J.d. Scott said:
Actually, I had to take out you circle talking into making it seem as though there was more choice than there was. IF you look at the part I underlined, your choice on the council didn't matter as they conveniently pulled Anderson off if you chose him. That didn't really bother me but I feel it is important considering you are trying to point out choices "that matter" here to support your original proposal. As well, we assume Earth survived, there is no proof that it did, and actually there is strong evidence it didn't considering a relay blew up in its solar system. That breath means little because so much random stuff happened, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the breath was actually drawn on a planet far away from Earth. If you think that is a ridiculous conclusion to draw, now you can relate to how little this ending makes to most people who paid attention to the story being told. This end makes NO sense. It makes so little sense that teleporting Shepard would not phase the "integrity" of the story at this point.
Yikes, you're really in love with yourself, aren't you?
Here's the funny thing about all of this - I showed you all the choices you got to make, and you picked them at them, because apparently, you're in love with how intelligent you seem, but it really proves my point.
You only get to choose what Bioware allowed you to choose.
This wasn't some game design experiment where you got to choose things - you got menus. Since they needed Anderson somewhere else, he got pulled away. Since they needed somebody to die on Virmire, you had to choose and you couldn't save both. Legion and Mordin died either way, it's just the choice between nice and ugly.
After all that "pick the choice off the menu", you got mad because the end choice was "pick the choice off the menu"?
As for Earth, if you didn't get enough points, it blew up. In the Red ending, they told you it would blow up. There's no factual evidence that the relays blew up in green side or blue side. So there's no proof that Earth or Victory Fleet got blown up. While I do think they should resolve this, it does however factor into your list of choices.
More importantly, if you don't feel you got choices, why suddenly do you want one now?
As for the plot itself, this isn't some sort of game framework or collaborative storytelling.
Well, you would know better than Bioware, the people that was claiming, for 5 years, that it was.
Quit bulls**ting. It makes you look snarky and idiotic. You know this wasn't Little Big Planet or some other make your own adventure game. You got to make choices, but every one was metered by Bioware. If they needed to negate your choice, they did. They listened to feedback, but that doesn't get you a writing credit. You don't write for Bioware. You don't deserve a new ending, and at the end of the day, you're just some a**hole playing a video game. Just because they were nice and supported the community and made the game a game with character choices doesn't mean that you are an active part of the storytelling at Bioware. If they tell you this is the ending, it's the ending. It's egotistical to assume you know better then anyone at Bioware. They gave you all the choices they wanted at the beginning, and the ones they wanted at the end. Now get over your f**king self.
This is what is irritating about people like you, you don't listen and then you make ignorant presumptions that are grossly oversimplified to either mock me or perhaps it is a simple illustration of your own inability to understand such things. Either way, its as irritating as the Starchild's logic. Perhaps that was the theme of Mass Effect 3, the downfall of a logical universe is stupidity.
Those choices they made to advance the plot are what writers call contrived but the starchild specifically, is a straight up fallacy. You solved the Geth & Quarian war peacefully and now organic and synthetic life co-exist peacefully. According to the Prothean DLC "From Ashes" the protheans had solved this problem too. EDI is walking proof yet again. The game thrusts all this at you logically, and then illogically tells you its impossible. Just because, and the only way to advance the story is having Shepard say "You're right". That part isn't even a fallacy it is just wrong. It is not 'wrong' in the sense of "I don't like that, it feels so wrong", it is 'wrong' in the sense of "That is factually incorrect, look I have proof". 3 parts of the same game show me "this is possible" 1 part claims "it is not possible" and I have to believe the the false claim?
Please, just stop. Your incredible belief that you understand the plot to this game better then the people who wrote it astounds me. You have no idea what the "starchild's" motivations were. It might be right. Just because you made peace with the Quarians and Geth doesn't mean that peace is permanent. More importantly, what happens when the next artificial race is made. EDI killed a whole bunch of people when she was a rogue AI. Just because she's nice now and seems to like humanity doesn't mean she couldn't be affected again. You don't have an ounce of f**king proof. You have exactly two samples, and since both that samples were out killing people five years ago, maybe you should rethink your absolute belief, especially since you're not in charge of this world. BIOWARE IS. THE PERSON WHO SAID ORGANICS AND SYNTHETICS CAN'T LIVE TOGETHER WROTE THIS WORLD. ALL OF IT. YOU STUPID TWAT.
You claimed I chose whether or not Joker and EDI hook up? The game tells me that is impossible. I could choose to peacefully resolve the war between the geth and quarians? Sorry, that choice is invalid. I destoryed the reapers you say? Well according to Arrival ME2 DLC, I just destroyed the galaxy too. Oh, but wait somehow it isn't destroyed? Well, don't worry about explaining it the fans will just eat it up, it isn't like the integrity of the story is on the line here or anything.
Man, your ego is absolutely astounding. Especially since you're ABSOLUTELY WRONG. If you don't make the quarians and geth coexist, one of the fleets basically right then. Now if you choose red side ending, the it doesn't matter, since the geth get blown up, but there's nothing to say that blue or green side ending doesn't end with Quarians and Geth coexisting. There's probably less Quarians, since a large portion of them were in Victory Fleet, but that doesn't change the outcome.
If you tell EDI not to pursue a relationship with Joker or change her programming, they won't have a relationship. And if you do, they definitely have a relationship before you go back to Earth. EDI mentions kissing Joker for good luck. Now if you kill EDI (red side), that doesn't happen, but it certainly happens on Blue and Green Sides - since you SEE THEM.
As for the Universe, it obviously didn't completely get blown up, since you see Joker and EDI on a planet, and the storyteller/little boy on a planet. So you can imply whatever the f**k you want, because you're NOT IN CHARGE. The people who are in charge said otherwise.
No, you're the one that suggested there's no risk that they could reopen the plot without altering the lore. Apparently, you think a complete rewrite to the ending doesn't seem to change anything. Since the people involved were the lead writer and the lead designer (per Patrick Weekes' little hatchet job on the PA Forums.)I would think they'd be entitled to set the ending as canon and that any alteration beyond some explanation might ruin what they were trying to say. You know, maybe a little.
The thing that is so special about Mass Effect's structure is that it has proven that gaming offers something no other media does, or even can. That is, it isn't restricted to one canon. A million different people can play the game and make a bunches of choices, and in the sequel have those choices from a separate game have impact on the content. That is huge for the industry and I have been saying it for a while now. You don't believe me?
http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/transgaming
I know what transgaming is. It's when gaming has an effect on other media. Like games that effect other games and some such. The concept's old. The Dreamcast let you play stupid little games on the VMU that gave you items in game. The Tingle Tuner is Transgaming. What does this have to do with anything?
However, you don't get to tell them what's canon. You get choices. They effect other choices. But at the end of the day, all of the choices, or lack thereof belong to Bioware. They get to say what's canon. And what you don't seem to get through your thick f**king skull is that no matter what choices or lack of choices or what Bioware says about your relationship with canon - it's still Bioware's story, so they get to tell it whatever way that want. Every choice you made was given to you from a list of choices that went to designated reactions which lead to other choices, which lead to designated reactions. Even though your choices may be different each time, you don't get to choose any that Bioware didn't offer you. So that ending is the same as everything else. It's Bioware's choices, you pick one off the menu, and you get what they tell you that you got.
It's still one canon. You create a Shepard. You save the council. You die. Cerberus resurrects you. They give you a ship. You go pick crew members. You go kill Collectors. You destroy human reaper. You destroy the relay in Batarian space. You get locked in the brig. You get reinstated. You go for help. You convince the Krogans to help the Turians. You resolve the Geth/Quarian conflict. You take out Cerberus. You go to Earth. You fight your way to the Citadel. You activate the crucible. The reaper attack is stopped.
That's it. All your little subchoices, while very valuable to me in a storytelling and character space, don't really mean anything to the plot. All those things happen whether you want them to or not.
Bioware's dictated the canon the entire time. Why should they give it to a whiny b***h like you now?
That isn't soley off the back of Mass Effect but don't think for a minute that Mass Effect didn't influence that. Canon is something that other media needs and many people have a hard time understanding that canon in games can actually be a lot more vague. The restrictions don't have to be there. Can they be there is the designer wants them to be? Sure, the previous Mass Effect games all had a canon that was used in the name of merchandising novels and comics because they needed them and everyone was OK, including myself. I don't care if you pick one of the 5 endings to be your canon, but there is NO reason why the 5 endings can't be vastly different, especially if you are going to advertise they are as Casey Hudson did. Casey knew what people wanted to hear so he told them that.
Casey told you that your choices had consequences. No matter how large or small they were, they did happen. You got exactly what he told you you would get. You might not like it, but to say that your owed something by Bioware is an absolute fallacy.
More importantly, suppose Bioware wants to have other adventures in the Mass Effect Universe. Who are you to dictate that they don't have a reason, you pompous a**hole? There's plenty of people still left, and since obviously the universe survived, it's not complicated to suggest that there could be lots of other Mass Effect novels, games, animated series, movies, etc. They could EASILY make more games. The Shepard saga is done, but they've got a universe full of preset races and interesting minor characters who may or may not be dead. To suggest that they have no reason why they may want to preserve canon is ridiculous. Quit telling them how to make their game. Ye gods, the arrogance.
Now, as my remark about how it doesn't effect the lore, Mass Effect is essentially a game about the legend who destroyed the reapers. The thing about legends is that they get embellished and altered over time. King Arthur's legend is probably on a much smaller scale then the legend itself would have you believe. He may have been a duke or something but clearly something was so great people passed the story on and now it has wizards and all kinds of stuff in it that has a bunch of contradicting versions. Legends of Emperors from China and Japan have dragons and all kinds of crazy shit in them.
Future Mass Effect titles that decide to use canon can do whatever they want by just picking an ending and calling it canon. They could also throw a nod to players by simply referencing that Shepard's tale is so popular with people and so widely told that there are many different versions of the tale. They could even site some "endings" as ridiculous, which casts validity at people who didn't get that ending and humor to those that did, that that particular ending is not believable to the population in that time despite that (according to the player) that IS how it ended. It would simply be double entendre.
One, even in King Arthur, there are still common points that appear in every translation, and every version. Guy, sword, lady in lake, knights, table, round, adventures, morgana, son, death, sword back in lake.
Which is exactly what they're trying to tell you - Shepard, ship, people, Saren, killed, resurrected, cerberus, collectors, multi-racial crew, war, reapers, crucible, reapers stopped.
The ending is a common point in EVERY RETELLING. That's why the endings aren't that different. It's a common point.
As for the "could they have wildly diversified the endings"? SURE! They could have. They chose not to. They didn't have to, and since they wanted the ending to be a common point, they chose not to. However, that doesn't make them wrong. They're allowed to do that, since THE CANON BELONGS TO THEM. You own nothing. You're a f**king player. You're owed nothing. They gave you a beginning, a middle, and an end, regardless if you liked it.
Besides, nothing is crappier then when a show decides to retcon continuity. Another good reason to diversify the ending is so you don't have to guess what happened. If there was one ending where Shepard lived, and another where he/she died, literally, Casey Hudson would be up to his neck with people trying to figure out what actually happened. More importantly, some people would be unhappy, because they assumed one, and it was the other. Multiple endings == NO ENDING.
The biggest flaw with games like Chrono Trigger is that you never know what actually happened.
However, that assumes someone
decides to hold game content to the confines of other media. They could easily just set variables for the choices in ME3 and in any sequels, do as the whole franchise has done all along and react to those choices.
See, you do it again. Your analogy is better presented by saying Burger King put bananas on my whopper regardless of the fact they don't carry them. Bioware are the ones that pulled this out of their ass for no reason anyone but you can fathom. I am simply saying "Well, you should put that on the menu, and I want the whopper that IS on the menu." (The one advertised that doesn't have bananas.) As well, you're damn right I will call them out on their logo "Have it your way" because I didn't request bananas. As a matter of fact, I ASKED if it had bananas on it and they said "no, that would be ridiculous"
Wow, you're really totally full of yourself. You assume that you know what Bioware should have written more then they do. I don't know if anything short of physical assault would ever get through to you, because you've left rational thought behind miles ago.
The reason that I used the metaphor that way is because Bioware tells you what the choices are, not vice versa. If Bioware says something, it's on the menu. If Bioware wanted you to kil the reapers ten minutes into the game and then do some parody of cheesy 90s sci-fi, they could have done it, and you can't tell them otherwise. The endings are that way because they chose them, and THEY CONTROL THE CANON. NOT YOU.
You want something that's off the menu, and when I tell you that you're being idiotic, that you can't just demand something that isn't on the menu - you're the one that demands that you get whatever choice you want because they said you had choices.
YOU DON'T GET TO DICTATE TERMS TO THEM. THEY DICTATE TERMS TO YOU. THEY CREATED IT. NOT YOU. YOU ARE NOT PART OF THIS. YOU ARE AN END USER. PLEASE STOP PRETENDING YOU ARE ANYTHING ELSE.
First, they lied. I know you aren't bothered by such practices but a lot of us are. Integrity means to hold true to something, so the artist's integrity is on the table in that regard. Changing the ending to what they promised would actually serve to redeem their integrity, not destroy it.
Second, I don't want to type out this point again considering you will probably ignore it and spout some nonsense through your jaded goggles you like to look at the issue from so here is a lazy link to an article that explains it:
http://www.gamefront.com/why-changing-mass-effects-ending-wont-compromise-art/
I read your article, and it's wrong on so many points.
Artists may choose to voluntarily alter their art based on fan reaction, first readers, editors, etc. I've changed things I've written based on feedback.
However, that choice is mine and mine alone. The choice to maintain the ending or not is Bioware and Bioware's alone. If Bioware wants to say that the ending is the way they wanted it, and nobody can say otherwise - YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO ARGUE. IT'S THEIR ART. IT'S THEIR CANON.
You can complain, but any attempt to force them to alter it is ridiculous, and even this discussion is considerably more aggressive and distasteful then any artist should be treated by their fanbase - much less the insults, PR sneak attacks, and forum flamewars they've received.
More importantly, test screeners, first readers, and beta testers are there FOR THE SOLE PURPOSES OF PROVIDING FEEDBACK. The reason they exist is so that the content creator can see how the audience reacts to parts. They give suggestions. The creator might take them. I am very particular about my first and second readers. I value their suggestions. However, once something is done - it's done. Suggesting that endusers are the same as test readers is utterly ridiculous.
You, and all your other stupid f**king overzealous fanboys are basically forcing Bioware to change their ending, to alter their writing, to alter their design at the barrel of a gun (metaphorically).
BTW, some of those cases are patently ridiculous. Bethesda changed the ending of Fallout 3 to make money with Broken Steel. It was a patently ridiculous move, a deliberate subjugation of their efforts in the name of profits, and I didn't buy it or anything else Bethesda has produced since. I actually was really happy Kingdoms of Amalur came out so I didn't have to consider purchasing Skyrim.
I like that article claims that just because a game can be patched or altered by DLC that it should be altered by patches and DLC. Gamefront and that idiot author has done the gaming world no service by making that poisonous suggestion. What an absolutely terrible article.
So much wrong with this part. First, donating to charity to get developers attention is morally low? Do you know it was your side of the debate that got things close down? Allow me to point out how.
"In particular, some people who are against the Retake ME effort have written hate mail to the charity, accusing them of supporting our petition directly."
I stood up against people hating on Hepler even on this very forum I believe. If you are going to categorize me for that, you get lumped in with this crew that threatened a charity. For someone not interested in semantics, you sure felt the need to keep that particular dig in there despite claiming that you edited you post to keep it from being to long.
Yes, it was. The point was to leverage Child's Play against Bioware. It created negative feedback, and tried to make it look like Bioware didn't care about sick kids. It wasn't a positive movement - it was a leverage play. I don't mind that sick kids get things, but it got shut down for the absolutely right reason - if Jerry and Mike continued to accept donations in the name of this, it makes them seem like they support your ideas, and as Jerry stated, he obviously DID NOT. It was an attempt to give a terrible concept some good PR, the same way someone famous might try to make a PSA or charitable appearance after being convicted of a crime.
What definition is hate mail? If you write a letter to Child's Play saying that they shouldn't be associated with RME, that's NOT HATE MAIL. They don't hate you, they hate your idea. If you call Jennifer Hepler "a fat dyke", THAT'S HATE MAIL. It's a BIG DIFFERENCE.
More importantly, I never suggested that you in particular were involved - just that people involved with your side of this argument were. There has been a nasty escalation in tone from civil discourse, to uncivil discourse, to shifty PR moves and hate speech.
It should have never gotten past civil discourse. You should be asking Bioware to be nice to you, not telling them what they owe you. Since they don't owe you anything.
Stop with the "holier than thou attitude" and approach the subject with logic. Trying to get someone to hold true to their word, is not incorrect. I know you think you have this whole "right and wrong" thing down despite humanity as a whole struggling with it since the very concept of it, but protesting someone fulfill a promise I wouldn't call "incorrect".
-I cut out the part about DLC because that can only be discussed with someone logical. I could say the same thing for the entire post (I have snipped insane assertions) but I have a shred of hope for you yet.-
Seriously? Reread that whole seven lines you just wrote, and think about the words "holier then thou". And then maybe google "hypocrisy". Ye gods.
No, I look at your posts and see someone using hyperbole to drive simple illustrations into ridiculous extremes to parody them to make them seem silly. Contrary to your egotistical view, I am not "an idiot with no perspective".
You compared a pithy little b***h session about a video game you didn't like to the Montgomery Bus Boycotts and World War 2. And I'm the one that's HYPERBOLIC? You compared Bioware to the AXIS POWERS. Do you just say things and forget you said them or literally try to project the dumb things you say onto other people?
And I didn't make fun of it, since it's not actually his quote, but Edmund Burke is most notable for commenting on the American Revolution, so one could imply that the evil is King George the 3rd and the good men are the American Colonists, which would make attempting to justify your whining and b***hing with that quote just that much more surreal.
I've noticed you've given up on the historical allusions. Maybe even you can realize how stupid you sound when somebody points out the context of the words you say.
http://consumer.laws.com/false-advertising
This violates the consumers right of consumer information and even falls under plain misleading the consumer. The FTC complaint so many people are saying is ridiculous hasn't been ruled out yet, it is merely speculated that it will fall through due to a loophole that the FTC has not addressed mmainly due to the game being software. For years software developers (And game publishers) have been fighting the FTC over what the consumer should and shouldn't be able to claim. Of course, the developers want rules that are wide open and allow for a lot of legal wiggle room for them, however, the consumer needs to become engaged in this if they want to be able to trust how games are marketed. Bioware just told bold faced lies to the public and people like you are standing there telling upset consumers that Bioware is right and they were wrong. You want to talk about dangerous precedents?
They didn't false advertise. The only thing you can even argue is that when Casey Hudson said there wouldn't be three point choices, and even then, one could easily say that an interview to a third party doesn't qualify as advertising.
The FTC claim is going to get thrown out.
Honestly, I read the whole "meteor98" list on the forums, and there's very few you can even argue about. The backstories do get resolved. He does think he gave you a great ending. You do get to decide how it comes to an end. You do decide what your story is. Decisions you made in 1 and 2 do affect 3. The ending is definitive.
The only think you can argue is the whole thing about it being the end and them deciding they can do multiple diverse endings. Even then, there's variance in the endings, and effects, so the only part you can get is the A,B,C part, and since there's really six to nine endings if you want to quibble about it.
It's not that I'm a particular fan of the quote - it's the type of thing that he should not have said, but it certainly won't hold up with the FTC or in court. So you can save the weblinks. I don't even think the usual cast of internet lawyers want to touch this one.
Go ahead, make your little jokes about how consumer rights can't be compared to the rights of blacks or the principle of freedom. Just make sure you shell out, and not complain, when game companies get a strong enough foothold they can legally sell you Gear of War 3 when they told you it was Rome:Total War and if you want to see the end, you have to buy the DLC.
Protip: I'm a smart consumer. I haven't bought a Bethesda game in four or five years because of Fallout 3. I don't support Konami or Capcom either (Konami for generally sucking, and Capcom for trolling their own audience). I didn't like it, so I didn't buy it. Content providers will meet my needs, or they'll find some other market. There's a lot of gaming companies, and I'm not that important. There are plenty of companies out there. Buy something else. If Bioware changes the ending and we flip sides, I'll just not buy anything Bioware makes again. Simple. You're the one that wants to make this a greek tragedy.
You, on the other hand, really think you are important. You really think you're fighting back against some wave of brutal injustice or that this is some sort of slippery slope. This is a game with a bad ending. There's a million games with bad endings. Just looking over at my modest game shelf - Borderlands. Horrible ending. Uncharted 2: Horrible Ending. Uncharted 3: Horrible ending. Star Ocean: TTEOT. Horrible Ending. Eternal Sonata. Horrible incomprehensible ending.
Fable 2 had a horrible ending and so did 1, so I'm sure 3 did as well. Peter Molyneux loves hyperbole. Almost every game he releases is the finest game ever created. Do I consider him some sort of deviant? NO! Would I consider a guy like Tomonobu Itagaki (former Team Ninja head), a guy who constant babbles endlessly about how his games redefine the genre a criminal? He once claimed that Dead or Alive 3 redefined the role of women as game characters. Are you kidding me? Please. None of these guys are criminals in any sense. You really need to get some perspective.
I actually like ALL OF THOSE GAMES. Eternal Sonata and Uncharted 2 would definitely be in my top 10. I'm looking forward to Borderlands 2. If I had a Vita, I'd play Golden Abyss. I'd play a ME sequel.
You desperately need to get a grip on reality. This isn't the death of gaming, or the beginning of some age of deception that you need to fight back against. It's a game with a questionably bad ending. That's all.
"Jesus, everything ends badly, otherwise it wouldn't end." -Brian Flanagan (Tom Cruise), Cocktail.
-[Whole bunch of arrogant crap]-
Trust me, I understood what I said. What you're not getting is that the community said it was bad and they wanted it changed. Bioware ignored you, because they didn't want to do it. So you got louder. Bioware ignored you. (AT THIS POINT, THIS SHOULD HAVE CEASED). So then you guys started pulling PR stunts to attempt to force them to do it. (Which is WRONG. It's INCORRECT.) Some of you guys demolished that poor woman on Reddit (Absolutely wrong, morally and right/wrong) and got the FTC involved (Absolutely wrong). Bioware has caved to your demands, but that doesn't make the community's actions correct. You had no right to escalate things past dialogue. It's mob mentality, and while they could certainly stick to their principles and not change, it doesn't make anything past socially correct dialogue acceptable.
I phrased my attack wrong. You certainly have the legal rights to be gigantic a**holes, as you've obviously shown. However, what happened was WRONG, not legally, but certainly ethically.
I point that out because it is becoming clear to me that you aren't very good at understanding parallels. You can't draw the parallel I am expressing with my quotes yet all you can seem to do with the first amendment is to draw parallels when you are looking for a contrast. Quit reading my post looking for things to dispute and start reading the message I am sending to you.
I understand what you say, idiot. I mock the parallels you draw because they're irresponsible and stupid. You're a petty, insignificant, loudmouth a**hole using big words to sound important while you guys attempt to browbeat a company into doing what you want. You're certainly not Dwight Eisenhower or George Washington or Martin Luther King, and any attempt you make to draw parallels of yourself, or your bulls**t "struggle" against the "tyranny" of Bioware is going to be met with scorn and ridicule. You're a tiny thing with a tiny complaint trying to connect it to people who fought against genuine evils and social injustices.
You're a dooshebag who got a game you didn't like.
Haha, I did write better endings in the ninth grade you nincompoop. That's why I said it. It is actually coherent with the rest of the story and all of the things that resolve at the end of the story are formed naturally without contrivity. Believe me, I know about writing stories. Bioware aren't "Gods of Writing". I can imagine they must seem that way to you, as your scope seems very narrow. The end of the story is always the hardest to do even assuming you know how you want to end it. The reason why is because going into the story your view into the story, as the writer, explores much more than your audience ever will. So you have all these loose ends begin to spread out and some can be left alone but the further the get spread out the harder it is to bring them all back together. I have rewritten half of a story just to end the damned thing properly and I even had to make sacrifices to the "ending I really wanted" just to do that.
Not to knock you off your high horse, but judging from your writing here, you barely made it out of the ninth grade. The ending was coherent. I provided an interpretation consistent with the story and the dialogue given. Just because you don't understand high school level philosophy or sociology doesn't mean everyone else does not.
More importantly, while I'm sure you've done well with your high school litmag, you've never written professionally, or for an interactive medium. Considering as I surmised earlier, the script for Mass Effect is probably closer to three thousand pages then anything, I doubt you've ever even considered writing on such a scale. More importantly, when you write at such a scale, and you're not writing in a vacuum, it's very difficult to justify certain things.
When you sacrificed half your story...it was what? Two pages? Ten? Mass Effect 3 would have had to have sacrificed more text then the entirety of War and Peace (It's a big book, you'll read it in college someday. Just trust me on this.) Plus, there's animations, FMVs, voice acting, mocaps that may or may not be already done. Oh yeah, and a budget you have to keep. Programmers who haven't seen their families in weeks that suddenly you want to add three more months of crunch? And you say I have a narrow scope!
You apparently think you are a shining example, throwing away a few pages of a short story and rewriting. You're nothing. You have no idea.
More importantly, you had what...five characters? Eight? There were DOZENS of characters in ME. All of them had plotlines. All of them needed resolution.
You self-indulgent a**hole. I thought comparing yourself to Eisenhower was stupid - comparing your piddly twenty page short story rewrite to ME3 is absolutely insane. Does your ego come with a handle for convenient carrying?
Mass Effect essentially painted itself into a corner with the played up "unstoppability" of the reapers. Had they not brought in the crucible, it is possible people may have felt like the reapers weren't that hard to defeat and the drama would have been seen as overplayed. Believe it or not, that would be better than what we got. What we got was actually worse than a McGuffin that you may see people refer to over the ending. We got a McGuffin that tried to explain itself needlessly by contradicting facts pertaining to the story's universe. There is no word for how dumb that is. I mean, it seriously is enough for ANY writer to scratch their head and ask "Why would you do that?". It's bad enough to need to use a McGuffin, but to then go on to needlessly explain it contrary to the story you already told... what the hell would you do that for? It's like saying your favorite color is "jump". This McGuffin is by the terms of a McGuffin "so bad, it isn't really even a McGuffin anymore".
Wow. You learned a literally term. Congratulations.
Again, you assume you know more about ME3 then the writers themselves. One of the overwhelming themes I think was in the game was the inevitability of death when facing a superior enemy. More then one game has presented an "invincible" enemy that was easily defeated. The Reapers killed billions of people in this game. Almost every Batarian is now dead or a cannibal. You knew coming in that a lot of people were going to die. I think one of the reasons for the mcguffin was that they wanted it understood that this was a desperate strategy that under every circumstance wasn't going to end particularly well for the people involved.
However, you seem to assume again that it saying that synthetics and organics can't coexist is some immutable fact because the Geth and the Quarians stopped shooting each other for two whole days, and the Luna VI started being nice instead of killing people. Since you don't know the facts, you can't assume the starchild is being contradictory.
BTW, just to show you how smart Bioware is, they had the plot to 3 in one. Go fire a copy of one, and visit planet Klencory in the Keplan Verge. (It's there in 2 as well. )
-Skipping a bunch. We covered this earlier.-
The rest of your post is you standing on your high horse talking down to me about stuff you know nothing about. My whole triumph here was getting you to admit how ignorant you are on this topic due to that last quote. That is why I didn't post Bioware quotes until now. Consider how long you made this post and then consider how long it would have taken to type in "Bioware lies" into google and hit "I'm feeling lucky". I mean, dude, its the first link. The first link.
