The catalyst is exposition. I don't see anybody hating on Vigil. Who served the same exact role. Some people just didn't like what the catalyst had to say.
You forgott to underline "bring in". I think it's obvious organics vs snythetics is a key element from the start, but not necesarrily the main one. Also i think it's clear with the sentance "We wanted to focus on some key themes and bring in cirtain key elements: organics vs sythetics etc etc" that it wasn't originally intended to be the main one.
Drew is also a proffessional and won't be entirly candid about what went on.
The whole organics vs synthetics thing certainly isn't out of the blue and a theme i enjoyed alot, but it dosen't fit into the events of ME2 while the Dark Energy plot acually does beacuse it gives a larger purpouse to what the Collecters were doing that would've tied in with ME3.
I'd argue that organics vs synthetics is much more fitting to ME universe as a whole (and ME2 in particular) than dark energy. Legion's loyalty mission and his character, Overlord DLC, Rogue VI hacking mechs, Tali/Legion confrontation all touched the subject. As for dark energy, it was mentioned by Veetor, Tali and Reegar regarding Haestrom mission and probably 1-2 more times (don't remember, might be none at all) but there was only one quest focused on that idea - Tali's recruitment. While there are three focused on organic vs synthetic theme.
If you look at ME2 and ME3, the organic vs synthetic theme is present in both, while dark energy only gets introduced in ME2. I think they made the right choice to go with the organic vs synthetic theme in ME3.
And tbh, I think ME2's disconnection from ME1 attributed to several flaws in ME3 writing. The writers were forced to tie together the loose ends and did not manage to do it completely (purely due to time constraints IMO). Still, I think they did a great job with the limited time they had.
I'd argue that organics vs synthetics is much more fitting to ME universe as a whole (and ME2 in particular) than dark energy. Legion's loyalty mission and his character, Overlord DLC, Rogue VI hacking mechs, Tali/Legion confrontation all touched the subject. As for dark energy, it was mentioned by Veetor, Tali and Reegar regarding Haestrom mission and probably 1-2 more times (don't remember, might be none at all) but there was only one quest focused on that idea - Tali's recruitment. While there are three focused on organic vs synthetic theme.
If you look at ME2 and ME3, the organic vs synthetic theme is present in both, while dark energy only gets introduced in ME2. I think they made the right choice to go with the organic vs synthetic theme in ME3.
And tbh, I think ME2's disconnection from ME1 attributed to several flaws in ME3 writing. The writers were forced to tie together the loose ends and did not manage to do it completely (purely due to time constraints IMO). Still, I think they did a great job with the limited time they had.
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
I'm glad to see that some people gets it. I'm personally working on a new project to fix ME3's flaws. But it's very unlikely that it will released any soon as I'm very busy.
It was also touched with EDI's character arc. And it was not resolved prior to the ending, even before the beam run she is not certain in what she experiences and still does not have a fixed point of view on her existence. Only after green wave of love does she become "alive". And finally, Reapers themselves are also a part of the conflict. ME3 has flaws but I find them mostly related to execution, not the ideas. For example, I think Crucible is a good idea and fits the already established Reaper lore, but the way it operates is weird and doesn't fit. One of my few gripes about writing is the Geth/Quarian peace. It should not have been possible to achieve.The problem with that particular plot point is that it was woven into the Quarrians/Geth arc which was already resolved with an adequate ending well before the actual end of the game. Not to mention how the Catalyst threw a wrench at your work if you build up a cultural understanding.
Guest_john_sheparrd_*
I have no idea what they were thinking I'm not a fan of the ending but I don't let it ruin the complete Trilogy
I simply follow Casey Hudson's words: Speculations for everyone! and just headcanon bits and pieces like EDI and the Geth survive in my destroy ending (with a mod)
I'd argue that organics vs synthetics is much more fitting to ME universe as a whole (and ME2 in particular) than dark energy. Legion's loyalty mission and his character, Overlord DLC, Rogue VI hacking mechs, Tali/Legion confrontation all touched the subject. As for dark energy, it was mentioned by Veetor, Tali and Reegar regarding Haestrom mission and probably 1-2 more times (don't remember, might be none at all) but there was only one quest focused on that idea - Tali's recruitment. While there are three focused on organic vs synthetic theme.
If you look at ME2 and ME3, the organic vs synthetic theme is present in both, while dark energy only gets introduced in ME2. I think they made the right choice to go with the organic vs synthetic theme in ME3.
And tbh, I think ME2's disconnection from ME1 attributed to several flaws in ME3 writing. The writers were forced to tie together the loose ends and did not manage to do it completely (purely due to time constraints IMO). Still, I think they did a great job with the limited time they had.
I'd argue that Overlord and Rouge VI show the success of human synthetic relations more than anything. Overlord wasn't ultimately man v. machine, it was man destroying itself. The kid was actually getting along quite well with the Geth up until his big brother tried to turn him into a weapon. And while the Rouge VI is "a synthetic which killed its master," it was used to make EDI, who seems to be perfectly peaceful.
Obviously, the Geth/Quarian conflict can support the organics vs. synthetics argument, but it was completely resolved. Resurrecting it alone is a weird move, but making it the central conflict just doesn't make any sense.
More than that I don't think organics vs. synthetics can even be the central conflict. Sure, it emerges intermittently throughout the series, but it's never been the driving force. It doesn't tie everything together. What about the Genophage arc or the Rachni? What about humans vs. aliens? What about co-operative bureaucracy vs. effective individualism? If your main theme doesn't encompass or weave together every major arc in the game, how can it be considered central? To me, the ending feels out of place and completely isolated from the core of the story. I blame part of that on poor characterization of the Reapers, but I also blame it on the near complete disregard for more than a few thematic pillars of the franchise. I don't need an ending that wraps up every single thread in a nice bow, but ME3's ending barely makes an attempt to tie things together at all.
For someone who played +30 trilogy playthroughs, I thought You'd be more interested in the lore than that. You're just focusing on the shallow details of it.
Maybe it's subjective to you, But it's not really. But since this conversation isn't going anywhere because of cynicism, I won't explain why it isn't subjective.
What's left to interpenetrate? What's left not to interpenetrate? As i said above, You're just taking the easy approach out of it, You don't understand almost anything about the reapers except for that they want to wipe out organics. And then they go ahead and explain that this is the way things just are and nothing will change that. And done. Like seriously?
No, You're failing to interpenetrate my words thoroughly. I'm telling you that mass effect never had shallow and unexplained concepts by telling you that this is the way things are. And then i was providing examples.
I know the lore of Mass Effect front to back, bud. Those "shallow details" you refer to, are actually part of that lore. Not sure where you get that I don't know anything about the Reapers as it's blatantly obvious that you don't. I know everything there is to know about the Reapers provided by the 3 games. They never said there's nothing to change the way things are. They actually clearly and thoroughly described the solution.
Once again you use these terms "shallow" (that's subjective), and "unexplained" (you haven't even stated what it is you see as unexplained). You've provided nothing in the form of unexplained aspects of the story. All you've referenced is Drew K's own words which we were already discussing before you brought them up. And all he had to say was that Dark Energy was a halfbaked idea that never saw the light of day.
The problem with that particular plot point is that it was woven into the Quarrians/Geth arc which was already resolved with an adequate ending well before the actual end of the game. Not to mention how the Catalyst threw a wrench at your work if you build up a cultural understanding.
"the peace won't last."
Vigil explained plot points at the end of the first tome of the trilogy, for a lot of players what he said gelled with the story of ME1 and made it clearer.
The Catalyst created a new plot point in the last ten minutes of the trilogy, for a lot of players what he said contradicted/nullified parts of the trilogy and made it murkier.
Kinda sums up what I said....they didn't like what the Catalyst had to say.
What it said didn't nullify or contradict anything. All it did was show you that everything isn't what it seems or what you thought it was. Not a new concept to introduce in the final minutes/pages of a story. Nor does it render it nonsensical.
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
I know the lore of Mass Effect front to back, bud. Those "shallow details" you refer to, are actually part of that lore. Not sure where you get that I don't know anything about the Reapers as it's blatantly obvious that you don't. I know everything there is to know about the Reapers provided by the 3 games. They never said there's nothing to change the way things are. They actually clearly and thoroughly described the solution.
Once again you use these terms "shallow" (that's subjective), and "unexplained" (you haven't even stated what it is you see as unexplained). You've provided nothing in the form of unexplained aspects of the story. All you've referenced is Drew K's own words which we were already discussing before you brought them up. And all he had to say was that Dark Energy was a halfbaked idea that never saw the light of day.
And that's why i never took seriously. You think you've got it all figured out and no one can challenge you while you're actually very cynical, And you're actually missing the point of the whole thing. You'd never change your mind that's why i don't bother. Honestly, All of you ending supporters have quite the exact same mind set as yours. Something notable really. My posts are perfectly portraying my point, You just have to analyze them thoroughly. I'm not speaking of a certain example, I'm speaking of a general narrative. But for some reason, You don't seem to get it. You're quite good at jumping to conclusions about my posts though as you clearly don't get what I'm trying to say, Like, At all. But I wouldn't bother going further because i get frustrated easily and quickly by that kind of mindset.
I'd argue that organics vs synthetics is much more fitting to ME universe as a whole (and ME2 in particular) than dark energy. Legion's loyalty mission and his character, Overlord DLC, Rogue VI hacking mechs, Tali/Legion confrontation all touched the subject. As for dark energy, it was mentioned by Veetor, Tali and Reegar regarding Haestrom mission and probably 1-2 more times (don't remember, might be none at all) but there was only one quest focused on that idea - Tali's recruitment. While there are three focused on organic vs synthetic theme.
If you look at ME2 and ME3, the organic vs synthetic theme is present in both, while dark energy only gets introduced in ME2. I think they made the right choice to go with the organic vs synthetic theme in ME3.
And tbh, I think ME2's disconnection from ME1 attributed to several flaws in ME3 writing. The writers were forced to tie together the loose ends and did not manage to do it completely (purely due to time constraints IMO). Still, I think they did a great job with the limited time they had.
Well it's not just Dark Energy itself,like you mentioned, is only exposed during Talis mission, but the genetic diversity of humans which is very prelevant through out the game which is why the Collectors harvested them which is an important plot point to the whole dark energy mumbo jumbo.
While the organics vs synthetics theme absolutely is there and is an important part, but it's a reoccuring theme, it never comes of as something part of the grand plot since, it's not part of the main mission while Dark Energy is(The Reapers use genetic code to solve the dark energy problem, humans are unique in their diversity and beacuse of this get targeted by the Collectors to find "the sollution")
But i agree with you that the problems in ME3 started in ME2 or even earlier, i'm not so much critezing ME3's writing, overall, i acually think it's story telling, pacing and dialogue is the best in the series. Where the other 2 games made me decide who or what lives or dies, ME3 made me wonder what makes a person and whether or not i could consider a robot alive, and the organics vs synthetics theme is familiar enough for the ending to sort of work even if it might have not been fantastic.
I'm more critizezing them for not writing a more cohesive trilogy. They knew what it should consist of but they didn't really seem to be able to decide how to put it together and made it up as they went along.
I feel that since the Collector/human genetics/dark energy plot shouldn't have been simply abandoned. Maby it wouldn've have been better to never introduced it at all and had "man vs machine" take a bigger part in ME2's plot(hell i'm surprised they didn't since Shepard is half synthetic at that point), but since they did i think they should've built on it.
And that's why i never took seriously. You think you've got it all figured out and no one can challenge you while you're actually very cynical, And you're actually missing the point of the whole thing. You'd never change your mind that's why i don't bother. Honestly, All of you ending supporters have quite the exact same mind set as yours. Something notable really. You're quite good at jumping to conclusions about my posts though as you clearly don't get what I'm trying to say, Like, At all. But I wouldn't bother going further because i get frustrated easily and quickly at that kind of mindset.
it's funny you refer to me as "one of you ending supporters", as I originally despised the endings at release. Challenge me? I'm not asking you to challenge me or change my mind. I'm asking you to explain yourself, because up until this moment you haven't. You've just stated how you feel about it. Not anything about why. You think it's shallow and you think something is unexplained. Why and what?
Jumping to conclusions? 
how could I jump to a conclusion without even understanding what you're getting at due to complete lack of explanation and context on your part?
You're not alone though. There are many like you who simply don't like the ending, or 'hate' it....and they too, say things like "shallow", "unexplained", "contradict", "plot hole", "nonsensical"....and they too, never give a reason or describe why and how they see it that way. You can't change their minds either.(There are also those who completely understand the ending, think it makes sense, and hate it for what it is)
Then again, I'm not asking you to change my mind. And I'm not trying to change yours. I'm asking you to describe why it is you feel the way you do. And you haven't. Maybe you just can't. You've just become defensive. So who knows....
Guest_john_sheparrd_*
Well it's not just Dark Energy itself,like you mentioned, is only exposed during Talis mission, but the genetic diversity of humans which is very prelevant through out the game which is why the Collectors harvested them which is an important plot point to the whole dark energy mumbo jumbo.
While the organics vs synthetics theme absolutely is there and is an important part, but it's a reoccuring theme, it never comes of as something part of the grand plot since, it's not part of the main mission while Dark Energy is(The Reapers use genetic code to solve the dark energy problem, humans are unique in their diversity and beacuse of this get targeted by the Collectors to find "the sollution")
But i agree with you that the problems in ME3 started in ME2 or even earlier, i'm not so much critezing ME3's writing, overall, i acually think it's story telling, pacing and dialogue is the best in the series. Where the other 2 games made me decide who or what lives or dies, ME3 made me wonder what makes a person and whether or not i could consider a robot alive, and the organics vs synthetics theme is familiar enough for the ending to sort of work even if it might have not been fantastic.
I'm more critizezing them for not writing a more cohesive trilogy. They knew what it should consist of but they didn't really seem to be able to decide how to put it together and made it up as they went along.
I feel that since the Collector/human genetics/dark energy plot shouldn't have been simply abandoned. Maby it wouldn've have been better to never introduced it at all and had "man vs machine" take a bigger part in ME2's plot(hell i'm surprised they didn't since Shepard is half synthetic at that point), but since they did i think they should've built on it.
I never connected the dark energy plot with the Collectors they just took humans because the Reapers wanted them gone by the time they arrived (or rather very weak) since Shepard (a human) denied them their entrance via the citadel and also defeated Sovereign so they considered them to be more of a threat then the other species
(this is just my interpretation)
I also think that the Trilogy is already very cohesive (just look at the Genophage and Geth/Quarian subplots they were developed very well from ME1 to ME3)
And ME 2 (which receives the most criticism for being a side adventure) doesn't feel like filler it introduced Cerberus (major villian in ME3 and also by having them bring Shepard to live I thought it added more depth to Shepard and TIM's relationship), and it also showed the Reapers already striking back without even appearing
we also got to know many awesome characters that all played their part in ME3 (some more than others)
Well it's not just Dark Energy itself,like you mentioned, is only exposed during Talis mission, but the genetic diversity of humans which is very prelevant through out the game which is why the Collectors harvested them which is an important plot point to the whole dark energy mumbo jumbo.
While the organics vs synthetics theme absolutely is there and is an important part, but it's a reoccuring theme, it never comes of as something part of the grand plot since, it's not part of the main mission while Dark Energy is(The Reapers use genetic code to solve the dark energy problem, humans are unique in their diversity and beacuse of this get targeted by the Collectors to find "the sollution")
Keep in mind all the genetic diversity and dark energy stuff was all contained to ME2. Ot started and ended there. ME1 had nothing to do with it. ME3 stayed away from it.
I agree, the trilogy could've been much more cohesive. Bioware has stated that they were proud that each game felt different and its own animal. And while that's cool and all, I think it hurt said cohesion. ME2 went off on a lot of tangeants. It was a grand side story. ME1 started the beginning arc of a trilogy narrative. It was ME3s job to conclude it. ME2 did a terrible job of bridging the narrative arc due to its lack of focus on the central conflict and the main antagonist of the series (the Reapers).
I never connected the dark energy plot with the Collectors they just took humans because the Reapers wanted them gone by the time they arrived (or rather very weak) since Shepard (a human) denied them their entrance via the citadel and also defeated Sovereign so they considered them to be more of a threat then the other species
(this is just my interpretation)
that could make sense.
It doesn't make sense to connect an idea the writing team was spitballing around or something left on the creative writing room floor, to something that is in the final product and canon. (essentially written in stone)
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
it's funny you refer to me as "one of you ending supporters", as I originally despised the endings at release. Challenge me? I'm not asking you to challenge me or change my mind. I'm asking you to explain yourself, because up until this moment you haven't. You've just stated how you feel about it. Not anything about why. You think it's shallow and you think something is unexplained. Why and what?
Jumping to conclusions?
You're not alone though. There are many you who simply don't like the ending, or 'hate' it....and they too, say things like "shallow", "unexplained", "contradict", "plot hole", "nonsensical"....and they too, never give a reason or describe why and how they see it that way. You can't change their minds either.(There are also those who completely understand the ending, think it makes sense, and hate it for what it is)
Then again, I'm not asking you to change my mind. And I'm not trying to change yours. I'm asking you to describe why it is you feel the way you do. And you haven't. Maybe you just can't. You've just become defensive. So who knows....
Again, Jumping to conclusions. I tried to get out of this because that behavior really pisses me off. No, I don't like the endings for a reason. Everything happens for a reason and a cause. And I have addressed it. You're just not connecting all the dots. I don't really feel like explaining my stand thoroughly in a giant wall of text after a long night at 05:30 A.M. in the morning. But I'll try to be brief, The Reapers concept was created to explain the things, The questions, Science can not answer now. Like, Where do we come from? How do evolution occur? And these kinds of questions. In ME1, The reapers concept was introduced with little to none knowledge about them. You just got to know their cyclical extinction plan. ME2 gave many details about the reapers through the collectors but it never connected them in a big reveal about something "Presumably setting things up for ME3". Like Why even create a human reaper in the first place? When it came to an end in ME3, I expected all these questions to be answered thoroughly. I even suggested that the inaccessible citadel core would be the best place to end the trilogy. But none of these questions were answered and instead i just got the starchild. Which was a really big letdown. Still don't get it?
You didn't like that they didn't explain "where we come from", "how evolution works", and you didn't like that Bioware didn't take your suggestion "that the inaccessible Citadel core would be the best place to end the trilogy".......
....therefore it's "shallow" and "unexplained" and doesn't fit the themes of the narrative.
That about right?
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
You didn't like that they didn't explain "where we come from", "how evolution works", and you didn't like that Bioware didn't take your suggestion "that the inaccessible Citadel core would be the best place to end the trilogy".......
....therefore it's "shallow" and "unexplained" and doesn't fit the themes of the narrative.
That about right?
*Facepalm*
I didn't like that they didn't explain the unaswered question of the reapers. The game DID technically end in the inaccessible citadel core, Expert.
*Facepalm*
I didn't like that they didn't explain the unaswered question of the reapers. The game DID technically end in the inaccessible citadel core, Expert.
Hey "expert", when did they ever suggest that either "where we come from" or "how evolution works" is one of the unanswered questions of the Reapers?
I'll wait.... 
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Hey "expert", when did they ever suggest that "where we come from" and "how evolution works" is one of the unanswered questions of the Reapers?
I'll wait....
Well, Technically, That is supposed to be on your mind spontaneously once you hear they are actually the ones in charge of evolution. And ME3 hinted at the answer of the last question when Vengeance The Prothean VI, spoke of the pattern of evolution and conflict on Thessia. The concept of the reapers is very vast in nature and could have been handled more properly. Also, I'm not speaking strictly of these two questions, I'm simply saying that the storywisely, You can't explain a concept like the reapers' by a very short and "forced" explanation like the one we got. Also, I'm no expert, I may be knowledgeable of mass effect, But surely there're some details here or there that i missed.
Well, Technically, That is supposed to be on your mind spontaneously once you hear they are actually the ones in charge of evolution. And ME3 hinted at the answer of the last question when Vengeance The Prothean VI, spoke of the pattern of evolution and conflict on Thessia.
Hate to break it to you, but nowhere in any of the 3 games does it say or imply that the Reapers are "in charge of evolution". Like, nowhere. Nor does it suggest that they have anything to do with our creation or where we come from. Again, nowhere.....ever. Throughout all three games, nowhere.
The VI's name is Vendetta. And what it was describing was the same patterns of conflict and the same points at which civilizations were allowed to evolve to before they were extinguished by the Reapers throughout the harvesting cycles. You took it way out of context. Or just misheard or misinterpreted. Who knows...
Very odd that you choose the very same conversation that foreshadows the "master" of the cycle. (the Catalyst). to try and say that the ending doesn't answer any of the foreshadowed questions of the Reapers.
Guest_AugmentedAssassin_*
Hate to break it to you, but nowhere in any of the 3 games does it say or imply that the Reapers are "in charge of evolution". Like, nowhere. Nor does it suggest have anything to do with our creation or where we come from. Again, nowhere.....ever. throughout all three games. Nowhere.
The VI's name is Vendetta. And what it was describing was the same patterns of conflict and the same points at which civilizations were allowed to evolve before they were extinguished by the Reapers throughout the harvesting cycles.
Very odd that you choose the very same conversation the foreshadows the "master" of the cycle. (the Catalyst). to try and say that ending doesn't answer any of the foreshadowed questions of the Reapers.
Really? You're seriously saying that? I'll give you the simplest example you can comprehend, When Leviathan said that the galaxy became an experiment for the reapers, Evolution its tool. Or when Sovereign said that they control the civilizations of organics through the technology of the mass relays. Later explained thoroughly by Legion. They control organics and their progress, Whether it's by controlling evolution itself or its process.
That's pretty much evolution. Sorry about the name though, Been a while since i played ME3.
Because that conversation was actually deep and thoughtful, Not shallow and emotional-centered as the ending that left it open for the player's interpretation to decide key points of the story.
Here is the video of Legion deciphering Sovereign's speech on Virmire:
It's 2015, guys. We need to just let these wounds heal, regardless of what we think of them. Let it scar and serve as a reminder of your disappointment, but we cannot keep re-opening these things purely for the sake of our continued whining, justified or otherwise.
We've had almost three years to talk about this now and we've done this dance numerous times. The Dark Energy/Karpyshyn Ending sounded better, but it didn't happen. Bioware did what they thought was best and tried to meet the fans halfway by releasing the Extended Cut, addressing fan concerns while preserving the ending that they -- the creators of the game -- wanted. And, in spite of continued protests, the ending will not be changed or retconned, they will not reboot the series, and they will not canonize the Indoctrination Theory. To continue to hope or believe that any of those things will happen is flat-out ignorant and borderline delusional.
Some of you might be going, "Well we deserve a better ending. My Shepard deserves a better ending. This ending was wrong for the series and the writers should have known that." You might have a point and you might even be right, but you all need to accept what happened and move on. It'll be downright ridiculous if we still have people trying to change the ending ten or twenty years after the fact.
Anyone is welcome to reply to this post and tell me that I'm wrong, but we need to move forward.
Really? You're seriously saying that? I'll give you the simplest example you can comprehend, When Leviathan said that the galaxy became an experiment for the reapers, Evolution its tool. Or when Sovereign said that they control the civilizations of organics through the technology of the mass relays. Later explained thoroughly by Legion. They control organics and their progress, Whether it's by controlling evolution itself or its process.
That's pretty much evolution. Sorry about the name though, Been a while since i played ME3.
Because that conversation was actually deep and thoughtful, Not shallow and emotional-centered as the ending that left it open for the player's interpretation to decide key points of the story.
Here is the video of Legion deciphering Sovereign's speech on Virmire:
Yes. I am saying that. You are taking things way out of context. They control the evolution only in the form of allowing space faring civilizations to advance along the paths they've laid out for them from that point on. (i.e. the Mass Relay network). No one is "in charge" of evolution except for nature itself.
They don't design and create individual species and evolve them as you were suggesting. They control the technological growth of advanced civilizations (space-faring species). Simply due to the fact that their tech is the most advanced in the galaxy, and once a civilization discovers it they learn from it and are influenced by it. Hence Reaper control. They simply allow us to evolve to a certain point once we reach the capability of space travel.
Legion just explained it perfectly for you. As did Sovereign. There's not much else to learn or understand, in that regard.
The catalyst was completely devoid of emotion. The only emotions involved were how 'you' (the player) felt about each choice. And that makes sense....because we're human.
Retour en haut