52 réponses à ce sujet

[chris2365]

''So, it's been over 3 years since Commander Shepard stood in the Catalyst's decision chamber.

 

Where a decision had to be made regarding the fate of the galaxy.

 

A decision was made.

 

But 3 years on, that decision remains as divisive as ever. ''

 

That's pretty much how I see ME3's ending, even years later. Argue and debate about the Catalyst, how the ending was implemented, what the EC fixed, etc. There are both positives and negatives to take out of the ending, even though I think it is fine overall, but one thing sticks out to me the most.

 

Still to this day, if I were to stand in Shepard's place in that decision chamber, I wouldn't know what to pick.

 

And I find that brilliant.

 

It remains the only decision of the ME trilogy that has left me stumped like this. Every other decision, I was simply comfortable riding Paragon choices throughout the entire trilogy.

 

But the ending decision, man I can't seem to break it down.

 

Initially, I chose Synthesis. It was presented as the ideal solution by the Catalyst, and the sound of a utopia where all conflict would between organics and synthetics sounded appealing. But then I second guessed myself. Is it right to impose this change on the galaxy? What about the moral and ethical implications? If the goal of organics is to survive and improve all the time, what happens when we reached this supposed perfection? Stagnation?

 

I backed out of that. And then I settled on Control. On paper, it sounded like the best option. Everyone stays as they are, synthetics live. Reapers help rebuild. It sounded ideal, but something just rubbed me the wrong way. While I obviously trust my Shepard in charge of the Reapers, I can't help but worry about the future. What happens if the galaxy, once it recovers, wants nothing to do with the Reapers? What if the conflict between organics and synthetics erupted again? What would Shepard and the Reapers do? Just something about having the Reapers around like that throws me off.

 

And then we have Destroy. It's the simplest and the most straight-forward, but with the greatest cost. While we get rid of the Reapers once and for all, and Shepard lives, it comes at the cost of the only friendly synthetics we've ever known: the Geth and EDI. If we lose them, what happens then? Do we simply avoid making new AI? We know this is inevitable. And what if we make the same mistakes again? The pattern has repeated itself time and time again. What if the Geth and EDI are the one in a billion shot we have for a true peace between organics and synthetics, and Shepard decides to blow it by choosing Destroy. What kind of example would that set for future AI, should they find out what organics decided to do to their AI ancestors when it came down to it?

 

I won't discuss Refuse for obvious reasons, but I hope you guys see my point. There is no real clear cut ''best ending''. Each ending has its own pros and cons, and anyone, Paragon or Renegade, could justify any ending choice they made. I really appreciate the fact that Bioware detached themselves from the standard good/bad moral choices for the ending, though I agree the execution could have been much better. The concept, as I described earlier, is quite sound though.

 

What about you guys? Do you all have canon endings now, or are some of you still on the fence about the final decision?

 

 

[Madrict]

Good post, well thought out

 

I love the way ME3 ends now, I have never understood why people had such a nappy rash over the endings, they are fine.

 

I find myself in a similar boat, it is a very hard choice to make, and I love that about it.

 

Personally I usually go destroy just because I hate leaving my Shepard dead (and poor Kaidan alone). After all they have been through they deserve some happiness. That being said I was really upset about EDI dying. I guess that's what I like about the endings, either way they are packed with emotion! 

[teh DRUMPf!!]

 I also agree. Not that there were not some real issues with the ending, and I would do things differently if I had the ability to change it, but I did feel like the final decision posed some interesting potential challenges of the players' beliefs/values. Lots of people would clearly prefer the overarching story/plot had remained some 2-dimensional fight between our side as the good and the unknown as evil, and I am quite happy they did not get their wish. That kind of narrative is the epitome of boring. Weird/wacky beats ho-hum any day.

[fraggle]

I loved the ending choices too. I will never forget how I felt during the last 20 minutes.

When I first played it was late into the night and I didn't think forever about the choices (there was just a lot of wtf, what am I even doing? ). I was emotionally done at that point anyway and I picked what sounded best. Synthesis. Peace. It was intriguing. I just didn't like what was presented to me afterwards and only then I started questioning my choice, do I really want to be the one changing all these races forever?

I came to the conclusion that I go with Destroy (Control was never an option for me personally). Yes, it was sad EDI and the geth died, but I argumented I just want to get rid of the Reapers, so the galaxy can take fate in their own hands. If the outcome is bad, so be it, but at least there's nothing that dictates their fate against their will.

 

So in real life, I might have first made the "wrong" decision for me in hindsight (or maybe I would have given it more thought after all, or maybe everything would have worked out awesome ).

[Madrict]

Lol I remember the first time I finished ME3....I got teary.

[fraggle]

Lol I remember the first time I finished ME3....I got teary.

 

Needed a feeew tissues for all the crying

[Excella Gionne]

Lol I remember the first time I finished ME3....I got teary.

Oddly enough, I did too. Control was my first ending, and so, you can imagine... 

[Excella Gionne]

Oh god! The feels! The feels are realz!

 

Spoiler

 

Personally, I don't mind the endings(Post-EC). They're far from perfect, but they're far from being the worst. I didn't play ME2 until late 2012 on PS3(ME1 didn't come out on PS3 until December when the Trilogy released). Nonetheless, ME2 was a good game to start from. Played ME2 for like 3-2 months before moving onto 3. Because there are three outcomes at best, an ending DLC that extends upon the events after the crucible fires would make Destroy the only ending anyone would choose. Why? Shepard lives and you get to see the events after as in your Shepard was saved and is alive and well. If you settled for Control or Synthesis, you wouldn't get those events because Shepard is dead. It would completely make Control and Synthesis non-ideal for ideal choices. EVERYONE wants their Shepard to live, but in order to keep all endings relevant the endings shouldn't be expanded upon post-EC. That is just my opinion.

[themikefest]

If I was in Shepard's shoes it would be a no-brainer. I would pick destroy. I've always picked destroy and have no reason to pick any of the others

[aoibhealfae]

My first ending was Synthesis.. oh my god that was traumatizing. But then as I reach EDI's narrative, I get skeptical really quick... Reapers gaining sentience... they're basically corpses coming alive through tech. That's not peace, that's eternal purgatory.

[prosthetic soul]

Ugh. 

 

 

Spoiler

I'd pick MEHEM

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Ugh. 

 

*snip*

 

Spoiler

I'd pick MEHEM

 

Kinda hurts in the pucker, dudn't it?

[AlanC9]

My first ending was Synthesis.. oh my god that was traumatizing. But then as I reach EDI's narrative, I get skeptical really quick... Reapers gaining sentience... they're basically corpses coming alive through tech. That's not peace, that's eternal purgatory.

Well, if they think that themselves, suicide's an available option.

[AlanC9]

In-character,my Shepards have gone all four ways. I think Control has a plurality, though.

Personally... I dunno. I'm not sure I could be trusted with Control.

[Excella Gionne]

Kinda hurts in the pucker, dudn't it?

Everyone likes clearin' their throat with some MEHEM, don't they?

[prosthetic soul]

Kinda hurts in the pucker, dudn't it?

what?

[ShepisFinnish]

I personally liked the way BioWare did the ending for much the same reasons as you already stated. I usually choose Destroy, but the first time ever playing, when I chose to save the Geth, I was really stumped. I wanted to see the Reapers burn, but at the same time I had just saved the Geth. So, in the end, I pretty much sacrificed two whole races to end the Reaper threat. And it still haunts me.

[dgcatanisiri]

I honestly go round and round on this. Destroy makes the most sense to me, because it feels the most in tune with what I felt the core of the series was - it wipes out the Reapers, ends the cycles, everything from here on is new and without a road map, we pick our own fate, but at the same time, there's still a cost (the geth and EDI). Control feels like the most ominous to me, since the Shepard-Intelligence might not be enough of Shepard to keep from facing the same fate as the Catalyst, deciding it knows better than the organics, but at the same time, it makes what were weapons of war (whether or not the Catalyst considers them as such...) into objects of peace and stability. Synthesis is presented in happy terms, feels like a cheery and upbeat conclusion, but I find it questionable, not enough time to explain what it does or how it works, and dear GOD the moral implications...

 

But I really do find that perfectly in keeping with the core idea of at least ME3 - make a choice, live with the consequences, they don't come easily, they may not be 'right,' but a choice has to be made. And I kinda like that.

[God]

 I also agree. Not that there were not some real issues with the ending, and I would do things differently if I had the ability to change it, but I did feel like the final decision posed some interesting potential challenges of the players' beliefs/values. Lots of people would clearly prefer the overarching story/plot had remained some 2-dimensional fight between our side as the good and the unknown as evil, and I am quite happy they did not get their wish. That kind of narrative is the epitome of boring. Weird/wacky beats ho-hum any day.

 

Indeed. I've changed my view on the ending as time has worn on. 

 

The faults with it are largely by presentation and execution, not inherent concept. 

 

BW had a good idea with the ending concept. They just screwed up miserably when bringing it into practice.

[God]

Oddly enough, I did too. Control was my first ending, and so, you can imagine... 

 

Synthesis was my first ending. I had absolutely no idea what the hell was going on at that point. The narrative had collapsed on itself by that point.

[aoibhealfae]

Well, if they think that themselves, suicide's an available option.

I always thought it was odd that the giant reaper were all... greenish nice giant machine thing. I'd imagine things happened differently after the crucible was fired... somewhere between massive hysteria, banshees screaming, brutes crashing themselves on a wall until their brains turned to mush or tear their eyes out. A lot of reapers are a mix of several different people, kinda like the Praetorian, Cannibal and Brutes... if each of them regain some part of themselves, then they remember what they did, think about all the people they killed, probably their family.... even without the space magic, Synthesis is pretty nasty.

 

And I thought Battlestar Galactica's synthesis ending was bad... 

[chris2365]

Indeed. I've changed my view on the ending as time has worn on. 

 

The faults with it are largely by presentation and execution, not inherent concept. 

 

BW had a good idea with the ending concept. They just screwed up miserably when bringing it into practice.

 

Exactly. I feel this is the main thing to take away from this whole ending fiasco. Casey and Mac had a really solid idea to give us a set of endings in which there is no clear cut ''best ending''. Every ending had its own implications, pros and cons, and each Shepard could correspond with each ending for different reasons. I really feel like it was a great step to move beyond Paragon/renegade decisions and go on to grey regions, one that contrasts with the rest of the game and makes it memorable, rather than the a standard ''Kill reapers, asari babies for Shep and Liara, etc.'' . I think that is what they meant when they said ''There is no A,B,C ending''. We could really interpret it however we wanted.

 

However, I agree that the execution was lacking. Even starting on Priority Earth, I felt the game was going soft. Instead of being a crescendo of epicness like the Suicide Mission and being an overwhelming mission, they kept it straightforward. Very little visual feedback of what we had done throughout the trilogy in terms of impact and War Assets. And then once you got to the Catalyst's chamber, I can see why people hated it. While I get caught up in the moment and atmosphere of the final decision, I ignore the many glaring potholes and inconsistencies. 

 

I'm also of the belief there should have been a greater variety of endings, even beyond the Catalyst. I always imagined an ending where the Collector Base Heart would generate a Destroy like pre-EC, with lots of damage, but Geth and AI spared, and the Collector Base Brain opens up an interaction like the Catalyst, presented differently, that gives us the choices that we got in EC. That way, if you want to go for the standard Reaper Kill Switch ending, you could. Or if you wanted to deal with moral reflections and decisions, you could get that too.

 

I feel that the problem with execution and presentation might truly lie with what Patrick Weekes said about Casey and Mac locking everyone out on the ending. While I loved the concept of the ending, it needed that overview from the entire team so that it could be presented as best as possible, in the most ways possible. I feel the EC was closer to what would have been accomplished had they worked together during the game's development, but obviously the EC had to work with what we had for the original ending, and that was the equivalent of polishing a turd, for some. And that was totally understandable.

 

I just hope that this ending fiasco doesn't stop Bioware from taking chances and going into new directions, especially with their stories. Taking a chance is the best way to innovate. It just needs to be polished chance that everyone could appreciate 

[Vazgen]

On my first playthrough I talked to the Catalyst, listened to its explanations of the consequences and workings of each ending. I dismissed Synthesis right away, it was too weird. I then walked, constantly thinking of the right decision. I walked halfway to Control but then turned around, went all the way to Destroy and shot the tube. I remember thinking that it was the human destructive nature that guided me... Destroy became my canon ending. I picked the other endings out of curiosity on different playthroughs but Destroy remains the one I'm the most comfortable with. 

[ArabianIGoggles]

I picked destroy the first time around.  The geth dying was the only downside.

[Reorte]

Indeed. I've changed my view on the ending as time has worn on. 

 

The faults with it are largely by presentation and execution, not inherent concept. 

 

BW had a good idea with the ending concept. They just screwed up miserably when bringing it into practice.

I mostly agree with that, although to get the implementation sorted it would've needed changes to the entire game. However because of the way it was done and the details my view on them hasn't changed at all. In the end there was no hard decision. Whatever the downsides in my choice I saw no upsides in the others. There need to be pros to them all as well as cons.