Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The problem with the ending is that the bulk of the series was spent building up the Reapers as *the* threat, only for the writers to introduce some god-being controlling things behind the scenes in the end.

The Reapers are supposed to be these dark, galaxy-harvesting machines of death that the writers, previously, took great pains to make the player fear and hate, and suddenly this god-thing pops out of nowhere in the end and it turns out the Reapers are effectively his pawn? That's just cheap writing.

LordofHats wrote:I actually think the structure of how endings are unlocked disproves the indoctrination theory (I actually did not know this information prior to an hour ago).

If your War Assests are below 1,750, you can't make a choice at the end of the game. The choice is made automatically by shepard (control or destroy) based on your decision at the end of ME2. That's actually kind of odd, cause the ME2 paragon choice results in the Renegade ending while the ME2 Renegade choice results in the Paragon ending? At the same time no Renegade or Paragon value is directly attributed to the ME3 endings, its just assumed by fans (unless I'm forgetting something).

The Synthesis choice is only available if your War Assets are at least 2,500.

I see no reason for Bioware to structure the ending this way if its all just a dream.

Yet in the end the reaper kid is portrayed as offering 'salvation through destruction!'.

Its not really an odd concept on its face. The Christian Apocalypse has some pretty rough gak in it. Pretty much everyone dies before JC comes back and makes it all okay with his savior-i-ness. The idea of change going hand in hand with the destruction of the old is an ancient cultural concept.

You know theres a reason the Enlightenment and Voltaire won m8.

Neither a rational nor compassionate being would ever commit wanton slaughter of the sort the reapers do. In fact I think Voltaire used that to disprove that particular part of the bible. Also, given that the reapers repeatedly made their thralls think of them as gods and hold them in awe don't you think the reaper would portray itself as a Christ like figure?

You really are determined to crush my hopes aren't you?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ronin-Sage wrote:The problem with the ending is that the bulk of the series was spent building up the Reapers as *the* threat, only for the writers to introduce some god-being controlling things behind the scenes in the end.

The Reapers are supposed to be these dark, galaxy-harvesting machines of death that the writers, previously, took great pains to make the player fear and hate, and suddenly this god-thing pops out of nowhere in the end and it turns out the Reapers are effectively his pawn? That's just cheap writing.

ps this man is right on every count http://www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/6/

You really are determined to crush my hopes aren't you?

Yes The sooner you lose that silly thing called hope the sooner you'll realize THERE IS NONE!

jk

At the end of the day its either gonna be true or untrue and only Bioware really knows. This is just me trying to read between all the lines and figure out the puzzle XD

LordofHats wrote:I actually think the structure of how endings are unlocked disproves the indoctrination theory (I actually did not know this information prior to an hour ago).

If your War Assests are below 1,750, you can't make a choice at the end of the game. The choice is made automatically by shepard (control or destroy) based on your decision at the end of ME2. That's actually kind of odd, cause the ME2 paragon choice results in the Renegade ending while the ME2 Renegade choice results in the Paragon ending? At the same time no Renegade or Paragon value is directly attributed to the ME3 endings, its just assumed by fans (unless I'm forgetting something).

The Synthesis choice is only available if your War Assets are at least 2,500.

I see no reason for Bioware to structure the ending this way if its all just a dream.

Yet in the end the reaper kid is portrayed as offering 'salvation through destruction!'.

Its not really an odd concept on its face. The Christian Apocalypse has some pretty rough gak in it. Pretty much everyone dies before JC comes back and makes it all okay with his savior-i-ness. The idea of change going hand in hand with the destruction of the old is an ancient cultural concept.

That directly helps the case of the indoctrination theory, actually. The bolded part, obviously.

Karon wrote:That directly helps the case of the indoctrination theory, actually. The bolded part, obviously.

That's a lot of extra work to do (and unnecessary cause getting War Assets that low is something you have to go out of your way to achieve)

And I'm still unclear on if the endings actually have in game defined moralities. Players as far as I know are just assuming destroy is Renegade because blowing up everything (including the allied fleet and EDI) doesn't seem very paragon. At the same time, Control is what Illusive Man was trying to do, and he certainly wasn't a paragon-esque character. It might also explain why the scene with Shepard in the rubble only appears for the Destroy ending (good guys always win?).

LordofHats wrote:

Karon wrote:That directly helps the case of the indoctrination theory, actually. The bolded part, obviously.

That's a lot of extra work to do (and unnecessary cause getting War Assets that low is something you have to go out of your way to achieve)

And I'm still unclear on if the endings actually have in game defined moralities. Players as far as I know are just assuming destroy is Renegade because blowing up everything (including the allied fleet and EDI) doesn't seem very paragon. At the same time, Control is what Illusive Man was trying to do, and he certainly wasn't a paragon-esque character. It might also explain why the scene with Shepard in the rubble only appears for the Destroy ending (good guys always win?).

I recently read this review and it put into context quite well how the ending violated a lot of the themes the game had established like tolerance and such since you effectively become the stooge of the reapers with their bleak no choice inevitable suffering Grimdark view of the universe.

http://www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/6/

Again I want to believe the Indoctrination theory since HOW could they have delivered such a coup de grace to all of the themes they had established? Even if the reapers had just been insane jerks (which we all assumed anyway) we could at least claim that they are the antagonists to all of the values established by the series. It just seems so inconcievable for the writers to have imagined this would have been good. I mean Casey Hudson said he wanted one that encouraged speculation and mystery. But, theres no real mystery. What the kid says is very simple. It just doesn't fit at all with whats been established and is thus incredibly galling.

Well there is mystery, just a little too much mystery. I honestly think additional context would fix the ending + an epilogue.

One thing I considered but hadn't thought of while playing through the ending is that in the scene where you're blasted by Harbinger, are the party members even actually there? I assumed they were right behind me cause they usually are, but I didn't actually look (too busy watching Harby blast hapless folk ). I want to check it but that means picking back up right at the Illusive man's base and playing through all that again just to check.

EDIT: Oh, and on Thessia the Prothean VI seems to suggest that the Catalyst takes an active role in shaping galactic history, which really raises a mountain of questions about events throughout the series.

LordofHats wrote:Well there is mystery, just a little too much mystery. I honestly think additional context would fix the ending + an epilogue.

One thing I considered but hadn't thought of while playing through the ending is that in the scene where you're blasted by Harbinger, are the party members even actually there? I assumed they were right behind me cause they usually are, but I didn't actually look (too busy watching Harby blast hapless folk ). I want to check it but that means picking back up right at the Illusive man's base and playing through all that again just to check.

No there really isn't a mystery. The kid tells you what he is (super reaper AI), why hes doing what hes doing (to stop synthetics killing organics) and how you can solve this (three colours to rule them all). This isn't 2001 where there you could argue for a vast amount of imagery and symbolism conveying various artistic interpretations of meaning. This is WTF in its rawest and purest form.

Also, I mentioned earlier on about the reapers only motivation being reproduction. Well, just had a conversation with EDI where she said she wanted to change her personality on self preservation because

'The Reapers are abominations. The reapers are about nothing but self-preservation. I'am different'

I still don;t understand. Even if Bioware re-wrote the reapers surely they wouldn't have if anything reinforced the established canon on what they were about. To my mind that does seem to add to the reaper indoctrination theory since HOW could Bioware not realise they were going against what they had said two missions prior to the ending on what reapers are


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LordofHats wrote:

EDIT: Oh, and on Thessia the Prothean VI seems to suggest that the Catalyst takes an active role in shaping galactic history, which really raises a mountain of questions about events throughout the series.

No it just means Deus ex machina. God (Reaper AI) manipulates the galaxy to do what it wants, we've known that the reapers have done so with the mass relays since the first game. The catalyst simply was the tool by organics to try and provide god with more options. Since they never got to use it then the thing doesn't really shape galactic history prior to that point. The reaper god does. Thats near 40k simplicity. Like the Emperor subtly influrncing human society until he became its master so that he could become god and protect it from chaos. No real grand philosophy just a plot device.

Again, I meant what I said earlier about if they retconned the chaos gods to be part of preserving human freedom. This is too much of a jump in motives to make any kind of sense.

I chose to destroy the reapers but I still died for some reason, but I had a gakton of war assets... How do you not die?

Anyway, I hope the ending is improved. I can't have my favorite video game series ever end like that.

GalacticDefender wrote:I chose to destroy the reapers but I still died for some reason, but I had a gakton of war assets... How do you not die?

People have found there are two ways to achieve the best ending. You can get it with a military strength value of 4000 IF you successfully persuade the Invisible Man during the conversation with him at the end. There are unknown values (or a glitch) with the persuade check however as people have noticed that even with max reputation a player can fail the persuasion check.

The second method is to have a military strength of 5000. That way you can fail the persuade check on TIM and still get the ending.

Make sure you have a good Galactic Readiness as it modifies the War Assets value by the %. EDIT: I didn't really have to worry about it when I did the ending. The EMS on the save was like, 7500+ because of all the multiplayer promotions achieved between me playing and the games actual owner. We had like 1000 alone from the N7 operatives asset.

Totalwar1402 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:[ It's not a happy-hollwood ending it seems that everyone wants.

...

This isn't 40k. You don't make a massively depressing game where it emphasises 'you are doomed!' and then have it end with the main character dying completely alone and half the galaxy being killed by relay explosions. That is a terrible way to end a series. Also, Bioware has set the trilogy up as analogue to a space opera Hollywood blockbuster; how can you not expect the ending to be a happy one? Being bittersweet isn't endearing in this context. The series was never grimdark enough to warrent such a depressing ending. Really, I was expecting a Return of the Jedi ending before the game came out.

Actually I really liked the ME universe because it was such a polar opposite from my other favorite universe: 40K. Everything was new and shiny and optimistic. Alien races working together etc. But then things started to get more grimdark in the second one. Now Ironically it's even more grimdark than 40K! At least in 40K the galaxy is only always on the verge of being destroyed, ME is totally destroyed now. It wasn't all of a sudden, it gets progressively more dark as the series went on. The 2nd game opens with the destruction of the Normandy, the death of most of its crew and Shepard. You spend the entire thing working fo rthe most evil terrorist group in the galaxy for god's sake.
40K is a setting and ME is a story with a beggining, middle and end and there's nothing wrong with it. It's a testament to how well a universe they built that so many feel sad or outraged that it was destroyed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Totalwar1402 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:[quote
It would seem you don't care for the Reapers and their ways. I think that most people in the ME universe would agree with you.

You don't actually think the cuttlefish were justified in what they were doing? What gave them the right to make these decisions? Why are they so certain organics can't get along with synthetics when both the geth and EDI can get along.

In fact, they actually could have simply uploaded the reaper code which turned legion from a consenus of AI's into a complete personality (which EDI states is what makes an AI able to prevent its own logic systems from 'devalueing the lives of those around them'). Why couldn't the reapers JUST. DO. THAT. TO. EVERY. SYNTHETIC. Its their own tech and it solves the issue instantly without resorting to super-genocide. All that god-like intelligence and they never considered telling the machines and humans to get along? That is too much of a leap for me to take. If the reapers really are having that motivation then they're just stupid. So no I don't care for the cuttlefishes opinion.

No, I don't agree with the Reapers. You're not supposed to agree with them, they're the villians.

Actually, I am confused by the ending outrage sweeping the internet. Perhaps they're right about organic life being too chaotic......and they do only target internet capable civilizations....ok, maybe they're on to something. Anybody else hear that hum?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ronin-Sage wrote:The problem with the ending is that the bulk of the series was spent building up the Reapers as *the* threat, only for the writers to introduce some god-being controlling things behind the scenes in the end.

The Reapers are supposed to be these dark, galaxy-harvesting machines of death that the writers, previously, took great pains to make the player fear and hate, and suddenly this god-thing pops out of nowhere in the end and it turns out the Reapers are effectively his pawn? That's just cheap writing.

Earlier in the game it's mentioned that the Reapers take orders from some one. Almost every race has a top dog that calls the shots. Most civilizations do. Why should the reapers be any different?

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Totalwar1402 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:[ It's not a happy-hollwood ending it seems that everyone wants.

...

This isn't 40k. You don't make a massively depressing game where it emphasises 'you are doomed!' and then have it end with the main character dying completely alone and half the galaxy being killed by relay explosions. That is a terrible way to end a series. Also, Bioware has set the trilogy up as analogue to a space opera Hollywood blockbuster; how can you not expect the ending to be a happy one? Being bittersweet isn't endearing in this context. The series was never grimdark enough to warrent such a depressing ending. Really, I was expecting a Return of the Jedi ending before the game came out.

Actually I really liked the ME universe because it was such a polar opposite from my other favorite universe: 40K. Everything was new and shiny and optimistic. Alien races working together etc. But then things started to get more grimdark in the second one. Now Ironically it's even more grimdark than 40K! At least in 40K the galaxy is only always on the verge of being destroyed, ME is totally destroyed now. It wasn't all of a sudden, it gets progressively more dark as the series went on. The 2nd game opens with the destruction of the Normandy, the death of most of its crew and Shepard. You spend the entire thing working fo rthe most evil terrorist group in the galaxy for god's sake.
40K is a setting and ME is a story with a beggining, middle and end and there's nothing wrong with it. It's a testament to how well a universe they built that so many feel sad or outraged that it was destroyed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Totalwar1402 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:[quote
It would seem you don't care for the Reapers and their ways. I think that most people in the ME universe would agree with you.

You don't actually think the cuttlefish were justified in what they were doing? What gave them the right to make these decisions? Why are they so certain organics can't get along with synthetics when both the geth and EDI can get along.

In fact, they actually could have simply uploaded the reaper code which turned legion from a consenus of AI's into a complete personality (which EDI states is what makes an AI able to prevent its own logic systems from 'devalueing the lives of those around them'). Why couldn't the reapers JUST. DO. THAT. TO. EVERY. SYNTHETIC. Its their own tech and it solves the issue instantly without resorting to super-genocide. All that god-like intelligence and they never considered telling the machines and humans to get along? That is too much of a leap for me to take. If the reapers really are having that motivation then they're just stupid. So no I don't care for the cuttlefishes opinion.

No, I don't agree with the Reapers. You're not supposed to agree with them, they're the villians.

Actually, I am confused by the ending outrage sweeping the internet. Perhaps they're right about organic life being too chaotic......and they do only target internet capable civilizations....ok, maybe they're on to something. Anybody else hear that hum?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ronin-Sage wrote:The problem with the ending is that the bulk of the series was spent building up the Reapers as *the* threat, only for the writers to introduce some god-being controlling things behind the scenes in the end.

The Reapers are supposed to be these dark, galaxy-harvesting machines of death that the writers, previously, took great pains to make the player fear and hate, and suddenly this god-thing pops out of nowhere in the end and it turns out the Reapers are effectively his pawn? That's just cheap writing.

Earlier in the game it's mentioned that the Reapers take orders from some one. Almost every race has a top dog that calls the shots. Most civilizations do. Why should the reapers be any different?

1-So I don't actually deserve to win at the end for all my hard work? Or even at least see my characters reaction to my sheps death?

2-No, they MAKE Shephard agree with the reapers at the end of this game. No ifs or buts. He doesn't sit down with the kid and have a discussion about free will, altruism and his own experiences with synthetics and organics. Instead the kid tells him where to go since we're all destined to annialate eachother so the only way to solve it is to meld human and organic. Despite EDI and the Geth disproving the reapers assertion Shephard completely agrees unless he has an Asura's Wrath moment and blows them up. Coz, you know, in the grim darkness of the 3rd millenium there is only war since the machine will rise!!!

3-Yes they have a leader/master director. Up until game three we assumed it was Harbinger. The problem is that the game forces you to agree philosphically with these chaos gods. The thing is insane and is being completely unreasonable. You should have been able to talk the kid out of its own stupidity. You do not kill organics to save organics when YOUR OWN CODE makes you smart enough to prevent you killing organics. The things motive makes no sense. The fact that you HAVE to agree with him and his Darwinian view of the Universe (when you have spent three games disprooving that view) makes no sense. The game puts me in a position where I'am expected to be tolerant of the reapers and forgive them of what they have done completely out of the blue considering they were established as the pinnacle of evil and anti-thesis of what ME verse is about.

Again, I want to think that I'am thinknig about this wrong and that Shephard can't tell Harbinger where to go sinc ehe's being indoctrinated unless he can break the games hold. Shephard did say to the Illusive Man, 'You've gotten too close to the enemy. You're starting to think like they do.' which is what the game forces you to do in the end. Either this is indoctrination and you're supposed to think 'wait a minute' or its terrible writing and Bioware are going to mkae fools out of themselves trying to justify it.

So you're saying that the ending when you blow up the Reapers is justifying them?

I don't really get what you're saying. I think by blowing them up you aren't agreeing with them. All the other options force you to agree with them.

Chemical Cutthroat wrote:So you're saying that the ending when you blow up the Reapers is justifying them?

I don't really get what you're saying. I think by blowing them up you aren't agreeing with them. All the other options force you to agree with them.

Yes, that's the point of this whole argument. If you choose anything but destroy, you are agreeing with them. You have no option to not destroy synthetics and persuade the Reapers to break the cycle. You can agree and choose control, you can disagree and choose destruction, or you can waffle on the choice and choose synthesis which is effectively the same as agreeing in the end. You are given no option to do anything but those three things, which is the impetus behind this argument.

Ah. Well that makes more sense when you say it like that.

It just seemed like something else was being stabbed at, but I thought I wasn't seeing it. Nope, just the same argument I've heard forty times with slight rewording.

Is there really anything left to discuss? Bioware is gonna do what Bioware is gonna do. I don't 'like' the ending, but all I can really do is sit and wait for DLC.

And read forum posts from people waaaay more motivated about discussion than I am it seems. At least it's an interesting read from ya'll when it's not flaming.

I told my brother about the ending and he said the Reapers sound like the Shadows from Babylon 5. They to destroy advance civilations whenever they become too powerful. But without the whole genocide to prevent genocide idea.

Totalwar1402 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

Totalwar1402 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:[ It's not a happy-hollwood ending it seems that everyone wants.

...

This isn't 40k. You don't make a massively depressing game where it emphasises 'you are doomed!' and then have it end with the main character dying completely alone and half the galaxy being killed by relay explosions. That is a terrible way to end a series. Also, Bioware has set the trilogy up as analogue to a space opera Hollywood blockbuster; how can you not expect the ending to be a happy one? Being bittersweet isn't endearing in this context. The series was never grimdark enough to warrent such a depressing ending. Really, I was expecting a Return of the Jedi ending before the game came out.

Actually I really liked the ME universe because it was such a polar opposite from my other favorite universe: 40K. Everything was new and shiny and optimistic. Alien races working together etc. But then things started to get more grimdark in the second one. Now Ironically it's even more grimdark than 40K! At least in 40K the galaxy is only always on the verge of being destroyed, ME is totally destroyed now. It wasn't all of a sudden, it gets progressively more dark as the series went on. The 2nd game opens with the destruction of the Normandy, the death of most of its crew and Shepard. You spend the entire thing working fo rthe most evil terrorist group in the galaxy for god's sake.
40K is a setting and ME is a story with a beggining, middle and end and there's nothing wrong with it. It's a testament to how well a universe they built that so many feel sad or outraged that it was destroyed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Totalwar1402 wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:[quote
It would seem you don't care for the Reapers and their ways. I think that most people in the ME universe would agree with you.

You don't actually think the cuttlefish were justified in what they were doing? What gave them the right to make these decisions? Why are they so certain organics can't get along with synthetics when both the geth and EDI can get along.

In fact, they actually could have simply uploaded the reaper code which turned legion from a consenus of AI's into a complete personality (which EDI states is what makes an AI able to prevent its own logic systems from 'devalueing the lives of those around them'). Why couldn't the reapers JUST. DO. THAT. TO. EVERY. SYNTHETIC. Its their own tech and it solves the issue instantly without resorting to super-genocide. All that god-like intelligence and they never considered telling the machines and humans to get along? That is too much of a leap for me to take. If the reapers really are having that motivation then they're just stupid. So no I don't care for the cuttlefishes opinion.

No, I don't agree with the Reapers. You're not supposed to agree with them, they're the villians.

Actually, I am confused by the ending outrage sweeping the internet. Perhaps they're right about organic life being too chaotic......and they do only target internet capable civilizations....ok, maybe they're on to something. Anybody else hear that hum?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ronin-Sage wrote:The problem with the ending is that the bulk of the series was spent building up the Reapers as *the* threat, only for the writers to introduce some god-being controlling things behind the scenes in the end.

The Reapers are supposed to be these dark, galaxy-harvesting machines of death that the writers, previously, took great pains to make the player fear and hate, and suddenly this god-thing pops out of nowhere in the end and it turns out the Reapers are effectively his pawn? That's just cheap writing.

Earlier in the game it's mentioned that the Reapers take orders from some one. Almost every race has a top dog that calls the shots. Most civilizations do. Why should the reapers be any different?

1-So I don't actually deserve to win at the end for all my hard work? Or even at least see my characters reaction to my sheps death?

2-No, they MAKE Shephard agree with the reapers at the end of this game. No ifs or buts. He doesn't sit down with the kid and have a discussion about free will, altruism and his own experiences with synthetics and organics. Instead the kid tells him where to go since we're all destined to annialate eachother so the only way to solve it is to meld human and organic. Despite EDI and the Geth disproving the reapers assertion Shephard completely agrees unless he has an Asura's Wrath moment and blows them up. Coz, you know, in the grim darkness of the 3rd millenium there is only war since the machine will rise!!!

3-Yes they have a leader/master director. Up until game three we assumed it was Harbinger. The problem is that the game forces you to agree philosphically with these chaos gods. The thing is insane and is being completely unreasonable. You should have been able to talk the kid out of its own stupidity. You do not kill organics to save organics when YOUR OWN CODE makes you smart enough to prevent you killing organics. The things motive makes no sense. The fact that you HAVE to agree with him and his Darwinian view of the Universe (when you have spent three games disprooving that view) makes no sense. The game puts me in a position where I'am expected to be tolerant of the reapers and forgive them of what they have done completely out of the blue considering they were established as the pinnacle of evil and anti-thesis of what ME verse is about.

Again, I want to think that I'am thinknig about this wrong and that Shephard can't tell Harbinger where to go sinc ehe's being indoctrinated unless he can break the games hold. Shephard did say to the Illusive Man, 'You've gotten too close to the enemy. You're starting to think like they do.' which is what the game forces you to do in the end. Either this is indoctrination and you're supposed to think 'wait a minute' or its terrible writing and Bioware are going to mkae fools out of themselves trying to justify it.

I'd say no matter what you don't agree with the Reapers. Either you become their new master, you destroy them or you bring bring about peace through synthesis. No matter what the 50,000 year cycle of "house cleaning" is stopped. That was your objective all along.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Anung Un Rama wrote:I told my brother about the ending and he said the Reapers sound like the Shadows from Babylon 5. They to destroy advance civilations whenever they become too powerful. But without the whole genocide to prevent genocide idea.

A little bit. They also foster as much conflict as they can.

Chemical Cutthroat wrote:Ah. Well that makes more sense when you say it like that.

It just seemed like something else was being stabbed at, but I thought I wasn't seeing it. Nope, just the same argument I've heard forty times with slight rewording.

Is there really anything left to discuss? Bioware is gonna do what Bioware is gonna do. I don't 'like' the ending, but all I can really do is sit and wait for DLC.

And read forum posts from people waaaay more motivated about discussion than I am it seems. At least it's an interesting read from ya'll when it's not flaming.

You're definetly right there. Waitings just killing me.

The Gamestop review I read described much better than I can about the specific themes that the game jetisoned in the end by you agreeing with the reapers. This is what makes you agreeing with the reapers far more inexplicable in the context of what ME was about.

I also brought up the reaper code and conversations with EDI since it seemed to present massive plot holes. If the reapers could make code that allows AI to become individuals that can interact normally without going psycho then why couldn't they just make a galactic virus that would do that or guide organics and synthetics to get along.

At least I have the MP to keep me busy. It has zero interaction, but it's fun to make up scenarios and stuff in my head while I'm playing.

Since Resh the Turian could not exist in the Single Player game, the badass Sentinel finally gets to take the stage in multiplayer!

*twiddles thumbs* ...yep... is it April yet? I might not even log onto the Internet on the 1st. There is going to be so much trolling people might explode. I really really hope someone at Bioware doesn't do something that they'll regret on that fated day.

Chemical Cutthroat wrote:At least I have the MP to keep me busy. It has zero interaction, but it's fun to make up scenarios and stuff in my head while I'm playing.

Since Resh the Turian could not exist in the Single Player game, the badass Sentinel finally gets to take the stage in multiplayer!

*twiddles thumbs* ...yep... is it April yet? I might not even log onto the Internet on the 1st. There is going to be so much trolling people might explode. I really really hope someone at Bioware doesn't do something that they'll regret on that fated day.

What's happening April Fools' day?

Horrible terrible things that are the stuff a child's nightmares are made of.

LordofHats wrote:Horrible terrible things that are the stuff a child's nightmares are made of.

You know, I think I'll base a character in my Dark Eldar fanfic on you...

LordofHats wrote:Horrible terrible things that are the stuff a child's nightmares are made of.

.....ok. Anything Mass Effect related though?

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

LordofHats wrote:Horrible terrible things that are the stuff a child's nightmares are made of.

.....ok. Anything Mass Effect related though?

I don't think BioWare proper will do anything; but the fanbase will likely go nuts with fake links to material made by people looking to shaft those who expect informative postings.

Totalwar1402 wrote:You know, I think I'll base a character in my Dark Eldar fanfic on you...

Not sure if I should be proud or deeply and resoundingly disturbed

.....ok. Anything Mass Effect related though?

Wouldn't be shocked if they did another multi-player event for it. I vote for painting all enemies pink and that when they die they explode into confetti

Kanluwen wrote:

KamikazeCanuck wrote:

LordofHats wrote:Horrible terrible things that are the stuff a child's nightmares are made of.

.....ok. Anything Mass Effect related though?

I don't think BioWare proper will do anything; but the fanbase will likely go nuts with fake links to material made by people looking to shaft those who expect informative postings.

Ok, I guess the internets is up to something. Sorry, if I missed it but have you chimed in on the Mass-Effect-Ending-Controversy-of-Doom yet Kanluwen? What were your thoughts?

*shrug*

It wasn't a dealbreaker for me. With how BioWare did ME2, I figured they would end up having DLC to finish it off.

Is this ending-changing DLC totally confirmed by Bioware? I thought it was just an IGN rumor.

LordofHats wrote:

Totalwar1402 wrote:You know, I think I'll base a character in my Dark Eldar fanfic on you...

Not sure if I should be proud or deeply and resoundingly disturbed

...

That was a joke.

Clever total clever

@Kamikazi it is confirmed they're doing something with it. We don't know exactly what yet.