407 odpowiedzi w tym temacie

[jojobe71]

Bioware said that their ending wasn't made in the last minute. If you really want to think that it was made like this, you're free to think that.

Anyway, Casey didn't see anything wrong in the ending, Casey was involved in the writing of the ending, the other producers didn't see anything wrong, the voice actor didn't see anything wrong. well that's more than one guy who didn't see anything wrong. And after that some critics didn't see anything wrong.

 

Who ever is writing the ending PLEASE take a Xanex it does wonders. The ending was very depressing all the choices were. As the AI was telling me them I was like... dam I know I'm gonna die. My first game i decided to kill off all synthetics, that decision was so wrong to do so i chose the worst of all choices: synthesis. I say synthesis is wrong because it interferes with evolution no telling what damage I've done. The computer itself does not know what to do or can see any possible solution. The AI itself is faulty. Then to force that choice on every being in the galaxy, its so wrong ethically on so many levels...  but the story seems to like it so i went with that.

[angol fear]

Who ever is writing the ending PLEASE take a Xanex it does wonders. The ending was very depressing all the choices were. As the AI was tell me them I was dam I know I'm gonna die. My first game i decided to kill off all synthetics, that decision was so wrong to do so i chose the worst of all choices: synthesis. I say synthesis is wrong because it interferes with evolution no telling what damage I've done. Then to force that choice on every being in the galaxy, it wrong but the story seems to like it so i went with that.

 

Well, in the beginning of Mass Effect, on Eden Prime, the first guy you see (if you do it) tells you that he sees our destruction. Then Mass Effect is about Shepard who is facing an unstoppable force that have harvested civilizations, even more advanced. Shepard warns the galaxy that the reapers are coming but no one listen. Mass Effect 1 and 2 is about delaying the reapers, not stopping them. In Mass Effect 1 and 2 Shepard fails. In Mass Effect 3 an unprepared galaxy is facing the reapers. So how could people think that it could end like an american movie with a happy end?

[Linkenski]

Yeah, I think, while the mood certainly affects my opinion of the ending, it's not really a root cause of why there was such a huge "no-no!" and backlash towards it. It's clearly the shaky logic and the trying-to-do-too-much-at-the-very-end and the lack of choice that makes it all so bizarre and out of place.

 

I was quite happy it didn't end with Shepard and Anderson saying goodbye and then *boom* Crucible kills all reapers in one shot. The only word that would describe that scenario would be "cheesy".

 

It didn't need a happy ending... it just needed an ending most would be able to get behind and a proper epilogue where we get some resolution on what really happened and a fade-out sequence for the most important characters. After 90 hours, no matter your EMS, your choices or romance options any player should've earned that kind of ending.

[angol fear]

It's clearly the shaky logic and the trying-to-do-too-much-at-the-very-end and the lack of choice that makes it all so bizarre and out of place.

 

 

For the "shaky logic", it's not only in the ending, let's take an example : if you take a look at the geth, they are interconnected, they have no individuality, but they can do individual actions. That paradox is from Mass Effect 2. The ending didn't break with the logic established in the earlier games, actually, it's the opposite, they have started to establish that logic in Mass Effect 1 (the circle and the trap with the citadel), they just went further.

For the lack of choice, there are more choices than in Mass Effect 1 and 2 endings, so I don't really understand. That's the only ending really based on choice in the trilogy.

 

 

 

It didn't need a happy ending... it just needed an ending most would be able to get behind and a proper epilogue where we get some resolution on what really happened and a fade-out sequence for the most important characters. After 90 hours, no matter your EMS, your choices or romance options any player should've earned that kind of ending.

 

I don't think that the game needed an epilogue. Actually a lot of books and films don't have epilogue. Storytelling isn't about what people should have earned, storytelling is about its own internal logic. The game was about Shepard and the reapers. And the writers noticed that Mass Effect was a very personnal experience, each player has his version of the game, of the story. That's one reason they have chosen an open ending ( I think that's not the only one because I've found other reasons).

I understand that you would like an ending that would be "developed" ("extended"?) but the ending was purposely written this way. This intention from the writers should be interpretated, not be classified as "bad/lazy writing" (I know you didn't say that but that's what we mostly see on this forum, so I'm not saying that for you), that argument is lazy and only reveals bad reading from the one who said that.

[ImaginaryMatter]

For the "shaky logic", it's not only in the ending, let's take an example : if you take a look at the geth, they are interconnected, they have no individuality, but they can do individual actions. That paradox is from Mass Effect 2. The ending didn't break with the logic established in the earlier games, actually, it's the opposite, they have started to establish that logic in Mass Effect 1 (the circle and the trap with the citadel), they just went further.

For the lack of choice, there are more choices than in Mass Effect 1 and 2 endings, so I don't really understand. That's the only ending really based on choice in the trilogy.

 

I'm not quite sure what you're talking about here with the Geth, that's not really even factually true (from an in game perspective). As for internal logic, the ending doesn't even maintain it's own internal logic (like how is Destroy a 'solution' when the Catalyst explicitly states that it doesn't solve the problem?), much less with past story bits. The Catalyst/Citadel trap angle has been brought up many times on this board and the only way around it is to make a bunch of assumptions on behalf of the writers.

[fraggle]

like how is Destroy a 'solution' when the Catalyst explicitly states that it doesn't solve the problem?

 

For me it's the solution of taking fate in one's own hands. Getting rid of the Reapers finally lets all races live their lives, with no interference from a species "above" them.

And if another war comes between Synthetics and Organics, so be it. It might not be solving the problem the catalyst talks about, but it gets rid of the ones that rule over a whole galaxy and force their solution on them.

I know I'd rather live a life where I can make my own choices, and not having the choice of being wiped out forced on me.

That's why I loved the Destroy ending.

[angol fear]

I'm not quite sure what you're talking about here with the Geth, that's not really even factually true (from an in game perspective). As for internal logic, the ending doesn't even maintain it's own internal logic (like how is Destroy a 'solution' when the Catalyst explicitly states that it doesn't solve the problem?), much less with past story bits. The Catalyst/Citadel trap angle has been brought up many times on this board and the only way around it is to make a bunch of assumptions on behalf of the writers.

 

Ok, you didn't see that about the geth in Mass Effect 2. And you didn't see that the citadel was a trap in Mass Effect 1. And you didn't see that the structure of Mass Effect 1 is a circle. And you didn't see that in Mass Effect 3 they used that.

And how can't you understand that Destroy is a solution? You wanted a destroy solution that could be definitive (you only talk about this ending and complain about that fact), that's idealistic, just like conventional victory in a game where it's obvious that the writer never wanted it, or a happy ending.

[Iakus]

For me it's the solution of taking fate in one's own hands. Getting rid of the Reapers finally lets all races live their lives, with no interference from a species "above" them.

And if another war comes between Synthetics and Organics, so be it. It might not be solving the problem the catalyst talks about, but it gets rid of the ones that rule over a whole galaxy and force their solution on them.

I know I'd rather live a life where I can make my own choices, and not having the choice of being wiped out forced on me.

That's why I loved the Destroy ending.

Not all the races.  Shepard genocides every single AI in the galaxy.

 

Which is the problem with the endings.

 

Despite wanting to reject the Catalyst's logic, you must follow it in order to "win":  That organics and synthetics cannot coexist peacefully.  Therefore:

 

One side (organics) must destroy the other (synthetics)

or

One side (Synthetics) must dominate the other (organics)

or

You must forcibly combine the two, make them alike whether they want to be or not.

 

There is no option to "Just leave us be to find our own path"  You have to take one the Catalyst marks for you.

 

Well, EC does give you that option, but that's just Bioware trolling you.

[fraggle]

Not all the races.  Shepard genocides every single AI in the galaxy.

 

Which is the problem with the endings.

 

Despite wanting to reject the Catalyst's logic, you must follow it in order to "win":  That organics and synthetics cannot coexist peacefully.  Therefore:

 

One side (organics) must destroy the other (synthetics)

or

One side (Synthetics) must dominate the other (organics)

or

You must forcibly combine the two, make them alike whether they want to be or not.

 

There is no option to "Just leave us be to find our own path"  You have to take one the Catalyst marks for you.

 

Well, EC does give you that option, but that's just Bioware trolling you.

 

You're right about having to destroy synthetic life, and I was majorly upset about it, because of EDI, because I just made peace between the Geth and the Quarian, and because I had to actually do something so horrible. But in the long run, it was better for me to make one sacrifice, but rid everyone of the possibility of annihilation.

Plus Organics will always invent new Synthetics. Sure, it's not the same as before, but it's a new path, one which I gladly took in the end. Of course that's just my personal opinion, and maybe I like this ending so much because I see a lot of it in real life. Sometimes you have to make a tough choice, but it will (hopefully) lead to better things in the future.

[Vazgen]

Not all the races.  Shepard genocides every single AI in the galaxy.

Which are "experiments only. Tightly controlled". They don't come close to EDI, geth, or even Eva Core

[Iakus]

Which are "experiments only. Tightly controlled". They don't come close to EDI, geth, or even Eva Core

Still alive, though.  Still sentient.  And there's still EDI.  ANd potetnially the geth.

 

 

You're right about having to destroy synthetic life, and I was majorly upset about it, because of EDI, because I just made peace between the Geth and the Quarian, and because I had to actually do something so horrible. But in the long run, it was better for me to make one sacrifice, but rid everyone of the possibility of annihilation.

Plus Organics will always invent new Synthetics. Sure, it's not the same as before, but it's a new path, one which I gladly took in the end. Of course that's just my personal opinion, and maybe I like this ending so much because I see a lot of it in real life. Sometimes you have to make a tough choice, but it will (hopefully) lead to better things in the future.

I'm just going to point to my sig

[Vazgen]

Still alive, though.  Still sentient.  And there's still EDI.  ANd potetnially the geth.

Subjective. I don't view neither EDI nor the geth as alive. And, of course, neither those experiments

[Iakus]

Subjective. I don't view neither EDI nor the geth as alive. And, of course, neither those experiments

And I do.  ME2 and ME3 pretty much beat you over the head with it.

[Vazgen]

And I do.  ME2 and ME3 pretty much beat you over the head with it.

If you choose Paragon options. While Renegade Shepard tells Legion "Sure, they're more complex, but to say they are alive? They were upgraded". You can avoid activating Legion in ME2. It all depends on Shepard

[aoibhealfae]

I love ME3... but I tend to stop myself at Priority Earth and restart the game again. Less depressing... more fighting and angst

[jojobe71]

For me it's the solution of taking fate in one's own hands. Getting rid of the Reapers finally lets all races live their lives, with no interference from a species "above" them.

And if another war comes between Synthetics and Organics, so be it. It might not be solving the problem the catalyst talks about, but it gets rid of the ones that rule over a whole galaxy and force their solution on them.

I know I'd rather live a life where I can make my own choices, and not having the choice of being wiped out forced on me.

That's why I loved the Destroy ending.

 

I feel the same. the future needs to worry about itself we make it we make it we do not we do not. We must learn cooperation not the survival of the fittest but survival as a species, that is the ultimate success. To go further is the suvival of life.

[jojobe71]

Subjective. I don't view neither EDI nor the geth as alive. And, of course, neither those experiments

 

 

Well tell that to them.... to them they are alive. Who am I or anyone else for that matter to tell them they are not. The geth walked over an picked up a gun to save what it thought was its life or its existence... Can life be created that is synthetic I do not see why not especially if they are able to make adv decisions. I would not do it, to me creating such things are a cop out : ultimately laziness.

[Vazgen]

Well tell that to them.... to them they are alive. Who am I or anyone else for that matter to tell them they are not. The geth walked over an picked up a gun to save what it thought was its life or its existence... Can life be created that is synthetic I do not see why not especially if they are able to make adv decisions. I would not do it, to me creating such things are a cop out : ultimately laziness.

It's not my place to tell them that and I don't (unless asked for). It's irrelevant though. I make a decision based on my perception of the world, not theirs. A geth might've chosen Control or Synthesis. I choose Destroy and I don't have any ethical concerns with it.

[mindw0rk]

ME2 > ME3 > ME for me even so the story in ME1 was the best

[jak11164]

should be ME> ME2>me3

can play ME again and again couple maps /different character type/ different skill setup

and hate how everything ends I just dont want to play just to kill my Shep. Bioware just took all fun from the game

[Pasquale1234]

And I do.  ME2 and ME3 pretty much beat you over the head with it.

I find it pretty hard to accept the idea that synthetics are alive, but I accept that it is MEU lore.

[Vazgen]

I find it pretty hard to accept the idea that synthetics are alive, but I accept that it is MEU lore.

It's as much MEU lore as them not being alive. Games present views on both sides of this question. For example, when Legion/Geth VI talks about Reaper upgrades Shepard can say "Sure, they're more complex, but to say they are alive?". Legion/Geth VI says "They have evolved!" to which Shepard replies "They were upgraded" (Link). Another situation, conversation between EDI and Javik when Shepard can support Javik (Link). Another situation, conversation between Dr. Chakwas and Engineer Adams (Link). The games leave the question unanswered and each player decides his/her side. There is no fixed answer to this. 

[jak11164]

I find it pretty hard to accept the idea that synthetics are alive, but I accept that it is MEU lore.

No one says synthetics are alive. They have consciousness, free will, artificial intelligence and as consequence some sort of soul (ofc existence of soul has religious and some philosophic content). It is really hard to define what life is

[ImaginaryMatter]

For me it's the solution of taking fate in one's own hands. Getting rid of the Reapers finally lets all races live their lives, with no interference from a species "above" them.

And if another war comes between Synthetics and Organics, so be it. It might not be solving the problem the catalyst talks about, but it gets rid of the ones that rule over a whole galaxy and force their solution on them.

I know I'd rather live a life where I can make my own choices, and not having the choice of being wiped out forced on me.

That's why I loved the Destroy ending.

 

Let me specify, destroy isn't a solution the Catalyst's problem. It acknowledges that Destroy is only a temporary solution. If you were the Catalyst and you were willing to go to the Reaper extreme to maintain all organic life why would you offer Destroy when you had Synthesis available (a permanent solution)? Heck it seems like a worse plan for the Catalyst than the current cycle which doesn't work anymore for some reason. If the Catalyst can't physically choose a solution itself (which doesn't make much sense either) and a new solution is needed, why not take time to decide instead of leaving it to a split decision from a dying person who doesn't have a full grasp of the information or the cosmic perspective. I'm not asking why Shepard would choose it, I'm asking why the Catalyst is offering it up at all?

[fraggle]

The Catalyst said the docking of the Crucible changed it and created new possiblities, maybe like some kind of reprogramming, if you will. We know that several cycle civilisations before have worked with new ideas for the Crucible, so I'm guessing that they actually created the new solutions at some point, and the Catalyst can't deny them since the Crucible docked. The Catalyst says he's not able to make them happen, and he simply presents the new solutions because it is forced to by the change it went through by the Crucible.

Not sure if it's making any sense, but that's what I think

 

Even though it also states they tried something like Synthesis before, so... maybe the idea of the Synthesis-similar solution was one the original creators of the Catalyst incorperated, but since it failed they never tried it again, even though the possibility is still there, or maybe was also added as an idea from former civilisations.

Meh, I wish we knew more about older civilisations and their role in designing the Crucible