It doesn't matter if we're done with Shepard or not, what matters is the ending Shepard chose. I can't see Synergy working as a "canon" ending for obvious reasons. In my mind, this is indeed space magic and a nod to fairy tale endings. Even though I chose it first (out of curiosity, but I did save with the intent to immediately see the other endings) it's clear to me that that ending is not only the ending to Shepard's story, but the story of the Mass Effect universe. Without conflict, there is no story or drama. Also, it always struck me as a bit creepy and unsettling. This would be a complex and hard to understand status quo for new fans and I don't see Bioware or EA going that route.
Control is also a dead end for me. Shepard is now a seemingly benevolent AI god that controls a vast fleet of Reapers that go on to repair every relay, planet, etc, and constantly watch over and defend the "many." Would the Shepalyst even allow conflict between organic species? Not that war is a good thing, of course, but taking away any "right" limits conflict and thus limits story potential. It's also a bit too "high concept" to use as a status quo for new fans, though that's debatable.
Destroy is the only ending that makes sense to me. The only aspect of it that's unappealing to most players (particularly paragons that did everything right by the krogan, quarians, geth, etc) is the destruction of the geth (and of course EDI). But, remember, the Cataylst and Hackett both clearly point out that anything that was destroyed would be rebuilt. It also raises many interesting possibilities. Would AI's be held in even more suspicion now? Would the altruistic actions of EDI and the "soul" geth make organics think differently? Would the quarian's consider rebuilding them? Of course this is the only ending where it's possible to see Shepard at the end, possibly with a chance of living, so you can't help but feel that Bioware's hints point to this to be the best possible outcome for future games. While sacrifice is made, it's the only of the three main options that leaves everyones free will and right to choose firmly intact. This is an appealing philosophy for obvious reasons.
The fourth "do nothing" option is the least appealing. There are some aspects about it that make sense to me, but overall it simply can't work. All advance life is wiped out and I don't see Bioware setting a game 50,000 years in the future. This just breaks with the overall "not that far off..." feel of Mass Effect.
This of course assumes that Bioware has to choose just one ending to be the status quo going forward. I can't see how anything other than Destroy provides an appropriate setting for non-prequels, but if Bioware pulled off being able to incorporate all possible endings, I'd like to see it.
Modifié par Brannon, 11 août 2013 - 05:31 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
