so successful, the ability to make your choices and game play matter and allow you to play how you saw fit. You could involve yourself in your ally’s stories or kill allies by not doing ally sub-missions that ultimately led to their deaths. Again your choices were the driving force behind the story.
The fact that ME3’s ending caused such an up roar should not anger or disappoint bioware writers/Devs etc. But give them prided that the first 2 ½ games provided was so rich that folks cared enough to be concerned when the history/tradition that was embraced in choice and consequences seemed to be abandoned in the final installment of the series and particularly in the last 10 minutes.
It has been argued time and time in the forums and will continue to be argued over. But one thing that cannot be argued is that the nature of choice was what brought the ME series to the blockbuster series that it is. The fact that they abandoned what engaged folks from the beginning is what is so frustrating in the ending of this series and even more frustrating is that an EC was added that did little to address this issue. .
Agreed. Apart that I don't like ME2 'Boss' style of gameplay and the plot holes that came with it.
But totally with you on the EC. Also like to point out, I feel like the new ending, the rejection, felt more like BioWare were saying, "FU Fans, you don't like our endings, well, have this, Game Over Screen Ending!"
Pure laziness from BW ... That's so obvious that it really hurts. I thought I am playing ME - a choice driven epic space opera where nearly everything is possible if you're working on it - not a railroad shooter with ... well just 4 bad and inevitable endings...
The entire ending sequence can be viewed as a rather ham-handed attempt to shoe-horn in Ghost Boy and to try to force him to work as a plot device. Whoever wrote the ending was obviously completely enraptured by the idea of Ghost Boy, to the point where he basically warped the ending to try and justify Ghost Boy's presence. Too much time spent watching the recent BSG series is also evident in the "synthetics and organics always start fighting" element of Ghost Boy's comments (given that was the same idea behind the new series), and so that was tacked on even though there is NOTHING else in the series to support the idea.
Of the three endings, the "Destroy" ending obviously had to go in. Players expected a "Kill the Reapers" option. "Control" and "Synthesis" were added because the writer apparently thought that the ending needed to have choices (the idea that, as in the first two games, you didn't need to have choices during the climax and could rely on the choices made earlier in the game, apparently escaped the notice of the writer; but this is a stylistic decision, and in and of itself isn't cause for complaint), and couldn't come up with anything better that would work with Ghost Boy. Gotta keep Ghost Boy around, after all. The "kill EDI and the Geth" detail was more than likely added to Destroy not for any relevant plot reason, but because the writer wanted to "punish" players for picking the no-brainer option and ignoring the rest of his "vision". The ONLY reason why 99% of the players who don't pick Destroy do so is because of EDI and the Geth. Thus, we have a rather blatant "Screw You!" by the writer directed at the players. The "don't choose anything and fail" option from the original ending was most likely added as a joke by the writer. But when it turned out that players were actually taking that option intentionally (and also the rise of players who complained that they couldn't have Shepard adopt the same attitude toward Ghost Boy that the writer had adopted toward the players), the "Reject" ending for the Extended Cut was added.
LOL, this sounds plausible... the ending certainly feels like it. Especially when they decided: "Ok, so for it to make sense, we need to extract team mates now. Harby is just gonna wave and smile,... or will run out of laser beams to shoot, so Normandy should do just fine"
Just to point out the blindly obvious, in case no one else has in the last 90 odd pages, the Reject ending is exactly what we asked for...sort of.
You see back when there were 'discussions' about the original ending there were two often mentioned endings - One the Reapers win, the other being able to shoot the blasted Star Child. They put the two together and gave us the Reject option...so regardless of what you may or may not think about it, they did at least give us some of what was asked for.
The rest...I'm sort of 'Meah' about it. Not bad by any stretch, but maybe not the ending the game really needed either.
I DO think Bioware deserves some credit for even making the expanded ending. And we should give a nod towards all those who worked on it. As things go it IS clearly better than what we had to start with - the old ending gave me the urge to throw my screen at the nearest wall, the new ones don't.
That said the basic problem with the ending and the game as a whole is bad pacing and the lack of the 'Hell yeah!' factor that the first two games had. Short of totally replacing the ending from the attack in London the DLC was never going to be able to solve these problems.
So, thanks for the DLC and all the effort that went into it...but I'll be honest and say that it isn't enough to make me feel like going back and playing all the way through again - which isn't a problem that comes just from the ending - let alone make me consider buy any DLC.
Because of the work that went into the DLC, and because it isn't horrific, I'm willing to remove Bioware games off my personal Blacklist (Do not buy), and instead put them on the 'Grey list' (Consider purchase only after careful investigation of customer comments and reviews).
May I mention that the "Normandy evacuating the wounded"-scene is a pretty half-baked attempt at fixing one of the most glaring plot holes?
After watching how the EC handled this particular plot point, it only became more glaringly obvious that the writers had not thought these matters through the first time around. They "fixed" it, but so clumsily and so inefficiently that the result is hardly satisfying. How does the Normandy manage to arrive within seconds? Why would Shepard order an evacuation in the middle of a critical mission (especially considering that neither squad mate is critically wounded)?
The more you think about it, the less sense it makes.
Exactly. At first it seemed laughable but when you think of all that was wrong in that one scene, it's so badly done that it's just to fill their oversight.
Shepard is concerned about those 2 teammates, but then within like 5 seconds there are really torn up soldiers that Shepard just walks past. Shepard calls in the Normandy and Joker seems to be saying it can't be done, sort of by saying they are taking a lot of casualaties up there-what does that even meant? Are you taking a lot of damage or have you got a lot of dead and injured on the Normandy? Does that mean you are too busy now? No idea, because right away after saying it the Normandy is there with Joker say something like he's on his way. No he isn't he's there.
And then there's the fixit scene for Joker running away. Hackett telling everyone to meet at the rendevous point. Well, it was done well enough, but the thing is they told us our problem was we just needed clarity and didn't understand what they had said-how were we supposed to get that from what we saw? Were we supposed to read their minds?
Then, the jungle planet-another complete re-write of the scene. Were we supposed to guess that the Normandy was going to be fixed and fly off when that seemed like it was clearly and end scene. They never thought it through, again.
I still have so many issues that mostly start at London-the whole thing is kind of a mess with the phone calls to friends and the whole team is down there and Joker has to pick them up at some point.
Then, I still have issues with Shepard shooting Anderson-no reaction other than to continue telling TIM he's wrong.
You could write a dissertation on this thing and never completely cover what's wrong with it.
The evac scene was one of my problems as well. I got pretty excited at first when the "Beam"didn't hit me when I was expecting it to and then cutscene. But when it was over and we're back to running I was like, "Crap!" Plus Harbingers just watching this go down. Um big ass ship floating smack in the middle of the battlefied and Harby doesn't even take shot. They filled the major plot hole from the original and created several others. The only way I could strech my logic to accept that sequence is that the Normandy is the fastest ship in the fleet and is designed for stealth insertions. That's it, that's all I got. Moving on, oh right, and we're running, we're running, crap Harby beam!
Soooo..... why can't I reunit with my crew if I get the breath scene?... I mean.. much time has passed right? they have already fixed the normandy, why wouldn't they just come back to earth and Abra Kadabra! There's Shep felling nice and dandy full of smiles and kisses.
Why the breath scene if we are trying so hard to ignore it?
Soooo..... why can't I reunit with my crew if I get the breath scene?... I mean.. much time has passed right? they have already fixed the normandy, why wouldn't they just come back to earth and Abra Kadabra! There's Shep felling nice and dandy full of smiles and kisses.
Why the breath scene if we are trying so hard to ignore it?
you either have to imagine that you get to meet with your crew again, or Shepard bleeds to death in the rubble.
Harby was busy fighting off hammer team. Also with low EMS your squadmates get rosted.
And every LI-mancer will throw logic over board, when it comes to say a final good bye.
I think the EC made the ending better. not perfect, but much better. I would have loved a reunit with LI scene, and I'm still not too fond of the starchild, but at least Shepard could have a longer discussion with it.
TMPAL wrote... What I have taken from my disappointments: The Mass Effect series provided so much rich experiences in the story and the dialogue. The original game was never about how much you could shoot but how the story developed based off of your choices. You could dive into the experience as much as you wanted or as little. Both ME 1-2 are proof of that. If you did not care about someone or cared too much, ME1 introduce the challenge of choice, letting someone die in Ash/Kaidan or Shooting Rex. ME2 added a bit more of shooting and blowing stuff up, however they continued to embrace what made Mass Effect so successful, the ability to make your choices and game play matter and allow you to play how you saw fit. You could involve yourself in your ally’s stories or kill allies by not doing ally sub-missions that ultimately led to their deaths. Again your choices were the driving force behind the story. The fact that ME3’s ending caused such an up roar should not anger or disappoint bioware writers/Devs etc. But give them prided that the first 2 ½ games provided was so rich that folks cared enough to be concerned when the history/tradition that was embraced in choice and consequences seemed to be abandoned in the final installment of the series and particularly in the last 10 minutes. It has been argued time and time in the forums and will continue to be argued over. But one thing that cannot be argued is that the nature of choice was what brought the ME series to the blockbuster series that it is. The fact that they abandoned what engaged folks from the beginning is what is so frustrating in the ending of this series and even more frustrating is that an EC was added that did little to address this issue. .
Just to play devil's advocate...
Regarding the choices, and how they operate therein... I think it's fair to say that the Mass Effect series has introduced choice in a way that no game trilogy has EVER done before. It's not like twelve developers do this cross-game-consequences thing regularly and Bioware had a clear path to follow in. They broke ground with this series, which a LOT of people seem to forget in all of their anger, and I'm willing to give them something of a pass for not having choices and choices all the way through the ending.
From panels and interviews, I think it's fair to say Bioware had no idea what they were REALLY signing up for back when they made Mass Effect 1. So when they started working on ME2, I think it started to become clear to them just how much extra content needed to be done. As they are pioneers in this kind of thing, I'm willing to give them some slack for trying to reach the stars and coming up a few inches short. I'm not defending the writing of the ending as it now stands, but I do think it's somewhat unrealistic to expect the same level of choice/consequences that the earlier parts of the series provided. Even if they DID have the time to do that, the game would only be like 4 hrs long, as they'd run out of room due to having some 12,405 variant endings to place on the disc.
Case in point, they provided some facts during the PAX Panel in April: start talking about it 17 mins 30 seconds in...
ME1
136 Convos on Normandy
23 Designers
3500 Variable Plot Values
3k Rules for Animation Handling (Emotional States, Facial Expressions, etc)
ME2
172 Convos on Normandy
55 Designers
6400 Variable Plot Values
15k Rules for Animation Handling (Emotional States, Facial Expressions, etc)
ME3
300 Convos on Normandy (150 of which are ambient)
57 Designers
15000 Variable Plot Values
64k Rules for Animation Handling (Emotional States, Facial Expressions, etc)
Looking from 1 to 3, that's a pretty massive jump across the board. I sort of assumed that - for the most part - the arc of Mass Effect would most likely resemble a butterscotch candy wrapper. Everyone starts out in the same place, we make all our crazy choices in the middle, and then the end would wrap up in a pre-ordained way. A larger version of this: <==>
So I don't mind at all that the ending was boilerplated down to several limited choices. Yes, I think the handling of some things has been questionable. On several levels, they are in a cage of their own making. Just listening to the explanations of how they wrote the Genophage scene... "One potentially dead character is talking to another potentially dead character, who then has to interact with this other character who could also be dead, and then..." It really isn't as simple as "Write this scene." It's more like "Write this scene 150x with one or two minor variables to account for in each." I doubt many of us would get past the 25th iteration before our eyes started bleeding.
I admire how much they've really, genuinely tried to appease the community. It's unfortunate they've set an impossible goal to shoot for, but the hope that I am clinging to is that everything they mentioned on the social networks will be true once we've played ALL the DLC. The numerous endings, the closure, the sense of being able to say goodbye.... It can ONLY be properly handled through single player DLC, which gives them the time and resource bandwidth to do it up properly. Given how many tweets and statements they've made imploring people to keep their saves and how painful it is we can't see what they have planned, allow hopeful li'l ol' me to outline what I'm HOPING the case is:
- They KNEW they couldn't end the series properly for launch, especially after the story leak forced them to change things up on a super-crunched time table. So the extended cut provides the "What they intended out of the box" ending - which still extensively supports IT, I might add.
- A large amount of new content coming down the line will be SP post-ending content to fully wrap all the loose ends up. Think about it. They supported ME1 & 2 for about a year after launch, but were always moving on to the next game in the series. There IS no next game in the series anymore (at least not with Shep). It's not impossible that we could get up to 2 yrs of DLC to support this game, especially since there will probably not be another Mass Effect game on 360/PS3 on account of nextgen consoles. They also said with the new team supporting the game they can get DLC out faster, so I'm hopeful they made the smart choice and said "What if we just break this thing up and deliver closure over the course of several MEANINGFUL pieces of post-ending DLC." Based on their comments across the social networks, I think this is very possible. Perhaps the crew goes to find out what happened to Shepard, and we get more of an idea of what happened to the Citadel during the whole catalyst laser thing. Maybe IT is correct and some new content will show what really happened after Shep wakes up in London.
Mostly, I'm hoping that a fully developed DLC will give them the time and the resources to properly deal with the save state variables and provide an ONGOING conclusion. Hell, I'd love it if they release some content that doesn't even have combat in it. Just let us visit with different people, like Bailey on the Citadel, and get some closure / info on what happened to them. Sorry for the length - I don't do concise very well, unfortunately. I just think Bioware has earned enough goodwill over the years that I refuse to judge the conclusion of this series until they announce "We are no longer supporting the game with DLC." When that day comes, I will look back across ALL the DLC, and only then will I judge the series as a whole. Bioware, if you're reading this, PLEASE PLEASE PLEAAAAAAAAAASE make some awesome post-ending content. A few pieces here and there that show the state of the galaxy beyond a photo montage and more deeply explore our choices.
Hell, maybe even some flashbacks... do like the Lord of the Rings Extended Editions did, and insert some new flashback scenes to more properly flesh out some characters and give us a window into things we never saw before. Maybe one DLC can take place during the events of ME1 & we play as Saren going through the indoctrination process. Show him talking to Sovereign and slowly losing his mind, maybe he deals with the Catalyst on the Citadel after jumping from Ilos.... draw some nice little visual comparisons to the end of ME3 & finally prove if IT is in fact what's going on... some cool little pieces to help bridge the gap and reveal new insights. Everyone will love you for it... Or maybe we find out that everything post-Arrival was an Indoct attempt, and that Shepard can stop the Reapers from every showing up at all, but only if he has a 100% EMS score in ME3! Or maybe do some he-said she-said narrative, and you give us the entire ending as DLC from the PoV of another squadmate. So we don't learn of the indoct attempt through Shepard, but from the people around him. And if it's reflective of the choice you made at the end of the game, then it would be SUPER awesome.
So many choices... Mmmmmm... choiiiiiiiiiiiiiiices.
sdinc009 wrote...The evac scene was one of my problems as well. I got pretty excited at first when the "Beam"didn't hit me when I was expecting it to and then cutscene. But when it was over and we're back to running I was like, "Crap!" Plus Harbingers just watching this go down. Um big ass ship floating smack in the middle of the battlefied and Harby doesn't even take shot. They filled the major plot hole from the original and created several others. The only way I could strech my logic to accept that sequence is that the Normandy is the fastest ship in the fleet and is designed for stealth insertions. That's it, that's all I got. Moving on, oh right, and we're running, we're running, crap Harby beam!
I just startet laughing watching this scene. It was so absurd, so ridiculous.
instead of an awesome final boss fight we get red,blue,green I could ajust to that if they explained how the crucible works but they didn't. they have left the most important part out
I personally am not a big fan of boss fights. I am always relieved when I don't have to play a boss fight, will mod if it is possible so that I have "Godlyyy weapons and powers", making it as easy as possible, and always select casual or in this new case "Narrative" gameplay. I loved that Bioware actually made an option for us story gamers. I am personally more interested in Narrative/Story than I am in Action. I prefer to explore relationships when I game, collect fish, space hamsters, decorating my cabin. Most of the time I spend in games like Bioware's are exploring relationships and dialogue and listening to the different characters tell me their story, growing attached to them and writing it all out. I tolerate boss fights and fighting in games because That's just what games have always been about until Bioware. And I always appreciate a game where you fight tooth and nail to get to the end, and you don't have to fight anymore. I read that there are different kinds of gamers. In fact my Gaming Type is a combination of "Achiever+Seeker".
I LOVE the EC, and I did find the EC to be logical and satisifying for me. Regarding the "Refusal" option, you can still imagine that when lights went out your Shepard called in to your crew, and did what needed to be done according to how you saw it. After all it is YOUR story and you can write whatever ending you like. This new ending spells enough out so that we can do that, and enjoy it. It would be really sad if a few players idea of how it should be after the lights go out became put above other players with their own vision, so I say lets use our imagination here , do they really need to spoonfeed us every tiny detail? Does not knowing how the world rotates around the sun, make it "Space Magic?"
Personally I don't need an explanation to EVERY single little thing, and don't need to be spoon fed details about how the Crucible works just that it does. Just because we don't understand something does not make it "Magic".
Oh well, my standards and likes aren't the same as yours so any explanation I give won't satisfy people who have already decided it does not satisfy them!
A Sinister Lamb wrote...
I really feel like I'm the only person that was happy with the original ending. It was lacklustre, but I enjoyed it. The extended cut was what the ending should have been all along, so I'm grateful for it's addition. The use of concept art at the end was a bit meh, but in all honesty, I just don't think fans were ever going to be happy with what they were given. At least now we can all forget about the indoctrination theory, 'cause, let's be honest, it was ridiculous.
I feel like I am the only person to that enjoyed the original ending and just wanted CLOSURE. The EC gave me more than just closure, and just made me love it more...it's kinda weird that people who don't agree with the players who hate it are called Indoctrinated. To me Indoctrination is being a "Slave" unable to see any other point of view except for the one presented, it seems like if people convert from Liberals to Conservatives and vice versa they can easily be called "Indoctrinated" by the other side.
Fireclown2020 wrote... Also like to point out, I feel like the new ending, the rejection, felt more like BioWare were saying, "FU Fans, you don't like our endings, well, have this, Game Over Screen Ending!"
I'm of the opinion that the original Destroy ending (and the new one as well) is basically the same sort of "Screw You!" to fans. The Destroy ending in essence tells Ghost Boy that you believe he's full of it, and that organics and synthetics will get along just fine if given the chance. Best guess is that the Writer couldn't risk every last player rejecting his "organics and synthetics can't get along" hypothesis, so he arbitarily tacked on the whole "oh, btw, EDI and the Geth will all die if you destroy the Reapers" bit to force players who actually cared to go with one of the other options instead.
Soooo..... why can't I reunit with my crew if I get the breath scene?... I mean.. much time has passed right? they have already fixed the normandy, why wouldn't they just come back to earth and Abra Kadabra! There's Shep felling nice and dandy full of smiles and kisses.
Why the breath scene if we are trying so hard to ignore it?
IMO there is two arguments to the breathing scene still being there and not explained. Either they show Shep waking up either on the Citadel, thus completely destroying the IT (since it relies heavily on this scene) or in London which could validate it. Notice also that Shep waking up in the literal ending is quite difficult to explain since he was at ground zero when the pipe exploded with no armor, helmet or shields on.
The other endings don't allow such a reunion, so in "all fairness" they don't show it for the destroy explosion. Even if Shep survives.
The frustration at the reject ending reminds me of how I felt when I chose the equivalent ending in Deus Ex: Invisible War. (here it is )
When you choose to reject all the options in that, the Omar took over as they were the strongest remaining faction, and transformed humanity into drones.
I found it kind of annoying that I couldn't to the "screw you all!" ending like many people wished they could in ME:3, but within the context of the DE:IW universe, the outcome made sense. The outcome makes sense in the ME:3 reject option too.
I'm just glad that they changed the ending prompt. No more "Buy more DLC" at the end.
Overall, it was a good attempt to meet millions of different expectations.
On another note: "Control" Shepard's voice sounded alot like the Borg Collective...just sayin'...
Just to point out the blindly obvious, in case no one else has in the last 90 odd pages, the Reject ending is exactly what we asked for...sort of.
You see back when there were 'discussions' about the original ending there were two often mentioned endings - One the Reapers win, the other being able to shoot the blasted Star Child. They put the two together and gave us the Reject option...so regardless of what you may or may not think about it, they did at least give us some of what was asked for.
The rest...I'm sort of 'Meah' about it. Not bad by any stretch, but maybe not the ending the game really needed either.
I DO think Bioware deserves some credit for even making the expanded ending. And we should give a nod towards all those who worked on it. As things go it IS clearly better than what we had to start with - the old ending gave me the urge to throw my screen at the nearest wall, the new ones don't.
That said the basic problem with the ending and the game as a whole is bad pacing and the lack of the 'Hell yeah!' factor that the first two games had. Short of totally replacing the ending from the attack in London the DLC was never going to be able to solve these problems.
So, thanks for the DLC and all the effort that went into it...but I'll be honest and say that it isn't enough to make me feel like going back and playing all the way through again - which isn't a problem that comes just from the ending - let alone make me consider buy any DLC. Because of the work that went into the DLC, and because it isn't horrific, I'm willing to remove Bioware games off my personal Blacklist (Do not buy), and instead put them on the 'Grey list' (Consider purchase only after careful investigation of customer comments and reviews).
My thoughts exactly. I think purchase after review (not pre-order) applies to all games these days.
Harby was busy fighting off hammer team. Also with low EMS your squadmates get rosted.
watch the video... harbinger isn't firing a shot when the sr-2 shows up. no idea what hammer team he is fighting. Probably he is having a stare down but thats about it
Endings are still irritating as they elaborate on the lame ass control and synthesis ending which simply degrades the story. It pains me that this akward Bioware team said YES synthesis is the prime ending and is what we wanted this whole time.
Our best option to be somewhat satisfied with this game is the destroy ending which Bioware did not focus on. They clearly state in the destroy ending that well there will be more AI to take over the universe. To that I say 'no star child it doesn't work like that'. First off he is an AI who originally betrayed his own creator so why is Sheperd listening to this reaper's advise?
Why do the Geth have to die? The best plan in making this work is to let them live which is entirely possible as the quarians who rely on their suits and VIs to live are not effected but the geth are. Their god dang machines they have their own code! If the geth did not die why would they start another war? As the machines they are, they could calculate their odds to excel where the reapers had failed against this fight. Do we honestly think that the geth, whom never wanted war in the first place actually will turn into a new super ai like the reapers? They would take note the strength of unity the organics possess.
The Quarians started the war and don't blame them. They were afraid of what they had created and tried to eradicat the geth. As this did not work and the geth strived to survive they banished the quarians from their own home world. After this the quarians only wanted revenge but now we have to look at the situation. The Geth got their peace and the Quarians have their homeworld. They would not risk their home world in another war. Here comes in the whole idea of learning from your mistakes. The Geth are already helping the Quarians adapt to their old world I don't see what the problem is.
I truely don't understand why they are against this idea of peace. So to me it wasn't the plot holes that necessarily made it a bad ending. It was Bioware's idealist attitude that this is a brilliant ending because these akward writers want to add robot sex into the game. Just saying yo. Why do we need the reapers to fix this solution? Well those are my thoughts so feel free to like or hate as you may.
Retour en haut
