Mass Effect 3: It's not the endings, its the final battle (And synthesis)
- Thread starter Saviordd1
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's not the "best" ending, it's the ending where Shepard chooses to make the greatest personal sacrifice and which also has the greatest potential reward. For that reason, it's also probably the saddest or most bittersweet ending because unlike the others Shepard really is dead, and Shepard is the character you've been playing all this time.Saviordd1 said:
I also disagree with you on the "point" of the game, although in doing so I also have to point out a major flaw in the game. It has a moral choice system. Sure, you can teach the Geth and Quarians the power of lurve, you can also shoot Legion right in the face and exterminate the Geth. It is not guaranteed at all that Shepard's actions throughout the game in any way suggested that synthetics and organics had to learn to live together in harmony, or indeed that it was possible.
If I had to summarize the theme of the third game, I would say it's actually about order and inevitability versus chaos and the unknown (represented respectively by the catalyst and the crucible) with each ending reflecting a different point on the spectrum. "Control" as the name suggests, represents the continuation of an ordered universe under the will of an absolute power (be it benevolent or otherwise). "Destroy" leaves behind an uncertain future where society is finally free of the cycle but, as a result, must work to rebuild some of its lost glory. "Synthesis", as the name suggests, is the middle road. Some of the damage of "Destroy" is averted, but only at the cost of changing the nature of life itself and eliminating some of its diversity.
Again, that's just personal musing, but I include it here to show that you don't have to read the point of the game like that.
I think maybe you need to explain what you mean by this, because right now it looks bad for my opinion of you.JazzJack2 said:
To be completely honest, i am wondering why you created this thread.
We know this. These are the EXACT. SAME. complaints that caused such an uproar after the first couple of people completed the game.
Starting to feel sorry for the dead horse to be beaten so much.
We know this. These are the EXACT. SAME. complaints that caused such an uproar after the first couple of people completed the game.
Starting to feel sorry for the dead horse to be beaten so much.
It was the ending for me, pure and simple, Mass Effect died there for me.Zhukov said:
That said, I don't think the "dead horse" will ever die until EA/Bioware repairs the damage. Right now there are basically three possible outcomes here. One is that Bioware/EA stops doing Mass Effect entirely (unlikely) at which people people keep referring to the ending as an example of something that killed an entire series... for a lot of reasons. Two is that they change the ending (finally) either by releasing a proper DLC that doesn't "expand" the ending but changes it entirely, OR pretty much do that vicasiously through the beginning of whatever the new game is invalidating the problems. This is the best possible outcome for all parties, the ending will be remembered as a dick move, but people will get over it. Three is that they continue right on along this path, things remain nasty and divisive the series never acheives the heights it could have otherwise reached due to a justifiably divided fanbase, and the arguements go on forever... this "Dead Horse" perhaps being the pale steed Death will mount one day when the end times arrive.
I still think that the ending should have been the same up until right before the star child. Instead Wrex flies through the citadel and saves Shepard by brofisting him. Then the catlist just turns into sheperads first and he and wrex hold hands as they take down harbinger in one punch. the end.
Am I the only one who thought the endings after EC came out were actually pretty okay? I mean, not great, to be sure, but not terrible either.
If you're a fan of the first two games, you really can't be a fan of the ending, or the dream sequences, or all the mishmash that was trying to be a movie rather than a game. They're totally inconsistent with each other thematically. I guess conceptually you can be a fan of the ending (don't know why you would), but it really is completely separate from the themes of the series. It's sloppy Frankenstein writing.Lily Venus said:
I'm happy if you enjoyed the ending, because you're spared the crushing feelings of not only being ripped off, but feeling like another story-focused company has been crushed into the treads of a AAA game company. I don't wish that feeling on anyone.
And here i thought the game went downhill from the beginning where the reapers invade Earth for no good damn reason but OP sure proved me wrong.
The main plot was a fail right from the start. Even before we get to the endings and earth.
You get the intel from the collector base about Reapers- still no one thinks a reaper invasion is coming
Combined from the evidence of the conduit at Ilos-or did that get destroyed?
The Batarian's go quite for a few months - no1 cares that much
Macguffin/deus ex machina hybrid depending on if you look at the final game as a stand alone or the final game as an ending to all 3.
Advantages this cycle has that previous cycles didn't have;
2000+ years to further advance
More species to contend with- geth,humans and krogans weren't an issue when sovereign tried to use the rachni to take the citadel because the signal didn't work. The Quarian's also had no need for the biggest fleet in the galaxy.
No surprise attack at citadel
No control over relays
Galaxy species have now reverse engineered thianx cannons
More diverse species (the protheans ensured this by having a hand in asari& human advancement(even hinting at freezing the charon relay to ensure diversity)-non diversity was one of the reasons the protheans lost
NONE of these factors were mentioned...even mentioned enough to disregard...instead that Admiral guy kept saying the crucible is the only way! we don't know what it is..but lets make it..lot's of energy. But we still might need a catalyst..but lets make it anyway.
Why did this happen...because explaining the established lore and events would of been too difficult for new players.
The Reapers somehow can control the citadel at the end. Never explained. Off screen. I thought it closes and become indestructible?
The main new theme..chaos order theory is the same overused technological singularity. The word's order and chaos was only mentioned once in the previous 2 games. The Sovereign conversation...and that was in a different context. It described the evolution of organic life as the chaos. Star child describes synthetics killing organics as chaos. The writers just tried to find a meaning for order-chaos at the end and twisted that first sovereign conversation to mean something else.
The entire story was fixated about saving Earth for marketing purposes. The explanation of how Earth gets over run by reapers in 10 minutes but the Turians hold out while you have time to dance in the citadel is stupid. It's even more random considering now the reapers are near invincible so how is there a resistance on Earth and in Turian space.
All logic is twisted to fit the Earth is holding out but we still need a deus ex machina.
You get the intel from the collector base about Reapers- still no one thinks a reaper invasion is coming
Combined from the evidence of the conduit at Ilos-or did that get destroyed?
The Batarian's go quite for a few months - no1 cares that much
Macguffin/deus ex machina hybrid depending on if you look at the final game as a stand alone or the final game as an ending to all 3.
Advantages this cycle has that previous cycles didn't have;
2000+ years to further advance
More species to contend with- geth,humans and krogans weren't an issue when sovereign tried to use the rachni to take the citadel because the signal didn't work. The Quarian's also had no need for the biggest fleet in the galaxy.
No surprise attack at citadel
No control over relays
Galaxy species have now reverse engineered thianx cannons
More diverse species (the protheans ensured this by having a hand in asari& human advancement(even hinting at freezing the charon relay to ensure diversity)-non diversity was one of the reasons the protheans lost
NONE of these factors were mentioned...even mentioned enough to disregard...instead that Admiral guy kept saying the crucible is the only way! we don't know what it is..but lets make it..lot's of energy. But we still might need a catalyst..but lets make it anyway.
Why did this happen...because explaining the established lore and events would of been too difficult for new players.
The Reapers somehow can control the citadel at the end. Never explained. Off screen. I thought it closes and become indestructible?
The main new theme..chaos order theory is the same overused technological singularity. The word's order and chaos was only mentioned once in the previous 2 games. The Sovereign conversation...and that was in a different context. It described the evolution of organic life as the chaos. Star child describes synthetics killing organics as chaos. The writers just tried to find a meaning for order-chaos at the end and twisted that first sovereign conversation to mean something else.
The entire story was fixated about saving Earth for marketing purposes. The explanation of how Earth gets over run by reapers in 10 minutes but the Turians hold out while you have time to dance in the citadel is stupid. It's even more random considering now the reapers are near invincible so how is there a resistance on Earth and in Turian space.
All logic is twisted to fit the Earth is holding out but we still need a deus ex machina.
Believe it or not from my rambling I kinda agree. At least with destroy and control, they're not great but they're not what they were.Macgyvercas said:
Except, that, you know, Cortez doesn't even bring it up if you don't and only Kaidan jumps you so to speak.JazzJack2 said:
And he's Kaidan, the guy who's had an obvious crush on you since ME1.
Also just putting it out there, being attracted to the same gender doesn't give you more or less rights in this argument.
Electronics doesn't work that way, especially since you can visibly see IC's in a fucking LEAF in the synthesis ending.Mikeyfell said:
It.Just.Does.Not.Work.Like.That.
Zoidfreak said:
A note on trolls:Lily Venus said:
Just because your opinion differed from the mainstream one (And even in real life (Non internet) I have run into vastly more people who hated the ending then liked it) doesn't make the other people trolls.
It's hard to have respect for Bioware after the blatant cash grab that was From Ashes and Dragon Age 2, the ending just made it worse.
The EC did some repair work but there's still a lot of issues.
This, a million times this.Lily Venus said:
Not exactly sure how it was unnecessary? If you wanted to make the cure you had to. (And if your complaint is there's no other way to stop him than to shoot him your wrong)Blargh McBlargh said:
Because some people want to discuss it?Longstreet said:
People still discuss books that are hundreds of years old, we can discuss a game that's a year old.
Plus no one forced you to come into this thread and acknowledge its existence.
I don't have enough parts of my body to count how many people I've seen post reasons and explanations as to why they don't like the endings to Mass Effect 3.Lily Venus said:
Yet I can count on one hand the amount of people who I've seen give reasons and explanations as to why they like the endings.
Perhaps if the people who like the endings had posted with as much enthusiasm as those who did not their voice would not have been drowned out.
In my opinion instead of posting how much you dislike people who are against the ending of Mass Effect 3, you should put that energy into explaining why you do like it. Who knows, you may change some people's minds.