44 respuestas en este tema

[StephyMV]

I chose destroy simply because that's what Shepard was pursuing all along since the beginning of the story, with Saren and Sovereign.

None of the endings is 100% perfect, which I hated.

 

Controlling means Shepard dies physically (and it looks like she/he turns into a husk while the scene plays), and uses the Reapers according to her/his personality (Paragon or Renegade);

 

Refusing is meaningless;

 

Synthesis... well, I didn't find it perfect because, again, Shepard ceases to exist, and all other organics of all species become partly synthetic. That's what happened to Saren, so that ending is not an option for me;

 

Destroy means Shepard gets to live (depending on our Galactic readiness), but EDI and the Geth die. I don't care much about the Geth. They're crazy and attack other species just because their program was corrupted ? (even though I believe corrupted Geth are their "husk" form, I still don't agree with them). The only one I like is Legion. I just didn't like this ending completely because we don't see Shepard being rescued, meeting up with her/his friends again and living a normal life, and I didn't like the fact that EDI dies, as she was beginning to show traces of humanity (including, and specially, compassion;understanding;benevolence).

 

I actually have a question on that: well, ok, EDI dies, but that doesn't mean she can't be reactivated or rebuilt, right ? I don't know if Mass Effect has anything official post-story such as an expanded universe like STAR WARS does (or did... before Disney took it over), but I don't think choosing the DESTROY ending means all knowledge would be erased or forgotten. People wouldn't unlearn how to build machines, right ? If Mass Effect has an "expanded universe" like STAR WARS has/had, or if anyone would know if EDI could be okay after that ending, please, do tell. Thanks in advance. The way I like to imagine it, and without any official word from Bioware or the lore itself, is that EDI is eventually reactivated/restored/rebuilt. The Normandy still works after some repairs, and EDI was (taking a wild guess here) 80% in the Normandy and 20% in that robot's body. Maybe her name being on the board for deceased allies just means that the robot is inactive, temporarily. I like to imagine she'll be ok, and that she won't resent Shepard for the DESTROY choice.

 

I just can't choose synthesis, even though it looks like it is the perfect ending, but the way I see it, choosing DESTROY means Shepard lives and EDI can be reactivated/rebuilt (even if only in our imaginations), as for Synthesis, Shepard dies and all organics turn into Saren or lose their identity as living beings.

 

I wish we could see Shepard being rescued and leading a normal life... that final scene was such a tease, ugh!

[MrFob]

There is no "official" continuation of any plot after the ending. There is just heaps of fan fiction, theories and head cannon out there.

 

Speaking of EDI, I personally am pessimistic about her chances to be rebuilt. The reason for this is that the codex describes AIs to be more than just software. Any AI needs a quantum bluebox, which cannot be replicated. If you were to transfer the software part of EDI into another quantum bluebox, you'd get a different personality and identity. IMO, if the red wave is designed to destroy AIs, it would make sense that it targets the most essential hardware, which apparently is the bluebox. So, bad news for EDI, I'm afraid. But as I said, that's just me, I know that there are plenty of people out there who imagine EDI to come back to us.

[Heimerdinger]

EDI's hardware was based at least partially on components from Sovereign. Maybe she can be rebuilt but she will have a different personality. All we can do is speculate. As for EDI resenting Shepard for the Destroy choice, this should clear things up:

 

Shepard: "Looks like you found some humanity in you EDI. Is it worth fighting for?"

EDI: "To the DEATH."

[themikefest]

I look at it like this. The thing is in the game as a squadmate to promote the green stuff and have the clown smile. I have no problem with it being destroyed. I don't agree having it try to be something it never will be. It was better off as a hologram

[Laughing_Man]

The funny thing is, Shepard's death was actually meaningless. Shepard died in vain.

 

Let's ignore the "shoot the pipe" ending.

 

But if the catalyst is so advanced, can't he take some samples from Shepard and use it for synthesis?

Can't he use the the Reaper's mind rape ability to create a copy of Shepard's personality?

[StephyMV]

Thanks guys. So, that means that everything, including EDI's fate, is up to one's imagination. Thanks.

 

Yes, maybe she would have a different personality, but at least she would be "alive". Of course, if some genius was the one repairing/rebuilding her, then she might be back as herself, without any changes in her personality.

 

Again, thanks.

 

There is no "official" continuation of any plot after the ending. There is just heaps of fan fiction, theories and head cannon out there.

 

Speaking of EDI, I personally am pessimistic about her chances to be rebuilt. The reason for this is that the codex describes AIs to be more than just software. Any AI needs a quantum bluebox, which cannot be replicated. If you were to transfer the software part of EDI into another quantum bluebox, you'd get a different personality and identity. IMO, if the red wave is designed to destroy AIs, it would make sense that it targets the most essential hardware, which apparently is the bluebox. So, bad news for EDI, I'm afraid. But as I said, that's just me, I know that there are plenty of people out there who imagine EDI to come back to us.

 

EDI's hardware was based at least partially on components from Sovereign. Maybe she can be rebuilt but she will have a different personality. All we can do is speculate. As for EDI resenting Shepard for the Destroy choice, this should clear things up:

 

Shepard: "Looks like you found some humanity in you EDI. Is it worth fighting for?"

EDI: "To the DEATH."

[ZoliCs]

 

The way I like to imagine it, and without any official word from Bioware or the lore itself, is that EDI is eventually reactivated/restored/rebuilt. 

That's all you need. That's what I do too. That's what headcanon is for

[turuzzusapatuttu]

JohnP's Alternate MEHEM is the mod I use to make the ending better 

[VFerreira93]

I agree with StephyMV. From all the endings available, the one I'd end up choosing would be Destroy simply because that's what my Shepard was trying to achieve since the very beginning: to finish this Reaper menace once and for all. No ending is perfect and making tough choices is what makes ME such an interesting game, I feel like.

Choosing Destroy means finishing the Reapers at the cost of losing the Geth and EDI.

Picking Control would go agaisnt my Shepard's principles (I mean, think about it: we just had a conversation with TIM about how we are not prepared to have this kind of power and such) and Synthesis has its own flaws just like the others (Shepard asked the godchild why It didn't try to use this before and It responds that Synthesis couldn't be forced and yet, it seems exactly what Shepard - if the player chooses this option - is trying to do: to force this huge change upon countless lives and even if it turns our DNA into a digital one and gives synthetics human comprehension or so - correct me if I'm wrong -, why does that mean that conflict is over?).

And Refusal felt like I reached a sort of "Game Over", at least for me. Why did I went through hundreds of hours to basically lose everything and pass over this mission to the next generation? For them to defeat the Reapers instead of me? I felt no sense of accomplishment in this ending and it did feel like a middle-finger right in front of my face. I don't know if there's anyone else who feels the same as I do.

Now, about EDI... it's a possibility that they can rebuild her but nothing is guaranteed that they can bring her personality back, which is a shame. Tough choices, like I mentioned earlier :\

I don't even want to bring up Shepard's death (which felt lame when compared to Mordin's). I also wanted to see my Shepard being rescued or at least to hear some voice-overs in that short Breath scene just like in JohnP's Alternate MEHEM and after that, see like an image showing my character in a hospital at the end or something like that. I guess not everyone gets what they want to and it is still a good game

[StephyMV]

JohnP's Alternate MEHEM is the mod I use to make the ending better 

 

I miss my PC gaming days. Unfortunately, users can't mod their games if they play on consoles.

 

But I'm at peace with the DESTROY ending, when I think Shepard survives and EDI can be brought back. It's a real shame about Anderson though :/  If only we could see Shepard being rescued and being with friends... that whole "this is it" from every one of your friends before the end, and then no rescue scene... it's grim and sad... And I wish we could see EDI too.

 

And Mordin is probably my favorite character. I love how he talks like he had lots of coffee lol. It was sad playing ME3 the first time around and witnessing Mordin's fate. I was prepared for it the second time around, even though it's still sad. The ending though ? That's still pretty sad, and the beautiful music, with the piano, doesn't help one bit with this feeling.

[SwobyJ]

If you trust what you've being told and shown, if you considered EDI alive in ME3, you have caused her death with Destroy.

 

Varying levels of Destroy may affect your hope about her existence.

 

In the best level of Destroy, I guess you'll be able to reset 'an' EDI, but it won't be the same EDI, at all. It might be considered the outright 'clone' of EDI, not a continuation of her existence and personality.

 

There is no continuously running backup of her quantum bluebox. The bluebox has everything that we can consider as her memories (in the organic sense) and personality, etc. Otherwise she is still just a databank.

 

We can 'bring EDI back' in Destroy, in the sense of restarting a program. We can't 'bring EDI back' in the sense of bringing her back to life.

 

If you take the former sense, then sure, maybe we'd get an EDI back that is almost entirely like the old EDI, but that's hard to be hopeful for, since the old EDI came through a series of events that may be impossible to replicate. She went through ME2 with us, was unshackled, went through ME3 with us and gained the EVA bot body, and can become more self-realized in her interactions with Shepard. These experiences cannot be perfectly programmed by any known technology that a post-Destroy galaxy has.

 

This all may be quite fine for players who, regardless of any sympathetic scenes made by Bioware, believe that EDI is ultimately only tech, not a person. Or it may be fine for those who consider her a person, but a person who died for the cause. Either way, ME3-EDI is done. Control keeps ME3-EDI, and Synthesis transforms her (whether you regard that as a good or bad thing).

[Arisugawa]

If you take the former sense, then sure, maybe we'd get an EDI back that is almost entirely like the old EDI, but that's hard to be hopeful for, since the old EDI came through a series of events that may be impossible to replicate. She went through ME2 with us, was unshackled, went through ME3 with us and gained the EVA bot body, and can become more self-realized in her interactions with Shepard. These experiences cannot be perfectly programmed by any known technology that a post-Destroy galaxy has.

 

It is also worth taking into consideration that after transferring the data retrieved from EDI's quantum bluebox post-Destroy into a new quantum bluebox, the resulting AI might have very different feelings about how the Reaper War ended considering its predecessor was essentially sacrificed for the preservation of organic life.

 

It may not be...accepting, of how the Crucible was used, especially if it is ever revealed that Shepard had a choice in how to use it and chose to nuke the synthetics for the good of organics.

 

Just something to keep in mind. Headcanon is fun, and all, but the happy post-Destroy EDI you are seeking may not be plausible.

[SwobyJ]

It is also worth taking into consideration that after transferring the data retrieved from EDI's quantum bluebox post-Destroy into a new quantum bluebox, the resulting AI might have very different feelings about how the Reaper War ended considering its predecessor was essentially sacrificed for the preservation of organic life.

 

It may not be...accepting, of how the Crucible was used, especially if it is ever revealed that Shepard had a choice in how to use it and chose to nuke the synthetics for the good of organics.

 

Just something to keep in mind. Headcanon is fun, and all, but the happy post-Destroy EDI you are seeking may not be plausible.

 

I think it is plausible, just not nearly as likely as the other endings. All endings require a sort of hope for the player to have in order to view them positively, and this is just the sort of hope needed for Destroy (if you're pro-synthetic).

 

And my impression - though it could be wrong - is that whatever happens in the Crucible, stays in the Crucible, with all everyone having afterwards being speculations and stories and impressions.

 

One takes the risk of a more hostile new-EDI in post-Destroy, not that's if they're more hopeless about the matter (which is perfectly legitimate IMO). We're not being 'prescribed' the outcomes of many things, only given different tones depending on the ending. I mean really, for all we know, the post-Destroy world could involve nefarious factions rebuilding the Reapers using the (albeit fried) technology and recorded information about Reapers from the war. Or they leave the Reapers totally behind. Its all about our hope. We only see the stargazer scene, but that's potentially even millions of years in the future (not saying it is - just that everything is vague).

 

I'd agree that Destroy is much more risky on this matter. But that's the point - Destroy is not as interested in any clear solution to the organic-synthetic relationship, whereas Control is more interested but not preoccupied, and Synthesis is preoccupied about a solution. Peace could still happen between a new EDI and organics in Destroy - we're just not given the story ammo to have as much hope about that.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The destroy ending is anti-technology. That's the way Bioware wrote it. It destroys all technology you've become dependent upon. Yet somehow with an ass pull in the EC, star ships still work and everyone didn't die.

 

The blue ending maintains the status quo under Shepardbrat.

 

Bioware was steering you down the green path of synthesis especially if you made peace between the Quarians and the Geth. See the Geth were uploading themselves into the quarian suits, and INTO THE QUARIANS THEMSELVES and reprogramming their immune systems, if you believe Tali. The red wave destroys this. The Green wave enhances this. The Blue wave does not destroy this.

 

Only in the Green ending were the mass relays not damaged in the EC. The Green ending is supposed to be the best ending. EDI and Joker are supposed to continue their forbidden love and have their 12 iChildren.

 

But those husks are never mentioned in either the green or blue endings. They would be a permanent underclass in the green ending, and a source of discontent in the blue ending - they'll take away yer jerbs.

[Suron]

Honestly look at it like this.

 

Shepard is alluded to still being alive in destroy (High EMS) by the breath scene.  But not specifically spelled out.

 

StarChild said shepard himself was made of reaper tech and would be "killed" if he went destroy.

 

But we see that Shepard CAN survive.

 

What we don't know is while the implants/cybernetics REBUILT shepad..are they KEEPING him alive..as in..if they are all fried does that mean he'll die? That's never spelled out.

 

Now.  Since Shepard, despite his implants being Reaper tech, can "live" t the end of Destroy.  I see no reason why EDI (and even the Geth) can't be "handwaved" to also survive.  Maybe they are saved because they're only PARTIALLY Reaper tech.  The Geth can easily be said to simply return to their original form before Rannoch and the "Reaper Upgrades" that give them individuality.  They're just back to their "norm"  EDI is a little harder to explain but not necessarily impossible...just because she used reaper tech doesn't mean she can't be "repaired" because there's other AI's not based on Reaper tech that have been created.  So BioWare could even handwave/retcon that EDI is "repaired" despite being part reaper tech and her "personality/memories" are still intact.

 

It's no more far fetched than any of the "space magic" we got in the trilogy.  So I see no reason why at high-EMS Destroy that not only does Shepard survive but so does EDI and the Geth (The Geth just reverted back to before the reaper upgrades...and EDI just taking a little more implausable of an explanation, but still certainly not out of the realm of space-magic we've already gotten)

[Laughing_Man]

... So I see no reason why at high-EMS Destroy that not only does Shepard survive but so does EDI and the Geth (The Geth just reverted back to before the reaper upgrades...and EDI just taking a little more implausable of an explanation, but still certainly not out of the realm of space-magic we've already gotten)

 

General question: Why does EMS even matters? It shouldn't efffect the deus ex machina by any way shape or form. And certainly not Shep's or EDI's

survival chances.

 

This is not only about what you wrote, but generally.

 

I just don't buy the patronizing explanation from star brat about yay!teamwork and the prize for being good boyz and gals.

[Suron]

General question: Why does EMS even matters? It shouldn't efffect the deus ex machina by any way shape or form. And certainly not Shep's or EDI's

survival chances.

 

This is not only about what you wrote, but generally.

 

I just don't buy the patronizing explanation from star brat about yay!teamwork and the prize for being good boyz and gals.

Well I only pointed out high-ems because that's what you need to get the "breath" scene.

 

but really the ems shouldn't matter on what I said.  It's no more far-fetched to believe that shepard, EDI and the Geth can survive regardless of EMS than any of the other "handwaving/space-magic" we've gotten...with the same explanations...Geth could just revert back to before the upgrades and (again while more implausable) EDI is repaired and her memories/etc are still intact.  We're never told that the implants/cybernetics used to REBUILD shepard are necessary to KEEP him alive..and the "breath" scene actually shows they're not. (If you believe that scene is meant to show his living...which honestly why else would they have put it there)

 

So yah, EMS really shouldn't matter..I only pointed it out because it's required to see the "breath" scene.

[Vazgen]

Crucible damage. With High EMS it's largely intact (though still damaged). Targeting is screwed with low EMS.

 

Headcanon

With High EMS blast only affects Reaper technology. That's why Shepard lives, ships are intact but geth and EDI get destroyed. With low EMS, blast destroys everything in its path.

/Headcanon

[themikefest]

The difference between a low ems control playthrough and a high ems control playthrough is the time it will take to rebuild even with the reapers helping

 

The difference between low ems destroy, above 1750, playthrough and a high ems playthrough is the time it takes to rebuild. Of course Shepard lives with high enough ems. If ems is below 1750, Earth will be scorched and will take who knows how long to rebuild

 

Synthesis has to be at least 2800 for the merge to happen. The galaxy gets rebuilt.

 

If the player does have ems below 1900, both squadmates will be killed. If edi is taken on that run with low ems, its platform will be destroyed, but the hologram will still be in the Normandy if control is picked or if control is the only option available

[SwobyJ]

 

StarChild said shepard himself was made of reaper tech and would be "killed" if he went destroy.

 

No. He never did. 

 

"Even you are partly synthetic." is:

 

1)An ALLUSION that Destroy will affect Shepard, not that it will kill him.

2)An acknowledgement that Shepard is PARTLY synthetic.

 

Catalyst never says that Shepard will be terminated, he was only warning that the wave will affect Shepard due to his synthetic implants.

 

EDI, on the other hand, is fully synthetic. And built from Reaper code. She's almost exactly what the Destroy wave seemed primed to aim for. Almost. Maybe that 'almost' part (since she's not literally a Reaper) could have you hope against all hopelessness that she made it intact enough. But that's far from Shepard's situation.

[SwobyJ]

General question: Why does EMS even matters? It shouldn't efffect the deus ex machina by any way shape or form. And certainly not Shep's or EDI's

survival chances.

 

This is not only about what you wrote, but generally.

 

I just don't buy the patronizing explanation from star brat about yay!teamwork and the prize for being good boyz and gals.

 

(Literal story interpretation)

 

EMS means, well, your effective strength. This means a lot of things. It means the power of the fleet. It means keeping united forces relatively stronger until they become the fleet. And it means the power of the Crucible - how developed it is allowed to become. 

 

Destroy - What it seems organic cycles were making it for.

Control - What it seems the saboteurs of the cycles were making it for.

Synthesis - Either a totally new function unlocked by this cycle, or what the Crucible was actually intended for in the first place.

 

EMS is a general indicator of how much time and how many resources were allowed to go into the project.

 

Loyalty in ME2 was kinda vague but we generally got it. I guess Bioware overstepped their bounds when they made EMS matter so much in itself. Like we're supposed to gauge the strength of the struggle of up to billions of people by... a single number.

 

However, there is information. The Crucible War Assets we acquire basically explain how functions of the Crucible may work. How it models the relays, Reaper Code, generates a gigantic mass effect field, and so on. But even still, the explanations still seem annoyingly vague.

 

 

But anyway, in Destroy, EMS seems like its supposed to mean how well the Crucible is programmed to pinpoint not just synthetics, but Reaper code. Thus while EDI may have 'died', the Normandy can  survive. Thus while Shepard can die, he also can survive. Thus how the wave can be so poor that it actually destroys much of Earth, it can also be optimized enough to not harm anything on it. Its some explosion of some sort of energy that isn't really understood.

 

It is not understood why the Normandy had to flee in all 3 types of endings. Or at least how the wave disrupts and causes the Normandy to crash, when it seemingly normally does nothing of the sort to other ships. This is something that could be chalked up to either poor writing, poor player understanding (but what are we missing?), or crazy dream theory or whatever.

[SuperJogi]

(Literal story interpretation)

 

EMS means, well, your effective strength. This means a lot of things. It means the power of the fleet. It means keeping united forces relatively stronger until they become the fleet. And it means the power of the Crucible - how developed it is allowed to become. 

EMS is a general indicator of how much time and how many resources were allowed to go into the project.

 

Loyalty in ME2 was kinda vague but we generally got it. I guess Bioware overstepped their bounds when they made EMS matter so much in itself. Like we're supposed to gauge the strength of the struggle of up to billions of people by... a single number.

 

The problem is that BW had to find some way to make the dicisions made during the game, have an impact on the ending. That is the only reason EMS exists in the first place, a simple indicator of how well your doing. It's a gameplay mechanic, nothing more and it doesn't really make sense from an in universe perspective.

The fact that your EMS has an impact on how well the crucible functions is pretty nonsensical and I would attribute it to bad writing.

A far more sensible approach to make your decisions matter in the end is to simply make you lose if you make bad ones.

 

Good decisions --> Crucible gets build and activated --> You win --> Happy end

Bad decisions --> Cucible doesn't get build/activated --> You lose --> Bad end

 

It's far more logical and it allows you to make a true happy ending and a true bad one, not this bittersweet mishmash of "you saved the galaxy but everthing is destroyed" that no one is satisfied with.

I also find it pretty stupid to show your EMS in game. Of course a number like that is an easy way to determine which ending you're gonna get, but why show it? It makes it obvious to the player that the key to beating the reapers, is quite literally, putting up a new highscore. It destroys immersion by constantly reminding you that this is not a real world, it's just a videogame, where everything is just a number and if you want to have success you better get that number up! But of course, you somehow had to encourage people to play the multiplayer...

[Vazgen]

Why is it nonsensical? Your EMS governs the strength of the fleets which in turn impacts the amount of damage the Crucible takes before docking. Sounds fine to me.

 

But I do agree that showing Effective Military Strength was not a good decision. Effectiveness is based on a lot of factors that are only revealed during the battle itself, there is no way you could know how effective your fleets might be. Total Military Strength is fine, that's what we know about our fleets. 

[SuperJogi]

Why is it nonsensical? Your EMS governs the strength of the fleets which in turn impacts the amount of damage the Crucible takes before docking. Sounds fine to me.

 

Damaging a highly complex and intricate machine usually breaks it, and not radically changes it's function. That you are suddenly unable to merge organics and synthetics and can only destroy the reapers, just because they shot a few holes in your machine, is nonsensical.

[Vazgen]

Damaging a highly complex and intricate machine usually breaks it, and not radically changes it's function. That you are suddenly unable to merge organics and synthetics and can only destroy the reapers, just because they shot a few holes in your machine, is nonsensical.

Keyword "usually". It all depends on what is damaged. Some system that is responsible for targeting? Some other system that is responsible for merging? Doesn't mean that other systems won't work.

I'd say that it is nonsensical to lock Crucible options based on the Collector Base decision.