221 réponses à ce sujet

[Conniving_Eagle]

I did not think that the biggest problem that most people had with the ending was the lack of closure, because that is what the Extended Cut supplements. I am very surprised. There are a lot of areas that Mass Effect 3 could have improved upon, but let me just talk about the ending for now.

My Mass Effect History

First, some back story. Mass Effect was(technically it still is) my favorite video game series. I discovered the joy of the Mass Effect series during a very depressing time in my life, and it gave me hope. I had something to look forward to again when I wasn't busy. My life was still very stressful when I picked up the first two, but when I was escaping that life and immersing myslef into the universe of Mass Effect, I felt a happiness that I hadn't felt in a long time. I was so excited for Mass Effect 3, but then, something happened. About a week before its release, my 5-year-old Xbox finally broke. Not just that, but I was in need of a new hard drive as well. This created complications. I had saved just enough money to buy a Collector's, addition, but now I had to buy another Xbox (among some other more important things). I had to drop my preorder, and make enough money to buy a new Xbox for $300. Going through March was terrible, I was so tempted to find out as much about the game as possible, It was very difficult to refrain myself from spoiling anything. Then, the news about the ending came, I heard all the talk about how it almost ruins the whole series, a betrayal of Shepard's character, etc (it still does). I didn't want to believe it,

Finally, come mid-June, I bought a new Xbox along with a regular copy of Mass Effect 3. I played the game, it was amazing, until I got to those last ten minutes, those last ten f***ing minutes, where I watched the series I loved so much get destroyed. I cried a bit the night before, knowing that the incredible journey of my favorite franchise was coming to an end. That day, I cried myself to sleep, in disbelief of what just happened to the series that I revered so much. I understood Kaidan/Ashley's devastation in Mass Effect 2 when they found out Commander Shepard died, it was almost "like losing a limb," so to speak. And please don't ridicule me for that, I'm being very vulnerable right now, no one I know in real life understands how I feel about Mass Effect, I am hopeful that someone on these forums will.

My Problems with the Ending

I do not like the ending because it is tainted by nihilism. It is narratively and thematically inconsistent with the rest of the story. It goes against everything that my Shepard believed in and fought for throughout the trilogy. Not only that, but it made all of his/her choices pointless. Over a hundred hours of amazing gameplay, rendered obsolete by the last ten minutes. My original choice was Synthesis, because out of the three, it seemed the least evil. I still loathed it. Back then my options were:

Destroy: Destroy all technology in the galaxy, including the Mass Relays and myself. This would also destroy most life as collateral damage.

Control: Sacrafice your identity to take the role of the Catalyst and control the Reapers.

Synthesis: Impose all organic and synthetic life in the galaxy into a singular existence.

My biggest regret was not being able to tell my squadmates goodbye. I was very attached to my crew, I felt a connection with each one of them, because almost all of them had something about their past or their character that I could relate to; and friends are very dear to me, I only have a few, close ones in real life. But Shepard never got to see them again, Shepard never got to open that bottle of Brandy with Dr. Chakwas, he never got to retire some place tropical with Garrus, be reunited with his/her LI, etc, etc.

These endings were horrible and full of plotholes. After watching the credits, the last thing I get is a message from EA/Bioware asking me to buy their DLC. Yeah, you betrayed your fans, and now you want more money? F*** you.

Extended Cut

I beat Mass Effect 3 the day after Extended Cut released. I watched the videos on YouTube; they didn't help. Although clumsily (with retconning and the use of proverbial smoke and mirrors), Extended Cut did fix some problems and add clarity, but the main problem was still there: there were still plotholes, some old and some new, the catalyst still had an irrational and circular logic, and the fundamental problems remained.

The ending that was changed the most was the Destroy ending. I haven't played Mass Effect's story since completing the third, but if I could change my choice, I would most likely choose Destroy now. Now, only the Geth and EDI are sacraficed, the Mass Relays don't obliterate the rest of the galaxy and Shepard doesn't die. However, I would need to metagame. There ultimately is no 'best' choice.

Destroy: Why do I have to sacrafice the Geth and other AI? According to the Catalyst, organics and synthetics cannot peacefully coexist, but my Shepard's actions refute that. My Shepard created peace with the Quarians and the Geth, he taught the Geth to value and respect the perspective of organics, as he did with EDI. This seems like a cheap and arbitrary consequence tacked on so that the player will be more prone to considering the other choices, even though destroying the Reapers is what we set out to do in the first place.

Control: Control leaves a lot of interpretation to what can happen. Shepard sacrafices himself, he is the blue box for the fruition of an AI/VI that controls the Reapers. Shepard becomes the new abomination that is the Catalyst. He/she says that they will use the Reapers for good, but how long will that last? Who is to say that its perspective won't change and eventually it will use the Reapers for the same purpose, or an even worse one? So does this mean that the Illusive Man, the same person a lot of us have opposed throughout the entire series, was right all along? I believe that a common belief for Commander Shepard is that no one should be able to control that kind of power, it is too dangerous, it is playing with fire, it is better to get rid of it. That was my reason for destroying the Collector Base at the end of Mass Effect 2. "The needs of the many outweight the needs of the few." doesn't sound very comforting coming from a Reaper god-complex.

Synthesis: I now think that this is the most evil choice of all. Shepard uses the Crucible to fuse all organic and synthetic life into a singular existence. No one deserves to make this choice. One of the underlying themes of Mass Effect is diversity, the beauty and disversity of the galaxy and the universe. In all three titles, Shepard leads a team of people of different religions, races, backrounds, and cultures, to accomplish the impossible. When you find Navigator Pressly's datapad at the Normandy crash site, he wrote that he would be willing to fight and die for any of his crew, regardless of what world they were born on. He learned to appreciate that uniquity, and came to regret his pervious, bigoted and xenophobic beliefs. When Legion discusses the issue of the Geth heretics, it mentions that it cannot form an opinion whether to rewrite them or not because of the consequences. The Geth heretics left to pursue their own future, the other Geth allowed them to do so because they respected their decision. They did not agree with it, but they understood it. The heretics offered unique perspective, a perspective that benefits all Geth. If they are rewritten, that perspective is destroyed. That is what Synthesis does, it fuses organics and synthetics, eliminating their uniquity and perspective to form a 'perfect society.' In technicality, this choice turns everyone into the same thing as the Reapers.

All three of these conform to the Catalyst's logic of 'the created will always rebel and try to kill the created.' Destroy solves the problem by destroying all synthetics. Control solves the problem by having Shepard assume control of the Reapers, in turn keeping synthetics in line. Synthesis combines organics and synthetics, eliminating the conflict.

Refusal: I don't think I need to go into much detail for this one. Essentially, it is the game's articulation of Hudson and Walters' "You don't like the artsy ending that we made? Well fine! Screw you, then!" All those hours that you put into Mass Effect were for nothing, everybody dies, because you didn't want to play by glow-boy's/the writers' rules.

Refusal brings me to my next and final point.

What the ending should have been

Why does a series that is centered around consequences and player-choice have to end on one final, big decision? I think it is better if the end is determined by all your choices throughout the trilogy (maybe have it explained afterwards, Fallout style). Mass Effect 3 didn't need to have a final choice, and it didn't need to have a DEM that made everything you did pointless.

Here's how it should have played out:

The Catalyst should have simply been a necessary component of the Crucible, and the Crucible should not have been a magical space canon. Some time during the campaign, we should have learned that it was a device that would be used to weaken the Reapers, not destroy them at 'the push of the button' (I believe one of the developers specifically said that there wouldn't be a 'Reaper off switch'). According to the game, the Crucible was built by all the previous cycles, and each had added something to it. What if the Crucible sent a pulse through the galaxy that would disable the Reapers' kinetic barriers. Perhaps the previous cycles had contributed to it by adding Reaper code and tech salvaged from those that they managed to kill conventionally, so that the Crucible could detect any Reapers in the galaxy and hinder them. If this were the case, then the war assets we spent 30 hours collecting would actually mean something. EMS would matter! After using the Crucible, if your EMS is too low, the Reapers take losses, but they manage to wipe out the galaxy's forces, and the cycle continues. If your EMS is moderate, the Reapers take heavy casualties, the galaxy's forces are annihilated, but the Reapers are to weak to continue the cycle, this cycle still dies, but the next one is guaranteed victory. If your EMS is very high, let's say +6,000; the Reapers are completely destroyed and the galaxy's forces take heavy losses, albeit a pyrrhic victory, the dreadful cycle of genocide has finally been broken, forever.

But we want to see it happen in front of our eyes, we want to see our war assets fighting (an epic final battle with Harbinger would also be very nice). We want to see the fleet of council forces going toe to toe with the Reaper fleet, in an incredible Star warsesque clash. We want to see the entire Geth Armada come out of FTL, flanking the Reapers and obliterating several capital ships who were trying to take down the Destiny Ascenscion. We want to see Quarian commanders suicide crashing their burning ships into the Reapers, in a last desperate attempt to finish off the enemy, Keelah Se'lai!!! We want to see Turian fighters, ruthlessly rushing into the fray, dropping nuclear ordinance on capital ships.

Not just in space, we want to see this epic battle unfold on Earth. We want to see tens of thousands of Rachni soldiers swarming a Reaper Destroyer as it helplessly struggles to survive. We want to see Jack and her biotic squad shielding an anti-air outpost from an onslaught of Ravager artillery, so that the outpost can gun down several Harvesters and watch them give out one last guttural scream as they plunge to their deaths. We want to see Grunt charge at a Brute, shouting "I AM KROGAN!!!" as he single-handedly wrestles it to the ground and curb stomps its face into the concrete. We want to see an army of husks rushing a group of powerless Alliance marines who are being overwhelmed. As the marines close their eyes, preparing for the worst, the husks are gunned down by a platoon of Geth Primes. We want to see Liara fighting off multiple Marauders and get saved by a miracle sniper shot from Garrus. We want to see Vega and Ashley/Kaiden back to back, firing off at Cannibals from 360 degrees. We want to see Elcor Tanks relentlessly firing down upon Reapers and decimating them. We want to see Wrex and Wreav taking cover from on-going fire in a trench, then curtly nodding to eachother as they go over the top and lead a battalion of Krogan shocktroopers in a bloodrage battle charge.

I think you get the point. There's a lot we want to see. But we want to see an amazing cinematic battle take place before our eyes, one that will be talked about and lauded for years to come, all while playing to the glorious sound of www.youtube.com/watch.

Hell, it looks pretty good when done in this video - www.youtube.com/watch

We want pay off. We want to have the same feeling that we did when we watched that awe-inspiring launch trailer (). The one that made us say "This isn't just going to be an incredible game, this is going to be an incredible experience!"

Conclusion

In the end, you can only polish a piece of **** so much, it will still be a piece of ****. That is exactly what Extended Cut did, it added clarity with a few slides and a 30-line monologue from three voice actors (I know EC added more than that but that's the gist of it). A Mass Effect fan on YouTube made a better ending in a day than what Bioware did in over three months, simply by taking out the conversation with the Catalyst and the Crucible's space magic. If I had to rate Extended Cut, I would give it a 4/10, or a D+. Is Mass Effect a D+ game? No, not by a long shot, looking at the other 99% of the trilogy is indicative of the contrary. Bioware could have made a better ending in their sleep. CASEY AND MAC could have written a better ending if they weren't so caught up in their pseudo-intellectual philosophical bull**** and pursuing some far-fetched artistic vision for a game with so much potential.

Some of you may argue that without these endings, there wouldn't be enough sacrafice. I disagree. Look around you when you're at the end of the game. Remember all those burning ships? What happened to the other half of Hammer group? What about the hundreds of millions of lives that the Reapers took in our cycle alone? Even with the 'conventional' ending that I suggested, at the end of this war, the galaxy is going to be a much emptier place.

What do you think?

What is your opinion? Do you agree with me? Or do you think I am just some self-entitled, whiney Retaker? Do you think there's still a change that Bioware might change the ending? Although I will defend my position, I appreciate all feedback, both positive and negative. This thread took me over 3 hours to write, and I rarely try to express a point with such passion in my writing.

Thanks for reading and responding!

Modifié par Conniving_Eagle, 11 septembre 2012 - 07:31 .

[Oni Changas]

You're not alone, OP. You almost echoed my sentiment on the matter after I experienced the EC. It's beyond sad when you think about what could have been. BioWare presented these lush, epic looking trailers for the game, insinuating that they'd pull all stops, go in hard and go big. I've said so much on this matter that I don't even care for ME3 anymore. It's soulless and The Sh**storm has taken alll the fun and wonder of this series. I still have the first two but with no conclusion to the trilogy I feel there is a giant void...

[chemiclord]

Here's the problem with the argument that Geth/Quarian peace means the catalyst is wrong.

The statements are not ones inherently in conflict. They do not contradict each other.

Shepard demonstrates "Peace is possible." The Catalyst says "War is inevitable." Both can be correct, because the statements actually are NOT in conflict. One does not naturally preclude the other.

Picture a light switch. Person A says, "The switch is flipped to ON." Person B says, "Eventually, the switch will be flipped to OFF." Both people are correct, because they actually are not making two contradictory claims.

Current peace between Geth and Quarians does not, in and of itself, prove the Catalyst's claim incorrect.

Anyway... that's the only thing that really stood out to me as logically inconsistent, OP. Good work otherwise.

Modifié par chemiclord, 07 juillet 2012 - 04:18 .

[essarr71]

chemiclord wrote...

Here's the problem with the argument that Geth/Quarian peace means the catalyst is wrong.

The statements are not ones inherently in conflict. They do not contradict each other.

Shepard demonstrates "Peace is possible." The Catalyst says "War is inevitable." Both can be correct, because the statements actually are NOT in conflict. One does not naturally preclude the other.

Picture a light switch. Person A says, "The switch is flipped to ON." Person B says, "Eventually, the switch will be flipped to OFF." Both people are correct, because they actually are not making two contradictory claims.

Current peace between Geth and Quarians does not, in and of itself, prove the Catalyst's claim incorrect.

Anyway... that's the only thing that really stood out to me as logically inconsistent, OP. Good work otherwise.

All good points.  What I found amusing, as I anticipated the opposite, is that in the ECs further explination of the starbrat, he reveals that his sample size for coming to it's conclusion was incredibly tiny seeing how large a scale he's applying the results to.  And while he does hint at attempting alternatives, I still fail to see how - like Shepard in the Control ending - he couldn't act as a peacekeeper rather than a Reaper.  Tho I imagine allowing peaceful races to eventually surpass Reaper strength would eventually be an issue.

[Conniving_Eagle]

chemiclord wrote...

Here's the problem with the argument that Geth/Quarian peace means the catalyst is wrong.

The statements are not ones inherently in conflict. They do not contradict each other.

Shepard demonstrates "Peace is possible." The Catalyst says "War is inevitable." Both can be correct, because the statements actually are NOT in conflict. One does not naturally preclude the other.

Picture a light switch. Person A says, "The switch is flipped to ON." Person B says, "Eventually, the switch will be flipped to OFF." Both people are correct, because they actually are not making two contradictory claims.

Current peace between Geth and Quarians does not, in and of itself, prove the Catalyst's claim incorrect.

Anyway... that's the only thing that really stood out to me as logically inconsistent, OP. Good work otherwise.

You're right about that, but I still don't think it was necessary, more so if you compare it to control. What if someone's Shepard was 'evil' and they wanted to control the Reapers after all? I don't see any immediate consequences that come with that decision, as opposed to someone who just wants to destroy the Reapers, they have to sacrafice a whole race to be able to do so.

What's more confusing is why Control is considered Paragon and Destroy is considered Renegade.

[Silent Rage]

Don't the endings just make you want to take back Omega so you can see a slide of Aria sitting down somewhere?

[kyban]

Don't worry Eagle, I share your same feelings on the characters of Mass Effect. I won't make fun, instead i will sympathize, and apologize for the inevitability that someone will be a jerk.

[CrutchCricket]

Nah I agree its still crap. But insofar as I don't care anymore and control personally satisfies me I will speak on those points....

... by pointing you to my sig. The Control Explained link has my arguments for identity and why Shepard going crazy is silly.

[Tyeme Downs]

Did you really miss the point of the whole series? It's about morals (paragon/renegade) and choices. There is no "happy" ending for Shepard. Shepard must, in the end, make a moral decision as it was throughout.

Red/renegade - sacrifice another (EDI, Geth) to achieve victory
Blue/paragon - sacrifice self to achieve victory
Green/blend - sacrifice self, choose for another to achieve stability/victory
Reject - failure to sacrifice resulting in defeat

Many stories do not have happy, perfect endings and are still great stories. Hamlet, Romeo and Juliette, Oedipus are examples. They are classics with "bad" endings. Think about it.

[kyban]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...


Here's how it should have played out:

The Catalyst should have simply been a necessary component of the Crucible, and the Crucible should not have been a magical space canon, it should have been a device that would be used to weaken the Reapers, not destroy them at 'the push of the button' (I believe one of the developers specifically said that there wouldn't be a 'Reaper off switch'). According to the game, the Crucible was built by all the previous cycles, and each had added something to it. What if the Crucible was a device that sent a pulse through the galaxy that would disable the Reapers' kinetic barriers. Perhaps the previous cycles had contributed to it by adding Reaper code and tech salvaged from those that they managed to kill conventionally, so that the Crucible would be able to send a pulse throughout the galaxy strong enough to detect the Reapers and hinder them. If this were the case, then the war assets we spent 30 hours collecting would actually mean something. EMS would actually matter. After using the Crucible, if your EMS is too low, the Reapers take losses, but they manage to wipe out the galaxy's forces, and the cycle continues. If your EMS is moderate, the Reapers take heavy casualties, the galaxy's forces are annihilated, but the Reapers are to weak to continue the cycle, they flee the milky for a very long time, giving the galaxy time to rebuild. If your EMS is very high, let's say +6,000; the Reapers are completely destroyed and the galaxy's forces take heavy losses, but the dreadful cycle of genocide has finally been broken, forever.

But we want to seet it happen in front of our eyes, we want to see our war assets fighting (an epic final battle with Harbinger would also be very nice). We want to see the fleet of council forces going toe to toe with the Reaper fleet, in an incredible Star warsesque clash. We want to see the entire Geth Armada come out of FTL, flanking the Reapers and obliterating several capital ships trying their to take down the Destiny Ascenscion, and saving it. We want to see Quarian commanders suicide crashing their burning ships into the Reapers, in a last desperate attempt to finish off the enemy, Keelah Se'lai!!! We want to see Turian fighters, ruthlessly rushing into the fray, dropping nuclear ordinance on capital ships.

Not just in space, we want to see this epic battle unfold on Earth. We want to see tens of thousands of Rachni soldiers swarming a Reaper Destroyer as it helplessly struggles to survive. We want to see Jack and her biotic squad shielding an anti-air outpost from an onslaught of Ravager artillery, so that the outpost can gun down several Harvesters and watch them give out one last guttural scream as they plunge to their deaths. We want to see Grunt charge at a Brute, shouting "I AM KROGAN!!!" as he single-handedly wrestles it to the ground and curb stomps its face into the concrete. We want to see an army of husks rushing a group of powerless Alliance marines who are being overwhelmed. As the marines close their eyes, preparing for the worst, the husks are gunned down by a platoon of Geth Primes. We want to see Liara fighting off multiple Marauders and get saved by a miracle sniper shot from Garrus. We want to see Vega and Ashley/Kaiden back to back, firing off at Cannibals from 360 degrees. We want to see Elcor Tanks relentlessly firing down upon Reapers and decimating them. We want to see Wrex and Wreav taking cover from on-going fire in a trench, then curtly nodding to eachother as they go over the top and lead a battalion of Krogan shocktroopers in a bloodrage battle charge.

I think you get the point. There's a lot we want to see. But we want to see an amazing cinematic battle take place before our eyes, one that will be talked about and lauded for years to come, all while playing to the glorious sound of www.youtube.com/watch.

Hell, it looks pretty good when done in this video - www.youtube.com/watch

We want pay off. We want to have the same feeling that we did when we watched that awe-inspiring launch trailer (). The one that made us say "This isn't just going to be an incredible game, this is going to be an incredible experience!"

Conclusion

In the end, you can only polish a piece of **** so much, it will still be a piece of ****. That is exactly what Extended Cut did, it added clarity with a few slides and a 30-line monologue from three voice actors (I know EC added more than that but that's the gist of it). A Mass Effect fan on YouTube made a better ending in a day than what Bioware did in over three months, simply by taking out the conversation with the Catalyst and the Crucible's space magic. If I had to rate Extended Cut, I would give it a 4/10, or a D+. Is Mass Effect a D+ game? No, not by a long shot, looking at the other 99% of the trilogy is indicative of the contrary. Bioware could have made a better ending in their sleep. CASEY AND MAC could have written a better ending if they weren't pursuing some far-fetched artistic vision for a game with so much potential.



Thanks for reading and responding!

Just finished reading your whole post (wanted to write down a thought)


I agree with you on every point, and the part I bolded is what exactly should have happened. The priority Earth mission should have been much bigger, more emotional, and more bad ass.

I give ME3 with the EC a 6/10. it would have been a perfect 10, if not for those last few minutes you talk about...
To this day I can't understand... How ME2's ending was so masterfully done, every decision, every squadmate, mattered. You decisions mattered. It was so intense, and you could have lost, it could have failed. But you take out what you put into it, and ME3 you did Not  take out what was put into it. Not by an inch, not by a mile, not by a parsec.

Thanks for sharing OP. Some of us here do understand where you're coming from.

[foilpainter]

I agree OP, that playing this trilogy was a great stress relief when you are going through hard times and its been a great journey and I was excited to reach the epic conclusion, got more excited as I reached the Citadel and was thinking this will be the most epic ending ever but I was sadly disappointed! The EC explains some stuff and I get to say a final goodbye to my LI but still not the epic ending I was hoping for.

[kyban]

Tyeme Downs wrote...

Did you really miss the point of the whole series? It's about morals (paragon/renegade) and choices. There is no "happy" ending for Shepard. Shepard must, in the end, make a moral decision as it was throughout.

Red/renegade - sacrifice another (EDI, Geth) to achieve victory
Blue/paragon - sacrifice self to achieve victory
Green/blend - sacrifice self, choose for another to achieve stability/victory
Reject - failure to sacrifice resulting in defeat

Many stories do not have happy, perfect endings and are still great stories. Hamlet, Romeo and Juliette, Oedipus are examples. They are classics with "bad" endings. Think about it.

Did you miss the point of the OP? It isn't whether or not Shepard lives or dies. Sure, the game is about making choice; the players choice. But there were lots of events that the diehard fans wanted to see. Everything the OP listed should have happened. The ending was flat out rushed, it sped you along to the points they wanted you to see.
In a game with over a hours upon hours of dialogue, it's not just about choice, it's also about the characters and the setting. It really feels like the endings turn on everything the previous two games established.

ME1 ending: Incredible build up, somewhat cliche, but overall satisfactory and triumphant. Previous choices had some impact, mostly paragon/renegade determine ending events.
ME2 ending: Choice mattered. Previous quests, upgrades, decisions, all made an impact that changed the end. You could lose it all, or win, triumphant again.
ME3 ending: your EMS score only changed a very few amount of things. Besides paragon/renegade scores, what changes the outcome of the end? The build up was intense, but hits a brick wall. You are exposed to New Ideas of high philosophical debate. Btw, you have 5 minutes to decide. Ends with questions.

Whatever happened to Vigil's idea: "In the end, what does it matter? You survival depends on destroying them, not understanding them." - an ending doesn't have to be complicated and profound to be good...

Whatever happened to old Shepard: "I won't let fear compromise who i am." and "We'll do it without sacrificing the soul of our species." - forcing sythesis sounds like sacrificing who we are to me, it also sounds like what the reapers wanted all along "ascension" and "genetic destiny." Yeah, no thanks.


I will agree with you on your last point. Good stories don't need happy endings. The protagonist doesn't have to live either (look at Gladiator, or Seven Samurai). But the core concept of the game should have remained in tact.

I think Walters and Hudson got tunnel vision near the end, they wanted everyone to see their profound and philosophical ending. No, an ending should be an ending. Not a question.

Modifié par kyban, 07 juillet 2012 - 06:05 .

[Conniving_Eagle]

Tyeme Downs wrote...

Did you really miss the point of the whole series? It's about morals (paragon/renegade) and choices. There is no "happy" ending for Shepard. Shepard must, in the end, make a moral decision as it was throughout.

Red/renegade - sacrifice another (EDI, Geth) to achieve victory
Blue/paragon - sacrifice self to achieve victory
Green/blend - sacrifice self, choose for another to achieve stability/victory
Reject - failure to sacrifice resulting in defeat

Many stories do not have happy, perfect endings and are still great stories. Hamlet, Romeo and Juliette, Oedipus are examples. They are classics with "bad" endings. Think about it.

If the whole series is about morals and choices that doesn't mean the whole series is about sacrafice. One of the main themes of ME was Commander Shepard completing the impossible.

Stopping Sovereign, Saren, and the Geth in ME1 - thought to be impossible.

Passing through the Omega 4 Relay and destroying the Collectors - thought to be impossible.

Passing through the Omega 4 Relay, destroying the Collecters, and comeing out unscathed - thought to be doubly impossible.

Stop a war by shouting - improbable.

Assembling the largest fighting force the galaxy has ever seen to destroy its greatest threat - thought to be impossible.

Do you really believe that Mass Effect 3's ending was a fitting one?

[CELL55]

Preach it, OP! If ME3 had just ended after Anderson's death, and the Crucible had just worked, it would have been my most favorite game ever. But nooooo, they had to work hard and add additional fecal material in order to destroy the whole gorram series! Fail of this magnitude took effort, and damn if they were going to let that effort go to waste with an Extended Cut!

[Conniving_Eagle]

kyban wrote...
Just finished reading your whole post (wanted to write down a thought)


I agree with you on every point, and the part I bolded is what exactly should have happened. The priority Earth mission should have been much bigger, more emotional, and more bad ass.

I give ME3 with the EC a 6/10. it would have been a perfect 10, if not for those last few minutes you talk about...
To this day I can't understand... How ME2's ending was so masterfully done, every decision, every squadmate, mattered. You decisions mattered. It was so intense, and you could have lost, it could have failed. But you take out what you put into it, and ME3 you did Not  take out what was put into it. Not by an inch, not by a mile, not by a parsec.

Thanks for sharing OP. Some of us here do understand where you're coming from.

Tuchanka and Rannoch were one of the best parts of the game. They should have treated every major planet that way: several missions cumulating a few hours of gameplay and finishing up amazingly.

They should have done this for Palaven, Thessia, and Sur'Kesh. We didn't even get a boss fight on Earth, we had to kill Marauder Shields, who was actually trying to save us. What having Shepard destroy a few capital ships, or an epic boss battle with Harbinger (something that was expected as much as destroying Cerberus)?

[MrFob]

I am rather torn concerning the EC. I thought it was a hell of a gesture from BW to make a free extended cut and I thank them for the effort. However, the content is the worst case scenario I was afraid of.
The original cut was horrid because we were forced to jump into a hole which I was convinced would have spikes at the bottom. For me, it was not in question if the catalyst tried to fool us, it was a certainty, supported by facts. It was the only way to make any sense of the endings but we had no choice but to go along with it. So I vehemently argued for a refusal option. Well I got it and had BW ticked to their oh so important artistic integrity, I might even have been contempts. However, they chose to change the whole context of the endings by removing the ambiguity. I never thought clarity and closure would work against them in any scenario but they managed it. Now, after the EC, the endings contain so many logical and narrative fallacies that I cannot accept them in any kind of way. And by forcing the original three choices into the the happily-ever-afters we have now, they invalidated the refusal choice as well. Now nothing makes sense any more (not even to mentions that it would fit to the rest of the series).
It's not that I wanted a happy ending or that I reject the fact that we have a tough choice and loose something whatever we do. I actually support the concept but it has to be integrated in the story in way such that it is not forced on the protagonist, such that it makes sense within the context of what we have seen before and such that it is logically plausible. Unfortunately ME3 is not satisfactory in any of these points.
Yes, now Shepard wins a bright and happy future for the galaxy (whatever s/he does as long as it's not refuse) but this future doesn't really emerge from Shepard but from a hand waving action of a writer in the form of the catalyst. There is no sense of accomplishment in this, just compliance.

Modifié par MrFob, 07 juillet 2012 - 06:38 .

[marcustheMezz]

 I know how you feel, I've been replaying the first game this week and 3 months later still am just in shock over the whole thing, I keep thinking things like "maybe if I stress the reapers' existance enough everyone will listen and prepare well enough", but I know nothing will change, I know that no matter what, it will still end in the worst possible way, and it's that feeling of futility that really crushed me.
As for your ideas I agree completely, but I'm just not sure it's worth the energy when Mac n' Casey have seemingly convinced themselves what they wrote was pure brilliance.

[Binary_Helix 1]

Agreed.

ME3's legacy will be it's squandered potential.

[kyban]

MrFob wrote...

I am rather torn concerning the EC. I thought it was a hell of a gesture from BW to make a free extended cut and I thank them for the effort. However, the content is the worst case scenario I was afraid of.
The original cut was horrid because we were forced to jump into a hole which I was convinced would have spikes at the bottom. For me, it was not in question if the catalyst tried to fool us, it was a certainty, supported by facts. It was the only way to make any sense of the endings but we had no choice but to go along with it. So I vehemently argued for a refusal option. Well I got it and had BW ticked to their oh so important artistic integrity, I might even have been contempts. However, they chose to change the whole context of the endings by removing the ambiguity. I never thought clarity and closure would work against them in any scenario but they managed it. Now, after the EC, the endings contain so many logical and narrative fallacies that I cannot accept them in any kind of way. And by forcing the original three choices into the the happily-ever-afters we have now, they invalidated the refusal choice as well. Now nothing makes sense any more (not even to mentions that it would fit to the rest of the series).
It's not that I wanted a happy ending or that I reject the fact that we have a tough choice and loose something whatever we do. I actually support the concept but it has to be integrated in the story in way such that it is not forced on the protagonist, such that it makes sense within the context of what we have seen before and such that it is logically plausible. Unfortunately ME3 is not satisfactory in any of these points.
Yes, now Shepard wins a bright and happy future for the galaxy (whatever s/he does as long as it's not refuse) but this future doesn't really emerge from Shepard but from a hand waving action of a writer in the form of the catalyst. There is no sense of accomplishment in this, just compliance.

I agree that it was pretty awesome of BioWare to give a free DLC for the end.

However, the ending felt rushed and forced. It didn't really fit the setting in my opinion. I don't need a happy ending either, but people keep saying that, and honestly the Synthesis ending was Too happy. It was all too perfect and felt weird.

[Tyeme Downs]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Tyeme Downs wrote...

Did you really miss the point of the whole series? It's about morals (paragon/renegade) and choices. There is no "happy" ending for Shepard. Shepard must, in the end, make a moral decision as it was throughout.

Red/renegade - sacrifice another (EDI, Geth) to achieve victory
Blue/paragon - sacrifice self to achieve victory
Green/blend - sacrifice self, choose for another to achieve stability/victory
Reject - failure to sacrifice resulting in defeat

Many stories do not have happy, perfect endings and are still great stories. Hamlet, Romeo and Juliette, Oedipus are examples. They are classics with "bad" endings. Think about it.

If the whole series is about morals and choices that doesn't mean the whole series is about sacrafice. One of the main themes of ME was Commander Shepard completing the impossible.

Stopping Sovereign, Saren, and the Geth in ME1 - thought to be impossible.

Passing through the Omega 4 Relay and destroying the Collectors - thought to be impossible.

Passing through the Omega 4 Relay, destroying the Collecters, and comeing out unscathed - thought to be doubly impossible.

Stop a war by shouting - improbable.

Assembling the largest fighting force the galaxy has ever seen to destroy its greatest threat - thought to be impossible.

Do you really believe that Mass Effect 3's ending was a fitting one?

Great, lets have a conversation.  I hope my previous post atleast cleared up why the colors are aligned with their respective choices for you.

No doubt, Shepard had victories against the Reapers.  In ME1 and 2, Shepard was dealing with a single Reaper trying to be crafty in each case.  In ME3, Shepard is dealing with Reapers in force.  It's a different situation.  Against massed Reapers using brute force, we simpely can not win a convential war.  Thus, the Crucible.

Against Cerberus, Shepard had that glorious fight in Cerberus HQ.  Except, Cerberus is a conventional enemy.  The Reapers are not.  We can not expect the same kind of fight against Reapers that we had against Cerberus, or the Collectors, or Saren.

The fight your asking for came against Reaper forces before reaching the Citadel.  The Citadel, Catalyst, and Crucible are as much the prologue as they are the final decision.  Just reaching that point was defying the impossible.  After all, Shepard is the first organic to reach the Catalyst.

I think the choices we are given actually fit the story.  This is not a happy story after all.  We lose atleast one crew member in ME1.  We have the potential to lose more in ME2.  We see people being liquified.  We understand the horror of what the Reapers did to the Protheans.

In ME3, we are at war for our very existance against an enemy that is far beyond us in scale, longetivity, and technology.  Sad stories abound in the background.  Jokers' sister is killed by the Asari in the hospital.  The refugee girl waiting for her parents in the refugee camp.  The boy who lost his mother in Tali's loyalty mission and his father on Rannoch.  Samura and her daughters.  Ashley and her brother-in-law.

I think the endings choices were fitting.  Moral choices requiring sacrifice.  Remember Shepards N7 conversation with James Vega?  Shepard didn't get the choices we perhaps wanted or that we feel Shepards life deserved, but we have a final choice.

Should all of Shepards previous choices affect the outcome?  Well, if you only got to play the game once, or read it as a story, you'd assume those choices got you to this point.  On the flipside, this is the final act for each of your Shepards.  You, the player, should try to make the choice each of your Shepards would make.  It should be based not on your preferance, but the characters as played.  If their was a destroy the reapers only choice...where would the moral dilema be?

I will admit being dismayed a bit when I first did an ending.  I had to think about it...alot.  I had to look at it not only from the characters point of view, but the writers as well.  The DLC helped.

Could the DLC have been better?  Yes.  You wanted to see the war.  The Catalyst should have shown Shepard the war before the choice was made.  Outside the Crucible, Reapers destroying the great fleet as it tried to protect the Crucible.  Ships crews being sucked into space.  Miranda watching a Reaper fighter destroy her wingman.  Earth...Grunt and Wrex falling back as their units are being destroyed.  Jack, bloody and crying with one of her dead students in her arms.  Palavin and Thessia.....reaper forces collecting the dead for processing.

Shepard, head bowed, tears and anguish.  Shepard must choose or reject.

The Catalyst is insane..to answer that question.  The green choice is one the insane Catalyst created.  It wiped out it's creators, perverting it's mission with the creation of the Reapers.  Synthesis is it's solution to the possiblity that organics could one day defeat the reapers.

Control and destruction were the Catalysts' creators solution.  That's why they are built in stations, not part of the power stream like Synthesis.  A station to reassert control of the Catalyst, and one to destroy it (failsafe).  The AI they built and lost control of.  The AI that built the reapers that destroyed them. 

All is not explicitly stated.  We, the player are left to try to fill in the blanks.  Like any good story, we must use our imagination.  We must figure what the writer was trying to tell us.  People still discuss Oedipus, The Iliad, and Hamlet.

[yukon fire]

Its tough to care about the endings when I feel so disconnected because of the over abundance of auto dialogue keeps the narrative so restrictive. ME was special because it was a different game every time, and it makes me physically ill to see that aspect of the game has been gutted to make room for poor writing.

[Applepie_Svk]

Tyeme Downs wrote...

Red - sacrifice another (EDI, Geth) to achieve victory and free galaxy from chaiins of EVIL
Blue - sacrifice self to achieve victory and become new prison guard
Green - sacrifice self, choose for another to achieve stability/victory and sacrifice natural cause of life - evolution/ elimiínate differences
Reject - failure to sacrifice resulting in defeat and refuse Catalyst´s failing logic

 fix´ed

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 07 juillet 2012 - 08:54 .

[dorktainian]

it was like watching you closest friend screwing up and being powerless to help.

[SpamBot2000]

OP, I totally understand and sympathize. It's so damn GRRRR that I can't even go back and play the previous games without thinking of Star-Jar sitting there on Citadel, waiting. It was a torch job, for whatever reason. Even with arguments about an author's right to his work (which in this case apply only partially, since it is pretty obvious that the whole of the authorship didn't contribute to the end), it still is a staggering act of ego over many of the funders of the work. Why would I be part of commissioning them to do any future work if this is what they are going to do in the end?

[Brovikk Rasputin]

I don't agree with you, OP. I really liked the EC, and the closure it added.