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.
Ok if the goal of the Reapers is to stop organic life before they create synthetic life that would destroy all organic life (god this really can't be their motivation it's so stupid) haven't they failed? I mean Reapers obviously exterminate organics and in ME2 they were creating a new Reaper out of organics. So we have organics being used to create a synthetic life form which destroys all organic life. So the Reapers failed their goal by becoming what they wanted to stop....ugh.
Also since we're spoiling things left and right, anyone want to tell me who created the Reapers? Or if they have an origin at all.
"Order. Unity. Obedience. We taught the galaxy these things, and we shall do so again."
"They are not your worst nightmare; they are your every nightmare."
"Let the galaxy burn!"
Ok if the goal of the Reapers is to stop organic life before they create synthetic life that would destroy all organic life (god this really can't be their motivation it's so stupid) haven't they failed? I mean Reapers obviously exterminate organics and in ME2 they were creating a new Reaper out of organics. So we have organics being used to create a synthetic life form which destroys all organic life. So the Reapers failed their goal by becoming what they wanted to stop....ugh.
Also since we're spoiling things left and right, anyone want to tell me who created the Reapers? Or if they have an origin at all.
Spoiler:
#1 Not only did the Reapers fail by any reasonable standard (deliberately culling organics over and over again isn't a morally superior option to just taking your chances that they might be killed off for good), Shepard succeeded. He proved this fatalistic bs was wrong - he got the Geth and Quarians to cooperate again, and he's got EDI working happily with the organics.
#2 The deus ex Citadel from the end of the game created them.
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
-C.S. Lewis
Ok if the goal of the Reapers is to stop organic life before they create synthetic life that would destroy all organic life (god this really can't be their motivation it's so stupid) haven't they failed? I mean Reapers obviously exterminate organics and in ME2 they were creating a new Reaper out of organics. So we have organics being used to create a synthetic life form which destroys all organic life. So the Reapers failed their goal by becoming what they wanted to stop....ugh.
Also since we're spoiling things left and right, anyone want to tell me who created the Reapers? Or if they have an origin at all.
Welcome to the world where Bioware has become so atrociously bad at something they were once praised for. Its called story and Bioware doesn't care anymore
So if this is supposed to be the end of live, the universe and everything, does this mean there will be no Mass Effect 4? Or any other Mass Effect anything?
I was kinda hoping the franchise in general would stick around long enough for someone to make a mass effect miniatures game
LordofHats wrote:EA is known to have wanted to create a full franchise out of Mass Effect years ago but idk if those plans are still going.
It would have been nice. Before ME3 I would have been totally on board for ME spinoffs there was some great fodder there for RTS, Space Combat & MMO games at minimum. I'll see how I feel after the initial nerd rage wears off, but I really don't think I could touch any more Mass Effect stuff after this. Heck, I've been running a GMing a Mass Effect RPG and I'd cancel the whole thing right now if my players weren't so much fun to play with.
They seriously managed to flush the entire series with ~10 minutes of sheer ass.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/03/09 16:22:31
I'd also like to point out that wiping out organics with synthetic life to prevent organics from wiping themselves out with synthetic life is horribly oxymoronic.
I know
Spoiler:
I mean I absolutely loved every part of Mass Effect 3 until the ending/epilogue. They had already established in the previous two games that the reapers believed amalgamating organic civilizations into single enitites was a good thing (where if you take how legion describes them are kind of like a composite hive mind in one body although the people are most certainly dead). That wasn't an issue. The thing is, I was under the impression the Reapers or the thing that came up with this plan was insane! But they ascribe this MONSTROUS concept to a supposedly benign AI/integrated organic. Whose only reason for changing his plans and whole-heartedly letting you chose to destroy what it has done for millennia because its a little impressed with you!
What got me most first time round though was this. This is meant to be Shepards story, of his cause, of this universe we've came to enjoy and that of his companions. Yet when they end: they hijack shepards story to talk about a cliche sci-fi thing, does not make an epilogue explaining how his companions respond to his death/survival or how the galaxy is affected by his choices. Yes, they were (abused) themes very important to the Mass Effect universe and the Reapers but they should not have hijacked the ending and robbed us of closure. I could have lived with a morbidly grim ending, I could even live with bemusing sci-fi lore that makes no sense; but I do not appreciate Bioware putting in some abstract Garden of Eden thing. I wanted to know what happened to my shep, the galaxy and my companions. That is what Mass Effect was about; I'am just bewildered that Bioware consciously chose not to do that. As it stands, IMO they soured what was otherwise an outstanding game in more ways than I can count and a great service to this follower of the series. Its still great but its ending is not its strong point.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AlexHolker wrote:
asimo77 wrote:
Spoiler:
Ok if the goal of the Reapers is to stop organic life before they create synthetic life that would destroy all organic life (god this really can't be their motivation it's so stupid) haven't they failed? I mean Reapers obviously exterminate organics and in ME2 they were creating a new Reaper out of organics. So we have organics being used to create a synthetic life form which destroys all organic life. So the Reapers failed their goal by becoming what they wanted to stop....ugh.
Also since we're spoiling things left and right, anyone want to tell me who created the Reapers? Or if they have an origin at all.
Spoiler:
#1 Not only did the Reapers fail by any reasonable standard (deliberately culling organics over and over again isn't a morally superior option to just taking your chances that they might be killed off for good), Shepard succeeded. He proved this fatalistic bs was wrong - he got the Geth and Quarians to cooperate again, and he's got EDI working happily with the organics.
#2 The deus ex Citadel from the end of the game created them.
Spoiler:
Well, a reaper isn't actually a synthetic, its a union of organic and synthetic material. Almost a giant cyborg. Effectively it contains the genetic material of the machine and its implied (very vaguely) that in some way a reaper is composed of many millions of seperate entities that are united into a vast intelligence but still unique ac 2 Legion. Effectively that means, despite having killed them and destroyed what they were in terms of identity, it has absorbed them; most likely given the fact that most of the bodies are rotting and are just goup mixed together that this is just an arbitrary means of dividing consciousness in an almost administrative manner. Put simply, its an abomination and anyone who thought up of this is insane/murderously immoral. Think the new necrons but they were pooled into one machine hull and retained some organic components. It has the obvious advantage over organic life since, all 'people' exist in an egalitarian society, they are fed by the ships ME core so have no wants or desires, so have no need for conflict and are effectively immortal. By all rights, a perfect utopia. With one minor flaw, you have to kill everybody to get them to do it and you strip them of all humanity/ senses etc etc. Synthetics come into it because a machine race has no need for organic bioshperes at all. They don't need food, they don't need animals, they don't even need air. If you look at how humans treat animals they don't need that would likely mean that they would destroy all life bearing worlds in time through industrialization, over-mining etc, heedless of the damage because its not essential to their existence. Eventually, this would cause the galaxy to be as dead as a world eaten by the nids. Once thats done, advanced organic life can no longer develop. Which, yes, is a pretty horriifc thing and if you were one of those 'moral', logical and insane AI with a lot of firepower might decide to do this in order to 'preserve' advanced organic species in reapers but not interupt the development of organic life.
Oh you mentioned the Quarians Geth and the AI reckoning that conflict is inevitable. Simple ansawr, hes wrong, you're right. In fact, if hes willing to let you destroy the Reapers why doesn't it just give you the option of saying 'But you're wrong. Organics and Synthetics can live in peace. War and violence are conditions of organic as well as syntheitc.' and then tell them to go back to dark space?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/11 00:11:12
Starting Sons of Horus Legion
Starting Daughters of Khaine
2000pts Sisters of Silence
4000pts Fists Legion
Sylvaneth A forest
III Legion 5000pts
XIII Legion 9000pts
Hive Fleet Khadrim 5000pts
Kabal of the Torn Lotus .4000pts
Coalition of neo Sacea 5000pts
Wow. You guys missed the dark romanticism and Modernism references throughout the entire ending. I like that from Bioware. That is one hell of a bold step.
The ending makes you all feel something? Correct? You know that is what BIoware was trying to achieve make you feel something. Make you think OH THATS NOT FAIR!
Well to be honest. That is life. And that is realist right there. The Deus Ex Machina? really? No. After many hundreds of cycles maybe the Reapers lost their original purpose and went against their creator. It has always been in the game of some being in the Citadel.
Also everyone that keeps saying the ending was bad. Hi Fear 3, Crackdown 2, and many other games that sucked in my opinion would want to fight over the worst video game endings in history.
This Game does not have the worst ending of all time.
This has a meh ending.
There is a chance
Spoiler:
That shepherd can live if you collected the entire universe into one massive fleet. And then you defeat the Reapers. Also the best ending is wiping out all the reapers. And only the reapers. And that is only if you beat the game for a second time *Wink*
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Asherian Command wrote:Wow. You guys missed the dark romanticism and Modernism references throughout the entire ending. I like that from Bioware. That is one hell of a bold step.
The ending makes you all feel something? Correct? You know that is what BIoware was trying to achieve make you feel something. Make you think OH THATS NOT FAIR!
Well to be honest. That is life. And that is realist right there. The Deus Ex Machina? really? No. After many hundreds of cycles maybe the Reapers lost their original purpose and went against their creator. It has always been in the game of some being in the Citadel.
Also everyone that keeps saying the ending was bad. Hi Fear 3, Crackdown 2, and many other games that sucked in my opinion would want to fight over the worst video game endings in history.
This Game does not have the worst ending of all time.
This has a meh ending.
the
I vaguely understand the themes since they've been used for a long. But, and its a big but.
Spoiler:
This was a Bioware game, it was about a long term development enacted through your choices on the galaxy and upon your companions; with relationships going through three games. It was not about some pretentious and silly B-movie plot about 'Well this is where progress takes us. Will we become machines or will our creators overcome us?' or 'How do we solve conflict and create a true utopia. Is that immoral.'. No. I utterly disagree with that point. That was neither the appeal nor was it the most dynamic element of Mass Effect. It was your choices, it was your com,panions and it was the universe. To end it like some B-movie with an assinine, abstract moral tone. There should have been an epilogue. They should have shown what your characters reaction was. They should have shown what happened to the galaxy. They did not. They kicked me in the balls when I was on a high. Near everything up to that moment had been good. Yes, they did make it clear how your characters felt about you, intimated what would happen and they all individually said goodbye to you. But thats not quite the same thing and only made such a dramatic shift in emphasis at the end all the more bewildering. So I must ask you. What is Bioware trying to achieve by insulting me by not only forcing me to kill my shep, in a dumb scenario, but that they then refuse to show an epilogue explaining the main pillars of their game; story and character for some stupid abstract sci-fi. No, I do not care if I'am rude. It is not a 'bold step' to your fans like this. It is not okay to build up character and story for three games reach an apex in the third game only to you with some washed up dejected filth that would make Matt Ward himself recoil in horrer. Bringing in these concepts is neither welcome, nor well done, nor is it dynamic, any idiot whose watched the first Star trek can make abstract bull like that. It is not why I enjoyed Mass Effect. It is not relevent. They had no right, and no cause to do what they did.
This isn't about ranking the worst vid game ending. Its about people who invested and liked the franchise being annoyed at not getting a satisfactory ending.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/03/11 01:26:33
Starting Sons of Horus Legion
Starting Daughters of Khaine
2000pts Sisters of Silence
4000pts Fists Legion
Sylvaneth A forest
III Legion 5000pts
XIII Legion 9000pts
Hive Fleet Khadrim 5000pts
Kabal of the Torn Lotus .4000pts
Coalition of neo Sacea 5000pts
Asherian Command wrote:The ending makes you all feel something? Correct? You know that is what BIoware was trying to achieve make you feel something. Make you think OH THATS NOT FAIR!
I'll say the same thing I said after finishing Mass Effect (WRT the fake "Sovereign fell on Shepard" ending): It did not make me feel concern for Shepard, it made me feel anger towards Bioware for (seemingly) going for a bs Obsidian ending. It broke my suspension of disbelief.
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
-C.S. Lewis
Asherian Command wrote:Wow. You guys missed the dark romanticism and Modernism references throughout the entire ending. I like that from Bioware. That is one hell of a bold step.
The ending makes you all feel something? Correct? You know that is what BIoware was trying to achieve make you feel something. Make you think OH THATS NOT FAIR!
Well to be honest. That is life. And that is realist right there. The Deus Ex Machina? really? No. After many hundreds of cycles maybe the Reapers lost their original purpose and went against their creator. It has always been in the game of some being in the Citadel.
Also everyone that keeps saying the ending was bad. Hi Fear 3, Crackdown 2, and many other games that sucked in my opinion would want to fight over the worst video game endings in history.
This Game does not have the worst ending of all time.
This has a meh ending.
the
I vaguely understand the themes since they've been used for a long. But, and its a big but.
Spoiler:
This was a Bioware game, it was about a long term development enacted through your choices on the galaxy and upon your companions; with relationships going through three games. It was not about some pretentious and silly B-movie plot about 'Well this is where progress takes us. Will we become machines or will our creators overcome us?' or 'How do we solve conflict and create a true utopia. Is that immoral.'. No. I utterly disagree with that point. That was neither the appeal nor was it the most dynamic element of Mass Effect. It was your choices, it was your com,panions and it was the universe. To end it like some B-movie with an assinine, abstract moral tone. There should have been an epilogue. They should have shown what your characters reaction was. They should have shown what happened to the galaxy. They did not. They kicked me in the balls when I was on a high. Near everything up to that moment had been good. Yes, they did make it clear how your characters felt about you, intimated what would happen and they all individually said goodbye to you. But thats not quite the same thing and only made such a dramatic shift in emphasis at the end all the more bewildering. So I must ask you. What is Bioware trying to achieve by insulting me by not only forcing me to kill my shep, in a dumb scenario, but that they then refuse to show an epilogue explaining the main pillars of their game; story and character for some stupid abstract sci-fi. No, I do not care if I'am rude. It is not a 'bold step' to your fans like this. It is not okay to build up character and story for three games reach an apex in the third game only to you with some washed up dejected filth that would make Matt Ward himself recoil in horrer. Bringing in these concepts is neither welcome, nor well done, nor is it dynamic, any idiot whose watched the first Star trek can make abstract bull like that. It is not why I enjoyed Mass Effect. It is not relevent. They had no right, and no cause to do what they did.
This isn't about ranking the worst vid game ending. Its about people who invested and liked the franchise being annoyed at not getting a satisfactory ending.
The fact is the point of the game was to save humanity at any cost. This wasn't going to end well. The epilogue did happen.
Spoiler:
At the very end of the game. Shepherd becomes a freaking legend. Wait after the credits.
Watch what they are looking at. You know where that is? That is Eden Prime. It started there. And it ended there. A fitting end for the series.
They hinted what happened. Eden prime was now the center of humanity. Earth was a memorial site and still the cradle world. Use your imagination it is up to you to figure out what had happened. I mean you may revolt against bioware but they crafted. They did a really good job. It flows from start to finish. But it is still one of the most gripping stories of all time.
The little boy saying "Did that all really happen?"
"Yes son it did."
Yes that is closure the reason why you see the rest of the team on the garden of eden is that they found peaceful world where they can all live in peace.
That is closure. I love that type of ending. Its bittersweet. This betrayal of yours really didn't happen.
The ending is a metaphor for the fact that even though shepherd died he left humanity a symbol. Himself and those who had sacrificed themselves to defeat the reapers. You saw all those marines celebrating? They see that the war is over. The War is done. They can now return to a peaceful life. The Mass relays would be rebuilt because alot of the council races were planning on building a few. They know how to. Hell they have the plans for it. With all that wreckage and many of the outlying planets still functioning in no time the universe will be cured.
They left it open for one reason. Using your imagination. They couldn't end it any way that would appease everyone. Get off the high chair kid. Everyone is frustrated about it. But it is incredibely easy to see if you open your eyes and say "Why did the leave it open ended?"
They want you to see that the Races had united for something great. That made a legend out of it.
That is your ending for you. That time you so called 'wasted' was put to good use as you saw the races fight together. Now that is something amazing.
The reason also you do not see the ending for all the others is because you are dead. Shepherd died.
His story ended with one hell of a bang. He went out like heroes would sacrificing himself for the entire universe.
You can tear me apart. But I probably won't care. This after all my opinion and my interpertation. I take everything with a grain of salt. I know what is bad and what is good. Mass Effect 3 is amazing. It is great.
People just like jumping on a bandwagon.
I like staying off it. Thats why I am getting it for my birthday tomorrow. Mostly because I am turning 18. But I have watched the walkthroughs and I want to see the end of shepherds story. Because I know this the end of the Mass Effect universe as I know it. I love Mass Effect but I need to move on. Bioware is making way for something else. And it is not another MMO. They already got one.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AlexHolker wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:The ending makes you all feel something? Correct? You know that is what BIoware was trying to achieve make you feel something. Make you think OH THATS NOT FAIR!
I'll say the same thing I said after finishing Mass Effect (WRT the fake "Sovereign fell on Shepard" ending): It did not make me feel concern for Shepard, it made me feel anger towards Bioware for (seemingly) going for a bs Obsidian ending. It broke my suspension of disbelief.
Obsidan? What?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/11 04:18:53
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Asherian Command wrote:The ending makes you all feel something? Correct? You know that is what BIoware was trying to achieve make you feel something. Make you think OH THATS NOT FAIR!
I'll say the same thing I said after finishing Mass Effect (WRT the fake "Sovereign fell on Shepard" ending): It did not make me feel concern for Shepard, it made me feel anger towards Bioware for (seemingly) going for a bs Obsidian ending. It broke my suspension of disbelief.
Obsidan? What?
Obsidian Entertainment. It was a reference to the "rocks fall, everyone dies" ending of one of their games.
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
-C.S. Lewis
Asherian Command wrote:Wow. You guys missed the dark romanticism and Modernism references throughout the entire ending. I like that from Bioware. That is one hell of a bold step.
The ending makes you all feel something? Correct? You know that is what BIoware was trying to achieve make you feel something. Make you think OH THATS NOT FAIR!
There's a difference between invoking an emotional response from the audience and pissing the audience off because your ending sucked.
One is the result of well crafted story telling. The other is a result of sucking at story telling.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/11 06:29:34
The VI/Sentient Citadel kid is never explained in any meaningful fashion, and the reasoning behind the choices the force you into make no sense in the context of the rest of the story. "Created will always rebel against creators, synthetic life will eventually always destroy organic life, we're here to kill organic life before it can make synthetic life, rinse repeat" despite the fact at that point in the game you've resolved the Geth/Quarian issue and the Geth are making a point of helping the Quarians. Never mind that it was the Quarians who started all that gak in the first place and if they didn't have as itchy a trigger finger the Geth would have been more than happy to remain Helperbots.
It also feels grossly out of the tone for game that in each allowed you to play a character to sticks to his/her ideals and comes out on top, winning in the end without having to compromise their integrity. But the choices boil down to "Kill all Robots", "Destroy all life as we know it", "Become the Lich King (the bad guy was right)". Really the only ending that makes ANY sense in any context is the "Kill all Synthetics" ending, and only if you were playing hardcore renegade Shepard.
Egregious text so this isn't just a spoiler tag.
Spoiler:
It did? As I recall, if you stuck to your ideals (whatever they were) in ME2, you could suffer significant casualties. But then, personally, I like a game that forces you to compromise, especially given the seeming descent from the pristine, nearly black and white, moral choices of the first game.
As to explaining the kid: He's essentially God, explanation isn't necessary, or even necessarily desirable.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
As to explaining the kid: He's essentially God, explanation isn't necessary, or even necessarily desirable.
Spoiler:
Thats not the point. In the world, whether we believe in god or not, we know he could possible maybe exist. Therefore, if god walks into the house and asks wazz up at the end of the day, we might be pretty damn shocked but its not like were going to stare at him wonder who the crap god is. Nothing in Mass Effect's three game long storyline suggested that this plot point existed, so when it shows it its just WTF? There's a machine god and he is apparently powerful enough to do this gak, how the crappers has this not come up earlier?.
Honestly the biggest (and only structural) problem with the ending is that it comes from way left field because there was absolutely nothing in the story to suggest things might turn out that way or that this plot point ever existed. It just appears and the game ends. There could have at least been a hint or two that something like this existed to make it more natural and believable as an ending.
Asherian Command wrote:Wow. You guys missed the dark romanticism and Modernism references throughout the entire ending. I like that from Bioware. That is one hell of a bold step.
The ending makes you all feel something? Correct? You know that is what BIoware was trying to achieve make you feel something. Make you think OH THATS NOT FAIR!
Well to be honest. That is life. And that is realist right there. The Deus Ex Machina? really? No. After many hundreds of cycles maybe the Reapers lost their original purpose and went against their creator. It has always been in the game of some being in the Citadel.
Also everyone that keeps saying the ending was bad. Hi Fear 3, Crackdown 2, and many other games that sucked in my opinion would want to fight over the worst video game endings in history.
This Game does not have the worst ending of all time.
This has a meh ending.
the
I vaguely understand the themes since they've been used for a long. But, and its a big but.
Spoiler:
This was a Bioware game, it was about a long term development enacted through your choices on the galaxy and upon your companions; with relationships going through three games. It was not about some pretentious and silly B-movie plot about 'Well this is where progress takes us. Will we become machines or will our creators overcome us?' or 'How do we solve conflict and create a true utopia. Is that immoral.'. No. I utterly disagree with that point. That was neither the appeal nor was it the most dynamic element of Mass Effect. It was your choices, it was your com,panions and it was the universe. To end it like some B-movie with an assinine, abstract moral tone. There should have been an epilogue. They should have shown what your characters reaction was. They should have shown what happened to the galaxy. They did not. They kicked me in the balls when I was on a high. Near everything up to that moment had been good. Yes, they did make it clear how your characters felt about you, intimated what would happen and they all individually said goodbye to you. But thats not quite the same thing and only made such a dramatic shift in emphasis at the end all the more bewildering. So I must ask you. What is Bioware trying to achieve by insulting me by not only forcing me to kill my shep, in a dumb scenario, but that they then refuse to show an epilogue explaining the main pillars of their game; story and character for some stupid abstract sci-fi. No, I do not care if I'am rude. It is not a 'bold step' to your fans like this. It is not okay to build up character and story for three games reach an apex in the third game only to you with some washed up dejected filth that would make Matt Ward himself recoil in horrer. Bringing in these concepts is neither welcome, nor well done, nor is it dynamic, any idiot whose watched the first Star trek can make abstract bull like that. It is not why I enjoyed Mass Effect. It is not relevent. They had no right, and no cause to do what they did.
This isn't about ranking the worst vid game ending. Its about people who invested and liked the franchise being annoyed at not getting a satisfactory ending.
The fact is the point of the game was to save humanity at any cost. This wasn't going to end well. The epilogue did happen.
Spoiler:
At the very end of the game. Shepherd becomes a freaking legend. Wait after the credits.
Watch what they are looking at. You know where that is? That is Eden Prime. It started there. And it ended there. A fitting end for the series.
They hinted what happened. Eden prime was now the center of humanity. Earth was a memorial site and still the cradle world. Use your imagination it is up to you to figure out what had happened. I mean you may revolt against bioware but they crafted. They did a really good job. It flows from start to finish. But it is still one of the most gripping stories of all time.
The little boy saying "Did that all really happen?"
"Yes son it did."
Yes that is closure the reason why you see the rest of the team on the garden of eden is that they found peaceful world where they can all live in peace.
That is closure. I love that type of ending. Its bittersweet. This betrayal of yours really didn't happen.
The ending is a metaphor for the fact that even though shepherd died he left humanity a symbol. Himself and those who had sacrificed themselves to defeat the reapers. You saw all those marines celebrating? They see that the war is over. The War is done. They can now return to a peaceful life. The Mass relays would be rebuilt because alot of the council races were planning on building a few. They know how to. Hell they have the plans for it. With all that wreckage and many of the outlying planets still functioning in no time the universe will be cured.
They left it open for one reason. Using your imagination. They couldn't end it any way that would appease everyone. Get off the high chair kid. Everyone is frustrated about it. But it is incredibely easy to see if you open your eyes and say "Why did the leave it open ended?"
They want you to see that the Races had united for something great. That made a legend out of it.
That is your ending for you. That time you so called 'wasted' was put to good use as you saw the races fight together. Now that is something amazing.
The reason also you do not see the ending for all the others is because you are dead. Shepherd died.
His story ended with one hell of a bang. He went out like heroes would sacrificing himself for the entire universe.
You can tear me apart. But I probably won't care. This after all my opinion and my interpertation. I take everything with a grain of salt. I know what is bad and what is good. Mass Effect 3 is amazing. It is great.
People just like jumping on a bandwagon.
I like staying off it. Thats why I am getting it for my birthday tomorrow. Mostly because I am turning 18. But I have watched the walkthroughs and I want to see the end of shepherds story. Because I know this the end of the Mass Effect universe as I know it. I love Mass Effect but I need to move on. Bioware is making way for something else. And it is not another MMO. They already got one.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AlexHolker wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:The ending makes you all feel something? Correct? You know that is what BIoware was trying to achieve make you feel something. Make you think OH THATS NOT FAIR!
I'll say the same thing I said after finishing Mass Effect (WRT the fake "Sovereign fell on Shepard" ending): It did not make me feel concern for Shepard, it made me feel anger towards Bioware for (seemingly) going for a bs Obsidian ending. It broke my suspension of disbelief.
Obsidan? What?
[/spoiler]
Spoiler:
No, this ain't bandbagoning, I don't remotely care what you think and I love the game but I feel they made an odd choice for the ending. I could already 'use my imagination' before I bought the game and I said that I don't mind Shephard dying per sae. Yes you can try to guess what might happen but thats not anywhere near the same as getting the full closure or having stuff explained to you. I would have loved to have seen your companions react to your death. Which seemed to be what they had been building up to during most of the game. All we get told instead is that Shpehard is valued as a hero (which he already was) X number of years in the future. That does not address what happens and the only reason they have for doing that is probably because they haven't decided where to take the franchise yet so were deliberately vague as to what happens to the galaxy after ME3. Again, I cannot stress this enough, ME3 is a great game; but, it has a completely out of touch ending that doesn't do anything for anyone.
Starting Sons of Horus Legion
Starting Daughters of Khaine
2000pts Sisters of Silence
4000pts Fists Legion
Sylvaneth A forest
III Legion 5000pts
XIII Legion 9000pts
Hive Fleet Khadrim 5000pts
Kabal of the Torn Lotus .4000pts
Coalition of neo Sacea 5000pts
Thats not the point. In the world, whether we believe in god or not, we know he could possible maybe exist. Therefore, if god walks into the house and asks wazz up at the end of the day, we might be pretty damn shocked but its not like were going to stare at him wonder who the crap god is.
Spoiler:
Really? The nature, the "person" of God is a topic of much debate. We can't even agree, as a species, if God is appropriate, or if god is.
LordofHats wrote:
Spoiler:
Nothing in Mass Effect's three game long storyline suggested that this plot point existed, so when it shows it its just WTF? There's a machine god and he is apparently powerful enough to do this gak, how the crappers has this not come up earlier?.
Spoiler:
Because its, essentially, a god. I honestly don't understand how the terrible machine race that people call "Reapers" didn't instantly conjure up god-like images in anyone that paid attention. From the beginning it was either going to be deus ex machina, or "A God am I".
Give me another reason for a hyper advanced machine race to cyclically kill organics, that doesn't depend on a pastiche of AM (which this is).
LordofHats wrote:
There could have at least been a hint or two that something like this existed to make it more natural and believable as an ending.
I find it more believable because there were no hints.
Ants don't get hints when they're stepped on.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
Now, I've only played Mass Effect 1, and I did not enjoy the experience much at all, found it to be mediocre at best, but from what I read about the ending, although complaints about invalidating the entire point of choices throughout the games (something that I saw coming since early on in ME1, and something everyone else should have caught on with just as early), deus ex machina, and being rushed can be considered to be valid (in fact, the ending to ME1 had very similar issues...), the whole problem people have with the ending being "too sad" is completely groundless.
Some stories have sad endings. That's just the way they're written. In many ways, the fact that not everything ends happily helps to bring out the value of the actions and trials of the characters within the story. Although there may be problems with the game's ending, wanting the ending to be changed just because it's too sad is foolish.
And here I thought I'd never have a reason to defend Mass Effect...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/11 09:48:19
Thats not the point. In the world, whether we believe in god or not, we know he could possible maybe exist. Therefore, if god walks into the house and asks wazz up at the end of the day, we might be pretty damn shocked but its not like were going to stare at him wonder who the crap god is.
Spoiler:
Really? The nature, the "person" of God is a topic of much debate. We can't even agree, as a species, if God is appropriate, or if god is.
LordofHats wrote:
Spoiler:
Nothing in Mass Effect's three game long storyline suggested that this plot point existed, so when it shows it its just WTF? There's a machine god and he is apparently powerful enough to do this gak, how the crappers has this not come up earlier?.
Spoiler:
Because its, essentially, a god. I honestly don't understand how the terrible machine race that people call "Reapers" didn't instantly conjure up god-like images in anyone that paid attention. From the beginning it was either going to be deus ex machina, or "A God am I".
Give me another reason for a hyper advanced machine race to cyclically kill organics, that doesn't depend on a pastiche of AM (which this is).
LordofHats wrote:
There could have at least been a hint or two that something like this existed to make it more natural and believable as an ending.
I find it more believable because there were no hints.
Ants don't get hints when they're stepped on.
Spoiler:
Well, yeah, Reapers were powerful and repeatedly described as god like in intent and power. Indeed, I'am told that they actually resemble the outer gods from the Cthulu mythos. But as Legion describes they are not gods. To use a 40k analogue, a C'Tan was of immense power and could easily be percieved as god-like by mortals but it is not a god in the true sense of the term. Chaos gods on the other hand are real gods (not withstanding description as immensely powerful extra-dimensional beings) in that they require worship, reward their followers use super-natural powers and simply the magical nature of everything they do. So we knew that reapers were possesed of a god-dellusion, as when you talk to Soveriegn but thats a marker of how evil they are. To turn around and introduce a real god capable of altering the genetic material of everything and having a genuinely benign relation to the galaxy was out of the blue. We were expecting a super powerful skynet with a god delusion not to find the Lord in the machine. Two very different things that would have ellictied very different reactions from the audience. IMO the other option would have made far more sense since theres nothing rational about what the reapers are; they are abomination and the story made that clear.
Starting Sons of Horus Legion
Starting Daughters of Khaine
2000pts Sisters of Silence
4000pts Fists Legion
Sylvaneth A forest
III Legion 5000pts
XIII Legion 9000pts
Hive Fleet Khadrim 5000pts
Kabal of the Torn Lotus .4000pts
Coalition of neo Sacea 5000pts
It did? As I recall, if you stuck to your ideals (whatever they were) in ME2, you could suffer significant casualties. But then, personally, I like a game that forces you to compromise, especially given the seeming descent from the pristine, nearly black and white, moral choices of the first game.
As to explaining the kid: He's essentially God, explanation isn't necessary, or even necessarily desirable
It did? As I recall, if you stuck to your ideals (whatever they were) in ME2, you could suffer significant casualties. But then, personally, I like a game that forces you to compromise, especially given the seeming descent from the pristine, nearly black and white, moral choices of the first game.
Yeah, you could. I played both ME1/2 not only pretty much making 100% "Paragon" choices (except for where they felt really odd an unfair) pretty much always dealt with people with an even hand, always tried to talk down situations first, helped folks when they asked, gave enemies the benefit of the doubt, etc.. .All in all pretty much played the boy scout. I was able to complete every mission successfully, won the Suicide Mission with every squad member intact, the capture crew rescued, and destroyed the reaper base at the end.
It'd perfectly OK if in ME1 and ME2 you couldn't do this. If you had to play dirty or accept horrible truths to advance forward, but that isn't the case. It isn't the case in ME3 either, up until the last seconds of the game. It makes for a huge tonal shift that is just plain uncomfortable. It's not that the other tone is bad it's fine, even interesting... just not when it only appears in the last 10 minutes of a 3 game series that's been doing pretty much the exact opposite the whole time.
The only thing I felt like I lost out on the whole series due to me being goody-goody was when the Salarians refused to join when I insisted on being level with Wrex and the Krogans in undoing the Genophage. Ultimately, I didn't even need them because I could get to more than full resources bar (Over 5,000) without them easily.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2012/03/11 14:21:11
Really? The nature, the "person" of God is a topic of much debate. We can't even agree, as a species, if God is appropriate, or if god is.
Spoiler:
That's not what I mean. I'm not talking about the specifics of his person, just who he supposedly is. If I say god, we all think (I assume) of the Judeo-Christian creator of heaven and earth etc etc. We know who god is supposed to be in a general sense. This machine god whoever just seemingly springs from no where. Which is something a god could do, but as a point in a storyline it is a structural problem for the audience that this thing just pops up at the end having never been mentioned before only so that it can end the storyline.
. Which is something a god could do, but as a point in a storyline it is a structural problem for the audience that this thing just pops up at the end having never been mentioned before only so that it can end the storyline.
I would agree if there weren't heavy doses of "What the hell is going on?" throughout this game, and the larger series.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Chongara wrote:
Yeah, you could. I played both ME1/2 not only pretty much making 100% "Paragon" choices (except for where they felt really odd an unfair) pretty much always dealt with people with an even hand, always tried to talk down situations first, helped folks when they asked, gave enemies the benefit of the doubt, etc.. .All in all pretty much played the boy scout.
I don't see how that makes a better game.
Always being nice, and winning, is not a reflection of how the world works. Its just game logic.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Totalwar1402 wrote:
Spoiler:
To turn around and introduce a real god capable of altering the genetic material of everything and having a genuinely benign relation to the galaxy was out of the blue. We were expecting a super powerful skynet with a god delusion not to find the Lord in the machine.
Spoiler:
Why would you expect malice? You already know the process of "reaping" is cyclic, so its clearly not about winning a war of any sort. Its either malice (I Have no Mouth but I Must Scream), or detached consideration. Hell, even without knowing the endings, the Prothean alone (shouldn't have been DLC) would have given me that vibe..
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/03/11 15:32:15
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
Always being nice, and winning, is not a reflection of how the world works. Its just game logic.
It's a fine tone. There isn't anything wrong with an idealistic story with a sort of golden hero. Is it terribly realistic? No, but it can be very nice especially in this day an age of "Darker is Better".
I've enjoyed plenty of far more down to earth, grittier stories. Mass Effect even gives you that option if you want things to play out that way. That's been one of the nice things about it. Want a story about an idealistic hero that gets things down without compromise? We can give you that. Want a story about a hero who does needs to be done, because so much is at stake? You can have that too. Want to play between the two a bit? You've got that too! They treat all those things with respect, and let each approach feel like it has a consistent tone with itself.
It's jarring shift in tone in the last 10 minutes of a 3-game series. To say "Ok. This way we let you do things for the past five years? Yeah you can't do that here." That sucks. That they throw it out in favor of a random, lazy, literal Deus Ex Machina is just plain unacceptable for me.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2012/03/11 16:01:19
Always being nice, and winning, is not a reflection of how the world works. Its just game logic.
It's a fine tone. There isn't anything wrong with an idealistic story with a sort of golden hero. Is it terribly realistic? No, but it can be very nice especially in this day an age of "Darker is Better".
I've enjoyed plenty of far more down to earth, grittier stories. Mass Effect even gives you that option if you want things to play out that way. That's been one of the nice things about it. Want a story about an idealistic hero that gets things down without compromise? We can give you that. Want a story about a hero who does needs to be done, because so much is at stake? You can have that too. Want to play between the two a bit? You've got that too! They treat all those things with respect, and let each approach feel like it has a consistent tone with itself.
It's jarring shift in tone in the last 10 minutes of a 3-game series. To say "Ok. This way we let you do things for the past five years? Yeah you can't do that here." That sucks. That they throw it out in favor of a random, lazy, literal Deus Ex Machina is just plain unacceptable for me.
Why is it a Deus Ex Machina? They found the Crucible early on in the beginning of ME3. And plus there was a huge amount of sarcrafice. There was no intervention. They all knew the crucible was a weapon designed to defeat the reapers.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
Always being nice, and winning, is not a reflection of how the world works. Its just game logic.
It's a fine tone. There isn't anything wrong with an idealistic story with a sort of golden hero. Is it terribly realistic? No, but it can be very nice especially in this day an age of "Darker is Better".
I've enjoyed plenty of far more down to earth, grittier stories. Mass Effect even gives you that option if you want things to play out that way. That's been one of the nice things about it. Want a story about an idealistic hero that gets things down without compromise? We can give you that. Want a story about a hero who does needs to be done, because so much is at stake? You can have that too. Want to play between the two a bit? You've got that too! They treat all those things with respect, and let each approach feel like it has a consistent tone with itself.
It's jarring shift in tone in the last 10 minutes of a 3-game series. To say "Ok. This way we let you do things for the past five years? Yeah you can't do that here." That sucks. That they throw it out in favor of a random, lazy, literal Deus Ex Machina is just plain unacceptable for me.
Why is it a Deus Ex Machina? They found the Crucible early on in the beginning of ME3. And plus there was a huge amount of sarcrafice. There was no intervention. They all knew the crucible was a weapon designed to defeat the reapers.
Because an all powerful glowing little boy pops out of the citadel and solves the reaper issue with magic powers in a fashion that was never even hinted at in any part of the story up till that point? Heck, the crucible wasn't even mentioned or used in that entire sequence with him, so it was just kind of a non-thing.
dogma wrote:Always being nice, and winning, is not a reflection of how the world works.
Feth the world. This is a fantasy.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
Always being nice, and winning, is not a reflection of how the world works. Its just game logic.
It's a fine tone. There isn't anything wrong with an idealistic story with a sort of golden hero. Is it terribly realistic? No, but it can be very nice especially in this day an age of "Darker is Better".
I've enjoyed plenty of far more down to earth, grittier stories. Mass Effect even gives you that option if you want things to play out that way. That's been one of the nice things about it. Want a story about an idealistic hero that gets things down without compromise? We can give you that. Want a story about a hero who does needs to be done, because so much is at stake? You can have that too. Want to play between the two a bit? You've got that too! They treat all those things with respect, and let each approach feel like it has a consistent tone with itself.
It's jarring shift in tone in the last 10 minutes of a 3-game series. To say "Ok. This way we let you do things for the past five years? Yeah you can't do that here." That sucks. That they throw it out in favor of a random, lazy, literal Deus Ex Machina is just plain unacceptable for me.
Why is it a Deus Ex Machina? They found the Crucible early on in the beginning of ME3. And plus there was a huge amount of sarcrafice. There was no intervention. They all knew the crucible was a weapon designed to defeat the reapers.
Because an all powerful glowing little boy pops out of the citadel and solves the reaper issue with magic powers in a fashion that was never even hinted at in any part of the story up till that point? Heck, the crucible wasn't even mentioned or used in that entire sequence with him, so it was just kind of a non-thing.
That really didn't happen. He didn't do that. Shepherd did. The Citidael is just shown to be an intelligence makes sense as it apparently came before the reapers. So it is a Reaper in a sense. That makes perfect sense to me.
Not really a Deus Ex Machina as there was no happy ending. And the characters were all saved by a single thing. It really only solved the issue at a cost. Which you have ignored. The Crucible was mentioned at the beginning of the game. And they all said we don't know how it works.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object.
While the reaper threat isn't something I'd consider "unsolvable" the way the ending solves it is pretty damn DEM. Whether or not the ending is happy is irrelevant to the mechanism (EDIT: And frankly, DEM gets a bad rap, but its not always bad. War of the Worlds had a very well done DEM ending and frankly it worked.)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/03/11 18:12:39
"Order. Unity. Obedience. We taught the galaxy these things, and we shall do so again."
"They are not your worst nightmare; they are your every nightmare."
"Let the galaxy burn!"
insane! But they ascribe this MONSTROUS concept to a supposedly benign AI/integrated organic. Whose only reason for changing his plans and whole-heartedly letting you chose to destroy what it has done for millennia because its a little impressed with you!
Sylvaneth A forest
III Legion 5000pts
XIII Legion 9000pts
Hive Fleet Khadrim 5000pts
Coalition of neo Sacea 5000pts
