Xilizhra wrote...
That's quite truthfully what this has all been about. ME3's ending is not uplifting. It was not when the original endings were released so they created more content to make it supposedly apparent that the relays didn't explode and destroy the galaxy. The slides are supposed to make you feel happy that you did a good thing. They don't do that at all-they're super silly and out of line with what just happened. Shepard didn't win a war. S/he temporarily stopped some bleeding, but unequivocal good was not achieved.
"Unequivocal good" would be resurrecting all of the dead, which was never an option. All we can ever do in war is damage control. Stopping the war, stopping any more killing, seems quite uplifting enough for my tastes.
There's nothing to cheer about after playing the game and nothing intellectual or inspiring. I've seen, read, played plenty of sad things before and you can create something that inspires even in sadness. But this was a story that called for a variety of endings and not just 3 or 4 versions of depressing that's glossed over to try and make it seem happy.
How? It seems far more like you're determined to see depression in this and refusing to see the actual good that came of it.
No, unequivocal good doesn't mean that. It means that going forward what has been done is a known good and not some version of the lesser of 3 (4) bad decisions that do harm each in their own way.
As to your second point, I'm sorry but I can't see good that came of it nor can I see that the slides and cutscenes are reflective or true to what has just been done.
Each of the choices ultimately leads to real discernable problems and require a suspension of disbelief that can't exist if explored. Sure, people ignore the problems and then see only the supposedly defined good things that have been done, but that doesn't make it all work that way.
Synthesis-seems good, right. Everyone gets along and are super happy. Forget that it's just magically applied. Organics have tech fully integrated within their DNA (the cutscene sort of shows that)-well, ever see a commercial for how tech inside people tends to go bad and lawyers are now suing for the internal damage done? And what does the tech do? No idea. So, what's it for? No idea. EDI says some things that make no sense. She's alive. Well, what? She already was or so she said to me, but Synthetics are not changed so why is she now alive? Synthetics get full understanding of a now dead race-organics no longer exist so synthetics now understand them-why? And that makes EDI alive? Uh, she was alive because of her relationship to people she came to actually care about and want to protect and exist with. So, the idea that synthesis makes her alive is ludicrous and makes all that she did before somewhat meaningless.
And "we may even transcend mortality"-uh "we", we who? Synthetics are immortal. The game says so. So does she mean the hybrid organics? Immortal breeding Krogan and Rachni-that's a problem. Also, just because organic life no longer exists does not mean it will never exist again. And just because synthetics understand the organics that no longer exist, does not mean there won't be conflict. Never mind that it is an assault upon everyone's body without prior consent and against the wishes of some who never wanted any kind of tech inside of them.
Control-Ok, Shepard takes control and is turned into bits and bytes of data that is uploaded into the reaper consciousness and is not alone within the voice that narrates the cutscene. The Shepard I knew no longer exists and says things Shepard would not say. She says she needed to become something greater. Not in my game-she wanted everyone else to become something greater and worked to make it so. She wanted people to be responsible for their own lives and even to be alive. She didn't think anyone should be their caretaker. Shepard takes control and what, everyone just automatically knows that the reapers are now their friends, and they would like that? That is so ludicrous. In the real world people, a lot of people that Shepard knows, would not be satisfied nor happy with reapers with people goo in them, and reaper variants running around fixing things and policing the galaxy. Talk about conflict. And which Many will Shreaper help or kill when conflict breaks out? This is also just as culturally and intellectually stagnating as synthesis is, because if the reapers fix things and exist as nightmares to many, then a real depression may take hold, a real crippling one. The reapers exist and trillions of people do not because of them. I can't help but see this as horrifying.
Destroy-Well, the only thing known for sure about this is that EDI and the reapers die. The whole explanation for this is so ambiguous that the only thing I'd think Shepard could say to it is "WHAT?"
All Synthetics will be targeted. Even you are part synthetic. Ok, what does that mean?
All of the tech upon which you rely will be damaged. Ok, what does that mean? Synthetic people and parts inside organics are tech, so what happens to people with tech in them and what happens to all synthetic creations-AI, VI, or any other non-I? Don't know. The Migrant Fleet is tech and the suits that the quarians rely on are tech-the help of the geth (if the problem works out that way in your game) with the quarian suits is tech. Seems to be an issue if all tech is damaged.
There will be losses but no more than have already occurred. Ok really seriously WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? If EDI dies that's another loss. If people die because the tech inside them acts like a pacemaker that can't keep a beat, then those are losses. So, the kid is a total prophet because he knows that the tech that's damaged won't cause losses. Yeah, right. Call me silly but this is depressing.
Refuse-Great speech. Finally, a chance to try and fight the monsters. But nooooooooo. Game over, idiot. Yeah, that's depressing.
I said unequivocal good for a reason. That means that it is a known good that outweighs the bad, like some chemotherapy. The idea of it is you know it can do harm and recognize that, but it is meant to do good, meant to help. Going into it, the risks are obvious and discussed and debated and understood. The scale tips in its favor based upon a true understanding of it, so the good it can do is unequivocal at that point. The known good outweighs the known bad and yet even with beneficial chemotherapy, the results can be depressing. But the risks are understood. I'd run from any doctor that tries to promote slides of only happy after effects such as those we are shown for the choices made in ME3's ending. The only bad effects that are really outlined in the discussion the kid and Shepard have is based upon the kid's view of whether the "conflict" will or will not return. That makes the choices subservient to the kid's and leviathan's problem more than anything else. And that is depressing because that was never Shepard's problem.
Retour en haut
