I try... but I cannot resist
txgoldrush wrote...
....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.
You mean it is foreshadowed that the citadel contains an AI that looks like the boy that Shepard saw dying on earth? You have to tell me where, because frankly, I don't see it. That the reapers had some kind of chief was foreshadowed, but that's about it.
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.
quoting from wikipedia
"seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the
contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character,
ability, or object"
The unsolvable problem is the power of the reapers, the contrived part lies within the whole concept. Crucible+Catalyst+Shepard= WTF-ending, that's the problem.
The crucible itself can count as DEM: there is no logical explanation why we got it, it just conveniently comes out of nowhere.
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?
Synthetics will always destroy organics - that's the basic motivation we get for the reapers. That was one of the themes, but not THE major one. The major one was 'stop the reapers', not solve the problem of organics vs synthetics. You basically replace the central theme.
Then what the catalyst tells you flatly contradicts the experiences of your character. Shepard made peace between Quarians and Geth (at least my Shep did). The option for peaceful coexistence is there. This assumption of inevitability does clash with the series
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.
Then tell me, even if we accept the motive of the catalyst as valid, accept that he knows that his solution is not ideal, then there is still no reason why he should offer Shepard what he offers him.
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.
The catalyst is not a VI, but an AI, but that's jsut on a sidenote. Simply saying that the catalyst is mistaken is a very cheap resolution. That's like ending the game with Shepard waking up and saying, Thank god, it's just been a dream'. Very poor quality of writing if true, and poor quality of writing was the major concern with the ending.
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.
Yeah, really, I don't get that.
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 
You don't get it.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean its flawed.
Underdeveloped catalyst was the reason why people thought the concept doesn't make sense. By now, that is fixed. People now have clinching PROVE that the catalyst doesn't make sense. What is wrong has been outlined so often all over the forum and I don't think your explanations really address the concerns.
i sure wouldn't became something similar to the ones that killed so many people
Retour en haut
