Poll: ME3 EC didn't fix anything

[lumenadducere]

The existence of space magic and the ridiculously fallacious logic of Starbrat makes the EC still fail, but it's better than what the original ending was in the first place. Some people got the more obvious questions answered, although that stuff wasn't too hard to figure out. It's the bigger issues that show up from the whole end part on the Citadel that were truly problematic, and there's no way that "clarification" would fix that.

One thing that I find interesting is that if you do the "Refusal" ending then Starbrat speaks in a different, distinctly Reaper-esque tone. Makes you wonder, although I'm sure that is what they were going for.

 

[Elamdri]

Why did Sovereign need Saren to fix the Citadel signal if starchild was always there?

The refusal ending strongly implies that the Starchild is in fact Harbinger. Perhaps the Starchild only exists when Harbinger is in close proximity. Or perhaps the Starchild simply is a part of Harbinger that doesn't have full control over the Citadel. He says so much in that he is incapable of making the decisions for you at the end.

How did the protheans manage to sabotage the Citadel if the starchild has the ability to get into your head? Should we simply assume that a bunch of protheans were able to do all that and there was nothing the starchild could have done to stop them? We shouldn't assume that, because most people know by now what the original plot was supposed to be. And there was never any starchild in it.

There's nothing WRONG in assuming that the Starchild simply didn't have the power to stop them. It's clearly not the "Caretaker" of the citadel. I have a feeling that it is just a result of Harbinger interfacing with the Citadel.

Who created the starchild? Organics? Then why doesn't he simply protect the organics against the synthetics? Why don't the Reapers simply destroy the synthetics? Why are they waiting in dark space? Wouldn't it be easier for them to just roam around the galaxy making sure we don't create A.I.? Seems like an easier solution. And a more logical one. What if synthetics created the Catalyst? That's even dumber. Synthetics created an A.I in order to protect the organics against the synthetics by killing organics.

Synthetics didn't create the Catalyst. Organics did. He tells you that he was originally created to stop the conflict between Synthetic and Organics. He tells you that his first solution failed, so he came up with the Reapers. He even says that his Creators were his first victims and that they were "unhappy" with his solution. The reason that he doesn't just go around killing Synthetic life is that it is also LIFE and has just as much right to exist as organic life.

He tells you that his solution is to harvest all advanced Organic and Synthetic life in the galaxy and preserve them, their memories and collective intelligence in a new Reaper. That way the old races transcend into a Reaper and give way for new races to emerge.

What about the Crucible? It's still space magic. It still doesn't make any god damn sense.

So is the Force. Hell, the Force didn't become stupid until George Lucas tried to make it "Make sense." Sometimes Sci-Fi just needs to have it's Space Magic and we need to accept that it's just not gonna make sense.

Can't you see? As long as the starchild exists, the entire plot of Mass Effect makes no sense. And it's not like Bioware didn't have the easy way out. Jesus fuckin' Christ what a mess.

The poll is broken for some reason. Third option should say "I don't care anymore"

I can easily make sense enough out of it. I don't think it's a particularly good option, but to say that it doesn't make sense requires a lot of inferences designed to create a scenario where it doesn't make sense. The problem being that it's just as easy to create inferences where it does make sense.

 

[Gennadios]

I'm in the middle of a replay for the ending, few loose ends I missed in the original playthrough and this is the first I've seen of refusal. Does your Galactic Readiness/War asset rating actually effect the extinction in the refusal ending?

 

[Joccaren]

I'm of two minds about it.

It "Fixes" the current endings enough, adding extended dialogue about synthesis and destroy and control, it also adds in the much needed now my canon 4th option. In all endings it now provides closure, and gives some sense of what's going on. It has done probably the best it could to fix the whole Crucible section of the ending, whilst keeping Bioware's vision intact.

However, do I like it? No.
As you pointed out, its still the same crap as before, but now it comes down to personal taste more than just "WTF is this?".

-No additional war assets are shown in action. Major letdown.
-The options are still rather bleh, and they're still really trying to push the whole synthesis angle.
-The "Reject" option is obviously the weakest done option, with the least effort put in. Before someone says "You just want a conventional victory" - point 1 and this one could be fixed together: Show our war assets fighting to the death.
-EMS still means bugger all in the grand scheme of things. Once you hit 2-3K, there's still no reason for you to try to get more. This could be fixed by a conventional victory possibility at 7K+ EMS [Yes, I had to throw it in somewhere].
-The game on the whole still has a lot of flaws.

Its a decent effort, and I have forgiven them to an extent. They are a "Read up on full plot before purchase" company now, however, and checking videos of gameplay, as their most recent games have done nothing but disappoint me, and I'm not thinking they're going to change that habit.

 

[Joccaren]

I'm in the middle of a replay for the ending, few loose ends I missed in the original playthrough and this is the first I've seen of refusal. Does your Galactic Readiness/War asset rating actually effect the extinction in the refusal ending?

No. It has been tested at 7-8K EMS - pretty much the highest you can get - and you still fail completely. There is nothing more to it then what is presented there.
IMO, still the best ending.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I think we may be giving Bioware too much credit. Writing the quintessential happy ending is not where their strengths lay. They (Bio) don't think along the lines of; Kill the Dragon, save the Princess and live happily ever after.

We the players were expecting a happy ending, but we expected something that history has proven they can't do.

 

[Gennadios]

IMO, still the best ending.

Indeed.

Well, there go those playthrough plans.

 

[Vegosiux]

We the players were expecting a happy ending, but we expected something that history has proven they can't do.

But that's incorrect. Players weren't expecting "a happy ending", just an ending that makes a sliver of sense, an ending that wraps up teh saga; even if the best possible ending on the new EC refusal option was a phyrric victory that sets the entire galaxy 50,000 years back anyway, it would still be just fine. Instead, what happened was a deus ex machina followed by an Endingtron 3000, pick-your-color thing that was full of plot holes.

EC didn't help much in that regard either, I mean, the deus ex machina is still there, the pick your color is still there; and as far as "Why the Normandy was out there" goes - I wouldn't exactly expect Joker and the Normandy crew to set off, even under a direct order - they're Shepard's team, and even if technically part of the Alliance, it just strikes me as completely nonsensical to obey a command to abandon post, after all they've been through.

IMO, still the best ending.

Indeed, fight on your terms to the end, and all. It can even be considered a FU right back at the devs when people refuse to choose one of the "real" endings.

 

[XandNobody]

As I like to say, the Mass Effect 3 ending was, well, shit.

However, what people wanted from the Extended Cut was something that would turn shit into filet mignon.

What we got, was shit turned into a bologna sandwich, I'll take a bologna sandwich over shit. Ain't no filet mignon, but it ain't shit either.

 

[Something Amyss]

Failure to deliver what was promised?

I'm shocked.

...Sarcasm sense...Tingling.

 

[XandNobody]

Failure to deliver what was promised?

I'm shocked.

...Sarcasm sense...Tingling.

I actually think they did, but they could not, ever, deliver on what was expected.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

The extended cut didn't fix anything because it CAN'T. The problem is fundamental in the entire ME3 game, in the fact that none of your previous actions have any affect on the ultimate outcome.

None of your previous actions had an outcome of ME1. Only four choices made a difference in ME2 (the other three were non choices in that acquiring the resources necessary to fulfill them was was a trivial effort and there was no reason to not spend said resources since the game contained many times the amount needed to upgrade everything).

This is what I think bugs me about the whole "We were betrayed" and/or "They lied" arguments. Yes, the lied. And we saw evidence of that twice with damning evidence found by the fact that nothing you did in ME1 had any real impact on ME2 save altering a few bits of dialog and giving you a few passing and ultimately trivial quests. Yes, you were lied to but you had the information to recognize such things for what they were. Bioware didn't betray you - your expectations in the face of overwhelming evidence did.

 

[Gennadios]

Hum, so after watching the 40 minutes of endings on youtube, I'm certainly more satisfied than with the original endings, but not enough to actually vote "yes."

I certainly like the Space Jesus vibe of the Control ending.

The refusal ending pretty much has all the problems of the orignal ending(sic.) EMS did fuck all and the Stargazer scene at the end just confused me. The Stargazer looked like an Asari, so are we to assume that after heavy casualties the reapers were wiped out but the cost was so great that galactic civilizations ended up a technological dark age with only the data archives to work off of?

But then if the Geth and the Quarians were unified, wouldn't their combined technical aptitude allow them to regain spaceflight in short order? Mass relays would have survived since the Crucible didn't go off.

And if all civilizations were wiped out, then doom is imminent, wtf was the Stargazer saying when she was talking about being safe from the threat? They just have plans for a crucible to repeat the sorry cycle all over again.

TLR: More satisfied does not exactly mean satisfied in this case.

 

[Unsilenced]

The new endings were....okay? I guess? In my opinion, it went from an F to a C-. Passable, but nothing more.

^Pretty much that.

Sure there are some plot holes and major fridge logic, but the endings now have distinct traits and feeling to them. It's not a spectacular ending, it's not a great ending, it's not a great ending that will be remembered for generations, but it is an ending.

While not as free and open as much of the rest of the series the endings are now at least distinct.

Instead of Red, Blue, or Green, you now have Psychopath, Objectivist Hero, or Space Pot Fantasy.

 

[skywolfblue]

I loved it. Solved all 3 of my "quibbles" with the original ending
-epilogue screens
-explaining how your squadmates made it back aboard the normandy
-how the normandy ended up in the relay

So I'm happy as a clam.

 

[fezzthemonk]

No, the problem with the ending is that there's no happy ending whatsoever.

This is the only reason everyone is mad. I don't care how they dress it up, it all boils down to "But i didn't want my Shepard to die"

 

[Feylynn]

I'm tired of being angry, I never wanted to hate Mass Effect.
It explains what exactly the point of playing was (turns out you didn't destroy the galaxy) and explained some of the character inconsistency.

It responded directly to a lot of the fan complaints and showed a certain level of care that I have to respect (Even if it's motivated my the sales of their next game?).

 

[sobaka770]

No, the problem with the ending is that there's no happy ending whatsoever.

This is the only reason everyone is mad. I don't care how they dress it up, it all boils down to "But i didn't want my Shepard to die"

So what if I didn't? I made a huge effort to assure that I maximize my chances of survival. I've done all missions, brought peace everywhere I could, got my war effort on max (without MP though but I thought it was optional), surely a 3 second one-breath scene is not enough?

I couldn't die in ME1 granted, but I could choose in ME2 even if it's a non-canon and I'd have to almost willfully make bad decisions. One would think they might actually improve on the choice as they iterate.

I am fine with bad endings if I deserved them.

 

[Starke]

They didn't fix anything, I am not surprised. Kinda depressed though.

No, but they did actually make things worse. You're telling me no one on the Crucible project, the greatest minds in the galaxy, is smart enough recognize a fuckin' Duracell when they are building one!?

Also, all endings solve the problems created by the the mass relays exploding (they don't now) and the crew being stranded (they manage to get airborne again).

And they said they weren't changing the endings. Those last two bits are hugely significant. There goes their artistic integrity argument lol

Fuck their artistic integrity.

I'll take improvements, even small ones, any day of the week.

They were focused on that straw man argument of "you just don't like the ending because it's too sad", which was getting parroted off by the Biodrones. Which, of course wasn't the problem at all.

Also, "artistic integrity", they seem to think that term means a damn. It really doesn't. At the end of the day all art exists to cater to it's audience. When you have a piece that is hated, really hated, hiding behind "artistic integrity" and saying, "you don't understand my genius," is a horrible abuse of the term.

"No, we got it, it sucked, here's your mulligan."

 

[Adultratedhydra]

And yet, still no explanation on the shepard breathing scene. Well done bioware.

Incoming Epilogue comic?