Aller au contenu

Photo

Stupid fake criticisms of the ending


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
514 réponses à ce sujet

#1
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages
....seriously....fans still do not get the final ending. Nevermind all the FALSE criticism of the ending....like...

Da Spaceboy comes out of nowhere.....

No he doesn't, you basically ignored the foreshadowing earlier in the story, like on Thessia, where Vendetta states that their maybe a master, with Shepard even asking "Who is the master?" Or the Reaper on Rannoch foreshadowing the motives of the Reapers before he dies. Or the fact that the plot was about FINDING THE CATALYST...but nope, this dense fake criticism continues.

Its a Deus Ex Machina.....

Nope, its not. In fact, its a subversion of the trope. The fact is that Shepard is the contrived solution to THE CATALYST'S PROBLEM. Yeah, its backwards, a classic use of the trope turned on its head, where the supposed God From the Machine needs the protagonist to help him. Nevermind the fact that Shepard acted on the Catalyst before you meet him, by connecting the Crucible to the Citadel, and by him saying "you have altered the variables".

The Crucible isn;t either, its implimented in the logic of the story, and introduced logically by the logical character. Nevermind, going back to ME1, how the Protheans data and actions helped the current cycle. The Crucible follows that same path.

But it clashes with the series themes...

Nope, you were not paying attention. The final EC ending impliments all the major themes. Ending things on your terms is NOT one of them. In fact, you rarely do this throughout the series in a major way. there was always sacrifice, or more to the story, or a hollow victory. For Destroy, whine all you want about having to sacrifice synthetics but plainly, it fits the theme of the series. Remember Garrus talking about the "ruthless calculus of war"...well there you go. Control....Shepard was never  truly against controlling the Reapers, he was against TIM's methods and barbarism, while viewing him correctly as indoctrinated. Hell, Shepard can even ask Hackett "What if TIM is right?". There is no full betrayal here and no betrayal of themes. Synthesis goes back to ME1 with Saren's views. Did you miss that?

Nevermind the ending deals with main themes of the series like using others as tools without regards to the consquences, sacrifice, and even overcoming all odds....What ar ethe odds of Shepard even talking with the Catalyst and giving it a new solution.

The motive of the Catalyst is stupid....

Or not. He explains that there is no other option, through his EXPERIENCE in dealing with the conflict. Nevermind the cycle, is NOT his ideal solution. And fans simply ignore Mass Effect 2 Overlord....don't. it fits right in with the Catalyst's problem.

But it clashes with the series lore and has plot holes....

Originally, yes, but now it doesn't. The Catalyst simply has the highest lore authority here, you are simply too biased or ignorant to recognize this. ME3 even shows that Prothean VI's can be wrong, like Vendetta was about the Catalyst. Nevermind Vigil was wrong about Reapers wiping all traces of their existance. Derelict Reaper anyone, Leviathan of Dis? Prothean VI's and even Reapers have limited knowledge...the Catalyst and Leviathan has far more knowledge and far more authority on the lore...deal with it. Its not contradiction, its overrule.

If you cannot get that the Catalyst created the conditions so that a Shepard could rise and "solve" his problem, you didn't get the ending...the final canonical ending.

So what was the REAL problems with the ending?

Lack of closure, lack of clarity, underdeveloped Catalyst dialogue and an underdeveloped Catalyst, and lack of ending variations and consquences....all fixed with the extended cut. Everything else is fake criticisms, or basically the fact that A) You don't like it or B) You don't get it.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean its flawed.

#2
Liamv2

Liamv2
  • Members
  • 19 041 messages
I am a pro ender but i don't think those are the reasons just wait

#3
Liamv2

Liamv2
  • Members
  • 19 041 messages
 Also

Image IPB

#4
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages

Liamv2 wrote...

I am a pro ender but i don't think those are the reasons just wait


These are the criticisms I most saw on all the message boards on the net.

#5
Liamv2

Liamv2
  • Members
  • 19 041 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

I am a pro ender but i don't think those are the reasons just wait


These are the criticisms I most saw on all the message boards on the net.


Really? i normally hear about the illusive man coming from nowhere

#6
David7204

David7204
  • Members
  • 15 187 messages
Pretty much, yeah. This is the BSN, after all.

But there are some legitimate and solid complaints.

#7
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages

Liamv2 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

I am a pro ender but i don't think those are the reasons just wait


These are the criticisms I most saw on all the message boards on the net.


Really? i normally hear about the illusive man coming from nowhere


But Vendetta told you he was there. Its all in the narrative..

#8
Liamv2

Liamv2
  • Members
  • 19 041 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

I am a pro ender but i don't think those are the reasons just wait


These are the criticisms I most saw on all the message boards on the net.


Really? i normally hear about the illusive man coming from nowhere


But Vendetta told you he was there. Its all in the narrative..


Really:huh: i better go check

#9
111987

111987
  • Members
  • 3 758 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Liamv2 wrote...

I am a pro ender but i don't think those are the reasons just wait


These are the criticisms I most saw on all the message boards on the net.


Really? i normally hear about the illusive man coming from nowhere


But Vendetta told you he was there. Its all in the narrative..


I think a lot of people's problem is that such a major plot point was foreshadowed so late in the game.

#10
Yesmar

Yesmar
  • Members
  • 217 messages
I thought we knew the motives of the Reapers in Mass effect 2.
Thessia was near the end of the game about ~3 missions before meeting the catalyst.
Yeah great vague foreshadowing.


The catalyst doesn't actually need Shepard to help him, he is content without his help.
Introduced Logically? It makes no sense all of it, we were merely fed "These people made it" without any explanation as to how the **** they even knew to incorporate it into the Citadel let alone the technology behind it.
It makes no sense.
Turtles made it and they're keeping it in place.


Overload has very little to do with the Catalysts motives.
The Synthetics that killed Organics had different motives than the synthetics after the Leviathans time.
The catalyst was built under a false pretense about Synthetics.
Leviathans don't even know why Synthetics killed Organics, they have very little knowledge.
Shepard could beat them in a debate.
The Catalyst can't even explain the Crucible, yeah lots of knowledge there.


Lack of closure of Shepard and his friends and people he helped.
Lack of closure for the galaxy, lack of closure for the Reapers.

Lack of choices having an impact on how things play out.
We only got 1 ending in with the game, only difference was the color.
EC didn't give enough closure to anything it just merely showed pictures of random s**t.
I mean are this pictures suppose make me feel satisfied after a 100 hours career across the 3 games? Well they didn't because they were poorly done.
Overall this game is just awful.

#11
Coreniro

Coreniro
  • Members
  • 180 messages
The lack of closure etc. were your problems, not mine. Actually, they're not problems at all. The ending was left open to people's imagination on purpose, so, it's just a matter of taste. I liked the pre-EC ending, lots of people didn't.
I agree with you about the rest. But there's no need to say it on the bsn, where the same 40 ****s love to throw **** at the game every hour of the day. What a nice sport!

#12
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages

Yesmar wrote...

I thought we knew the motives of the Reapers in Mass effect 2.
Thessia was near the end of the game about ~3 missions before meeting the catalyst.
Yeah great vague foreshadowing.


The catalyst doesn't actually need Shepard to help him, he is content without his help.
Introduced Logically? It makes no sense all of it, we were merely fed "These people made it" without any explanation as to how the **** they even knew to incorporate it into the Citadel let alone the technology behind it.
It makes no sense.
Turtles made it and they're keeping it in place.


Overload has very little to do with the Catalysts motives.
The Synthetics that killed Organics had different motives than the synthetics after the Leviathans time.
The catalyst was built under a false pretense about Synthetics.
Leviathans don't even know why Synthetics killed Organics, they have very little knowledge.
Shepard could beat them in a debate.
The Catalyst can't even explain the Crucible, yeah lots of knowledge there.


Lack of closure of Shepard and his friends and people he helped.
Lack of closure for the galaxy, lack of closure for the Reapers.

Lack of choices having an impact on how things play out.
We only got 1 ending in with the game, only difference was the color.
EC didn't give enough closure to anything it just merely showed pictures of random s**t.
I mean are this pictures suppose make me feel satisfied after a 100 hours career across the 3 games? Well they didn't because they were poorly done.
Overall this game is just awful.


Yet he was foreshdowed, thats a fact (and so you move the goalposts)...and ME2 only told you how the Reapers were built.

Yes, the Crucible was a wild card, but it was their hope...very similiar to the Conduit in ME1.....If the Crucible is guilty by your logic, so is the quest for the Conduit in ME1. And has it crossed your mind that the Crucible team was actually figuring out what it was and that the fact that its a power source was foreshadowed.

Once again, the cycle was NOT the Catalyst's ideal solution, synthesis is...and he needs Shepard to do that. He is proof that the organics are ready according to him. Oh and the Catalyst DOES expalin the Crucible...you under a rock?

Leviathans have little knowledge? More than the Protheans did. And they observed the galaxy throughout countless cycles, therefore more lore authority.

The rest of you posts is just make up fake criticisms once again...and full of bias.

#13
LanceSolous13

LanceSolous13
  • Members
  • 3 003 messages
...Or the fact that the Catalyst/Crucible plot line wasn't even needed.

The only reason I can come up with this existing is for it to be a visual symbol of the Galaxy coming together.

Which... We could have simply just shown the Galaxy coming together and winning conventionally instead of this super weapon that comes out of nowhere and isn't foreshadowed at all.

#14
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages

Coreniro wrote...

The lack of closure etc. were your problems, not mine. Actually, they're not problems at all. The ending was left open to people's imagination on purpose, so, it's just a matter of taste. I liked the pre-EC ending, lots of people didn't.
I agree with you about the rest. But there's no need to say it on the bsn, where the same 40 ****s love to throw **** at the game every hour of the day. What a nice sport!


One apsect I do like about the original ending was the unknown...it was a new beginning. However, they did promise multiple varying endings with closure.

However, the main problem was that the Catalyst was badly underdeveloped.

#15
CaptainCommander

CaptainCommander
  • Members
  • 304 messages


#16
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages

LanceSolous13 wrote...

...Or the fact that the Catalyst/Crucible plot line wasn't even needed.

The only reason I can come up with this existing is for it to be a visual symbol of the Galaxy coming together.

Which... We could have simply just shown the Galaxy coming together and winning conventionally instead of this super weapon that comes out of nowhere and isn't foreshadowed at all.


And then the Reapers become less powerful and less threatening.

Seriously, a conventional win would devalue the threat.

#17
Mad-Hamlet

Mad-Hamlet
  • Members
  • 1 613 messages
Image IPB

#18
Yesmar

Yesmar
  • Members
  • 217 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Yet he was foreshdowed, thats a fact (and so you move the goalposts)...and ME2 only told you how the Reapers were built.


I didn't move my goal posts, I always said it was poor foreshadowing, since this game came out.
I felt ME1 + ME2 gave me the sense of why they were built, we simply didn't know who built them.

Yes, the Crucible was a wild card, but it was their hope...very similiar to the Conduit in ME1.....If the Crucible is guilty by your logic, so is the quest for the Conduit in ME1. And has it crossed your mind that the Crucible team was actually figuring out what it was and that the fact that its a power source was foreshadowed.

Nope, the conduit is not some wild card.
It is very similar to technology we encounter throughout the entire game, the Crucible is not.
The existence of the crucible is illogical.

Once again, the cycle was NOT the Catalyst's ideal solution, synthesis is...and he needs Shepard to do that. He is proof that the organics are ready according to him. Oh and the Catalyst DOES expalin the Crucible...you under a rock?

He said some one made it and that we wouldn't know them.
If that vague ass line is your idea of an explanation then you need to get checked out.

Leviathans have little knowledge? More than the Protheans did. And they observed the galaxy throughout countless cycles, therefore more lore authority.

I take them with a grain of salt.

The rest of you posts is just make up fake criticisms once again...and full of bias.



And your post is a shoddy way to try and defend something objectively bad.
The problem is you can't.

But please continue to ignore answering my problem with the closure Bioware promised me for the trilogy.
Your ignorance is not surprising, you're nothing more than a fanboy.

#19
LanceSolous13

LanceSolous13
  • Members
  • 3 003 messages
The threat was already substancial enough.

A one-hit KO weapon devalues them. A long galaxy wide battle with everyone uniting together AS PER THE THEME OF THE SERIES does not.

We have an advantage over them; The Galaxy can be united against the Reapers (Vigil states this as the reason Sovrign didn't outright attack the Citadel; Sovrign would be slaughtered and the presence of the Reapers revealed) and the Reapers have lost thier Plan A; Take the Galaxy by suprise and shut down the Mass Relays and systematically (excuse the pun) kill them system by system.

The two could very well be on even ground for the battle if they know what they're doing.

#20
JPN17

JPN17
  • Members
  • 1 289 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

LanceSolous13 wrote...

...Or the fact that the Catalyst/Crucible plot line wasn't even needed.

The only reason I can come up with this existing is for it to be a visual symbol of the Galaxy coming together.

Which... We could have simply just shown the Galaxy coming together and winning conventionally instead of this super weapon that comes out of nowhere and isn't foreshadowed at all.


And then the Reapers become less powerful and less threatening.

Seriously, a conventional win would devalue the threat.


Maybe in your mind. In most people's minds it wouldn't devalue the reapers, but would instead put more value into the choices you made as Shepard and would give a much greater feeling of accomplishment knowing that you were able to do something through your actions (over the course of all 3 games) that no civilization in the history of the galaxy was able to acheive.

But yeah, let's not have that. An ending that is handed to you and is based on stupidity and contrivance is much better. The reapers were already devalued from their rampant stupidity and ignorance in ME3.

Modifié par JPN17, 24 novembre 2012 - 10:34 .


#21
Applepie_Svk

Applepie_Svk
  • Members
  • 5 469 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

Da Spaceboy comes out of nowhere.....


It was crap and not foreshadowing, by this logic could be the master of Reapers - Harbinger, TIM, Shepard, Bozo the Clown... otherwise there is no proof in what saying Vendetta and he said it himself that they believed, not that they have a proof.

People also believe that god exist and I am saying that give me a proof of his existence and I will change my mind.

txgoldrush wrote...
Its a Deus Ex Machina.....


Yes it is, he solves problem instantly.

txgoldrush wrote...
But it clashes with the series lore and has plot holes....


I remember that series was always about something like -beating the odds thru diversity- and not about -running alone to glowboy and do as he said-... and about plotholes ? There is even more than before with EC, and that I thought that couldn´t be worse than in vanilla endings...

txgoldrush wrote...[

The motive of the Catalyst is stupid....


Yes they are, he is full of fallacies and contradictions

txgoldrush wrote...

So what was the REAL problems with the ending?

Lot of contradictions, lazy scene, stupid reveal, lot of plotholes ... etc etc
Before it was crap and now It´s  retconed crap with sprinkles... When we are talking about sptinkles and retcons, yes EC is filled with retcons only to please and execute all holes which they left in story, yet they managed create even more holes, contradictions and questions.

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 24 novembre 2012 - 10:37 .


#22
Massa FX

Massa FX
  • Members
  • 1 930 messages
All valid points OP. I still need more/better? from a trilogy conclusion as epic as the IP.

Call me a whinner or whatever, it was a bad end.

And I adore all of Mass Effect. All of it. But its conclusion still to this day hits me hard. I wish it didn't... but the bad taste in my mouth during the last 10 minutes persists no matter what I do. You may think no matter what BW did to conclude the trilogy, whinners will whine. No. Not I.

I wanted to save as many as I could, survive, and have my victory dance/party. I wanted full and complete bliss. I wanted that victory to come with cost... I am OK loosing EDI and the Geth. But... I don't want to envision what comes next. No. I want that to be part of the game I purchased.

Can't really explain better because emotionally... even after all this time the ending gives me a downer.

#23
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages

Yesmar wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Yet he was foreshdowed, thats a fact (and so you move the goalposts)...and ME2 only told you how the Reapers were built.


I didn't move my goal posts, I always said it was poor foreshadowing, since this game came out.
I felt ME1 + ME2 gave me the sense of why they were built, we simply didn't know who built them.

Yes, the Crucible was a wild card, but it was their hope...very similiar to the Conduit in ME1.....If the Crucible is guilty by your logic, so is the quest for the Conduit in ME1. And has it crossed your mind that the Crucible team was actually figuring out what it was and that the fact that its a power source was foreshadowed.

Nope, the conduit is not some wild card.
It is very similar to technology we encounter throughout the entire game, the Crucible is not.
The existence of the crucible is illogical.

Once again, the cycle was NOT the Catalyst's ideal solution, synthesis is...and he needs Shepard to do that. He is proof that the organics are ready according to him. Oh and the Catalyst DOES expalin the Crucible...you under a rock?

He said some one made it and that we wouldn't know them.
If that vague ass line is your idea of an explanation then you need to get checked out.


Leviathans have little knowledge? More than the Protheans did. And they observed the galaxy throughout countless cycles, therefore more lore authority.

I take them with a grain of salt.


The rest of you posts is just make up fake criticisms once again...and full of bias.



And your post is a shoddy way to try and defend something objectively bad.
The problem is you can't.

But please continue to ignore answering my problem with the closure Bioware promised me for the trilogy.
Your ignorance is not surprising, you're nothing more than a fanboy.


And yet Shepard didn't know what the Conduit was, just like the Crucible. But he or she did not want Saren to have it. And yes the Crucible is logical as it interacts with the Citadel, using Reaper tech against them. It fits with the lore of the series. The idea of a past civ helping the current one is the same as it is in ME1.

And wrong....the Catalyst defines what the Crucible is, a power source, and what it does. You were not paying attention. Its all in the narrative. What he didn't know is that the organics were still trying to build it.

Its not objectively bad, you just don;t get it. You ignore clear facts, plain and simple.

#24
txgoldrush

txgoldrush
  • Members
  • 4 249 messages

Applepie_Svk wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Da Spaceboy comes out of nowhere.....


1. It was crap and not foreshadowing, by this logic could be the master of Reapers - Harbinger, TIM, Shepard, Bozo the Clown... otherwise there is no proof in what saying Vendetta and he said it himself that they believed, not that they have a proof.

People also believe that god exist and I am saying that give me a proof of his existence and I will change my mind.

txgoldrush wrote...
Its a Deus Ex Machina.....


2. Yes it is, he solves problem instantly.

txgoldrush wrote...
But it clashes with the series lore and has plot holes....


3. I remember that series was always about something like -beating the odds thru diversity- and not about -running alone to glowboy and do as he said-... and about plotholes ? There is even more than before with EC, and that I thought that couldn´t be worse than in vanilla endings...

txgoldrush wrote...[

The motive of the Catalyst is stupid....


4. Yes they are, he is full of fallacies and contradictions

txgoldrush wrote...

So what was the REAL problems with the ending?

Lot of contradictions, lazy scene, stupid reveal, lot of plotholes ... etc etc
Before it was crap and now It´s  retconed crap with sprinkles... When we are talking about sptinkles and retcons, yes EC is filled with retcons only to please and execute all holes which they left in story, yet they managed create even more holes, contradictions and questions.


1. Belief enough is foreshaodwing. He says that Reapers are servants of the pattern not its master. once again, its a lead up to the finale.

2. Wrong...Shepard does. The Catalyst explicitly states he can't act, only Shep can.

3. And you do beat the odds...what are the odds of the Catalyst rethinking his cycle?

4. The only contradicition is the irony that the writer intentionally put in, that the Catalyst itself doesn;t truly understand organics and that its part of the problem, an AI turning on organics...however, overlord shows that a rogue synthetic is trouble and they can be destructive. Nevermind that the cycle is NOT his ideal solution, once again and that the Catalyst was looking for a better solution.

You simply don;t get it.

#25
Yesmar

Yesmar
  • Members
  • 217 messages

txgoldrush wrote...

And yet Shepard didn't know what the Conduit was, just like the Crucible. But he or she did not want Saren to have it. And yes the Crucible is logical as it interacts with the Citadel, using Reaper tech against them. It fits with the lore of the series. The idea of a past civ helping the current one is the same as it is in ME1.

And wrong....the Catalyst defines what the Crucible is, a power source, and what it does. You were not paying attention. Its all in the narrative. What he didn't know is that the organics were still trying to build it.

Its not objectively bad, you just don;t get it. You ignore clear facts, plain and simple.


So because Shepard didn't know what it was, that makes it the same as the crucible.
Yeah sure.
The way the Crucible interacts with the Citadel doesn't make any sense, no one could possibly get the data/technology required to do it, especially organics that were being harvested during their cycles.
I don't recall anyone even saying the Crucible is reaper tech so it is odd you call it Reaper tech.

Point is it is not the same and it doesn't fit the lore.
Especially with the random crap about it you're making up to try and justify it.


"Wrong? The catalyst defines the crucible?"
I wasn't even talking about what it does so I couldn't possibly be wrong on something I was not even discussing.
He didn't explain why it does what it does and how it came to be.

I get it, it stinks and so does your bad defense of it.

Modifié par Yesmar, 24 novembre 2012 - 10:46 .