It does, if a game is about unity then why give the option to betray allies on several occasions? The ending was just poorly executed that's all nothing more nothing less.
Again, you're not speaking to my point at all. But yes, the ending was poorly executed. Perhaps that's a good place for us to leave things?
All the EC does is take the nonsensical and says "It just works, okay?"
For the most part all it did was take a poorly done ending and try to claim that it wasn't poorly done, true.
However it did actually address the complaint about it that I quoted you on. You can reject the Catalyst's offer if you don't trust him on it and attempt to call BS on the whole thing.
It just turns out that calling somebody's bluff only works when they're actually bluffing =P
I'm just gonna add one other thing.. you probably know I don't think it's genocide by now (especially when I just kill Legion), but Destroy to me is just clean slate. It's the chaos that Reapers fear. If there's any negatives about it, it's that. Not genocide... not necessarily. I just happen to think chaos is the only way for life to move forward. All of these endings have an element of growth, and I prefer that one.
The Geth are screwed no matter what you do. Upload the Code, they aren't the Geth anymore. Kill Legion, the Geth are gone by the Quarians' hands.
I understood you don't consider it genocide, and I read through your reasons in the discussion since, but I think it's an arbitrary distinction you make born out of hubris. I on the other hand consider us "meat" creatures to be nothing more than biological machines, and the fact that it's a synthetic machine makes no difference in consideration of whether they're "alive" or not. But this is a philosophical debate on the nature of life, and one we won't ever resolve.
I understood you don't consider it genocide, and I read through your reasons in the discussion since, but I think it's an arbitrary distinction you make born out of hubris. I on the other hand consider us "meat" creatures to be nothing more than biological machines, and the fact that it's a synthetic machine makes no difference in consideration of whether they're "alive" or not. But this is a philosophical debate on the nature of life, and one we won't ever resolve.
Even if that was the case, you're not killing anything but Legion. Which, at best, is murder. He's the only one that's a true AI at that point.
Secondly, he has betrayed himself by doing so. "The Geth build their own future. The Geth are not the Heretics", ME2 Legion says. And then he went and did the complete opposite. And yet you blame me? All I'm doing is fighting the Reapers. Now suddenly we live in Bizarro land where suddenly this is a bad thing?
As for the other Geth, they're not even AI yet. If anything, if it was up to me, I would have left them alone and let them incubate and become unique synthetics. But that isn't up to me. The Reapers are greater enemies of letting them do this than I ever was.
No it isn't, if it was true then Shepard wouldn't been given the option to sabotage the cure and betray Wrex or let the geth die on Rannoch. The whole idea is that is Shepard willing to do what ever it takes to stop the reaper's?
*Your* Shepard. Or *certain people's* Shepard. Having the option doesn't mean you have to take it, or that it is the correct option to take. There were a number of recurring themes in the game and the trilogy as a whole. And Shepard ultimately obeying the Reaper overmind and capitulating by doing what they wanted wasn't one of them. That actually goes against all possible Shepard characters, since he never backed down in the first and didn't do so in the second, never capitulated in the face of the impossible, even when everything and everyone was against him.
Even if that was the case, you're not killing anything but Legion. Which, at best, is murder. He's the only one that's a true AI at that point.
Secondly, he has betrayed himself by doing so. "The Geth build their own future. The Geth are not the Heretics", ME2 Legion says. And then he went and did the complete opposite. And yet you blame me? All I'm doing is fighting the Reapers. Now suddenly we live in Bizarro land where suddenly this is a bad thing?
As for the other Geth, they're not even AI yet. If anything, if it was up to me, I would have left them alone and let them incubate and become unique synthetics. But that isn't up to me. The Reapers are greater enemies of letting them do this than I ever was.
Also EDI... and I have no idea what you're talking about since 1.) Legion can give the Geth true individualistic intelligence 2.) The Geth are true AI without Legion's upgrade, they're just a collective intelligence, not an individualistic one. As for the "build their own future" there's a difference between giving Geth the upgrade for free, and giving Geth upgrade with the string of having to bow to and obey another AI race unconditionally. The Heretics were allowing the Reapers to decide their futures, while Legion decided of his own free will. Whether you agree with his choice is irrelevant, he wasn't hypocritical about it.
But I'll stop now with this debate, it's too philosophical in nature to be resolved on a forum(or resolved at all).
So - the summary of this thread is that trust in Bioware/EA is as irrelevant as trust in the starchild? I agree 
Faith in Bioware isnt necessary, cause I wait for real information about the game and first previews or maybe even reviews.
*Your* Shepard. Or *certain people's* Shepard. Having the option doesn't mean you have to take it, or that it is the correct option to take. There were a number of recurring themes in the game and the trilogy as a whole. And Shepard ultimately obeying the Reaper overmind and capitulating by doing what they wanted wasn't one of them. That actually goes against all possible Shepard characters, since he never backed down in the first and didn't do so in the second, never capitulated in the face of the impossible, even when everything and everyone was against him.
Also EDI... and I have no idea what you're talking about since 1.) Legion can give the Geth true individualistic intelligence 2.) The Geth are true AI without Legion's upgrade, they're just a collective intelligence, not an individualistic one. As for the "build their own future" there's a difference between giving Geth the upgrade for free, and giving Geth upgrade with the string of having to bow to and obey another AI race unconditionally. The Heretics were allowing the Reapers to decide their futures, while Legion decided of his own free will. Whether you agree with his choice is irrelevant, he wasn't hypocritical about it.
But I'll stop now with this debate, it's too philosophical in nature to be resolved on a forum(or resolved at all).
I don't want to insult you... you seem well meaning. But I have to wonder how much you remember from ME2.
The fact that they are even getting this Reaper code at all is not "building their own future". I'm not talking about simply "bowing down" or not "bowing down" or any other superficial display. But following a unique evolutionary path. "The Geth believe all life should self-determinate." The Geth admired the Reapers, but they didn't want anything to do with their code. They believed it would limit them rather than improve. THAT would be building your own future.
It's also why Legion approves of you destroying the Collector Base. Talk to him after you do this. He says that you two are more alike than he thought.. While TIM and ME3 Legion are more alike.
I don't want to insult you... you seem well meaning. But I have to wonder how much you remember from ME2.
Riight.. cause that's not the most underhanded insult out there... for not remembering a specific line from a game that I played a long time ago... Okay, let's say you're right. Legion from ME3 was not Legion from ME2.
So your point is? How does that relate to them being alive? They are still self-aware, they have consciousness with or without the upgrade. They are true AI from the beginning of ME1. If you want to throw quotes around: "As peer networks expanded, our cognition improved, eventually we woke up". Also EDI.
While this is a fair complaint of the original ending, the EC addresses it just fine by allowing the player to reject the Catalyst's options.
You'll lose and get wiped out, but you can call BS on the whole scenario now.
And Space Cthulhu is telling you that shooting this tube will make everything better? Or grab the control rods; you'll die but still control the Reapers? Or jump into the beam of green space magic and spread your specialness throughout the galaxy and save us all?
Can you honestly say the possibility that the Reapers are screwing with Shepard's mind is not a nonzero probability? That, gameplay and story segregation aside, the Reapers aren't trying to distract Shepard, or trick him/her into getting killed because there was a way to stop the Reapers, and the Catalyst wasn't trying to lead Shepard astray? These "solutions" are ludicrous! Why should I trust any of this? It must be a dream!
It's not a question of whether it's possible - my Shepard thought it was more than likely he was being B.S.'d by the Reapers. it's a question of nothing is actually happening while Shepard pursues this hypothetical way to activate the Crucible, until it's blown up. It's not really a case of trusting/believing the Catalysts so much as a case of "Time's up, we're about to die anyway, may as well give something a shot".
Of course, if it's a dream, all the better since I'm not really getting anyone killed.
*Your* Shepard. Or *certain people's* Shepard. Having the option doesn't mean you have to take it, or that it is the correct option to take. There were a number of recurring themes in the game and the trilogy as a whole. And Shepard ultimately obeying the Reaper overmind and capitulating by doing what they wanted wasn't one of them. That actually goes against all possible Shepard characters, since he never backed down in the first and didn't do so in the second, never capitulated in the face of the impossible, even when everything and everyone was against him.
Not really as others have said before too much has been committed to the crucible and they have nothing, they should see it through to the end regardless of the result.
But what do you guys wanted? Shepard to find a magic button that would destroy all reapers and bring peace to milky way? Reapers already destroyed the protheans, a far more developed civilization than humans, turians, asari etc. If you consider the power of reapers, of course the ending of the game would be of a difficult choice. Its like we cant defeat the gods but the effort of one of us (shep) was so great that he was offered to become a god. Also, very little time passed between the discovery of reapers by shep and their attacks and lets remember that the council couldnt care less about them.
Im not fluent in english and probably couldnt make myself totally understood. But yeah, i liked the ending and i think it suits well the story.
I'd have liked a ME3 in which we actually find a way to stop the Reapers due to our actions. Not a retarded litteral Deus Ex Machina extracted out of the asses of the writers.
The writers went for Hollywood dumbness, instead of trying to reach for verisimilitude. So we end up with the retarded "fight for the Earth" instead of, for example, having the Reapers still in hibernation, finding their location and managing to destroy them in their deactivated state (it's the entire plot of ME1 that they aren't "awaken" and Sovereign is trying to contact them, after all).
Does "like yourself" mean that you'll only listen to original players who hated ME3 as much as you did?
It means I'll be listening to the opinions of others who, like myself, played the entire series and had higher expectations for the third game then what we got. If other players such as myself who want a Mass Effect game that has the spirit of the first one say that this coming game meets or exceeds expectations upon release, then yes, I'll probably buy it. I'm not going to be one of those people who listens to the "reviews" of gaming magazines who basically give every game that comes from a major company a 10/10, rather than actually trying to rate the game on playability, plot, and graphics.
Also, your condescending tone is not appreciated. If you don't share my opinions, fine, but don't be snippy just because someone disliked something that you clearly liked. Everyone has different opinions and those who disliked ME3 had as much a valid (if not more) reason to dislike the game just like you had valid reason to like it.
I'd have liked a ME3 in which we actually find a way to stop the Reapers due to our actions. Not a retarded litteral Deus Ex Machina extracted out of the asses of the writers.
The writers went for Hollywood dumbness, instead of trying to reach for verisimilitude. So we end up with the retarded "fight for the Earth" instead of, for example, having the Reapers still in hibernation, finding their location and managing to destroy them in their deactivated state (it's the entire plot of ME1 that they aren't "awaken" and Sovereign is trying to contact them, after all).
<<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>>
Reapers, unfortunately, are legion and are located "everywhere" in the MW galaxy. There is no way to find and kill them all.
The idea of defeating the Reapers while they are dormant is key. The action is to find the Catalyst and destroy it before it starts the pogrom. This ending is a viable one. While the various Council races prepare for war and the construction of the Crucible, Shep could follow a path that leads to the Catalyst and arrives "in time" to stop it. Bio could have Shep killed off while fighting the Catalyst and at the same time, ended the trilogy on a semi high note.
Well, in order:Can you honestly say the possibility that the Reapers are screwing with Shepard's mind is not a nonzero probability? That, gameplay and story segregation aside, the Reapers aren't trying to distract Shepard, or trick him/her into getting killed because there was a way to stop the Reapers, and the Catalyst wasn't trying to lead Shepard astray? These "solutions" are ludicrous! Why should I trust any of this? It must be a dream!
This reference went right by me. But yeah, Shepard can try on hysterical defiance to see if it works. Spoiler alert: nothing happens.One would almost expect Shepard to tell the Catalyst "You're the camel!"
The idea of defeating the Reapers while they are dormant is key. The action is to find the Catalyst and destroy it before it starts the pogrom. This ending is a viable one. While the various Council races prepare for war and the construction of the Crucible, Shep could follow a path that leads to the Catalyst and arrives "in time" to stop it. Bio could have Shep killed off while fighting the Catalyst and at the same time, ended the trilogy on a semi high note.
Every time I see the title to this thread I think of that Wham song....and I hate Wham.
Though there's a nonzero chance that destroying the Catalyst just makes things worse. Free Reapers wouldn't necessarily be any better for organics than Reapers who enforce the cycles. Maybe the Reapers just settle down, rule the Galaxy, and farm organics for Reaper chow. This wouldn't happen if destroying the Catalyst pre-invasion was the designed ending, of course.
<<<<<<<<<<(0)>>>>>>>>>
Where is the info that Reapers say they are free of control? The Catalyst designed the 50k cycle program and to me, the AI controls its minions. Without the "wake up call", the Reapers remain dormant.
Or, did I miss something?
For the most part all it did was take a poorly done ending and try to claim that it wasn't poorly done, true.
However it did actually address the complaint about it that I quoted you on. You can reject the Catalyst's offer if you don't trust him on it and attempt to call BS on the whole thing.
It just turns out that calling somebody's bluff only works when they're actually bluffing =P
Except I'm not saying it's a bluff, I'm saying the situation is in feels so unreal that calling BS on everything is a perfectly logical reaction.
And EC didn't do sh-...anything to remedy that.
Except I'm not saying it's a bluff, I'm saying the situation is in feels so unreal that calling BS on everything is a perfectly logical reaction.
And EC didn't do sh-...anything to remedy that.
It does let you reject the whole premise, though.
It doesn't give you specific dialogue to attempt to call BS to the Catalyst and have a discussion about it sure, but that's hardly a complaint specific to the ending of Mass Effect.
Even the games with the best of dialogue I've had cases where I didn't have an option for something that seemed like a perfectly logical reaction to me. That's just the limitation of video games at work there.
It does let you reject the whole premise, though.
It doesn't give you specific dialogue to attempt to call BS to the Catalyst and have a discussion about it sure, but that's hardly a complaint specific to the ending of Mass Effect.
Even the games with the best of dialogue I've had cases where I didn't have an option for something that seemed like a perfectly logical reaction to me. That's just the limitation of video games at work there.
I've played games where I ended up not having an opinion either, or just wanting to walk away (Dragon Age 2 comes to mind)
But what I'm talking about is more than that. It's the situation in toto
Why was Shepard, formerly bleeding out and unconscious, suddenly able to walk and talk?
Why does the Catalyst resemble the creepy child Shepard had been dreaming of?
How did Shepard just happen to pass out on the Magic Space Elevator?
How does shooting a pipe turn all synthetic life off?
WTF is "organic energy"?
Why can't Shepard just throw The Illusive Man's body into the magic green beam to achieve Synthesis?
What assurances does Shepard have that the Catalyst is not lying or trying to indoctrinate Shepard?
Why can't Shepard contact Hackett or Joker while chatting with the Catalyst
These are just questions about the situation Shep is in, beside the point of whatever nonsense the Catalyst is blathering on about inevitable robot uprisings, "final evolution of life" (someone's played too much Pokemon between cycles), and how organic life isn't worthy of existing alongside synthetics.
I've played games where I ended up not having an opinion either, or just wanting to walk away (Dragon Age 2 comes to mind)
But what I'm talking about is more than that. It's the situation in toto
Why was Shepard, formerly bleeding out and unconscious, suddenly able to walk and talk?
Why does the Catalyst resemble the creepy child Shepard had been dreaming of?
How did Shepard just happen to pass out on the Magic Space Elevator?
How does shooting a pipe turn all synthetic life off?
WTF is "organic energy"?
Why can't Shepard just throw The Illusive Man's body into the magic green beam to achieve Synthesis?
What assurances does Shepard have that the Catalyst is not lying or trying to indoctrinate Shepard?
Why can't Shepard contact Hackett or Joker while chatting with the Catalyst
These are just questions about the situation Shep is in, beside the point of whatever nonsense the Catalyst is blathering on about inevitable robot uprisings, "final evolution of life" (someone's played too much Pokemon between cycles), and how organic life isn't worthy of existing alongside synthetics.
but again, these are things that could be said of a lot of games in general. I mean, it's fine to have a problem with it but it seems kind of unfair to level it at specifically just the ME3 ending.
Alan's signature applies really well here. BioWare writing tends to fall apart once you actually stop to think about it. The main failing that the ME3 ending had here over the rest of the series is that it actually stopped pushing you forward and gave you the time to think about it, at which point it promptly fell apart.
I've often mentioned that the entire premise of Mass Effect 1 is ridiculous because the conduit adds nothing of value. The beginning of the game makes you think that it's something that can bring the Reapers back which provides reason to chase after Saren but the reality is that it was just a shortcut to a very public area of the Citadel. Sovereign knew that Saren just needed to access the master control panel, so why bother hunting for the conduit? He had Saren throw away Spectre status and ruined the element of surprise they had for literally nothing.
but at no point in the game can I actually question this, and as soon as you figure out the conduit is a pointless plot device the game is pushing you towards going to stop Saren.
but again, these are things that could be said of a lot of games in general. I mean, it's fine to have a problem with it but it seems kind of unfair to level it at specifically just the ME3 ending.
But that's not true at all. Iakus is talking about very specific examples of terrible writing. You're trying to write off the terrible-ness by saying "well all games tend to be kind of stupid" but that's an absurd cop out.
But that's not true at all. Iakus is talking about very specific examples of terrible writing. You're trying to write off the terrible-ness by saying "well all games tend to be kind of stupid" but that's an absurd cop out.
I've also provided an example of terrible writing, one that people often just shrug off. Keep in mind ME1 is often praised around here as having the best story of the trilogy, and that story relies on something which makes absolutely no sense at all.
My whole point here is that if you're going to throw ME3 under the bus for bad writing, we ought to be throwing a lot more than just ME3 under there. I'm not actually trying to write off the ME3 ending or excuse how badly done it was.
but ME3 is the thing that gets all the focus around here because it was the final culmination of a series of poorly written plot lines.
Retour en haut