501 réponses à ce sujet

[mumba]

EC made the endings worse for me. Am I the only one who feels that way?

[IanPolaris]

Mumba1511 wrote...

EC made the endings worse for me. Am I the only one who feels that way?

Well having the Normandy get out of a space fire-fight, land in full view of Harbinger and not get shot at once while picking up your injured squad is pretty much head-desk EPIC FAIL imo.

-Polaris

[Hexley UK]

The endings are still garbage (EC or otherwise).

I'm not so much mad at the endings anymore, more angry at Bioware for how they handled it then and continue to handle it now.

The Citadel DLC proves they know what alot of the fans wanted, why didn't we get it in the first place?

Why all the lies and exaggerations about ME3 even after the game had gone gold and they knew what was in it?

Why ignore most of the feedback for the EC?

Why still no Tali face reveal in either the EC or the Citadel DLC?

Why the ridicule and marginalisation of their biggest fans?

Why the laughable insistance that it was a minority that hated the ending?

And so on....

Modifié par Hexley UK, 14 mars 2013 - 08:25 .

[Eterna]

Steelcan wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

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. 

And if it makes sense, explain to me how Synthesis works.  Or how Control discriminates against Reapers, but Destroy doesn't 

Synthesis works by releasing a large wave of energy containing Reaper Nanites that attach to every organics DNA, thus altering it, in Synthetics the Nanites effectively reprogram them to have full understanding of organics.

Control is akin to uploading a new program on a computer while Destroy is more like grabbing a hammer and smashing said computer to bits. They have different effects. Also the Catalyst has no control over the Geth or other Synthetics, why wluld the new one? 

[DOsquareZER]

Forgive the endings or bioware?
Hahahaha
*insert joker gif of endless laughter here*

Modifié par doozer12, 14 mars 2013 - 08:21 .

[Mcfly616]

moater boat wrote...

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?

really? What's the "theme" of Mass Effect? Oops, I mean: in your "opinion", what is the theme of Mass Effect? Because there isn't a stated overall main overarching theme to the trilogy. There are plenty of themes that are explored throughout its narrative, yes, but there is no single overall theme.

The EC endings do tie in with many of these themes, and a rather ever present one at that.

[Eterna]

IanPolaris wrote...

Mumba1511 wrote...

EC made the endings worse for me. Am I the only one who feels that way?

Well having the Normandy get out of a space fire-fight, land in full view of Harbinger and not get shot at once while picking up your injured squad is pretty much head-desk EPIC FAIL imo.

-Polaris

Reaper IFF. At multiple points in the game EDI mentions that the Normandy is effectively disguised as a Reaper on scanners. Also, Nowhere does it even say Reapers have eyes, they most likely see through scanning their environment. 

[Zazzerka]

Nyeh.

[MegaSovereign]

I've always liked ME3. The ending isn't even the biggest flaw of the narrative.

[Jadebaby]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

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. 

I said, THE WORST!

[moater boat]

Comm1Sheppard wrote...

Not this again for crying out loud!

Yes, this again. Some of us are not so eager to roll over and lap up whatever BS is placed before us. If you are, that's your own business, but don't get upset because we won't all just on the bandwagon.

[Ownedbacon]

Eterna5 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Mumba1511 wrote...

EC made the endings worse for me. Am I the only one who feels that way?

Well having the Normandy get out of a space fire-fight, land in full view of Harbinger and not get shot at once while picking up your injured squad is pretty much head-desk EPIC FAIL imo.

-Polaris

Reaper IFF. At multiple points in the game EDI mentions that the Normandy is effectively disguised as a Reaper on scanners. Also, Nowhere does it even say Reapers have eyes, they most likely see through scanning their environment. 

Except when you're in the galaxy map and alert them. They enter the system and hunt you down. Why wouldn't the disguise still work? They could scan and find only Reapers, what would make them pursue you if they didn't have any other ways to recognize the Normandy as non-Reaper?

Modifié par Ownedbacon, 14 mars 2013 - 08:28 .

[Mylia Stenetch]

Baelrahn wrote...

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.

I'll add myself to that also. While the three games as a whole were great games. ME2 and ME3's endings were lacking overall.

[IanPolaris]

Eterna5 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Mumba1511 wrote...

EC made the endings worse for me. Am I the only one who feels that way?

Well having the Normandy get out of a space fire-fight, land in full view of Harbinger and not get shot at once while picking up your injured squad is pretty much head-desk EPIC FAIL imo.

-Polaris

Reaper IFF. At multiple points in the game EDI mentions that the Normandy is effectively disguised as a Reaper on scanners. Also, Nowhere does it even say Reapers have eyes, they most likely see through scanning their environment. 

No, just no.  Normandy is FULLY Visible.  Reapers have no trouble detecting and chasing (and killing) the Normandy during the space exploration scenes in ME3.  Not only that, but the Mark 1 eyeball can easily see Normandy and it sits there FOR MINUTES while Harby kindly lets the Normandy do a pickup.

No.  That is just terrible writing right there.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  Even if Harby didn't see normally (and I see no reason why he couldn't....he clearly does elsewhere...his minions clearly do, and we know there are a few (Marauder Shields and the Three Huskeleers) nearby and Harby is in communication with his minions.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 14 mars 2013 - 08:30 .

[moater boat]

Eterna5 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

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. 

And if it makes sense, explain to me how Synthesis works.  Or how Control discriminates against Reapers, but Destroy doesn't 

Synthesis works by releasing a large wave of energy containing Reaper Nanites that attach to every organics DNA, thus altering it, in Synthetics the Nanites effectively reprogram them to have full understanding of organics.

Control is akin to uploading a new program on a computer while Destroy is more like grabbing a hammer and smashing said computer to bits. They have different effects. Also the Catalyst has no control over the Geth or other Synthetics, why wluld the new one? 

What kind of "energy" and why this mystery energy at all if this is all done by nanites. And where did these nanites come from. I know they are small, but if we are talking about enough to modify the genetic code of every living cell in the galaxy that will still be an insane amount of mass. Your explanation is as full of holes as the BS it fails to support.

[Hexley UK]

Eterna5 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Mumba1511 wrote...

EC made the endings worse for me. Am I the only one who feels that way?

Well having the Normandy get out of a space fire-fight, land in full view of Harbinger and not get shot at once while picking up your injured squad is pretty much head-desk EPIC FAIL imo.

-Polaris

Reaper IFF. At multiple points in the game EDI mentions that the Normandy is effectively disguised as a Reaper on scanners. Also, Nowhere does it even say Reapers have eyes, they most likely see through scanning their environment. 

Reapers have eyes dude, a stealth bomber might be invisible to Radar and Infra-red but you can still see it.

[Xamufam]

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.

Bioware was forced to remove the prothean from the game because of time
limit, removing him had a domino effect on ME3 he would have been the
catalyst & thessia would have beeen 3 missions long. (from
thefinalhourofme3)
If they had him in the game with the missions, I believe that the controversy would have been 70% less

The ending was not written at that time it was written at november or december & the game went gold 1 month later

Modifié par Troxa, 14 mars 2013 - 08:31 .

[Eterna]

Ownedbacon wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Mumba1511 wrote...

EC made the endings worse for me. Am I the only one who feels that way?

Well having the Normandy get out of a space fire-fight, land in full view of Harbinger and not get shot at once while picking up your injured squad is pretty much head-desk EPIC FAIL imo.

-Polaris

Reaper IFF. At multiple points in the game EDI mentions that the Normandy is effectively disguised as a Reaper on scanners. Also, Nowhere does it even say Reapers have eyes, they most likely see through scanning their environment. 

Except when you're in the galaxy map and alert them. They enter the system and hunt you down. Why wouldn't the disguise still work? They could scan and find only Reapers, what would make them pursue you if they didn't have any other ways to recognize the Normandy as an enemy?

 The IFF is a costume, when the Nomrandy emits a pulse it is pretty much screaming "I am not a Reaper!".  That is why they only chase you after scanning for a bit. 

[moater boat]

Mcfly616 wrote...

moater boat wrote...

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?

really? What's the "theme" of Mass Effect? Oops, I mean: in your "opinion", what is the theme of Mass Effect? Because there isn't a stated overall main overarching theme to the trilogy. There are plenty of themes that are explored throughout its narrative, yes, but there is no single overall theme.

The EC endings do tie in with many of these themes, and a rather ever present one at that.

Go on...

[MegaSovereign]

You hear Harbinger shooting in the background. He's more focused on stopping people from reaching the beam.

I have a bigger problem with the fact that it's the Normandy that comes out of nowhere to do an extraction, rather than some random shuttle.

[Eterna]

Hexley UK wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Mumba1511 wrote...

EC made the endings worse for me. Am I the only one who feels that way?

Well having the Normandy get out of a space fire-fight, land in full view of Harbinger and not get shot at once while picking up your injured squad is pretty much head-desk EPIC FAIL imo.

-Polaris

Reaper IFF. At multiple points in the game EDI mentions that the Normandy is effectively disguised as a Reaper on scanners. Also, Nowhere does it even say Reapers have eyes, they most likely see through scanning their environment. 

Reapers have eyes dude, a stealth bomber might be invisible to Radar and Infra-red but you can still see it.

Where are the eyes? 

[ruggly]

Meh.

[Hexley UK]

MegaSovereign wrote...

You hear Harbinger shooting in the background. He's more focused on stopping people from reaching the beam.

I have a bigger problem with the fact that it's the Normandy that comes out of nowhere to do an extraction, rather than some random shuttle.

And so he completely ignores Shepard his worst and most threatening enemy and someone whom he has a personal vendetta against who is running directly at the beam and does not even make sure he is dead.....yea real focus.

[moater boat]

Eterna5 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Mumba1511 wrote...

EC made the endings worse for me. Am I the only one who feels that way?

Well having the Normandy get out of a space fire-fight, land in full view of Harbinger and not get shot at once while picking up your injured squad is pretty much head-desk EPIC FAIL imo.

-Polaris

Reaper IFF. At multiple points in the game EDI mentions that the Normandy is effectively disguised as a Reaper on scanners. Also, Nowhere does it even say Reapers have eyes, they most likely see through scanning their environment. 

Then how does Sovereign know to blast the individual soldiers running to the beam? Obviously he has something that mimics sight, and your suggestion that the ship that represents the biggest single threat to the Reapers, which they have had plenty of time to analyze before the IFF was aquired, would be able to fly around reapers without getting caught is not only absurd, but is contradicted by the fact that you have to flee reapers in the galaxy map.

[MrGMM88]

Eterna5 wrote...


Where are the eyes? 

There you go