514 réponses à ce sujet

[Peranor]

 

Les be honest here. if the ending was so riddled with facts there wouldn't be

[Dr_Extrem]

Tomwew wrote...

can someone post a list of every problem, plot hole, out of character action and theme ignoring/ changing in the last part of me3 to see if the op, who apparently understands the ending and i'm simply too dumb to get it, can answer them all?

i'll give my top 5 reasons i think the ending sucks harder than gay superman.
1. the catalyst says no organic has ever been to his digs on the bottom of the citadel. then how could anyone have designed the crucible to interface with it.

2. the catalyst admits it's solution doesn't work. why does it continue to reap?

3. why can't i argue against the (racist......robocist?) idea that syntetics will always rebel?

4. the catalyst tries to force the reapers into being 'good' guys by implying that he's not killing but 'ascending' people...... while taking the form of a young child he murdered as the boy attempted to flee. why can't i point this out.

5. the entire section with the catalyst feels hopeless and though there's no choice, as if i'm a player in the catalyst's game.
this feeling is strongest in th ec where, in one of the only dialogue choices where shep gets his backbone...er...back, he tells the catalyst he 'doesn't believe him' to which the catalyst replies, with the blunt abruptness of an annoyed parent talking to an overly inquisitive child, 'your belief is not required.'
no question there that line just leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. i guess being space jesus in inconsequntial when talking to space god (deus) from the machine (ex machina)

these are only five, i could go on.....for a long time but i feel as though there are more qualified types out there to list what's wrong with this franken-ending.

like mr. btoungue
extended cut

no way man .. i have a job .. that list would be longer than a roll of tp.

[Tomwew]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Tomwew wrote...

can someone post a list of every problem, plot hole, out of character action and theme ignoring/ changing in the last part of me3 to see if the op, who apparently understands the ending and i'm simply too dumb to get it, can answer them all?

i'll give my top 5 reasons i think the ending sucks harder than gay superman.
1. the catalyst says no organic has ever been to his digs on the bottom of the citadel. then how could anyone have designed the crucible to interface with it.

2. the catalyst admits it's solution doesn't work. why does it continue to reap?

3. why can't i argue against the (racist......robocist?) idea that syntetics will always rebel?

4. the catalyst tries to force the reapers into being 'good' guys by implying that he's not killing but 'ascending' people...... while taking the form of a young child he murdered as the boy attempted to flee. why can't i point this out.

5. the entire section with the catalyst feels hopeless and though there's no choice, as if i'm a player in the catalyst's game.
this feeling is strongest in th ec where, in one of the only dialogue choices where shep gets his backbone...er...back, he tells the catalyst he 'doesn't believe him' to which the catalyst replies, with the blunt abruptness of an annoyed parent talking to an overly inquisitive child, 'your belief is not required.'
no question there that line just leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. i guess being space jesus in inconsequntial when talking to space god (deus) from the machine (ex machina)

these are only five, i could go on.....for a long time but i feel as though there are more qualified types out there to list what's wrong with this franken-ending.

like mr. btoungue
extended cut

no way man .. i have a job .. that list would be longer than a roll of tp.

ha i know i actually planned on starting with 'what happened to the shuttle we were in right before the beam run?' and going straight to 'you finished the game i'm buzz aldrin buy dlc f*** you' but i'm in work tomorrow and rsi ain't worth it

[txgoldrush]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
Wrong on so many counts....

Implication is foreshadowing...this is how ME3 foreshadows, by asking questions that are answered in the ending. It does this for multiple plot threads.

As fo the Crucible, you obviously missed the fact that the Protheans knew what it did...how? Because they know that the Citadel is the final component (but obviously lore wise the Citadel fell first in their time and it wasn't completed). Use your head here..its only unknown to the CURRENT cycle.

Stopping reapers is not a theme, a theme is the message of the story, which the series has MULTIPLE ones. And yes, strength through diversity is part of the ending...how? Because if you don't get enough support, you devestate the galaxy. Hell, you wouldn't even get there without support of the galactic community. But once again, there are OTHER themes in ply atthe endng as well.

"And this means, that reapers are the problem they pretend they trying to fix."

And that is the point and the irony...its intentionally done and written that way. The other irony is the Leviathans are also their own problem...they create an AI to solve other problems because of AI's, and in turn the AI ttacks them. Life is like this. But in many stories.....guess what, a Well Intentioned Extremist antagonist can be a contradiction of himself. Its not new and its not bad writing.

News Flash: Cerberus was always the bad guys. They were in ME1 and the novel series. Guess what? The original writer also made them evil...read Retribution. TIM is clearly cruel, and so is Kai Leng. They hide behind grey morality.

"whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved
with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event,
character, ability, or object."

and yet ME3 doesn't fit.....the opening to ME2 does, the finale to ME1 does, but not ME3...why?

Because the Crucible is not a new object, it was the heart of the story and so was the Catalyst. It was developed, fleshed out upon, and the plot reolves around it. A Deus Ex Machina is out of the blue and quick, usually at the moment it occurs, not way before. Nevermind the Crucible has backstory which mean its woven in the lore of the series.

The Catalyst isn't either as I explained earlier in this thread. You really do not know what a Deus x Machina is.

If you think the Catalyst's problem is non existant, than you haven't played Overlord did you? What do you do in Overlord? I know, how about stopping a rogue AI from spreading and devestating the galaxy...that seems to be the answer. The series GAVE you an example.

Nevermind the problem of synthetic-organic conflict was the LEVIATHANS problem, not the Catalyst. The Catalyst was only created to facilitate the Leviathans request, in an unintended way.

Once again, you are ignoring FACTS that go against you.

so ... what exactly is the question, that leads to a guess, that the starchild is the catalyst?


the catalyst plot makes so many sidesteps, that there is not much left.

on thessia, the crude concept of a master entity was mentioned - but not in context with the catalyst. hell .. in retrospec, not even vendetta thinks of the possibility, that the ai is the catalyst - vendetta thinks, that the citadel is the catalyst.
that (the citadel being the catalyst) is revealed on cronos station.

the catalyst and the mastermind are two completely different plots at this point of the game.

so .. since mars, we are looking for a clue, what the catalyst is. we find our first breadcrum on thessia and get the answer on cronos - right before the final mission. in retrospec, that info is not even right.

the whole concept of the catalyst is wrecked, the moment you meet the starchild. untill shepard meets it, he/she is convinced, that the citadel is the catalyst.


so the vague "question" that "foreshadows" the existance of a mastermind, is answered by the citadel being the catalyst and not the mentioned mastermind.

the question is not there anymore - it is answered. well .. the answer was a lie but that comes out an the very end. another sidestep of the plot, that comes out of nowhere.

even if you have leviathan installed, there is no clue, that the mastermind is the catalyst. well maybe the leviathans forgot that little, totally unimportant fact over the millenia or they are just trolling shepard.
levi1 to levi2:
- "hey have you told the ape, that the ai we build is the catalyst?"
- "no ... i wish i could see its face when it finds out."
- "lol ... yeah .. good one!"

so .. the leviathans created the ai - little reminder ... sophisticated ai's can not be moved from server to server, they are depending on quantum blue boxes to function (this is mass effect lore) ... so .. they created the ai ... where? ... it is installed on the citadel ... so it is presumed, that the citadel was there before the ai - and they forgot this little detail too?

the problem is, that the reapers are build the citadel (mass effect lore) ... so either the leviathans are telling us bs or they just broke the lore of the game.


there simply is no real foreshadowing - just two different story arcs (and one is shady), that are combined at the very end - and yes ... this comes out of nowhere.

"the catalyst and the mastermind are two completely different plots at this point of the game"

And yet it still foreshadows and poses the question, "who is the master?"

Seriously, quit trying to worm your away out of my point because thats what you are doing.

All it takes is to talk about a master...and the master could be anything. It just so happens to be the Catalyst.

The FACT is that the VI while he thought there could be a master, did not know the Catalyst was one. But the fact of the master was implied.

And really, not every plot twist even has to be foreshadowed....there is no rule here.

Nevermind not only this, the Catalyst's motives are foreshadowed on Rannoch.

[txgoldrush]

Tomwew wrote...

can someone post a list of every problem, plot hole, out of character action and theme ignoring/ changing in the last part of me3 to see if the op, who apparently understands the ending and i'm simply too dumb to get it, can answer them all?

i'll give my top 5 reasons i think the ending sucks harder than gay superman.
1. the catalyst says no organic has ever been to his digs on the bottom of the citadel. then how could anyone have designed the crucible to interface with it.

2. the catalyst admits it's solution doesn't work. why does it continue to reap?

3. why can't i argue against the (racist......robocist?) idea that syntetics will always rebel?

4. the catalyst tries to force the reapers into being 'good' guys by implying that he's not killing but 'ascending' people...... while taking the form of a young child he murdered as the boy attempted to flee. why can't i point this out.

5. the entire section with the catalyst feels hopeless and though there's no choice, as if i'm a player in the catalyst's game.
this feeling is strongest in th ec where, in one of the only dialogue choices where shep gets his backbone...er...back, he tells the catalyst he 'doesn't believe him' to which the catalyst replies, with the blunt abruptness of an annoyed parent talking to an overly inquisitive child, 'your belief is not required.'
no question there that line just leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. i guess being space jesus in inconsequntial when talking to space god (deus) from the machine (ex machina)

these are only five, i could go on.....for a long time but i feel as though there are more qualified types out there to list what's wrong with this franken-ending.

like mr. btoungue
extended cut

1. Catalyst never said anything about Shepard being the first organic to stand in that area.....Catalyst could also be referencing the situation at hand or the first organic to meet him. Not clear enough to claim plot holes. Plot holes have to be clear.

2. Because his ideal solution was not enacted and he cannot make them work, no plot hole here. Looks like your Deus Ex Machina doesn't have power, hence its subverted.

3. Synthetics do always rebel in the lore.....every example the series gives to you, synthetics rebel...but sometimes for GOOD reasons. He never casts blame on the synthetics, notice this. He never paints them as the bad guys.

Did you also hear why the Catalyst was created?....because the races under the Leviathans kept getting destroyed by their own AI's. Its all in the narrative.

4. Shepard does argue that this methods are wrong, that is clear. He is never cast as a good guy...its the player to decide.

5. And really you are. The Catalyst created the cycle to experiment with evolution in order for him to find the ideal solution, which is Shepard. But you can reject him...thats what destroy does, Once again, destroy is the rejection of the Catalyst.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 26 novembre 2012 - 05:04 .

[The_Other_M]

[Steelcan]

Actually the Catalyst does say that Shepard is the first organic to ever stand there.

[LeandroBraz]

I agree, I just don't agree that the EC fixed all things, it still a ending mission that didn't reached the expectations created, Bioware was promising something a lot better, but I agree with your arguments..

[archangel1996]

archangel1996 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
Once again, you are ignoring FACTS that go against you.

I like this part so much Let's talk about ignoring facts

archangel1996 wrote...

archangel1996 wrote...

And
why, WHY, why in the blue hell why did not Harbinger kill Shepard? O_o Come on, seriously? The heart scans there are in COD and a Reaper, the boss of the Reapers, has lost his...its...whatever? And the Commander was very very near to the conduit too....maybe Harbinger was tired..... And why did not Harbinger shoot at Shepard while the normady was evacuating the squadmates? He didn't see the ship, i'm sure....
The ending just doesn't make any sense

Sorry for the english, i am Italian

Can someone answer me?

archangel1996 wrote...


Ok....let's go with an easy
question, that i find really important, how can Shepard survive in the destroy ending? The citadel has been destroyed, right? http://www.thegcp.co...itblowingup.jpg Yes..... And the fall? And the space? And the expolotion?

To this too

I hope the OP will see this now, it's like the third time i post it......someone could think that he...she...whatever is ignoring facts...

Modifié par archangel1996, 26 novembre 2012 - 02:45 .

[Little Princess Peach]

Op people on here just want to aruge for no reason

[archangel1996]

No reason at all!

[LeandroBraz]

archangel1996 wrote...

archangel1996 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
Once again, you are ignoring FACTS that go against you.

I like this part so much Let's talk about ignoring facts

archangel1996 wrote...

archangel1996 wrote...

And
why, WHY, why in the blue hell why did not Harbinger kill Shepard? O_o Come on, seriously? The heart scans there are in COD and a Reaper, the boss of the Reapers, has lost his...its...whatever? And the Commander was very very near to the conduit too....maybe Harbinger was tired..... And why did not Harbinger shoot at Shepard while the normady was evacuating the squadmates? He didn't see the ship, i'm sure....
The ending just doesn't make any sense

Sorry for the english, i am Italian

Can someone answer me?

archangel1996 wrote...


Ok....let's go with an easy
question, that i find really important, how can Shepard survive in the destroy ending? The citadel has been destroyed, right? http://www.thegcp.co...itblowingup.jpg Yes..... And the fall? And the space? And the expolotion?

To this too

I hope the OP will see this now, it's like the third time i post it......someone could think that he...she...whatever is ignoring facts...

He was unhappy on his last statement that the EC fix everything, which doesn't make his argument on specific points less true.

[dorktainian]

Tali-vas-normandy wrote...

Op people on here just want to aruge for no reason

lol

[What a Succulent Ass]

N*gga you is still here?????

DAMN, TX, YOU STAY DOING THE MOST DOE, HUH.

[Maxster_]

[quote]txgoldrush wrote...
 Wrong on so many counts....
[/quote]
You failed to counter my points.
So i guess this is goes back to you.
[quote]Implication is foreshadowing...this is how ME3 foreshadows, by asking questions that are answered in the ending. It does this for multiple plot threads.[/quote]
There is no trace of any reapers god in 2.66 of the game. It is asspull, which destroys(renders nonsensical) ME universe and nullifies prequels.
This is garbage writing.

[quote]As fo the Crucible, you obviously missed the fact that the Protheans knew what it did...how? Because they know that the Citadel is the final component (but obviously lore wise the Citadel fell first in their time and it wasn't completed). Use your head here..its only unknown to the CURRENT cycle.
[/quote]
It is irrelevant to my point.
Crucible can not be designed, because first thing every cycle loses - is the Citadel.
And you can not design unknown device with unknown function, which should interface with another unknown device, with unconfirmed existence and if it even needed at all.
It is just mocking of common sense, science and engineering.

So, you completely ignored my point, and answered something i never asked.
You only demonstrating, that you can't defend this garbage writing and nonsense, which Crucible is.
[quote]
Stopping reapers is not a theme, a theme is the message of the story, which the series has MULTIPLE ones. And yes, strength through diversity is part of the ending...how? Because if you don't get enough support, you devestate the galaxy. Hell, you wouldn't even get there without support of the galactic community. But once again, there are OTHER themes in ply atthe endng as well.
[/quote]
Yes, themes were various, but there was only minor inclusion of "synthetics vs. organics" in prequels, namely 1 in ME1, side quest with AI.
There was theme of uplifting and progressors, and morality of it. Themes of genocide, responsibility of creators(quarians), council(strength through diversity), nationalism, ethics of science and many others.
[quote]
And yes, strength through diversity is part of the ending...how? Because
if you don't get enough support, you devestate the galaxy.
[/quote]
Lol.
No, difference between various destroy endings is EMS, which is meaningless, and can be gained throghout multiplayer and fetch quests.
Real themes of the endings - unconditional surrender to an crazy enemy's  whim, peace is only possible through homogenization, galatic police state is means for survival, genocide is the only way, synthetics will kill all organics.
Strength through diversity is totally nullified - you can't win on your terms, only on terms of the enemy.
No amount of diplomacy and building alliances can help you win - only magic device and crazy enemy's whim.
[quote]

"And this means, that reapers are the problem they pretend they trying to fix."

And that is the point and the irony...its intentionally done and written that way. The other irony is the Leviathans are also their own problem...they create an AI to solve other problems because of AI's, and in turn the AI ttacks them. Life is like this. But in many stories.....guess what, a Well Intentioned Extremist antagonist can be a contradiction of himself. Its not new and its not bad writing.
[/quote]
And this is called garbage writing.
Leviathans are crazy and retarded.
To solve their "problem" of their minions creating synthetics and said synthetics destroying their creators - they created synthetics to solve "problem" of synthetics destroying their creators.
Instead of forced AI creation ban, which is far easier for them, than for council in current cycle.
It is retarded non-solution to a non-existing problem.
Such retarded civilization would never survive.

And you can't argue and can't beat reapers. Can't win.

[quote]
News Flash: Cerberus was always the bad guys. They were in ME1 and the novel series. Guess what? The original writer also made them evil...read Retribution. TIM is clearly cruel, and so is Kai Leng. They hide behind grey morality.
[/quote]
what nonsense is this? Hiding behind grey morality? lolwut?


[quote]"whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved
with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event,
character, ability, or object."

and yet ME3 doesn't fit.....the opening to ME2 does, the finale to ME1 does, but not ME3...why?

Because the Crucible is not a new object, it was the heart of the story and so was the Catalyst. It was developed, fleshed out upon, and the plot reolves around it. A Deus Ex Machina is out of the blue and quick, usually at the moment it occurs, not way before. Nevermind the Crucible has backstory which mean its woven in the lore of the series.
[/quote]
ME3 fit perfectly. Asspull Crucible, which can not exists, to solve unsolvalble problem.
Crucible have no place in the lore, no backstory. It is plain nonsense and garbage writing.

[quote]
The Catalyst isn't either as I explained earlier in this thread. You really do not know what a Deus x Machina is.
[/quote]
You know, stating something is not proving.
And you failed to do latter, so you resort to former.
[quote]
If you think the Catalyst's problem is non existant, than you haven't played Overlord did you? What do you do in Overlord? I know, how about stopping a rogue AI from spreading and devestating the galaxy...that seems to be the answer. The series GAVE you an example.
[/quote]
Catalyst's problem is non existent.
Overlord is example of synthesis(cyborgization), not an AI creation.

Your example have no relation to my point.
[quote]
Nevermind the problem of synthetic-organic conflict was the LEVIATHANS problem, not the Catalyst. The Catalyst was only created to facilitate the Leviathans request, in an unintended way.
[/quote]
Catalyst have free will. He is sentient.
He twisted retarded leviathans "problem", and destroyed them. Instead of peace, he brings death.
He is killing to prevent killing.
So, he is crazy.
[quote]
Once again, you are ignoring FACTS that go against you.[/quote]
Prove this assertion.
List facts i ignored, and prove that i ignored them.
Otherwise, your words are void.

As for now, you just failed to counter any of my points.

[Favourite store on the CitadeI]

don't know if its been said, but surely the #1 reason why we should hate the catalyst is because it completely contradicts itself?

Modifié par Favourite store on the CitadeI, 26 novembre 2012 - 07:29 .

[Kel Riever]

Favourite store on the CitadeI wrote...

don't know if its been said, but surely the #1 reason why we should hate the catalyst is because it completely contradicts itself?

No, silly.  The problem is you.  You are a vocal minority.  The ending is smashing and brilliant.  That is why everyone loves it to smitherines!  Except those awful negative people with their negativity and it is the negativity that is the problem, not god awful writing!

[Dr_Extrem]

Kel Riever wrote...

Favourite store on the CitadeI wrote...

don't know if its been said, but surely the #1 reason why we should hate the catalyst is because it completely contradicts itself?

No, silly.  The problem is you.  You are a vocal minority.  The ending is smashing and brilliant.  That is why everyone loves it to smitherines!  Except those awful negative people with their negativity and it is the negativity that is the problem, not god awful writing!

no s**t ..

we are just not smart enough to find the isolated points (without any connections untill the end) within the sideplots of the sideplots, where we could find a hint (that is first rendered wrong and then rendered valid again) are hidden.

shame on us.

[archangel1996]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Kel Riever wrote...

Favourite store on the CitadeI wrote...

don't know if its been said, but surely the #1 reason why we should hate the catalyst is because it completely contradicts itself?

No, silly.  The problem is you.  You are a vocal minority.  The ending is smashing and brilliant.  That is why everyone loves it to smitherines!  Except those awful negative people with their negativity and it is the negativity that is the problem, not god awful writing!

no s**t ..

we are just not smart enough to find the isolated points (without any connections untill the end) within the sideplots of the sideplots, where we could find a hint (that is first rendered wrong and then rendered valid again) are hidden.

shame on us.

Shut the **** up you ****ing hater! You hate to live you ****ing father ****er!

Modifié par archangel1996, 26 novembre 2012 - 08:23 .

[Archonsg]

archangel1996 wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Kel Riever wrote...

Favourite store on the CitadeI wrote...

don't know if its been said, but surely the #1 reason why we should hate the catalyst is because it completely contradicts itself?

No, silly.  The problem is you.  You are a vocal minority.  The ending is smashing and brilliant.  That is why everyone loves it to smitherines!  Except those awful negative people with their negativity and it is the negativity that is the problem, not god awful writing!

no s**t ..

we are just not smart enough to find the isolated points (without any connections untill the end) within the sideplots of the sideplots, where we could find a hint (that is first rendered wrong and then rendered valid again) are hidden.

shame on us.

Shut the **** up you ****ing hater! You hate to live you ****ing father ****er!

Whoa!

Anyone find it ironic that for someone with the "xxx desrves better" banners, so obviously you see that there is something wrong, calling someone "hater" when presented with a valid counterpoint to another's obvously wrong assertions on those who still and with good reason see the ending as flawed?

Pity.

Ironic too, that I see more hate, coming from "pro-enders" than from people labeled as "haters".
Apparently , what qualifies for such a label is to simply not be in agreement and able to post concise and valid reasons for NOT finding the Ending acceptable.

Go figure.

Modifié par Archonsg, 26 novembre 2012 - 09:05 .

[archangel1996]

Archonsg wrote...

archangel1996 wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Kel Riever wrote...

Favourite store on the CitadeI wrote...

don't know if its been said, but surely the #1 reason why we should hate the catalyst is because it completely contradicts itself?

No, silly.  The problem is you.  You are a vocal minority.  The ending is smashing and brilliant.  That is why everyone loves it to smitherines!  Except those awful negative people with their negativity and it is the negativity that is the problem, not god awful writing!

no s**t ..

we are just not smart enough to find the isolated points (without any connections untill the end) within the sideplots of the sideplots, where we could find a hint (that is first rendered wrong and then rendered valid again) are hidden.

shame on us.

Shut the **** up you ****ing hater! You hate to live you ****ing father ****er!

Whoa!

Anyone find it ironic that for someone with the "xxx desrves better" banners, so obviously you see that there is something wrong, calling someone "hater" when presented with a valid counterpoint to another's obvously wrong asseetions on those who still and with good reason see the ending as flawed?

Pity.

Ironic too, that I see more hate, coming from "pro-enders" than from people labeled as "haters".
Apparently , what qualifies for such a label is to simply not be in agreement and able to post concise and valid reasons for NOT finding the Ending acceptable.

Go figure.

....was i really that believable? See my signature brother

[Dr_Extrem]

archangel1996 wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

archangel1996 wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Kel Riever wrote...

Favourite store on the CitadeI wrote...

don't know if its been said, but surely the #1 reason why we should hate the catalyst is because it completely contradicts itself?

No, silly.  The problem is you.  You are a vocal minority.  The ending is smashing and brilliant.  That is why everyone loves it to smitherines!  Except those awful negative people with their negativity and it is the negativity that is the problem, not god awful writing!

no s**t ..

we are just not smart enough to find the isolated points (without any connections untill the end) within the sideplots of the sideplots, where we could find a hint (that is first rendered wrong and then rendered valid again) are hidden.

shame on us.

Shut the **** up you ****ing hater! You hate to live you ****ing father ****er!

Whoa!

Anyone find it ironic that for someone with the "xxx desrves better" banners, so obviously you see that there is something wrong, calling someone "hater" when presented with a valid counterpoint to another's obvously wrong asseetions on those who still and with good reason see the ending as flawed?

Pity.

Ironic too, that I see more hate, coming from "pro-enders" than from people labeled as "haters".
Apparently , what qualifies for such a label is to simply not be in agreement and able to post concise and valid reasons for NOT finding the Ending acceptable.

Go figure.

....was i really that believable? See my signature brother

where is leonard hofstadter and his sarcasm sign, if you need him!

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

[Conniving_Eagle]

Does this count as a stupid fake crticism? I hope it helps that I brought a picture to illustrate my point.

Modifié par Conniving_Eagle, 26 novembre 2012 - 09:33 .

[Necrotron]

The_Other_M wrote...

I'm not sure either.  The original poster claims to disprove all of the naysayers about the ending, but fails to provide a firm argument.  I think they simply dislike 'ending haters' and really believe that they are wrong.  They've been pretty consistent in complaining about the lesser fans who didn't like the ending, so *shrug* I guess that's their thing.

Either way, you either agree or disagree with their assessment.  I disagree, and I generally find the offensive tone of those Shepard deserves better fans banners and the people who usually wear them annoying, but *shrug*, there are plenty of offensive ending haters too, so I suppose it's not a big deal.

Also, we not to stop bumping the thread unless there is something constructive to add.

Modifié par Bathaius, 26 novembre 2012 - 09:28 .