329 réponses à ce sujet

[shingara]

Wayning_Star wrote...

The idea of the apex race creating a being and marking their own destruction/harvest is complementary of the NEED of all races in the MEU to utilize tools/technology to accomplish goals, or even exist at all in the MEU. The idea of speeding evolution is to accomplish a goal, that being finding a clue to the catalyst problem of chaos, that what it calls competition between races. In this case it happens to be organic sentience vs synthetic. The fighting doesn't seem to break out until one attacks the other, usually the organics strike first, for some reason, fear probably. Why would organics fear synthetics life forms. That what they need to exist in the MEU? The proto reaper is an independent idea of what the humanity requires to interact with the pure ideal of technology. A human reapership. But it was not finished nor reached full operation, as Shepard takes it out of service completely. The story hints that it is a contraption of the collectors and their controlling reapership.

That what is usually called plot holes are not holes, but clues to the plot. The actual "plot" isn't exposed until the endgame. The only left out agenda is that the crucible was devised by an unknown race and the choices were not made by those who invoke them. Shep merely gets to mouth the perspective. Leaving the crucible as unexplained and thus a kind of plot hole.

  Lets look, soverign is running around the universe, shep finds out kills him, sets out to kill all things reaper. Collectors pop up controlled by harbringer shep goes in kicks there heads in. in 3 we face off to a 7 year old.....................

The plot holes are all in three, not in one or two which points to the fact that some writers in three had no idea about the canon in mass effect. All reapers are not in the form of harbringer, some are varients of the original, some are nothing like harbringer mainly the proto reaper.

 In 3 we get this wierd is it a dream is it real bs, running through a wood in slow mo after a glowing kid. we originaly got control or destroy which was badly taken as nearly everyone taking that wanted shep to live so they added in a take a breath on earth scene that totaly blew everything else out of the water from the point harbringer knocks them out.

 Then we got synthesis added and as everyone had stated that TIM does control and Anderson does destroy that destroy must be the real ending so they make the cutscene show shepard do the synthesis just to peev off more people.


 And the synthetics dont always destroy the organics, the Zha'til were the synthesis by there own choice and what did the reapers do, they turned them into husks. So no synthesis doesnt work, it just makes it easier for the reapers to get you. The geth didnt attack the quarians, the quarians attacked the geth and they defended themselves, they didnt persue them, they let them go. EDI on luna didnt attack, she acted in self defence after becoming fully self aware whilst being attacked and tried to defend herself, her final message on luna is help.

 Also on the edi dying, did you know if you keep your score low enough and take edi on the final beam evas body will die but edi doesnt when you hit destroy. Thats because they never updated the cutscene for destroy with the extended ended cutscene.

 Plot holes galour.

Modifié par shingara, 05 août 2013 - 01:38 .

[3DandBeyond]

Wayning_Star wrote...

shingara wrote...

personaly i love the game but hate the ending or lack of. I spent the whole of 1-3 expecting to go toe to toe with harbringer and what did i end up doing, being talked to by a holographic kid who has been bugging me since i left earth and an ending that made no sense at all as in 1 and 2 its stated the reapers created the citidel yet in 3 we are suppossed to believe that the citidel created the reapers. Plot holes much ?

the leviathan created the intelligence who in turn went sapient and independent of levy to harvest them, making reaperships out of their society. The reaps are really recordings of all the races within their matrix. Technology as a living entity has pluses and minus's . Especially if they're designed by a super apex race....etc.

But the idiocy of this is not even lost on those who like the ending.  Often they will stipulate to the Leviathans being arrogant but they were stupid as well.  It doesn't make me think the ending is oh so great because Shepard gets to fix this whole freaking mess that idiots that are allowed to live (Leviathan) created.  And it doesn't help because Shepard can learn the whole thing is stupid.  That apex race is dumber than a doorknob.

Get this.  They were adept at control and afraid of one thing-synthetics.  So in one fell swoop they created an uncontrolled synthetic to solve their problem of uncontrolled synthetics.  Brilliant.

And the whole thing was created to explain the existence of the kid and why he had reapers creating people goo because it was not explained in the first place.  But the explanation is even stupider than no explanation.

The ending can be torn apart from London on.  The Normandy dropping down to pick up teammates that were with Shepard is stupid but meant to explain what they didn't explain in the original endings.  Except it doesn't explain how or why those at the FOB were on the Normandy.  And it's especially silly if EDI is a teammate for that run to the beam and gets injured.  The fact that if the Normandy could do that it would have made more sense for it to drop in to actually help keep Shepard and the team alive to make it to the beam is way more logical than it evacuating the injured is one point.

The scene with TIM and Anderson that sets up a truly great moment is all but laughable given that a few minutes later TIM is actually shown to be right but deluded by indoctrination into only thinking he was right, but he was right, except he was indoctrinated into thinking he was right but was right, oh frack.  Oh and Omega already proved he was right with the Adjutants.  Stupid indoctrinated TIM.  He must be killed for trying to control reapers.  So Shepard how about you control them?  No harm in that, right?

The rest of the thing hinges on anyone thinking it's plausible that this glow boy says he controls the reapers and Shepard doesn't go all crazy over that.  No, Shepard calmly asks the kid to sit down to tea and to discuss how the reaper situation might best be handled in order to help the kid keep killer synthetics from killing all organic life, including daisies.  Ignore those geth and EDI over there.  Shepard calmly has a discussion with the thing that has been turning people (trillions of them) into goo. 

And worse, he's had the reapers seed the galaxy with tech to ensure organics will advance enough to create synthetics so he can send the reapers back to harvest them so they won't create synthetics.  Great.  My only choice if I didn't like other aspects of the game would be to snap the disk in two.

But of course then the choice must be how can Shepard help him.  And what version of suicide can Shepard pick in order to get help from the thing that's been trying to kill him/her.  See, from what the kid says about destroy Shepard doesn't have enough information to think s/he will come out of it alive-no matter what we see later on.  So for all Shepard knows s/he will die based upon what someone who has been trying to kill him/her says will happen and must happen.  Cooler still.

[dorktainian]

in a singular ending, you cannot have any variation. there can only be one ending. Thats what makes mass effect 3's ending so terrible.

Yeah you can have loads of intertwining branching storylines, but at the end of the story there can only be one outcome. Someone forgot to tell the writers.

[AlexMBrennan]

Obvious troll is obvious? Do we know anyone who was banned last week?

In any case, most people disliking the ending is not inconsistent with some people liking the ending (as long as they don't care about the characters as you admitted, or lore, or narrative consistency).

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

shingara wrote...

personaly i love the game but hate the ending or lack of. I spent the whole of 1-3 expecting to go toe to toe with harbringer and what did i end up doing, being talked to by a holographic kid who has been bugging me since i left earth and an ending that made no sense at all as in 1 and 2 its stated the reapers created the citidel yet in 3 we are suppossed to believe that the citidel created the reapers. Plot holes much ?

the leviathan created the intelligence who in turn went sapient and independent of levy to harvest them, making reaperships out of their society. The reaps are really recordings of all the races within their matrix. Technology as a living entity has pluses and minus's . Especially if they're designed by a super apex race....etc.

But the idiocy of this is not even lost on those who like the ending.  Often they will stipulate to the Leviathans being arrogant but they were stupid as well.  It doesn't make me think the ending is oh so great because Shepard gets to fix this whole freaking mess that idiots that are allowed to live (Leviathan) created.  And it doesn't help because Shepard can learn the whole thing is stupid.  That apex race is dumber than a doorknob.

Get this.  They were adept at control and afraid of one thing-synthetics.  So in one fell swoop they created an uncontrolled synthetic to solve their problem of uncontrolled synthetics.  Brilliant.

And the whole thing was created to explain the existence of the kid and why he had reapers creating people goo because it was not explained in the first place.  But the explanation is even stupider than no explanation.

The ending can be torn apart from London on.  The Normandy dropping down to pick up teammates that were with Shepard is stupid but meant to explain what they didn't explain in the original endings.  Except it doesn't explain how or why those at the FOB were on the Normandy.  And it's especially silly if EDI is a teammate for that run to the beam and gets injured.  The fact that if the Normandy could do that it would have made more sense for it to drop in to actually help keep Shepard and the team alive to make it to the beam is way more logical than it evacuating the injured is one point.

The scene with TIM and Anderson that sets up a truly great moment is all but laughable given that a few minutes later TIM is actually shown to be right but deluded by indoctrination into only thinking he was right, but he was right, except he was indoctrinated into thinking he was right but was right, oh frack.  Oh and Omega already proved he was right with the Adjutants.  Stupid indoctrinated TIM.  He must be killed for trying to control reapers.  So Shepard how about you control them?  No harm in that, right?

The rest of the thing hinges on anyone thinking it's plausible that this glow boy says he controls the reapers and Shepard doesn't go all crazy over that.  No, Shepard calmly asks the kid to sit down to tea and to discuss how the reaper situation might best be handled in order to help the kid keep killer synthetics from killing all organic life, including daisies.  Ignore those geth and EDI over there.  Shepard calmly has a discussion with the thing that has been turning people (trillions of them) into goo. 

And worse, he's had the reapers seed the galaxy with tech to ensure organics will advance enough to create synthetics so he can send the reapers back to harvest them so they won't create synthetics.  Great.  My only choice if I didn't like other aspects of the game would be to snap the disk in two.

But of course then the choice must be how can Shepard help him.  And what version of suicide can Shepard pick in order to get help from the thing that's been trying to kill him/her.  See, from what the kid says about destroy Shepard doesn't have enough information to think s/he will come out of it alive-no matter what we see later on.  So for all Shepard knows s/he will die based upon what someone who has been trying to kill him/her says will happen and must happen.  Cooler still.

yes 3d, I know, but you must retire to the ideal that the game is for general audience, many who will see no need to proof the entire trilogy to accept that/their reality as a form of reality. It doesn't have to be exact to be accepted, normally. Snapping the disk wouldn't cure the MEU of it's ills so that's not an in game option..lol

You know that the technology gist is based on the ideal that it's origin is from organic minds, so they're related before they become synthesized... too late to say you're sorry..lol

[dorktainian]

johnswritersblock.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/ 

a critique on the ending by a writer.  Pretty damning.  

Also notice his love of The Indoctrination Theory.  And what it actually means. (if it were true)

Modifié par dorktainian, 05 août 2013 - 01:59 .

[shingara]

Wayning_Star wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

shingara wrote...

personaly i love the game but hate the ending or lack of. I spent the whole of 1-3 expecting to go toe to toe with harbringer and what did i end up doing, being talked to by a holographic kid who has been bugging me since i left earth and an ending that made no sense at all as in 1 and 2 its stated the reapers created the citidel yet in 3 we are suppossed to believe that the citidel created the reapers. Plot holes much ?

the leviathan created the intelligence who in turn went sapient and independent of levy to harvest them, making reaperships out of their society. The reaps are really recordings of all the races within their matrix. Technology as a living entity has pluses and minus's . Especially if they're designed by a super apex race....etc.

But the idiocy of this is not even lost on those who like the ending.  Often they will stipulate to the Leviathans being arrogant but they were stupid as well.  It doesn't make me think the ending is oh so great because Shepard gets to fix this whole freaking mess that idiots that are allowed to live (Leviathan) created.  And it doesn't help because Shepard can learn the whole thing is stupid.  That apex race is dumber than a doorknob.

Get this.  They were adept at control and afraid of one thing-synthetics.  So in one fell swoop they created an uncontrolled synthetic to solve their problem of uncontrolled synthetics.  Brilliant.

And the whole thing was created to explain the existence of the kid and why he had reapers creating people goo because it was not explained in the first place.  But the explanation is even stupider than no explanation.

The ending can be torn apart from London on.  The Normandy dropping down to pick up teammates that were with Shepard is stupid but meant to explain what they didn't explain in the original endings.  Except it doesn't explain how or why those at the FOB were on the Normandy.  And it's especially silly if EDI is a teammate for that run to the beam and gets injured.  The fact that if the Normandy could do that it would have made more sense for it to drop in to actually help keep Shepard and the team alive to make it to the beam is way more logical than it evacuating the injured is one point.

The scene with TIM and Anderson that sets up a truly great moment is all but laughable given that a few minutes later TIM is actually shown to be right but deluded by indoctrination into only thinking he was right, but he was right, except he was indoctrinated into thinking he was right but was right, oh frack.  Oh and Omega already proved he was right with the Adjutants.  Stupid indoctrinated TIM.  He must be killed for trying to control reapers.  So Shepard how about you control them?  No harm in that, right?

The rest of the thing hinges on anyone thinking it's plausible that this glow boy says he controls the reapers and Shepard doesn't go all crazy over that.  No, Shepard calmly asks the kid to sit down to tea and to discuss how the reaper situation might best be handled in order to help the kid keep killer synthetics from killing all organic life, including daisies.  Ignore those geth and EDI over there.  Shepard calmly has a discussion with the thing that has been turning people (trillions of them) into goo. 

And worse, he's had the reapers seed the galaxy with tech to ensure organics will advance enough to create synthetics so he can send the reapers back to harvest them so they won't create synthetics.  Great.  My only choice if I didn't like other aspects of the game would be to snap the disk in two.

But of course then the choice must be how can Shepard help him.  And what version of suicide can Shepard pick in order to get help from the thing that's been trying to kill him/her.  See, from what the kid says about destroy Shepard doesn't have enough information to think s/he will come out of it alive-no matter what we see later on.  So for all Shepard knows s/he will die based upon what someone who has been trying to kill him/her says will happen and must happen.  Cooler still.

yes 3d, I know, but you must retire to the ideal that the game is for general audience, many who will see no need to proof the entire trilogy to accept that/their reality as a form of reality. It doesn't have to be exact to be accepted, normally. Snapping the disk wouldn't cure the MEU of it's ills so that's not an in game option..lol

You know that the technology gist is based on the ideal that it's origin is from organic minds, so they're related before they become synthesized... too late to say you're sorry..lol

 Well under what standing is the best option for an ending suicide by option 1, suicide by option 2, suicide by option 3, or suicide by waiting long enough to starve to death via option 4 of doing sod all simply cos a holographic kids tells you so.

 If there was an option 5 of lick your finger and stick it in the mains to short out the kid i would honestly consider taking it and whats worse is it makes more sense then the bioware suicide options.

Modifié par shingara, 05 août 2013 - 01:58 .

[3DandBeyond]

shingara wrote...


  Lets look, soverign is running around the universe, shep finds out kills him, sets out to kill all things reaper. Collectors pop up controlled by harbringer shep goes in kicks there heads in. in 3 we face off to a 7 year old.....................

The plot holes are all in three, not in one or two which points to the fact that some writers in three had no idea about the canon in mass effect. All reapers are not in the form of harbringer, some are varients of the original, some are nothing like harbringer mainly the proto reaper.

 In 3 we get this wierd is it a dream is it real bs, running through a wood in slow mo after a glowing kid. we originaly got control or destroy which was badly taken as nearly everyone taking that wanted shep to live so they added in a take a breath on earth scene that totaly blew everything else out of the water from the point harbringer knocks them out.

 Then we got synthesis added and as everyone had stated that TIM does control and Anderson does destroy that destroy must be the real ending so they make the cutscene show shepard do the synthesis just to peev off more people.


 And the synthetics dont always destroy the organics, the Zha'til were the synthesis by there own choice and what did the reapers do, they turned them into husks. So no synthesis doesnt work, it just makes it easier for the reapers to get you. The geth didnt attack the quarians, the quarians attacked the geth and they defended themselves, they didnt persue them, they let them go. EDI on luna didnt attack, she acted in self defence after becoming fully self aware whilst being attacked and tried to defend herself, her final message on luna is help.

 Also on the edi dying, did you know if you keep your score low enough and take edi on the final beam evas body will die but edi doesnt when you hit destroy. Thats because they never updated the cutscene for destroy with the extended ended cutscene.

 Plot holes galour.

Yes a lot of people love to point at ME 2 and say that it had plot holes.  Maybe, but it was up to ME3 to fill them not to create more based upon what was ignored and happened in 1 and 2.  In fact, the devs said ME3's endings would answer all questions.  I'll always maintain that that is what endings are for for the most part-they answer questions and if a mystery existed they are the "aha" moments where you finally understand it all.  Sure they can end up as mysteries but then I've never been a big fan of those "I'm an intellectual story so figure out the ending yourself" kind of things.  Fun twists but ones that resonate with the audience can be yes, fun.  But taking these huge monsters with brains and even personalities and arrogance and turning them into circus monkeys was not a fun twist.

And ending the game on a boss conversation is far less rewarding then the overused boss fight.  No, I didn't want a simple boss fight but I'd have liked a confrontation, even a meeting of the minds, debate, argument, and a challenge to the illogical crap the kid spewed.  What I got was Spineless Shepard who can end up as char-broiled Shepard, Reaper Shepard, Suicidal Shepard, or Torso Shepard.  Yeah, that's what I spent all that time working on a face for, why I cared to create a Shepard that looked somewhat the same in all 3 games, and why many people worked to get a Shepard that looked like them.  Just so at best I might get to look at a headless one covered in rubble like garbage.

And it still comes down to a choice between flavors of suicide in service to something Shepard is even told and knows sees him/her as a threat or at best one version that should be death given what we're told and shown but is a gasping chest alone who knows where.  It still comes down to it being fully plausible based upon the fact we all have different personalities and understandings that this crap is about genocide (if you thought the geth and EDI were people or even if you figure that damaging tech will kill a lot of people at best), dictatorial oversight by an emotionless Shreaper who uses reapers to enforce peace, and magical pseudo-scientific synthesis accomplished instantly through some unknown means and for some uncertain reason.  Or refuse and die, morons.  None of the choices even certainly DO anything to accomplish the kid's goal let alone Shepard's.  Synthesized people won't be immune from conflict that could kill everything.  Controlled people with reapers alive won't all be super happy and some might actually fight.  In Destroy the kid (believable, yeah right), says the conflict will return.  Because he only understands one view, one type of conflict.  That is idiotic. 

And he sees order and chaos as the good and the bad of it.  It's why he's against evolution (it's chaotic due to the sometimes randomness of it).  But real people know both can be good or bad. 

And again the kid says his solution no longer works.  At that point if he really were some advanced AI he would not continue implementing a non-working solution because it no longer would be a solution.  At the point where new solutions that he thinks will work are presented, he would stop using non-working things.  He would stop using the reapers because they are no longer a solution.  But he doesn't.  Logic is thrown out the window.

[shingara]

@3dand totally agree with everything you have written. The plot holes left in 2 were purposly left because if there were no plot holes in 2 we would know everything before 3, Thats the point of a trilogy. Its like the edi must die if destroy is chosen, its just false as only evas body dies. Thats proven by getting a low enough score before the beam and getting evas body disintigrated by harbinger, edi survives within the normandy and her name never shows up on the dead board.

For me its just lazy writing of well we dont want them to play shep again so lets make them kill him or her. This char we have nurtured and learn to love through many years can grow old and die gracfully and we pick up later on, no we must end there days in one disatisfying way or another.

  As for the ending, we have had in the other mass effect games the conversations after the boss fights, the choices that show where shepard is going and what they may do in the future. It didnt require it then and could have been done after in some fashion or other.

Modifié par shingara, 05 août 2013 - 02:19 .

[Wayning_Star]

shingara wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

The idea of the apex race creating a being and marking their own destruction/harvest is complementary of the NEED of all races in the MEU to utilize tools/technology to accomplish goals, or even exist at all in the MEU. The idea of speeding evolution is to accomplish a goal, that being finding a clue to the catalyst problem of chaos, that what it calls competition between races. In this case it happens to be organic sentience vs synthetic. The fighting doesn't seem to break out until one attacks the other, usually the organics strike first, for some reason, fear probably. Why would organics fear synthetics life forms. That what they need to exist in the MEU? The proto reaper is an independent idea of what the humanity requires to interact with the pure ideal of technology. A human reapership. But it was not finished nor reached full operation, as Shepard takes it out of service completely. The story hints that it is a contraption of the collectors and their controlling reapership.

That what is usually called plot holes are not holes, but clues to the plot. The actual "plot" isn't exposed until the endgame. The only left out agenda is that the crucible was devised by an unknown race and the choices were not made by those who invoke them. Shep merely gets to mouth the perspective. Leaving the crucible as unexplained and thus a kind of plot hole.

  Lets look, soverign is running around the universe, shep finds out kills him, sets out to kill all things reaper. Collectors pop up controlled by harbringer shep goes in kicks there heads in. in 3 we face off to a 7 year old.....................

The plot holes are all in three, not in one or two which points to the fact that some writers in three had no idea about the canon in mass effect. All reapers are not in the form of harbringer, some are varients of the original, some are nothing like harbringer mainly the proto reaper.

 In 3 we get this wierd is it a dream is it real bs, running through a wood in slow mo after a glowing kid. we originaly got control or destroy which was badly taken as nearly everyone taking that wanted shep to live so they added in a take a breath on earth scene that totaly blew everything else out of the water from the point harbringer knocks them out.

 Then we got synthesis added and as everyone had stated that TIM does control and Anderson does destroy that destroy must be the real ending so they make the cutscene show shepard do the synthesis just to peev off more people.


 And the synthetics dont always destroy the organics, the Zha'til were the synthesis by there own choice and what did the reapers do, they turned them into husks. So no synthesis doesnt work, it just makes it easier for the reapers to get you. The geth didnt attack the quarians, the quarians attacked the geth and they defended themselves, they didnt persue them, they let them go. EDI on luna didnt attack, she acted in self defence after becoming fully self aware whilst being attacked and tried to defend herself, her final message on luna is help.

 Also on the edi dying, did you know if you keep your score low enough and take edi on the final beam evas body will die but edi doesnt when you hit destroy. Thats because they never updated the cutscene for destroy with the extended ended cutscene.

 Plot holes galour.

the dreamy stuff always came at me as the catalyst form of communication and Shep's link because of his/her tech from being resurrected. That stuff is all reaper tech, so Shep is closer to reapers than many would care to admit. The leviathan scenes of communication provide support for the form of communication with the catalyst. Kind of proves that Shepard is beamed up to the catalyst, but not his/her body, what's left down in that pile of rubble, unconscious. This is the dream state the IT folks took for total control, because of the blurred apparitions provided in the cut scenes. These were provided to inform, but I think confused folks a bit? Just because the catalyst is represented by a child has little effective value as a plot device, unless you consider it to represent what the MEU is to the catalyst. It might look at Shep/humanity as a child, so it resolves to enlist that iconic for Shepards benefit? There are many ways to consider what is relative, but to argue ever penny of the dollar is rhetorical. Edi represents humanity in technological form, the Reapers consider being reapers is a 'good' thing, as that is what they are programmed by the catalyst to believe. Eventually if the organics commit to applying pressure upon synthetic life forms without destroying them out right will eventually succumb to the synthetic life forms. According to the catalyst observations happens more than not, most always the thrall races who created/engineer the probability of synthetic life form, lose to those life forms. Usually they're created out of necessity and the resultant dependency puts the organic creator race at the serious/fatal disadvantage.

The Leviathan are prime example of this.

but for the technical issues and bloopers, have no bearing on the basic plot invoked.

[Ironhandjustice]

So, OP... you haven't read The Edge of Foundation, written by Isaac Asimov right?

Neither you have seen the Deus Ex ending, as far as I can see. Please watch/read both, and you'll have your answer.

[3DandBeyond]

Wayning_Star wrote...



yes 3d, I know, but you must retire to the ideal that the game is for general audience, many who will see no need to proof the entire trilogy to accept that/their reality as a form of reality. It doesn't have to be exact to be accepted, normally. Snapping the disk wouldn't cure the MEU of it's ills so that's not an in game option..lol

You know that the technology gist is based on the ideal that it's origin is from organic minds, so they're related before they become synthesized... too late to say you're sorry..lol

And yet this is exactly what some think is not true.  Some think BW created this super intellectual ending but I agree with you.  What BW did was the impossible.  They created a pseudo-intellectual ending that made people that like pew pew think they'd gotten something cool.  All those notions of BW wanting speculation was about them wanting people to say wow that's sooo cool...looking.  It was about appearances and I think there was some knowledge that as long as it sounded and looked and was said to be smart by the devs then some would never want to look more deeply at it.  But that worked against them because even those that think the endings are ok often acknowledge they aren't super great and are meant to as you say appeal to a general audience.  That would be fine if BW didn't indicate the endings were just too smart for us so we needed to understand them AND if they didn't even fail at something that generally appeals to the broadest audience of all-emotion.

They did attempt to fill that void with the slides and cutscenes at the end, but they had already created the big disconnect.  We were on an emotional ride, being carried by Shepard's ability at last to face his/her nemesis and the excitement and anticipation of how it all would turn out based upon what we the player had done and would do.  And then it falls apart.  Shepard is turned into a lumbering pile of idiocy, so for me that's a huge emotional disconnect-that Shepard had things coming out of her mouth that the Shepard I played would never say.  And she never said things my Shepard would have said.  Then she shoots Anderson and while she was upset about some probably imaginary kid dying, she barely winces over having shot him and then his subsequent death.  She sees TIM die or kills him and no matter what there should be some emotion there-he freaking brought her back to life.  Oh but he became this mustache twirling diabolical anti-hero, except he was right.  Okey dokey. 

And the reapers-ooooh loved to hate Sovereign, wanted to smack down Harbinger and had a lot of talks with him or listened to his taunts of how he wanted to cause us pain, wanted to destroy us, and so on.  These things that wanted to kill us but torture and torment us while doing so, are not trained monkeys who really never wanted anything bad to happen to us, no they were there to save us.  Talk about your emotional disconnect.  That rips out that notion that even a general audience would by and large think this is great.  I've said it before if you aren't going to write a great story with a great ending, you at least must let people leave with a smile-that does not mean that everything turns out all happy and light-it can even mean in the context of the story everyone dies, if it fits and makes sense.  People can leave with a smile and "tears".  And that can work if done well.  Even a "general audience" finds that appealing.

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

shingara wrote...


  Lets look, soverign is running around the universe, shep finds out kills him, sets out to kill all things reaper. Collectors pop up controlled by harbringer shep goes in kicks there heads in. in 3 we face off to a 7 year old.....................

The plot holes are all in three, not in one or two which points to the fact that some writers in three had no idea about the canon in mass effect. All reapers are not in the form of harbringer, some are varients of the original, some are nothing like harbringer mainly the proto reaper.

 In 3 we get this wierd is it a dream is it real bs, running through a wood in slow mo after a glowing kid. we originaly got control or destroy which was badly taken as nearly everyone taking that wanted shep to live so they added in a take a breath on earth scene that totaly blew everything else out of the water from the point harbringer knocks them out.

 Then we got synthesis added and as everyone had stated that TIM does control and Anderson does destroy that destroy must be the real ending so they make the cutscene show shepard do the synthesis just to peev off more people.


 And the synthetics dont always destroy the organics, the Zha'til were the synthesis by there own choice and what did the reapers do, they turned them into husks. So no synthesis doesnt work, it just makes it easier for the reapers to get you. The geth didnt attack the quarians, the quarians attacked the geth and they defended themselves, they didnt persue them, they let them go. EDI on luna didnt attack, she acted in self defence after becoming fully self aware whilst being attacked and tried to defend herself, her final message on luna is help.

 Also on the edi dying, did you know if you keep your score low enough and take edi on the final beam evas body will die but edi doesnt when you hit destroy. Thats because they never updated the cutscene for destroy with the extended ended cutscene.

 Plot holes galour.

Yes a lot of people love to point at ME 2 and say that it had plot holes.  Maybe, but it was up to ME3 to fill them not to create more based upon what was ignored and happened in 1 and 2.  In fact, the devs said ME3's endings would answer all questions.  I'll always maintain that that is what endings are for for the most part-they answer questions and if a mystery existed they are the "aha" moments where you finally understand it all.  Sure they can end up as mysteries but then I've never been a big fan of those "I'm an intellectual story so figure out the ending yourself" kind of things.  Fun twists but ones that resonate with the audience can be yes, fun.  But taking these huge monsters with brains and even personalities and arrogance and turning them into circus monkeys was not a fun twist.

And ending the game on a boss conversation is far less rewarding then the overused boss fight.  No, I didn't want a simple boss fight but I'd have liked a confrontation, even a meeting of the minds, debate, argument, and a challenge to the illogical crap the kid spewed.  What I got was Spineless Shepard who can end up as char-broiled Shepard, Reaper Shepard, Suicidal Shepard, or Torso Shepard.  Yeah, that's what I spent all that time working on a face for, why I cared to create a Shepard that looked somewhat the same in all 3 games, and why many people worked to get a Shepard that looked like them.  Just so at best I might get to look at a headless one covered in rubble like garbage.

And it still comes down to a choice between flavors of suicide in service to something Shepard is even told and knows sees him/her as a threat or at best one version that should be death given what we're told and shown but is a gasping chest alone who knows where.  It still comes down to it being fully plausible based upon the fact we all have different personalities and understandings that this crap is about genocide (if you thought the geth and EDI were people or even if you figure that damaging tech will kill a lot of people at best), dictatorial oversight by an emotionless Shreaper who uses reapers to enforce peace, and magical pseudo-scientific synthesis accomplished instantly through some unknown means and for some uncertain reason.  Or refuse and die, morons.  None of the choices even certainly DO anything to accomplish the kid's goal let alone Shepard's.  Synthesized people won't be immune from conflict that could kill everything.  Controlled people with reapers alive won't all be super happy and some might actually fight.  In Destroy the kid (believable, yeah right), says the conflict will return.  Because he only understands one view, one type of conflict.  That is idiotic. 

And he sees order and chaos as the good and the bad of it.  It's why he's against evolution (it's chaotic due to the sometimes randomness of it).  But real people know both can be good or bad. 

And again the kid says his solution no longer works.  At that point if he really were some advanced AI he would not continue implementing a non-working solution because it no longer would be a solution.  At the point where new solutions that he thinks will work are presented, he would stop using non-working things.  He would stop using the reapers because they are no longer a solution.  But he doesn't.  Logic is thrown out the window.

the crucible attachment is the only reason the catalyst says anything to shepard. The Idea of solution before then was to 'contain' the problem, not resolve it. Apparently, smarter beings in the MEU sets up Shepard to rewire the catalyst to obey a certain request chain.  Chaos isn't about people, it's about the universe as it confused the catalyst, who takes It on its own to change the nature of things to remove the chaotic nature of build and destroy. A typical organic approach to survival..lol

[KieranW]

OnlyMrChill wrote...


I also didn't care for the Geth or Tali and her species dying. I only cared about me, Miranda, ensuring humanities survival and killing those damn reapers.

I'm getting the sense that you may have supported Cerberus in your playthrough?

That aside, I will say this for the endings. They were powerful. That doesn't mean I believe they were good. In fact, I hated them. Origins had the right of it.

*Spoilers*

You can slay the Archdemon, killing your Warden. Or you can sacrifice the (potentially) current king and (potentially) your best friend Alistair. Failing that, you can do the dark ritual with Morrigan, which could (potentially) screw everything up for everyone in the not-so-distant future. 

But no. Let's just screw everything over in every way possible. You want to achieve your goal for the last three games? Well tough. The Geth die, EDI dies, all tech get's owned and you, most likely, also die. And in the other two... Well, the idea of re-writing all Organic and Synthetic life is kinda abhorent. Imagine if someone, for arguements sake, kidnapped you, lopped off your limbs and gave you cybernetic grafts. How grateful would you be for that, really? "Oh, but cybernetics are better" "Gee, thanks for drugging me and cutting off my limbs. I'm so much happier now."

[shingara]

Wayning_Star wrote...

shingara wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

The idea of the apex race creating a being and marking their own destruction/harvest is complementary of the NEED of all races in the MEU to utilize tools/technology to accomplish goals, or even exist at all in the MEU. The idea of speeding evolution is to accomplish a goal, that being finding a clue to the catalyst problem of chaos, that what it calls competition between races. In this case it happens to be organic sentience vs synthetic. The fighting doesn't seem to break out until one attacks the other, usually the organics strike first, for some reason, fear probably. Why would organics fear synthetics life forms. That what they need to exist in the MEU? The proto reaper is an independent idea of what the humanity requires to interact with the pure ideal of technology. A human reapership. But it was not finished nor reached full operation, as Shepard takes it out of service completely. The story hints that it is a contraption of the collectors and their controlling reapership.

That what is usually called plot holes are not holes, but clues to the plot. The actual "plot" isn't exposed until the endgame. The only left out agenda is that the crucible was devised by an unknown race and the choices were not made by those who invoke them. Shep merely gets to mouth the perspective. Leaving the crucible as unexplained and thus a kind of plot hole.

  Lets look, soverign is running around the universe, shep finds out kills him, sets out to kill all things reaper. Collectors pop up controlled by harbringer shep goes in kicks there heads in. in 3 we face off to a 7 year old.....................

The plot holes are all in three, not in one or two which points to the fact that some writers in three had no idea about the canon in mass effect. All reapers are not in the form of harbringer, some are varients of the original, some are nothing like harbringer mainly the proto reaper.

 In 3 we get this wierd is it a dream is it real bs, running through a wood in slow mo after a glowing kid. we originaly got control or destroy which was badly taken as nearly everyone taking that wanted shep to live so they added in a take a breath on earth scene that totaly blew everything else out of the water from the point harbringer knocks them out.

 Then we got synthesis added and as everyone had stated that TIM does control and Anderson does destroy that destroy must be the real ending so they make the cutscene show shepard do the synthesis just to peev off more people.


 And the synthetics dont always destroy the organics, the Zha'til were the synthesis by there own choice and what did the reapers do, they turned them into husks. So no synthesis doesnt work, it just makes it easier for the reapers to get you. The geth didnt attack the quarians, the quarians attacked the geth and they defended themselves, they didnt persue them, they let them go. EDI on luna didnt attack, she acted in self defence after becoming fully self aware whilst being attacked and tried to defend herself, her final message on luna is help.

 Also on the edi dying, did you know if you keep your score low enough and take edi on the final beam evas body will die but edi doesnt when you hit destroy. Thats because they never updated the cutscene for destroy with the extended ended cutscene.

 Plot holes galour.

the dreamy stuff always came at me as the catalyst form of communication and Shep's link because of his/her tech from being resurrected. That stuff is all reaper tech, so Shep is closer to reapers than many would care to admit. The leviathan scenes of communication provide support for the form of communication with the catalyst. Kind of proves that Shepard is beamed up to the catalyst, but not his/her body, what's left down in that pile of rubble, unconscious. This is the dream state the IT folks took for total control, because of the blurred apparitions provided in the cut scenes. These were provided to inform, but I think confused folks a bit? Just because the catalyst is represented by a child has little effective value as a plot device, unless you consider it to represent what the MEU is to the catalyst. It might look at Shep/humanity as a child, so it resolves to enlist that iconic for Shepards benefit? There are many ways to consider what is relative, but to argue ever penny of the dollar is rhetorical. Edi represents humanity in technological form, the Reapers consider being reapers is a 'good' thing, as that is what they are programmed by the catalyst to believe. Eventually if the organics commit to applying pressure upon synthetic life forms without destroying them out right will eventually succumb to the synthetic life forms. According to the catalyst observations happens more than not, most always the thrall races who created/engineer the probability of synthetic life form, lose to those life forms. Usually they're created out of necessity and the resultant dependency puts the organic creator race at the serious/fatal disadvantage.

The Leviathan are prime example of this.

but for the technical issues and bloopers, have no bearing on the basic plot invoked.

  Whilst shep had alot of cybornetics mixed with bolts and plates to stick them back together most of the lazerus project was biological. No reaper tech was put into them which is shown in the lazerus videos in 2 and the mini videos in 3. Also Bioware played with the idea of having a reaper shepard but totally threw it out as indoctrination was a no go with shepard.

  The more then probably reason had the dreams at all is because the writers had no clue how todo the child and the bulk of us still have no idea why they did the child at all. Leviathon is borked within its own lore. Its is able to control anything but cant control doctor bryson who could call of the leviathon hunt instantly. And if leviathon could control shep it would never have released them, it would have retained control of them and used shep to destroy the reapers.

   And again the catalyst who is the main reaper is standing there spewing out rubish so you dont kill it but ultimatly kill yourself no matter what you do. Again why should you believe a word the catalyst who has been trying to kill you for 3 game says ?

 This is that cataylst who is the citidel yet couldnt do anything to help soverign hmm, ye ok.

Modifié par shingara, 05 août 2013 - 02:29 .

[hiraeth]

3DandBeyond wrote...
And again the kid says his solution no longer works.  At that point if he really were some advanced AI he would not continue implementing a non-working solution because it no longer would be a solution.  At the point where new solutions that he thinks will work are presented, he would stop using non-working things.  He would stop using the reapers because they are no longer a solution.  But he doesn't.  Logic is thrown out the window.

This is a good point that I hadn't really verbalized. There was always something a little bit off about an advanced AI admitting that it's solution doesn't work anymore, yet staying around to offer "choices" on how to fix it. It just felt wrong. If your solution doesn't work anymore, self-destruct. Go away. If you're going to stay around, give me choices that don't involve the very tool you were using that no longer works (e.g., controlling reapers).

But this is where people jump in and say, "He only does that because the Crucible 'changed' him," otherwise he wouldn't have offered those choices. Rather than just being an overpowered gun, the Crucible completely changes the rules of the entire universe. The Crucible made it so that not only does the solution not work anymore, but somehow "changes" the AI and directs him to offer me choices (e.g., destroy the reapers) that seem to counter what he's been doing for the last gajillion years. And I'm hearing all of this from the king of the reapers himself, who has only his word as proof of what he's saying (because last I checked the Crucible is just supposed to point and shoot reapers).

In the end, if the Crucible is truly that much of a game-changer, then it's truly a deus ex machina...introducing the Crucible at the beginning of ME3 already felt random/contrived, but then in the last 10 minutes of the game making it an omnipotent weapon that changes the fundamentality of organic and synthetic life in the galaxy is just ridiculous. I still honestly can't believe they did it.

[Ironhandjustice]

KieranW wrote...

OnlyMrChill wrote...


I also didn't care for the Geth or Tali and her species dying. I only cared about me, Miranda, ensuring humanities survival and killing those damn reapers.

I'm getting the sense that you may have supported Cerberus in your playthrough?

That aside, I will say this for the endings. They were powerful. That doesn't mean I believe they were good. In fact, I hated them. Origins had the right of it.

*Spoilers*

You can slay the Archdemon, killing your Warden. Or you can sacrifice the (potentially) current king and (potentially) your best friend Alistair. Failing that, you can do the dark ritual with Morrigan, which could (potentially) screw everything up for everyone in the not-so-distant future. 

But no. Let's just screw everything over in every way possible. You want to achieve your goal for the last three games? Well tough. The Geth die, EDI dies, all tech get's owned and you, most likely, also die. And in the other two... Well, the idea of re-writing all Organic and Synthetic life is kinda abhorent. Imagine if someone, for arguements sake, kidnapped you, lopped off your limbs and gave you cybernetic grafts. How grateful would you be for that, really? "Oh, but cybernetics are better" "Gee, thanks for drugging me and cutting off my limbs. I'm so much happier now."

They were powerfull the first time I saw them...

As I stated...

So, OP... you haven't read The Edge of Foundation, written by Isaac Asimov right?

Neither you have seen the Deus Ex ending, as far as I can see. Please watch/read both, and you'll have your answer.

[3DandBeyond]

shingara wrote...

@3dand totally agree with everything you have written. The plot holes left in 2 were purposly left because if there were no plot holes in 2 we would know everything before 3, Thats the point of a trilogy. Its like the edi must die if destroy is chosen, its just false as only evas body dies. Thats proven by getting a low enough score before the beam and getting evas body disintigrated by harbinger, edi survives within the normandy and her name never shows up on the dead board.

For me its just lazy writing of well we dont want them to play shep again so lets make them kill him or her. This char we have nurtured and learn to love through many years can grow old and die gracfully and we pick up later on, no we must end there days in one disatisfying way or another.

  As for the ending, we have had in the other mass effect games the conversations after the boss fights, the choices that show where shepard is going and what they may do in the future. It didnt require it then and could have been done after in some fashion or other.

This is exactly the thing.  Any failure of ME2's was ME3's responsibility to fix or just answer.  But the writers just ignored stuff.  The Collector base should have mattered and loading screens in ME2 said choices would in ME3.  But they don't.

I do agree-I think the whole idea always was to kill off Shepard but at the last minute they realized they needed to leave in some ambiguity so as to be able to put up that "buy more DLC" screen as Shepard becomes a legend.  The torso was also a way to try and force people to play multi-player since it originally could not be gotten without MP and that was to encourage more money from micro-transactions.  The fact that BW kept denying you needed MP for it until they decided to fix it indicates this.

And you are right about the timing of any conversation.  People say they liked the ending because they wanted to know all about the reapers except that was not a big need in the game.  No one ever said they needed to understand them, find out their motivations, and get all cozy with them in order to fix this.  They said they needed to destroy them.  The epilog would have been effective had it been used appropriately to answer the unasked questions.  That was the time for motives to be explained.  Sort of like the scene in Alien where Ripley is talking with the android's head about what he was doing and who for. 

In one version I imagine Shepard confronting a dying Harbinger and asking why.  How it plays out could be up to you, but as I see it for those that wanted answers perhaps he'd explain the reapers were just as needful as any living thing OR for those who didn't, maybe he'd say that Sovereign already made it clear that puny beings like Shepard could never comprehend things like reapers.  If you've ever seen Babylon 5 there was a scene once about some dark forces existing in the galaxy and the one character said he could no more explain them than an ant could tell another ant about people.  That's how I saw the reapers-huge and unknowable.

The thing for me is that BW took the story where the action and tension should be the greatest and made a dream-like slow motion walking scene and capped it off with a boss conversation that never allowed the player any sort of real palpable resolution.  There's no "phew, we did it" moment followed by real epilogs and a cooldown.

[Wayning_Star]

MassEffectFShep wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
And again the kid says his solution no longer works.  At that point if he really were some advanced AI he would not continue implementing a non-working solution because it no longer would be a solution.  At the point where new solutions that he thinks will work are presented, he would stop using non-working things.  He would stop using the reapers because they are no longer a solution.  But he doesn't.  Logic is thrown out the window.

This is a good point that I hadn't really verbalized. There was always something a little bit off about an advanced AI admitting that it's solution doesn't work anymore, yet staying around to offer "choices" on how to fix it. It just felt wrong. If your solution doesn't work anymore, self-destruct. Go away. If you're going to stay around, give me choices that don't involve the very tool you were using that no longer works (e.g., controlling reapers).

But this is where people jump in and say, "He only does that because the Crucible 'changed' him," otherwise he wouldn't have offered those choices. Rather than just being an overpowered gun, the Crucible completely changes the rules of the entire universe. The Crucible made it so that not only does the solution not work anymore, but somehow "changes" the AI and directs him to offer me choices (e.g., destroy the reapers) that seem to counter what he's been doing for the last gajillion years. And I'm hearing all of this from the king of the reapers himself, who has only his word as proof of what he's saying (because last I checked the Crucible is just supposed to point and shoot reapers).

In the end, if the Crucible is truly that much of a game-changer, then it's truly a deus ex machina...introducing the Crucible at the beginning of ME3 already felt random/contrived, but then in the last 10 minutes of the game making it an omnipotent weapon that changes the fundamentality of organic and synthetic life in the galaxy is just ridiculous. I still honestly can't believe they did it.

cannot provide an argument with concepts you're debunking.

the dues ex machina.is undone by Shepard invoking the crucible and communing with the catalyst because of it.


the crucible isn't a weapon, it's a tool. That's the funny part...

[Archonsg]

In the end, MEHEM even though its a flawed ending is a better ending for myself because I didn't play 3 games over 5 years to be a "Neville Chamberlain" to Cataylst's "Hitler".
You can supplant "Neville Chamberlain" for Benedict Arnold, or Vidkun Quisling if that brings context.

So yeah, the only way to "win" is to appease your enemy by commiting an act of suicide at your enemy's bequest.
Right.
Screw that.

[Wayning_Star]

3DandBeyond wrote...

shingara wrote...

@3dand totally agree with everything you have written. The plot holes left in 2 were purposly left because if there were no plot holes in 2 we would know everything before 3, Thats the point of a trilogy. Its like the edi must die if destroy is chosen, its just false as only evas body dies. Thats proven by getting a low enough score before the beam and getting evas body disintigrated by harbinger, edi survives within the normandy and her name never shows up on the dead board.

For me its just lazy writing of well we dont want them to play shep again so lets make them kill him or her. This char we have nurtured and learn to love through many years can grow old and die gracfully and we pick up later on, no we must end there days in one disatisfying way or another.

  As for the ending, we have had in the other mass effect games the conversations after the boss fights, the choices that show where shepard is going and what they may do in the future. It didnt require it then and could have been done after in some fashion or other.

This is exactly the thing.  Any failure of ME2's was ME3's responsibility to fix or just answer.  But the writers just ignored stuff.  The Collector base should have mattered and loading screens in ME2 said choices would in ME3.  But they don't.

I do agree-I think the whole idea always was to kill off Shepard but at the last minute they realized they needed to leave in some ambiguity so as to be able to put up that "buy more DLC" screen as Shepard becomes a legend.  The torso was also a way to try and force people to play multi-player since it originally could not be gotten without MP and that was to encourage more money from micro-transactions.  The fact that BW kept denying you needed MP for it until they decided to fix it indicates this.

And you are right about the timing of any conversation.  People say they liked the ending because they wanted to know all about the reapers except that was not a big need in the game.  No one ever said they needed to understand them, find out their motivations, and get all cozy with them in order to fix this.  They said they needed to destroy them.  The epilog would have been effective had it been used appropriately to answer the unasked questions.  That was the time for motives to be explained.  Sort of like the scene in Alien where Ripley is talking with the android's head about what he was doing and who for. 

In one version I imagine Shepard confronting a dying Harbinger and asking why.  How it plays out could be up to you, but as I see it for those that wanted answers perhaps he'd explain the reapers were just as needful as any living thing OR for those who didn't, maybe he'd say that Sovereign already made it clear that puny beings like Shepard could never comprehend things like reapers.  If you've ever seen Babylon 5 there was a scene once about some dark forces existing in the galaxy and the one character said he could no more explain them than an ant could tell another ant about people.  That's how I saw the reapers-huge and unknowable.

The thing for me is that BW took the story where the action and tension should be the greatest and made a dream-like slow motion walking scene and capped it off with a boss conversation that never allowed the player any sort of real palpable resolution.  There's no "phew, we did it" moment followed by real epilogs and a cooldown.

I'd suspect that understanding an advanced computer of the billions year past could be considered incalculable..at least mildly so..

[GreyLycanTrope]

OnlyMrChill wrote...
I also didn't care for the Geth or Tali and her species dying. I only cared about me, Miranda, ensuring humanities survival and killing those damn reapers.

So why all the hate towards the ending(s) of this game?

Because not everyone else felt that way perhaps? That and it was narrative suicide to bring glowboy into the picture.

[shingara]

3DandBeyond wrote...

shingara wrote...

@3dand totally agree with everything you have written. The plot holes left in 2 were purposly left because if there were no plot holes in 2 we would know everything before 3, Thats the point of a trilogy. Its like the edi must die if destroy is chosen, its just false as only evas body dies. Thats proven by getting a low enough score before the beam and getting evas body disintigrated by harbinger, edi survives within the normandy and her name never shows up on the dead board.

For me its just lazy writing of well we dont want them to play shep again so lets make them kill him or her. This char we have nurtured and learn to love through many years can grow old and die gracfully and we pick up later on, no we must end there days in one disatisfying way or another.

  As for the ending, we have had in the other mass effect games the conversations after the boss fights, the choices that show where shepard is going and what they may do in the future. It didnt require it then and could have been done after in some fashion or other.

This is exactly the thing.  Any failure of ME2's was ME3's responsibility to fix or just answer.  But the writers just ignored stuff.  The Collector base should have mattered and loading screens in ME2 said choices would in ME3.  But they don't.

I do agree-I think the whole idea always was to kill off Shepard but at the last minute they realized they needed to leave in some ambiguity so as to be able to put up that "buy more DLC" screen as Shepard becomes a legend.  The torso was also a way to try and force people to play multi-player since it originally could not be gotten without MP and that was to encourage more money from micro-transactions.  The fact that BW kept denying you needed MP for it until they decided to fix it indicates this.

And you are right about the timing of any conversation.  People say they liked the ending because they wanted to know all about the reapers except that was not a big need in the game.  No one ever said they needed to understand them, find out their motivations, and get all cozy with them in order to fix this.  They said they needed to destroy them.  The epilog would have been effective had it been used appropriately to answer the unasked questions.  That was the time for motives to be explained.  Sort of like the scene in Alien where Ripley is talking with the android's head about what he was doing and who for. 

In one version I imagine Shepard confronting a dying Harbinger and asking why.  How it plays out could be up to you, but as I see it for those that wanted answers perhaps he'd explain the reapers were just as needful as any living thing OR for those who didn't, maybe he'd say that Sovereign already made it clear that puny beings like Shepard could never comprehend things like reapers.  If you've ever seen Babylon 5 there was a scene once about some dark forces existing in the galaxy and the one character said he could no more explain them than an ant could tell another ant about people.  That's how I saw the reapers-huge and unknowable.

The thing for me is that BW took the story where the action and tension should be the greatest and made a dream-like slow motion walking scene and capped it off with a boss conversation that never allowed the player any sort of real palpable resolution.  There's no "phew, we did it" moment followed by real epilogs and a cooldown.

 Yes agree, For me this trilogy was always meant tobe the reapers, the next one was about dark matter. If on destroying the reapers it had turned out that they were created to stop the dark matter destroying the galaxy but needed more reapers to stop the chaos of the galaxy destroying itself that would have made perfect sense from the reapers perspective but what we got was just a joke.

 There was zero need for us to commite suicide as shepard for them not to tobe played in the next trilogy. it could simply have been made years after when shepard is old and grey and next to no use at all. all the previous choices would have had some impact and i firmly believe that was the original idea.

Modifié par shingara, 05 août 2013 - 02:49 .

[3DandBeyond]

MassEffectFShep wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...
And again the kid says his solution no longer works.  At that point if he really were some advanced AI he would not continue implementing a non-working solution because it no longer would be a solution.  At the point where new solutions that he thinks will work are presented, he would stop using non-working things.  He would stop using the reapers because they are no longer a solution.  But he doesn't.  Logic is thrown out the window.

This is a good point that I hadn't really verbalized. There was always something a little bit off about an advanced AI admitting that it's solution doesn't work anymore, yet staying around to offer "choices" on how to fix it. It just felt wrong. If your solution doesn't work anymore, self-destruct. Go away. If you're going to stay around, give me choices that don't involve the very tool you were using that no longer works (e.g., controlling reapers).

But this is where people jump in and say, "He only does that because the Crucible 'changed' him," otherwise he wouldn't have offered those choices. Rather than just being an overpowered gun, the Crucible completely changes the rules of the entire universe. The Crucible made it so that not only does the solution not work anymore, but somehow "changes" the AI and directs him to offer me choices (e.g., destroy the reapers) that seem to counter what he's been doing for the last gajillion years. And I'm hearing all of this from the king of the reapers himself, who has only his word as proof of what he's saying (because last I checked the Crucible is just supposed to point and shoot reapers).

In the end, if the Crucible is truly that much of a game-changer, then it's truly a deus ex machina...introducing the Crucible at the beginning of ME3 already felt random/contrived, but then in the last 10 minutes of the game making it an omnipotent weapon that changes the fundamentality of organic and synthetic life in the galaxy is just ridiculous. I still honestly can't believe they did it.

Yes that's it.  If the crucible changed him then what, his programming is altered?  And if it's altered then how is it the only solutions still utilize non-working ones (reapers) or involve or affect them?  The reapers are no longer a solution, but oh yeah they are or they need to be taken care of or you must become one with them.  The non-working things still are after effects of a new solution meant to solve what they could not.  My head hurts. 

If they don't work hit the off switch.  Destroy is not needed-you control them right?  Turn them off.  Or is this not about the reapers?  Of course it is and it isn't all at the same time.  What matters is using the reapers to solve a problem that no longer is all that relevant but is best exemplified by the existence of the reapers.  Oh frack.

[Steelcan]

Just because you personally found no issue with the ending does not mean the ending is good. It is narratively and thematically revolting and a fine example of how not to end a series.