3584 réponses à ce sujet

[Callidus Thorn]

But the endings do fit the settings and the story. Every ending that exists fits within the logic of Shepard and how he/she can be portrayed in the trilogy.

 

The illusion does hold. The Reapers control and merge (synthesis) with their enemies. Or you can destroy them at a price. These choices are well documented throughout the series. You just chose to ignore it and hate the writers for not writing it how you want. 

 

That's on you, not on them. 

 

Plenty of people in this thread have pointed out why the ending and the choices fit the rest of the game. In that case, the writing isn't the problem

 

You do know that trying to reinvent the argument that everyone who didn't like the endings wanted a happy ending is neither subtle nor clever, right?

 

Y'know, with a few tweaks, the Catalyst scenario could actually work pretty well: Leave the Reapers as Synthetics. Have them stir up conflict between organics and synthetics, to stop the synthetics becoming too advanced for the organics to deal with. And have them wipe the slate clean if they're discovered(or if the organics are losing), so that their purpose can't be undermined. It'd tie into Sovereign using the Geth in Mass Effect, the relays and citadel being a trap, keep an organic versus synthetic struggle going throughout the trilogy, and even let the Reapers keep being the villain, rather than some kind of misguided saviours. You could even leave the choices more or less as they are, though something still needs to be done about synthesis.

 

Now, I could(and almost did) write out a lengthy post about the ending. But I've realised that there's no point, because that underlined bit tells me that you're already dismissing my view, no matter how much I could say to support it, no matter how many people have pointed out why the ending is a badly written mess that's found itself in the wrong game, the wrong story, and(with synthesis) the wrong genre.

 

And that's why I said on a previous page that this thread should be locked. Because so many people that are defending the endings are doing so by misrepresenting the multitude of valid criticisms of those endings. And you can't hold a discussion on those terms.

[General TSAR]

They didn't set up a crappy ending. That's your opinion that they did.

The poor writing say, copy and paste cinematics, and fan reaction say otherwise.

The Extended Cut expands on the ending and provides closure.

Looks like you're still trying to deny that the extended cut was an attempt at placating the outraged fans. If the ending was so well received they wouldn't have spent time and resources making the extended cut.

 

Your last point can be chalked up to your personal expectations. You expected the ending to be good, and when it wasn't, the outrage ensued because Bioware writers didn't give enough freedom with your choices. Oh, I'm sorry, their choices.

 

It's less what I expected and more about:

[rossler]

You do know that trying to reinvent the argument that everyone who didn't like the endings wanted a happy ending is neither subtle nor clever, right?

 

Y'know, with a few tweaks, the Catalyst scenario could actually work pretty well: Leave the Reapers as Synthetics. Have them stir up conflict between organics and synthetics, to stop the synthetics becoming too advanced for the organics to deal with. And have them wipe the slate clean if they're discovered(or if the organics are losing), so that their purpose can't be undermined. It'd tie into Sovereign using the Geth in Mass Effect, the relays and citadel being a trap, keep an organic versus synthetic struggle going throughout the trilogy, and even let the Reapers keep being the villain, rather than some kind of misguided saviours. You could even leave the choices more or less as they are, though something still needs to be done about synthesis.

 

Now, I could(and almost did) write out a lengthy post about the ending. But I've realised that there's no point, because that underlined bit tells me that you're already dismissing my view, no matter how much I could say to support it, no matter how many people have pointed out why the ending is a badly written mess that's found itself in the wrong game, the wrong story, and(with synthesis) the wrong genre.

 

And that's why I said on a previous page that this thread should be locked. Because so many people that are defending the endings are doing so by misrepresenting the multitude of valid criticisms of those endings. And you can't hold a discussion on those terms.

 

Putting stuff down on paper is fine, but don't expect to hand this to the writers, have them agree with you, and redo their ending to your specifications. 

 

Gotta face reality here, man. 

 

It's less what I expected and more about: *snip*

 

I think several others including myself have pointed out the Reaper logic is nothing even close to that. 

 

Looks like you're still trying to deny that was the extended cut was at placating the outraged fans. If it was well received they wouldn't have spent time and resources making the extended cut.

 

And you were still disappointed after the fact. I guess there's no pleasing you. 

 

Here we go again with the I expected a good ending and got a crap ending (in your opinion). If it was good, they wouldn't need to make the Extended Cut. 

 

Sounds like they couldn't meet your expectations. That's on you, not on them. 

 

The poor writing say, copy and paste cinematics, and fan reaction say otherwise.

 

Well that's your opinion. If you want mine, the fan reaction was nothing short of psychotic filled fan rage akin to Annie Wilkes from misery. The cinematics weren't a direct copy a paste either. I don't see how controlling the Reapers in one ending is the same as the Reapers being destroyed in a different ending. Or the synthesis one which ascends the galaxy to the pinnacle of evolution and has them become part Reaper. 

[General TSAR]

Putting stuff down on paper is fine, but don't expect to hand this to the writers, have them agree with you, and redo their ending to your specifications. 

 

Gotta face reality here, man. 

The reality is that the ME3 endings sucked so much that not only did BioWare make a free ending DLC to try to fix it but they had to set their next game in another galaxy because the setting was so irreparably screwed with space magic and because they refused to canonize an ending.

 

I think several others including myself have pointed out the Reaper logic is nothing even close to that.

The Reapers have circular logic and that's the fault of the writers.

 

The Dark Energy plot line would have fit the Reaper's motivations much better than killing this species to prevent if from being killed by another species.

 

 

 

And you were still disappointed after the fact. I guess there's no pleasing you.

Putting a cherry on top of a mud pile doesn't make it a chocolate Sunday. Who knew? 

 

 

 

Here we go again with the I expected a good ending and got a crap ending (in your opinion). If it was good, they wouldn't need to make the Extended Cut. 

 

Sounds like they couldn't meet your expectations. That's on you, not on them.

"You just don't understand the beauty of their circular logic and copy and paste cut scenes, that's your fault."

 

Also the fact they made the extended cut shows they didn't meet a lot of the fans' expectations.

Well that's your opinion.

Same can be said with your attempts to make others face "reality."

 

If you want mine, the fan reaction was nothing short of psychotic filled fan rage akin to Annie Wilkes from misery.

How dare the fans wanted a story that didn't rely on nonsense, space magic, a problem and antagonist introduced in the last 15 minutes, and a problem that came way out of left field.

[gothpunkboy89]

You do know that trying to reinvent the argument that everyone who didn't like the endings wanted a happy ending is neither subtle nor clever, right?

 

Y'know, with a few tweaks, the Catalyst scenario could actually work pretty well: Leave the Reapers as Synthetics. Have them stir up conflict between organics and synthetics, to stop the synthetics becoming too advanced for the organics to deal with. And have them wipe the slate clean if they're discovered(or if the organics are losing), so that their purpose can't be undermined. It'd tie into Sovereign using the Geth in Mass Effect, the relays and citadel being a trap, keep an organic versus synthetic struggle going throughout the trilogy, and even let the Reapers keep being the villain, rather than some kind of misguided saviours. You could even leave the choices more or less as they are, though something still needs to be done about synthesis.

 

Now, I could(and almost did) write out a lengthy post about the ending. But I've realised that there's no point, because that underlined bit tells me that you're already dismissing my view, no matter how much I could say to support it, no matter how many people have pointed out why the ending is a badly written mess that's found itself in the wrong game, the wrong story, and(with synthesis) the wrong genre.

 

And that's why I said on a previous page that this thread should be locked. Because so many people that are defending the endings are doing so by misrepresenting the multitude of valid criticisms of those endings. And you can't hold a discussion on those terms.

 

That is the ending many people seem to have preferred. Simplfy the Reaper's logic and simply want Shep to show up, dock the Crucible and blow the Reapers into chunks no larger then a Turian's left nut.

 

Your idea is actually a step down from what is presented in game. It actually follows the same logic behind slavery and oppression. If you are different then me then you should be my slave and never be allowed to rise above me. Which would over all would ruin the game. Techno racism is still racism.

 

Your reply equally tells me there is no point attempting to go into detail to explain how all endings fit with how Shepard can be played because you have already dismissed my view no matter how much I could say to support it.

 

And many of those criticisms of the ending are a multitude of misrepresentations of the game.  General TSAR's pic is great example.

[rossler]

How dare the fans wanted a story that didn't rely on nonsense, space magic, a problem and antagonist introduced in the last 15 minutes, and a problem that came way out of left field.

 

This goes back to "I didn't get the game I wanted", and "they didn't write it how I would have done it".

 

Also the fact they made the extended cut shows they didn't meet a lot of the fans' expectations.

 

Fan expectations maybe, but there was plenty who were satisfied. 

 

Putting a cherry on top of a mud pile doesn't make it a chocolate Sunday. Who knew? 

 

Well if you wanted a new ending you weren't going to get one. Extended Cut is the best they could offer. 

 

The Reapers have circular logic and that's the fault of the writers.

 

Their logic isn't circular, it makes quite a bit of sense. Plenty have proven why. So it's not the writing that is the issue. 

 

The reality is that the ME3 endings sucked so much that not only did BioWare make a free ending DLC to try to fix it but they had to set their next game in another galaxy because the setting was so irreparably screwed with space magic and because they refused to canonize an ending.

 

You don't know why they're putting the next game in Andromeda. Neither do I. Won't find out why until you play it. Don't judge a book by its cover. 

 

They chose to leave things open to interpretation, but I guess you couldn't handle deciding things for yourself, and needed Bioware to tell you which ending is the correct one. 

 

There is no space magic in ME3. None. This gets used a lot for anything that isn't explained properly or doesn't make any sense. So people call it space magic. 

[ImaginaryMatter]

You just want an ending without any consequences. 

 

Why, yes, I do want an ending without consequences. Same way I want to laze and be pampered all day. I can face reality though. Look at the way the Catalyst sets up the conversation -- you are ostensibly choosing a solution to the Catalyst's problem. Now look at the Crucible options. One of those problems is explicitly stated to not be a solution to the Catalyst's problem, yet it offers it any way. The Catalyst doesn't provide a reason for this, nor can Shepard present a logical, simpler, and more effective alternative. This is a contradiction. That's all I'm pointing out.

 

Yet, the first thing you do is throw out a baseless accusation that neither addresses anything I said, not is it remotely related to the conversation at hand. I'm starting to think you don't actually have a defense for the ending on any kind of logical or artistic grounds. If you do, I would love to hear it.

[rossler]

Why, yes, I do want an ending without consequences. Same way I want to laze and be pampered all day. I can face reality though. Look at the way the Catalyst sets up the conversation -- you are ostensibly choosing a solution to the Catalyst's problem. Now look at the Crucible options. One of those problems is explicitly stated to not be a solution to the Catalyst's problem, yet it offers it any way. The Catalyst doesn't provide a reason for this, nor can Shepard present a logical, simpler, and more effective alternative. This is a contradiction. That's all I'm pointing out.

 

Yet, the first thing you do is throw out a baseless accusation that neither addresses anything I said, not is it remotely related to the conversation at hand. I'm starting to think you don't actually have a defense for the ending on any kind of logical or artistic grounds. If you do, I would love to hear it.

 

You don't have to do anything he says. You tell him off by destroying the Reapers. I really dislike these arguments of how the kid controls the whole situation and Shepard just sits there and accepts everything. 

 

What option? Destroy? What the kid says is no different than the Reaper on Rannoch. They simply do not believe synthetics and organics can co-exist peacefully. That is not a contradiction. That is what they believe. It's their opinion, and you're not going to change that. They operate on a strict routine, and are bound by their programming. They don't care about what Shepard has done. This was established in the first minute or two of the game. The Reapers are more powerful, more intelligent. They don't fear us, and they'll never take pity on us, the line goes. Perhaps you need a better example. 

 

It's not the point of the scene to have a debate with the kid and find a better alternative. You simply don't have the time, because regardless of what I said about Shepard's health earlier, the Reapers are trying to destroy the Crucible, while you are sitting there talking with the kid. Had the shield fleet not been there, you would have less time. 

 

Reapers won't listen to you anyways. 

[gothpunkboy89]

Why, yes, I do want an ending without consequences. Same way I want to laze and be pampered all day. I can face reality though. Look at the way the Catalyst sets up the conversation -- you are ostensibly choosing a solution to the Catalyst's problem. Now look at the Crucible options. One of those problems is explicitly stated to not be a solution to the Catalyst's problem, yet it offers it any way. The Catalyst doesn't provide a reason for this, nor can Shepard present a logical, simpler, and more effective alternative. This is a contradiction. That's all I'm pointing out.

 

Yet, the first thing you do is throw out a baseless accusation that neither addresses anything I said, not is it remotely related to the conversation at hand. I'm starting to think you don't actually have a defense for the ending on any kind of logical or artistic grounds. If you do, I would love to hear it.

 

 

But the Catalyst does present a reason why the destroy option is valid. Things have changed it's solution isn't as viable as it once was and is predicted to eventually fail. Meaning a new solution is required. Destroy is a possible solution you do not disregard a solution because you personally do not like it. That is now how the scientific method works.

[General TSAR]

This goes back to "I didn't get the game I wanted", and "they didn't write it how I would have done it".

Nope, try again.

 

 

 

Fan expectations maybe, but there was plenty who were satisfied.

Not enough of them for BioWare not to make the extended cut.

 

 

 

Well if you wanted a new ending you weren't going to get one. Extended Cut is the best they could offer.

Extended cut was the band aid for a broken bone.

 

 

 

Their logic isn't circular, it makes quite a bit of sense. Plenty have proven why. So it's not the writing that is the issue.

Circular logic still stands and still doesn't explain crap like Synthesis.

 

 

 

 

They chose to leave things open to interpretation, but I guess you couldn't handle deciding things for yourself, and needed Bioware to tell you which ending is the correct one.

Okay Guru 3deep5u.

 

In case you haven't noticed, Mass Effect is not Dark Souls or NGE, there's no up to interpretation or fill in the blanks. The story up until the ending gets explained straight forward through huge codex entries, cut-scenes, conversations, and other media. 

 

It's a talky-techie franchise and everyone loves it for that. If it started out as a Sci-Fi fill-in-the-blanks story with this scattered info, then the up for interpenetration ending would be fine.

 

Also correct one? There is no correct ending.

 

 

There is no space magic in ME3. None. This gets used a lot for anything that isn't explained properly or doesn't make any sense. So people call it space magic

So you admit it doesn't make sense, finally some progress.

 

Okay explain how Shep's DNA caused the fusion of organic and synthetic life through various species.

[ImaginaryMatter]

You don't have to do anything he says. You tell him off by destroying the Reapers. I really dislike these arguments of how the kid controls the whole situation and Shepard just sits there and accepts everything. 

 

It's not the point of the scene to have a debate with the kid and find a better alternative. You simply don't have the time, because regardless of what I said about Shepard's health earlier, the Reapers are trying to destroy the Crucible, while you are sitting there talking with the kid. Had the shield fleet not been there, you would have less time. 

 

Can you explain how Destroying the Reapers is telling the Catalyst off?

[rossler]

So you admit it doesn't make sense, finally some progress.

I didn't say that. I said that anyone who finds something that doesn't make any sense calls it space magic. I said there is no space magic, so everything must have made sense to me. 

 

Okay explain how Shep's DNA caused the fusion of organic and synthetic life through various species.

 

It's not the fusion of organic and synthetic life through various species. It is the fusion of Reaper DNA through various species. 

 

One species in the known Mass Effect universe has hybrid DNA (both organic and synthetic), and that is the Reapers. 

 

Bottom line is he's making Reapers out of you. Just like in ME2. Very well documented throughout the series, and it doesn't come from nowhere. There's also synthesis which Saren mentions in ME1. So if you want more, replay the part where Saren is describing the Reapers. Or where you are at the human Reaper in ME2 (before you fight it)

 

Can you explain how Destroying the Reapers is telling the Catalyst off?

 

He disappears immediately after doing so, because the Reapers and by extension him, are destroyed. 

[Iakus]

You do know that trying to reinvent the argument that everyone who didn't like the endings wanted a happy ending is neither subtle nor clever, right?

 

It's not even very original.  

[Iakus]

 

It's not the fusion of organic and synthetic life through various species. It is the fusion of Reaper DNA through various species. 

 

One species in the known Mass Effect universe has hybrid DNA (both organic and synthetic), and that is the Reapers. 

 

Bottom line is he's making Reapers out of you. Just like in ME2. Very well documented throughout the series, and it doesn't come from nowhere. There's also synthesis which Saren mentions in ME1. So if you want more, replay the part where Saren is describing the Reapers. Or where you are at the human Reaper in ME2 (before you fight it)

 

"Reaper DNA" is the DNA of tens if not hundreds of thousands of species they murdered over the last billion or so years.

 

How is that going to be merged with the species of this cycle?

[gothpunkboy89]

"Reaper DNA" is the DNA of tens if not hundreds of thousands of species they murdered over the last billion or so years.

 

How is that going to be merged with the species of this cycle?

 

The ability to merge technology to an organic body is what is shared.

[Iakus]

The ability to merge technology to an organic body is what is shared.

How?

[General TSAR]

I didn't say that. I said that anyone who finds something that doesn't make any sense calls it space magic. I said there is no space magic, so everything must have made sense to me. 

Or you're deliberately deluding yourself.

 

 

 

It's not the fusion of organic and synthetic life through various species. It is the fusion of Reaper DNA through various species. 

 

One species in the known Mass Effect universe has hybrid DNA (both organic and synthetic), and that is the Reapers.

Reaper DNA? What are you going on about? The starbrat says  Shep's energy will be broken down and dispersed which will cause a chain reaction that combines all organic and synthetic life into a new DNA somehow (Which is utterly nonsensical BTW). Okay, how the hell can Shep's organic "energy" combine all organic and synthetic species?

 

 

Bottom line is he's making Reapers out of you. Just like in ME2.

Shepard was a reaper in ME2? This keeps getting better and better.

 

 

 

Very well documented throughout the series, and it doesn't come from nowhere. There's also synthesis which Saren mentions in ME1. So if you want more, replay the part where Saren is describing the Reapers. Or where you are at the human Reaper in ME2 (before you fight it)

It's called implants and turning people into raw DNA through understandable and logical mechanisms. There's no giant wave of space magic covering the galaxy and fusing billions/trillions of organics and synthetics all caused by the organic energy of one human being.

 

 

How?

Space magic! Because when you can't find a logical explanation for the forced evolution of millions of unrelated organic and synthetic species through the organic energy of one human, why not make up some BS to look "compelling"?

[gothpunkboy89]

How?

Many possible reasons.

 

Nanomachines in the preexisting reaper soldiers spreading towards other beings and altering them. Mass effect field directed in such a way that causes and evolutionary jump in the organic body.

[General TSAR]

Many possible reasons.

 

Nanomachines in the preexisting reaper soldiers spreading towards other beings and altering them. Mass effect field directed in such a way that causes and evolutionary jump in the organic body.

Sounds like head canon and the synthesis wave is caused by the Relays not by the Reapers.

[AlanC9]

Can you explain how Destroying the Reapers is telling the Catalyst off?

Well, everything it's ever attempted to accomplish is off the table at that point. And if Shepard survives to tell what happened, the very concept of synthetic-organic conflict will likely be discredited.

[ImaginaryMatter]

Well, everything it's ever attempted to accomplish is off the table at that point.

 

I don't follow. This could be my bad, since "telling off" is pretty vague, but the Catalyst just stands there and lets you. The more intuitive, simpler option just seems to let Shepard say it versus taking out every single AI.

[rossler]

Sounds like head canon and the synthesis wave is caused by the Relays not by the Reapers.

 

Nothing wrong with head canon. 

 

Shepard was a reaper in ME2? This keeps getting better and better.

 

You seem amused. When I said you I didn't mean Shepard himself. The colonists were processed and made into the human Reaper. When I mean you in reference to ME3's ending, I meant organic life and synthetic life. 

 

Or you're deliberately deluding yourself.

 

I'm deluding myself, because I don't believe in there was any space magic? But you do. 

 

This basically sums up your arguments: You want me to agree with you. 

[General TSAR]

Nothing wrong with head canon. 

Ahh, so this is the core of your argument.

 

Thought so.

 

I'm deluding myself, because I don't believe in there was any space magic? But you do.

You're using head canon and pulling ideas out of thin air to attempt to justify why the ending is good.

 

You want me to agree with you. You call me delusional for having a different opinion.

What I want is irrelevant, but you trying the 2deep4u BS with your head canon is disingenuous.

[rossler]

You're using head canon and pulling ideas out of thing air to attempt to justify why the ending is good.

 

You're using bad writing and calling everything space magic in an attempt to justify a bad ending. It's no different. 

 

What I want is irrelevant, but you trying the 2deep4u BS with your head canon is disingenuous.

 

No different than you saying it's bad writing or space magic. Or hating on the writers to feel better about yourself. It's not going to make your pain over the ending go away. It'll make you feel worse.

 

I didn't say too deep for you, but when the game says multiple times that you can't negotiate with the Reapers, and you still think you can hammer out a better solution,

 

Or they don't give me a clear-cut explanation that you can understand on how the Crucible functions work. You just need to know what it will do. 

 

I would say you need to pay more attention to the writing of the game, instead of hating it because it's badly written. It's all you, not the writing. 

[General TSAR]

You're using bad writing

Circular logic is actually a logical fallacy and therefore should be avoided. BioWare didn't avoid it.

 

 

 

You're using bad writing and calling everything space magic in an attempt to justify a bad ending. It's no different.

Pointing out how the ending doesn't make sense is the same as your nonsensical head canon? Holy fanboy Batman.

 

and calling everything space magic in an attempt to justify a bad ending. It's no different.

When there's no logical reason given as to why the organic energy of a human can alter the DNA of billions/trillions of other species and synthetics in a galaxy and only head canon can justify it, then it's space magic.

 

 

 

No different than you saying it's bad writing or space magic. I didn't say too deep for you, but when the game says multiple times that you can't negotiate with the Reapers, and you still think you can hammer out a better solution, I would say you need to pay more attention to the writing of the game, instead of hating it for no reason.

"Hating it for no reason?" Wow, no wonder you go into the 3deep5u, you don't understand why people are complaining. Anyway, the Reapers fighting a total war has nothing to do with the logical clusterfvck of the ending.

 

 

No different than you saying it's bad writing or space magic. Or hating on the writers to feel better about yourself. It's not going to make your pain over the ending go away. It'll make you feel worse.

LOL, you really are reaching ain't ya? I don't need to hate the writers to feel good about myself, I criticize them for causing such a huge mess in their setting that they have to make a not!sequel in another galaxy. That's like hiting the bullseye in a game of let's not hit the bullseye.

 

 

It's not going to make your pain over the ending go away. It'll make you feel worse.

Mr. Headcanon trying the good ol' condescending psychobabble route. Nice try, the only game that has given me pain is The Phantom Pain and yet I don't hate the writers, disappointed maybe, but I don't hate them in fact I adore them to no end. The Mass Effect 3 ending doesn't give me pain, only laughter when the BioDrones try to defend it with their headcanon.