Poll: ME3 EC didn't fix anything

[RJ 17]

Snip.

Forgive me for showing up late to this topic, and again I apologize if someone has already mentioned this. But as someone who was never "raging" over the original endings (but was rather just very disappointed with them) and as one who defended the Literal Interpretation P suck-it all you Indoctrination Theorists! I predicted the endings in the EC 6 days after the game came out!), I'd like to take a shot at answering your questions.

First and foremost, I'll address pretty much everything revolving around Space Timmy. One thing you have to understand (and something the game attempted to explain) is that Space Timmy isn't a single AI. "I am the collective will of the Reapers." This in emphasized if you choose to tell him to fuck off with his choices and that you'd rather die than make them, he says "So be it." in Harbinger's voice. On a side note, I think they threw in that 4th ending specifically for people who were complaining that all the endings seemed forced, there is no real choice because you're doing what Space Timmy wants you to. This gives you the chance to tell him to piss off, and essentially you sacrifice your cycle so that the NEXT cycle will be the one to stop the Reapers.

Now, as for "Why didn't Space Timmy just activate the Citadel relay himself? Why was Soveriegn even needed?" Ever stop to consider that maybe he couldn't? Perhaps Soveriegn's entire purpose wasn't so much to turn the Citadel into a relay, but rather he was sent to awaken Space Timmy so that HE could open the relay? It's not said that that is the case...but it's certainly not said it isn't. With that suggestion in mind, everything else falls in place: he wasn't there in the beginning. It could be that he didn't even wake up until the Reapers officially took control of the Citadel in ME 3.

As for "Who created Space Timmy?" It was Organics, he says as much. "Why'd they make him?" Again, he specifically says "To be the Catalyst of peace between Organics and Synthetics." Another thing he specifically states is "The Created will always rebel against their Creators." As seen when he explains "The civilization that made me was turned into the first true Reaper. They did not approve, but it was the only way." Sure enough, the cold calculations of an AI determined that in order to follow his programming - create peace between Organics and Synthetics - he must simply remove the organics and synthetics to begin with. There can't be conflict if there's no one to fight. Which means that he, himself, rebeled against his creators to institute his creator's wishes.

"Why didn't the Reapers just hang around and snuff out all AI whenever it arose?" Because that's not what the Catalyst was programmed to do. In his own calculations, organics could be allowed to live and flourish for about 50K years before AI would start being developed. At that point, it's time for a Harvest to wipe the galaxy clean of all life - organic and synthetic (as he mentions in the EC that they harvest synthetics as well) to make way for the next crop of organics to live out their lives becauuse advanced civilizations (if left alive) will just keep making more AI. The Catalyst is doing what it said it'd be doing from the very beginning: imposing Order on the Chaos of organics. Everything happens in patterns, history repeats, yadda yadda yadda. It's all based off the calculations of the Catalyst. In short, the Catalyst wasn't programmed to be an enforcer, he was programmed to ensure there's no conflict between organics and AI. If AI doesn't get developed until approximately every 50K years, then there's no real reason for the Reapers to be hanging around, is there?

As for the Crucible...yeah, the way it implements the three endings is indeed "Space Magic". But what the hell is wrong with that? What's The Force (at least in the original trilogy)? Is that not - by definition - space magic? Does the entire SW story line NOT revolve around space magic? A friend of mine once told me the difference between Star Trek and Star Wars is that Star Trek attempts to be scientific, having specific amounts of energy in weapons to say "Alright, that laser IS powerful enough to blow up an asteriod of that size." where as Star Wars doesn't, it just says "That laser is strong enough to destroy an asteriod that big because we say it is."

In the new Star Trek movie, they shoot a drop of red goo into a planet's core and it creates a black hole. How does that happen? Space magic. In Star Wars, the Death Star has a beam powerful enough to oblitherate a planet. How does it generate that much energy? Space magic.

I don't know when we started demanding scientifically accurate data to support things that occur in SCIENCE FICTION. But if that's the case, you should have been disgusted with the ME series from the very beginning when they said "Initiating Faster Than Light Travel." How do we go faster than light? How do the relays work? Space Fucking Magic. :3

As such, I'm very satisfied with the EC endings. Not just because I predicted them by drawing out the logical conclusion to each ending six days after the game came out, but also because it gave me all I needed for the endings to be good: an epilogue and some closure. I would have liked a bit more closure with the specific characters, but I'm still happy with what I got.

 

[Riff Moonraker]

I watched the Destroy and Synthesis endings on Youtube and am currently downloading the EC to see Control for myself.
From what I've seen all the plotholes are still there. And it seems to me the endings went from "Everyone dies!" to "Everyone lives a happy life and everything gets rebuilt because we say so!" and "The Normandy crashed on a planet and is nearly destroyed? No Problem, they will fix it in a day and fly away like nothing ever happened because we say so!"
And since when is the Normandy capable of vertical flight?
Whatever.

Edit: And how were we supposed to get any of this from the original endings?

The Normandy has pulled off "vertical flight" before... in multiple occasions, actually. At the "dead" Reaper in ME2 when they were escaping it... at the Collector base...

My bad, I didn't remember. Thanks for pointing it out.

No problem!

 

[Murmillos]

I still think that if the Reapers wanted to really control Organics, they would pounce the second one used the mass relay. One or two planets in a solar system, all neatly cleaned up without this mess of tracking them all over the Galaxy, or having some accident happen when you arrive too late and they thrive like a bad rash 'every where'.

But of course, real Reaper logic doesn't make for a good story (or game) so we are left with a open gaping hole of Reaper logic shoehorned to fit in at the last second, so we would all get to enjoy a Reaper 'midichlorian' moment.

But ok, even keeping with "current" ending, a few changes would have made the ending choices more palatable.

Scene setup:
Earth -- (get rid of EC Normandy Shot, get rid of Harbinger blasting Shepard)
Shepard makes to his beam and with his squad mates, they battle their way to the "control room" where they meet Anderson and TIM with gun drawns at each other. There is a quick debate, in which depending on dialog choices (along with supporting points), either just TIM gets shot, or Anders & TIM get critically shot & Shepard wounded.

Shepard Activates the Crucible which (space magic) sets up a solar wide damping field that basically kills all Mass Effect functionality -- the war is at a stand still (but Earth still burns) and Harbinger invites Shepard up to the top. (squad mates at this point do not join, but still are communication linked to Shepard, who patch his conversion to the 'fleet' whom listen in.)

A final verbal debate against Harbinger (the master and 1st Reaper), aka Shepard vs Sovereign "2" begins, Harbinger alludes that the Crucible was the weapon created by their Creators in an attempt to destroy the 'Reapers' (hence the choices for Absolute control, destroy and "merge*" -- yet I still don't know how to make "merge" work)), but lost and the "Cycle" has continued in a perverse logic of controlling/protecting the Galaxy ever since (but still presented in Sovereign style -- this is what we do, we have no desire to explain it to you, you will submit to our will). The conversion also would have over tones of the just completed Geth/Quarians war (depending if you allow one side to die or save them both).

But at least Shepard would feel more in control about the endings, and why/how they exist.

We still have the 4 endings, our 3 color coded choices and the kicked in the nuts refusal (Shepard deactivates the Crucible).. but I would also include a 5th ending, a 2nd refusal, that if you have a high enough war assets, you eventually beat the Reapers, but the ending is just bleak/gloom, 99% of all space ships are destroyed in battles with the Reapers, Earth and every other major planet burns in ruins, Civilizations that once numbered in the trillions can barely number in the single digit millions. To top it off, the last of the Reapers being being hunted down performed scorched Earth policies on hundreds of possible "Eden worlds".

 

[Murmillos]

I don't know when we started demanding scientifically accurate data to support things that occur in SCIENCE FICTION. But if that's the case, you should have been disgusted with the ME series from the very beginning when they said "Initiating Faster Than Light Travel." How do we go faster than light? How do the relays work? Space Fucking Magic. :3

The problem with the ME series is that it goes from being Star Trek in ME1 (everything tries to have a science logic behind it) to Star Wars at the end of ME3 (where it just makes up random space magic because fuck.. real endings are hard).

And even tho ME1 has "space magic" with FTL, they tired to reason it with a logical reason;
FTL: The 'Mass Effect' can lower the mass of any object, even to zero. When mass reaches zero, we can then push something up to the speed of light.
Relays: The 'Mass Effect' allows to relays to set a corridor of negative space which allows ships to travel between with greater ease and speed.

Yes, its all space magic, but it tired to be smart/thinking space magic. Casey didn't understand this and just started pulling crap out of his ass for the funkyjunk of it.

MrBtounge explains Mass Effect really well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MlatxLP-xs

edit: Because Mass Effect wanted to the smart and logical Science Fiction, it's the reasons all those codec exist in the manner that they did. If Mass Effect just wanted to be Star Wars, those codec would not have mattered (or existed).

 

[Savagezion]

ME1 had plot holes which retroactively destroyed the plot of the game, nobody seems to know or give a shit about them. I guess some people give a shit about certain plotholes and not others.

Like what? The only significant one I am aware of is that no one suggests that Saren is planning to attack the Citadel until your meeting with the Council, and then everyone assumes that he must be.

I like the part where Sovereign takes off from Eden Prime without Saren, but shortly after we see Saren on-board Sovereign

how about the one where Saren Attacks Eden Prime to look for the mcguffin that would enable him to use another mcguffin so he can infiltrate the Citadel because he is branded a traitor for Attacking Eden Prime?

This is actually only true because of the sequels. The beacon on Eden Prime wasn't a Mcguffin until further events of the story turned it into one. This could have been used later on, if any effort was ever put into the plot of the series. However, Bioware is mostly only concerned with dialogue it seems and the plot takes a backseat to it.

How about a canon female character despite canon Shepard being male. (?) Yeah, that a brain fuck for a plot hole. I think Bioware needs to quit using the term canon. I don't think it means what they think it means.

 

[Murmillos]

I think Bioware needs to quit using the term canon. I don't think it means what they think it means.

Bioware has always used a very loose version of canon; that Command Shepard is a member of the Earth Alliance who was the 2nd Human to become a Specter, lead a hash-tag group of aliens vrs a rogue Specter Saren, stop a unknown/Reaper warship labeled as Sovereign, was lost for 2 years, surfaced again under the flag of Cerberus, went thru the Omega relay to stop the Collectors, came back, stopped the Reapers at the "Alpha" relay, was being put onto trial for said Alpha Relay event, and then gathered a galaxy wide fleet in an attempt to stop the Reapers at Earth.

Again.. that is the only canon by Bioware standard. Everything else is player-based and specifically non-canon. I'm not sure how that can get any more confusing.

 

[RJ 17]

I don't know when we started demanding scientifically accurate data to support things that occur in SCIENCE FICTION. But if that's the case, you should have been disgusted with the ME series from the very beginning when they said "Initiating Faster Than Light Travel." How do we go faster than light? How do the relays work? Space Fucking Magic. :3

The problem with the ME series is that it goes from being Star Trek in ME1 (everything tries to have a science logic behind it) to Star Wars at the end of ME3 (where it just makes up random space magic because fuck.. real endings are hard).

And even tho ME1 has "space magic" with FTL, they tired to reason it with a logical reason;
FTL: The 'Mass Effect' can lower the mass of any object, even to zero. When mass reaches zero, we can then push something up to the speed of light.
Relays: The 'Mass Effect' allows to relays to set a corridor of negative space which allows ships to travel between with greater ease and speed.

Yes, its all space magic, but it tired to be smart/thinking space magic. Casey didn't understand this and just started pulling crap out of his ass for the funkyjunk of it.

MrBtounge explains Mass Effect really well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MlatxLP-xs

edit: Because Mass Effect wanted to the smart and logical Science Fiction, it's the reasons all those codec exist in the manner that they did. If Mass Effect just wanted to be Star Wars, those codec would not have mattered (or existed).

Soooooooo just because they tried to create science behind FTL justifies it. It's technology based upon a non-existant elemant (Element Zero) that has the power to inrease or decrease the mass of an object. Translation: Space Magic makes things lighter or heavier.

Blue Ending: Combined with the massive energy within the Crucible, the Citadel sends out a shockwave that effects every Reaper unit, altering their programing to obey the benevolent will of ParaShep. This energy is spread across the entire galaxy via the relay network, thus ensuring that every Reaper unit in existence is under ParaShep's control. Translation: Space Magic makes the Reapers obey Shepard.

Red Ending: Combined with the massive energy within the Crucible, the Citadel sends out what is essentially a massive EMP that wipes out synthetic life and even damages "the technology you rely on, but it shouldn't be too much trouble to repair the damage". Using the relays, this EMP covers the entire galaxy, yadda yadda yadda. Translation: Space Magic kills off da Reapahs.

Green Ending: In combining her organic DNA with the energy flow of the Crucible, Shepard allows the Citadel to release a massive burst of energy (i.e. radiation) which alters the cellular structure of all things considered to have life. Organics and Synthetics are granted a "new DNA" by that energy, thus making all life the same and the difference in "species" is now little more than the difference in skin color amongst humans. Translation: Space Magic brings about a boring utopian society.

There, were those explinations technical enough for you?

My point was that this is Science Fiction, folks. Fiction. Fictional implies made up. The only reason you can have a problem with it is if you make a decision that you WANT to have a problem with it. Everything in the ME series has been "space magic", and I still hold to the notion that if you don't like the Crucible due to it's space magic, then you shouldn't have liked the entire series at all.

For god's sake, they ressurect someone who fell from orbit and had a suit rupture before even hitting the atmosphere! I'd say the beginning of ME 2 involves a LOT more "space magic" than the ending to ME 3.

 

[Murmillos]

*snip*

You miss the intent of my post. ME1 attempted to Treky smart at the start and had devolved into Star Wars space magic towards the end. Both are fictional, but one tires to have plausible grounding in the real world as we currently know it.

 

[RJ 17]

*snip*

You miss the intent of my post. ME1 attempted to Treky smart at the start and had devolved into Star Wars space magic towards the end. Both are fictional, but one tires to have plausible grounding in the real world as we currently know it.

And you apparenty missed the intent of mine. Space Magic = Space Magic, no matter if it has backing or if it's just there to be there. The point being that it's a fictional story, as such you shouldn't care if it goes from trying to be "realistic" to saying "just because". I feel I offered a pretty adequate explination of how each ending could work (my own, personal BS explination, but an explination none-the-less) and while I admit there's nothing that says it happens the way I suggested, there's nothing that says it doesnn't.

Basically I'm saying that if you consider the over usage of "Star Wars Space Magic" in a Sci-Fi Space Opera to be a major criticism, then I think you're being a bit too nit-picky. And no, I don't expect to change your mind on this issue.

 

[Murmillos]

I have no problem with a genre being the way it is, if its that way from the start. I love Star Trek, I love Star Wars; each has its strengths and enjoyment. Not everything needs to be set to Treky Smart, not everything needs to be set to Star Wars Space Magic.

What my problem (and many others) is that ME focus shifted from Treky Smart to Star Wars Space Magic. Yes ME1, ME2 and ME3 required the occasional unnecessary hand wave to get something passed, but they tried to provide the unnecessary techno babble to tie it back down to original premise; its science fiction, its almost a necessary that its going to happen at points in the story. Most logical adults accept this.

ME3 end breaks and bends the logical structure that had been set up in the previous 3 games, just so they could try to have this "cool epic ending" that they needed to fill in at the last minute.

 

[RJ 17]

I have no problem with a genre being the way it is, if its that way from the start. I love Star Trek, I love Star Wars; each has its strengths and enjoyment. Not everything needs to be set to Treky Smart, not everything needs to be set to Star Wars Space Magic.

What my problem (and many others) is that ME focus shifted from Treky Smart to Star Wars Space Magic. Yes ME1, ME2 and ME3 required the occasional unnecessary hand wave to get something passed, but they tried to provide the unnecessary techno babble to tie it back down to original premise; its science fiction, its almost a necessary that its going to happen at points in the story. Most logical adults accept this.

ME3 end breaks and bends the logical structure that had been set up in the previous 3 games, just so they could try to have this "cool epic ending" that they needed to fill in at the last minute.

Just out of curiousity, if you had it your way, how would you have had the Crucible completely eliminate the Reaper threat in a manner that doesn't wipe out all life in the Galaxy? It was made clear from ME 1 that even with a galaxy united, there's just not enough military power to defeat the Reapers in a head-on fight. A doomsday device of some sort would be required, one that could affect the entire galaxy. How would your doomsday device work?

 

[Cabisco]

I like many others hated the Mass Effect 3 ending (that being said Mass Effect 2 had the human reaper so Bioware did foreshadow stupidity), but I don't quite understand why all the blame is being heaped onto EA and not Bioware.

Can someone please explain it? Why is Bioware praised for all the good parts of Mass Effect but gets to pass all the shite off as EAs fault?

 

[Censorme]

I can accept the endings now.
It's not going to get any better than this, even with all the plot-holes and bullshit. Mass Effect is over and done with.

Bioware wanted Shepard to die. Shepard has to die in order to get a good ending.
Once you accept that, "Synthesis" and "Control" are the best possible choices.

"Synthesis" is the ending achieved with 5000+ war assets, and is the best one. You are helping all forms of life by creating universal understanding and unification through the spreading of your essence/space magic.

That being said, I really like "Control". If I were close-minded enough to let robots be robots and humans be humans, then I would sacrifice myself to be the policing force of the galaxy and holder of all knowledge.

 

[AD-Stu]

I like many others hated the Mass Effect 3 ending (that being said Mass Effect 2 had the human reaper so Bioware did foreshadow stupidity), but I don't quite understand why all the blame is being heaped onto EA and not Bioware.

Can someone please explain it? Why is Bioware praised for all the good parts of Mass Effect but gets to pass all the shite off as EAs fault?

I don't know if that's necessarily the case - rightly or wrongly people are blaming EA for all sorts of things when it comes to this game (like forcing multiplayer into the game, or the Day 1 DLC) but I'm pretty sure it's been Bioware (and Casey Hudson / Mac Walters in particular) that have been the main focus of fan anger over the ending. It was Bioware that got the cupcakes sent to them, not EA.

Bioware wanted Shepard to die. Shepard has to die in order to get a good ending. Once you accept that, "Synthesis" and "Control" are the best possible choices.

"Synthesis" is the ending achieved with 5000+ war assets, and is the best one. You are helping all forms of life by creating universal understanding and unification through the spreading of your essence/space magic.

Which one is "best" really depends on your point of view. Personally I think Synthesis is the most revolting one, because aside from the sheer idiocy of the concept (seriously, how would that even begin to work?!?) and the lazyness of Bioware's execution (really? you merge organics with synthetics, and the only difference is the organics get glowing green eyes and veins?) you're taking all the diverse species in the galaxy, even ones that weren't involved in the war, and making them all the same - all on the say-so of one human. The concept is monstrous.

That said, that's just the way I see it. A lot of people see it differently again and will tell you that Destroy is the best ending, because that's the one where Shepard (maybe) lives. Or that Refusal (now that it's an option) is the best ending because you don't have to sell out to the Star Child.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I can accept the endings now.
It's not going to get any better than this, even with all the plot-holes and bullshit. Mass Effect is over and done with.

Bioware wanted Shepard to die. Shepard has to die in order to get a good ending.
Once you accept that, "Synthesis" and "Control" are the best possible choices.

"Synthesis" is the ending achieved with 5000+ war assets, and is the best one. You are helping all forms of life by creating universal understanding and unification through the spreading of your essence/space magic.

That being said, I really like "Control". If I were close-minded enough to let robots be robots and humans be humans, then I would sacrifice myself to be the policing force of the galaxy and holder of all knowledge.

The way your EMS works is retarded. You need certain amount of war assets in order to get one of the endings even though the endings are triggered by the Crucible which is in fact finished when you get to Earth? It makes absolutely no fuckin' sense.

 

[Murmillos]

I have no problem with a genre being the way it is, if its that way from the start. I love Star Trek, I love Star Wars; each has its strengths and enjoyment. Not everything needs to be set to Treky Smart, not everything needs to be set to Star Wars Space Magic.

What my problem (and many others) is that ME focus shifted from Treky Smart to Star Wars Space Magic. Yes ME1, ME2 and ME3 required the occasional unnecessary hand wave to get something passed, but they tried to provide the unnecessary techno babble to tie it back down to original premise; its science fiction, its almost a necessary that its going to happen at points in the story. Most logical adults accept this.

ME3 end breaks and bends the logical structure that had been set up in the previous 3 games, just so they could try to have this "cool epic ending" that they needed to fill in at the last minute.

Just out of curiousity, if you had it your way, how would you have had the Crucible completely eliminate the Reaper threat in a manner that doesn't wipe out all life in the Galaxy? It was made clear from ME 1 that even with a galaxy united, there's just not enough military power to defeat the Reapers in a head-on fight. A doomsday device of some sort would be required, one that could affect the entire galaxy. How would your doomsday device work?

Its just not the Crucible is a doomsday device that is the problem, its the entire premise/setup. Starchild with the Crucible that did something logical would have been bearable, Magic Crucible with a conversation with Harbinger (an example that I alluded to before hand [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/9.380005.14971317] would have bearable.

But what we get is Starchild with Magic Crucible.


But to answer your question... my initial thought to the Crucible and War Assets, was that the Crucible as a weapon that would link up to the Citadel and cause all the other Mass Relays that would send out a pulse that would disrupt only the Reapers, the more damaged the Crucible (due to lower War assists) less effective it would be (or could start causing problems to non Reaper technology). So the more damaged the Crucible is, the more friends / alien allies we lose. A near perfect War Asset totally protects the Crucible, it fires neatly disabling the Reapers for easy pickings, the ending gives you the good fuzzy feeling we beat the Reapers and we work together as a unified galaxy (which the Red/Blue/Green endings are now.. if somewhat in a different manner). Middle high War Assets = half damaged Crucible. Mass Relay engines on even non reaper ships overload.. we lose crew mates, even love ones due to that. Reapers still half able to fight, half of the war fleet is lost, many blame Shepard for the heavy lost. We defeated the reapers, but Humans are hated to hell, and Shepard is the first head on a pike they want. Low Assets = heavy damaged Crucible, does more damage to the War Fleet then Reapers.. but it really didn't matter, the fleet was out numbered anyways. Reapers win.

And that is just 3, Great, Below-Average, Bad endings. You could add even more depending on how gradient you wanted the endings. Want to double that? How about 6. A 98%+ Perfect ending, 97-90% Good, 89-75% Ok, 74-55% Not Well, 54-25% Really Bad, 24-0% Were you even trying?... and the lower down the scale, the more you "lose" and the less unified the galaxy is after.

 

[Acton Hank]

I can accept the endings now.
It's not going to get any better than this, even with all the plot-holes and bullshit. Mass Effect is over and done with.

Bioware wanted Shepard to die. Shepard has to die in order to get a good ending.
Once you accept that, "Synthesis" and "Control" are the best possible choices.

"Synthesis" is the ending achieved with 5000+ war assets, and is the best one. You are helping all forms of life by creating universal understanding and unification through the spreading of your essence/space magic.

That being said, I really like "Control". If I were close-minded enough to let robots be robots and humans be humans, then I would sacrifice myself to be the policing force of the galaxy and holder of all knowledge.

The way your EMS works is retarded. You need certain amount of war assets in order to get one of the endings even though the endings are triggered by the Crucible which is in fact finished when you get to Earth? It makes absolutely no fuckin' sense.

Guess you really didn't see all of the Extended Cut.

 

[Acton Hank]

I like many others hated the Mass Effect 3 ending (that being said Mass Effect 2 had the human reaper so Bioware did foreshadow stupidity), but I don't quite understand why all the blame is being heaped onto EA and not Bioware.

Can someone please explain it? Why is Bioware praised for all the good parts of Mass Effect but gets to pass all the shite off as EAs fault?

I don't know if that's necessarily the case - rightly or wrongly people are blaming EA for all sorts of things when it comes to this game (like forcing multiplayer into the game, or the Day 1 DLC) but I'm pretty sure it's been Bioware (and Casey Hudson / Mac Walters in particular) that have been the main focus of fan anger over the ending. It was Bioware that got the cupcakes sent to them, not EA.

Bioware wanted Shepard to die. Shepard has to die in order to get a good ending. Once you accept that, "Synthesis" and "Control" are the best possible choices.

"Synthesis" is the ending achieved with 5000+ war assets, and is the best one. You are helping all forms of life by creating universal understanding and unification through the spreading of your essence/space magic.

Which one is "best" really depends on your point of view. Personally I think Synthesis is the most revolting one, because aside from the sheer idiocy of the concept (seriously, how would that even begin to work?!?) and the lazyness of Bioware's execution (really? you merge organics with synthetics, and the only difference is the organics get glowing green eyes and veins?) you're taking all the diverse species in the galaxy, even ones that weren't involved in the war, and making them all the same - all on the say-so of one human. The concept is monstrous.

That said, that's just the way I see it. A lot of people see it differently again and will tell you that Destroy is the best ending, because that's the one where Shepard (maybe) lives. Or that Refusal (now that it's an option) is the best ending because you don't have to sell out to the Star Child.

I get the basic idea for Synthetis. That organics want to improve themselves with tech and synthetics want to improve themselves with the understanding of organics; Basically they are polar opposites heading in the same direction and synthetis is the point where they meet in the middle.

I undertand why it's supposed to be the best, I just think that something like that should be a result of natural evolution and not just because Shepard jumps into the Crucible's beam.

 

[RJ 17]

Snip.

If the full fleet couldn't take out the Reaper fleet, half the fleet isn't going to be able to take out half the Reaper fleet.

Anyways, more to the point, doesn't the Catalyst make it pretty clear that he is, in a way, Harbinger? Would you honestly have rather have had a conversation with Harbinger, a being who has had nothing but utter contempt for you and never ceased to remind you how hopeless your struggle is, but now he's suddenly explaining just how many ways you can utterly fuck over the Reapers? I think that would cause an even bigger leap in logic than Space Timmy's exisstence. Were it not for him - the collective will guiding the Reapers - then Harbinger would be in charge. And if that were the case, Shepard would have never even made it to Crucible firing station. Harbinger would have commanded the Reapers to destroy the Crucible immediately when it docked on the Citadel, knowing full well it was the bane of the Reapers, or at least not being so stupid as to wait and see if it worked.

My point is that if not Space Timmy, SOMETHING else had to be guiding the Reapers. Something had to be keeping the Reapers from attacking the Crucible once it was docked. The reason it does this is, as Space Timmy says: the Crucible offers new solutions for the Catalyst to implement.

 

[boag]

If they had not been complete and utter dicks to the fans by calling the people disatisfied with the original ending, and I quote "Whiny, homophobic entitled brats", then Yes i would have been satisfied with the EC.

As it stands, I cant wait for Bioware to burn down and join the likes of Bullfrog and Westwood in the graveyard of companies EA has raped to death.

Hey now, Westwood was a great little company. Respect for the dead

They were a great little company, after what EA did to them, death was the best possible outcome.

When did they say that?

When did who say what?

I dont understand your question here.


oh I see, you are inquiring about the quote.

Go follow the original post and subsequent replies for the anwsers

When did Bioware literally call people who were unhappy with the ending: "Whiny, homophobic, entitled brats"?

Sorry for not being clear, my mistake.

no worries, I encourage you to go follow the original posts I made, I even put links up and everything.