501 réponses à ce sujet

[NeonFlux117]

WarGriffin wrote...

Honestly...

All the ending did was make me look at the main game more critically.

The ending is bad sure... logically stupid sure, thematically betraying absolutely.

however Me3's problems extend past the ending.

Now i get the feeling that they got rushed and the game needed another year of development, but as the Capstone to Shepard's story barring Citadel... The EC didn't help that Shepard pretty much tripped at the finish line.

ohhh like what good sir? Zero explortion, zero sidequests- well it's got 6 N7 mission, ME2 had 19. But..... What else? ooh I got a few- forced multiplayer, auto dialogue, 1 hub world- ME2 had what? 4 I think. Yeah, there's alot wrong with ME3 compared to it's predecessor- it doesn't come close, that's why it's best to view the game objectively and apart from the ME1 and ME2. 


But the ending(s) are still the worst- the rest is forgivable, but the endings are not. 

Modifié par NeonFlux117, 14 mars 2013 - 07:58 .

[AlexMBrennan]

Nope. Catalyst's removal is non-negotiable if you want me to like the ending - having the guy who could have stopped the Reapers at any point stop the Reapers eliminates any sense of achievement.

[IanPolaris]

Eterna5 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

ending still sits way outside of ME thematically. it still just doesn't make sense.

It does fit themeatically and it does make sense. 

. Organic/synthetic conflict was wrapped up over Rannoch.  It was resurrected and made the main theme for some reason.  

And no, it doesn't make sense, none of it does.

Yes, because Rannoch will be the only case of organic vs Synthetic conflict ever...

And it totally does make sense. 

Also completely ignoring the fact that the Reapers are Synthetic constructs fighting organics. 

Sorry but no it doesn't.  Transhumanism was never a big theme in Mass Effect.  Even when conflict between AIs and Organics is discussed, it is always on the topic of "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" rather than the technological "evolution" of man.  That is to say, that when we worry about AIs and machines at all (and mostly implants are just part of the 'decor' of mass effect and the social implications are completely ignored), it is with the idea of AIs having 'natural rights' to live AS intelligent beings in their own way (that was especially evidence with Legion and ME2).  In fact you can argue quite passionately with Tali in ME1 that it was the Quarians that were guilty of attempted genocide.

So no, the entire Deus Ex/Transhumanism ending comes out nearly from complete left field.  For 99.9% of the series, the ultimate goal was to destroy the Reapers.  It is the last 0.1% that doesn't fit.

-Polaris

[D1ck1e]

Ending is still bad.

[Jills Toy]

EC gave me closure over what I thouhgt was not an atrisitic ending at all for a wonderful series. I didn't want or expect a Greek Tragedy for an RPG I believe was one of the best, especially ME3. As for the Citadel DLC, very nice and had many laughs...wonderful dialogue as usual. I have nothing to forgive since for the most part (sans the last 10 mintues of ME3) Mass Effect gave me many hours of enjoyment and I look forward to their next adventure.

[Xellith]

No.

[Mcfly616]

I hated the original endings. Came here everyday, went from believing in IT for hope of explaination into the extremely vague ambiguity of them and the Catalyst. I thought for sure that Bioware had something up their sleeves in the form of a classic twist.

I was wrong. They released photos of Mac working on the EC. This is when I realized that IT would not be implemented. I resumed expressing my disgust with the endings and the fact that they were simply going to extend them. I knew I would hate it just as much.

I was wrong, again. The extended beam run and farewell was great. Still dreading the Catalyst convo. Minutes later I was ecstatic the fact that we had an actual dialogue wheel and that the Catalyst was explaining himself. Then came the final response "I reject these choices"?! I accidently got the new ending on my first go around, so I had to reload and choose my Canon ending, Destroy. But I had to admit things were looking promising.

After I chose Destroy. And experienced the epilogue....I was overwhelmed. After 3 and half months of confused rage, it was over....and I was happy.

It wasn't what I expected. Then again, ever since ME1 I would have spitball ideas of what the Reapers could possibly be, where they came from, what there purpose is/was, and how in the hell are we going to defeat them. I never expected any of my ideas about how things would turn out, would ever be correct. And they weren't. And that's okay, because everything ended up making sense in the end and I know the impact my choice had on the galaxy. Now I can look forward to the future. All thanks to the EC.

[Jewlie Ghoulie]

I was a little unhappy with the ending at first since I didn't feel it was explained enough. But yes, with EC, I did feel it touched the areas I needed and it breaks my heart to pick Destroy now at the Memorial to see EDI's name and Legions [yes, Legion dies before Ending but, when I see his name I think 'he died for his race can flourish, and I still destroy him despite backing him the whole way'] With the EC, I felt satiated but thats me, and the Citadel DLC just made me even happier with ME again.

[WheatleyHQ]

Eh. EC really didn't make a difference to me, tbh.

[SiriusXI]

The only reason I can enjoy ME3 again is MEHEM. Bioware screwed up bad. They lost me as a fan and I will not pay for their games anymore.

[im commander shep]

I love the Trilogy, Like ME3 and the ending is rubbish with or without the EC. The citadel has no bearing on the ending and is great fan service and a right laugh.
The current ending makes no sense, does not fit with the story up until that point and shepards character is forgotten and made to listen to the starkid crap.

[moater boat]

Eterna5 wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

ending still sits way outside of ME thematically. it still just doesn't make sense.

It does fit themeatically and it does make sense. 

Not at all

[Dieb]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

I never liked the ending, and I still don't. But those last 10 minutes being bad never ruined the rest of the game, let alone 'ruining all games forever' like some people liked to go on about. I hated the Reaper Baby of ME2 just as much, but I didn't dwell on it. Its pretty easy to find a bad ending in an otherwise good video game.

Citadel made me love the parts I loved even more though. (which is everything other than the endings of ME2 & 3.) There was nothing I had to forgive them for.

Sheesh. One year, and still it wasn't even I that finally managed to speak my exact thoughts.

Absolutely, brother.

Modifié par Baelrahn, 14 mars 2013 - 08:06 .

[ParkBom]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

I was sated by the extended cut. The writing is still lacking in several areas, but I'm not left with a pit in my stomach afterwards like I was before.

This. EC made it better. It's like a band-aid, not completely healing the problem but it's a step in the right direction. Now with EC Destroy, I feel ready for whatever else Bioware gives us of the Mass Effect universe.

[Tootles FTW]

I don't forgive the ending, no, but it's restored my general good feeling in regards to the series. It was good that they saved a "happy" DLC for last.

[Mcfly616]

moater boat wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

ending still sits way outside of ME thematically. it still just doesn't make sense.

It does fit themeatically and it does make sense. 

Not at all

Definitely does.

[Maverick827]

IanPolaris wrote...

Sorry but no it doesn't.  Transhumanism was never a big theme in Mass Effect.

Except for Saren, the first game's main antagonist.

Synthesis isn't even espousing Transhumanism.  It's just another option under which Catalyst's logic will allow the cycle to end.  It doesn't attempt to re-theme the entire series.

- Unnecessary pretentious signature

[IliyaMoroumetz]

Nope.

[SiriusXI]

Mcfly616 wrote...

moater boat wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

ending still sits way outside of ME thematically. it still just doesn't make sense.

It does fit themeatically and it does make sense. 

Not at all

Definitely does.

Definitely not.

[moater boat]

Mcfly616 wrote...

moater boat wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

Reap_ii wrote...

ending still sits way outside of ME thematically. it still just doesn't make sense.

It does fit themeatically and it does make sense. 

Not at all

Definitely does.

Really? Then explain to me the theme of ME3 and tell me how the endings make sense, heck, tell my how just synthesis makes sense?

[kobayashi-maru]

Honestly the EC helped but I have serious reservations with it. When they decided to fix ending changing destruction of Citadel/Relays and changing fate of Normandy (them being stranded) it seemed beyond silly to keep Normandy crash as is. Also the main issue is epilogue and pretty much the entire final Earth mission which seems wrong somehow.

So basically making sillier events happen (Normandy at beam run) to somehow clarify the mistakes from old ending where and still are my biggest issue.

[Jadebaby]

no to everything. Endings are still the worst piece of narrative to ever intrude itself into a science fiction genre.

[Comm1Sheppard]

Not this again for crying out loud!

[Calibrations52]

That ending cannot be forgiven. Yes, the EC improved on the original ending and the Citadel DLC was a great send off for the series, but I'll never forget the feeling I had when completing the original game. I'd probably make the analogy that the original ending was a steaming pile of crap. The EC covered up the crap, but you can still smell it.

The entire catalyst idea made no sense. I'm still trying (and failing) to understand a word the starbrat said. The Reapers were reduced to servants whose motivations were apparently "good" instead of evil. Vague hints at Shepard's indoctrination were thrown in simply to make people speculate. Synthesis was introduced as a choice way too late - it became a cop out rather than a viable option. Finally, the scene at the end of Destroy was ridiculous. Either Shepard is dead or alive. Don't give people tantalizingly vague scenes like that.

While the EC filled many of the plot holes and provided better explanation for the consequences of your decisions, it kept all of the above things that I mentioned. This prevented the final ending from being "good" in my opinion.

[NeonFlux117]

Jadebaby wrote...

no to everything. Endings are still the worst piece of narrative to ever intrude itself into a science fiction genre.

Top 5 for sure.