BioWare Says Farewell With Mass Effect 3: Citadel and Reckoning

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Huh. I didn't notice I'd accidentally signed into BSN.

Blachman201:

The Ubermensch:

-snip-

Yeah, I very much agree the end of the Evangelion TV series was bad. I can sort of see what Gainax was going for with those last two episodes, but that doesn't excuse the lackluster execution and stopping the plot dead in its tracks.

But I will defend End of Evangelion, to, well, the end. It at least had the common courtesy to follow up on the series' foreshadowing, themes, and plot threads, and stuck with them to the bitter end. That is a lot more than I can say for Mass Effect.

I actually liked the original 25 and 26, EOE is better, but original instumentality, considering they had NO money to make it... Look don't get me wrong; I love it, ME was going for the same thing "an ambiguous ending that everyone is going to take something different away from". It thematically fit into NGE, it didn't in ME.

But thats not my point. My point is if the ME fandom keeps going this way they will end up with Rebuild. Now for what ever reason I'm okay with Anno gratifying himself in front of me because it has some high level irony to it; But not Bioware.

The Ubermensch:

I actually liked the original 25 and 26, EOE is better, but original instumentality, considering they had NO money to make it... Look don't get me wrong; I love it, ME was going for the same thing "an ambiguous ending that everyone is going to take something different away from". It thematically fit into NGE, it didn't in ME.

But thats not my point. My point is if the ME fandom keeps going this way they will end up with Rebuild. Now for what ever reason I'm okay with Anno gratifying himself in front of me because it has some high level irony to it; But not Bioware.

I don't know. A reboot might be the most likely direction Mass Effect goes in.

If Bioware Montreal doesn't have enough of a mess on their hands by picking up the pieces after Mass Effect 3, they are sure to have one afterwards. Stepping on some fans' toes no matter what they do just seems unavoidable at this point, and the easiest way for them to please EA and preventing to anger too many of the remaining fans, just seems to be a reboot.

Blachman201:

I don't know. A reboot might be the most likely direction Mass Effect goes in.

If Bioware Montreal doesn't have enough of a mess on their hands by picking up the pieces after Mass Effect 3, they are sure to have one afterwards. Stepping on some fans' toes no matter what they do just seems unavoidable at this point, and the easiest way for them to please EA and preventing to anger too many of the remaining fans, just seems to be a reboot.

Oh, I thought bioware already said goodbye with the original ending. Or at least goodbye to any motivation I had in their franchises as I know they will end in the most dissapointing way imaginable no matter how invested you get in their series. Sorry, still bitter. Can't help myself.

Hey, if they were going to end it in such a way they should of NEVER made it so emotionally involving. They brought it on themselves. At least now I save myself from ever paying 12$ for hour long garbage bioware dlc again. Goodbye ME3, good riddance.

Wrex died in my ME1 save file. Does that mean I have to hang out with Wreav?

The:
Wrex died in my ME1 save file. Does that mean I have to hang out with Wreav?

Now I'm picturing a really somber after-party for those who got half of their crew killed.

So this DLC will basically be Egoraptor's ending?

Kermi:
This only remotely begins to work if the ending was objectively bad, and not just something that didn't meet the unreasonable expectations of millions of very different people.

Since you prefer to invent ways to be miserable than actually contend with superfluous details like logic and fact, I'm going to bow out of this conversation. You win. The game was terrible and Bioware should burn in hell for it. Yay! We made a difference!

It was not hype, it was trust. Bioware made quality works before and the press release (and presentations of Armando Troisi) pointed out that the last game would branch out as a result of "your choices matter". It didnt happen. They couldnt even make a proper epilogue like Dragon Age Origins did for every choice you did UNTIL the Extended Cut came (and DAO was a game from 2009 up to standars of the industry)

Its not invented when even the developers can keep a single fact right:

So tell me, where is YOUR version of the story that points out that we this "minority" made up the facts? here, let me show you in this other video the dates and the quotes from the developers at (14:40 to 18:28):

As for the hype arguement, skip to 1:05:00.

For once, i would like ot hear a GOOD argument on why it isnt an objectively bad ending. That doesnt resort to Ad Hominens to dismiss the complainer or the "mystical minority".

Archangel357:

Oh boo hoo.

Seriously, at this point, I want to slap everybody who uses the word "ending"; bell end, more like.

I mean, we all know how The Godfather or Star Wars end, right? Still, would that preclude any possible enjoyment one cound gain from, say, a spin-off about Michael Corleone's time in the war, or, you know, the entire pre-Jedi expanded universe? Vader dies at the end, spoiler alert; does that make Shadows of the Empire irrelevant? Are the millions of people who enjoy The Clone Wars stupid because we have all seen the end of Revenge of the Sith? I mean, it's just some manipulative crap to give us characters to care about, leading up to an ending we all know, right?

It doesnt make Shadows of the Empire irrelevant because Vader's death was build up to its logical conclusion. Its the point of the whole journey. I think the best way to sum it up is by looking at Star Wars and Mass Effect like part of the Epic Literature, so you can understand why the later failed:

http://drayfish.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/its-not-just-the-journey-mass-effect-3-and-why-endings-matter/

Bioware is know for making THAT kind of games since they were first created, the fans are just asking for consistency that Bioware brought up in the first place. To tie up all the loose ends like they SAID they would.

I dont see why complaining about it is a problem. Hell, right now, critics and consumers are complainig abut Aliens: Colonial Marines doing the same thing as BW did.

Anyone else find it awkward to play DLC set some time in the middle of the game like a year after beating it? The final farewell should have been the game's actual ending, not some smaller mission set before it. Though if people say it's good I'll still probably buy it.

Blachman201:

Kermi:
No, you see, you're supposed to remember the good things and let go of the bad things. People reveling in their own misery because they didn't like the end of the game, that's like forgetting what a great person your grandma was just because you cried at her funeral.

If you really want to go with that metaphor, then a more an accurate one would that you have this grandmother with whom you have shared many found memories, but the last time she ever spoke to you, was when she called you to her side by on her deathbed, and proceed to calling you a bastard, a screw-up, and the worst disappointment in her life, before passing on without ever giving any reasons why she would say such things. Don't you think it would be hard to view those fond memories in the same way?

You're taking it way to the opposite extreme, it's more like if grandma called you to her side and her final words were something lame like "don't forget to feed my cat" and then dies leaving you feeling underwhelmed, but then months later you find a letter from her with a few extra parting words to help give a little more closure but by then you hardly care anymore.

edit: You can then choose to destroy her cat, control her cat, or... uh nevermind.

Lily Venus:

- It's called the Catalyst. You were told exactly what its role would be in the story, and it fulfills the role you were told it would fulfill. You even get dialogue hinting at the existence of a creator of the Reapers. And it's far from a "main antagonist", given that the Catalyst never directly opposes you and willingly helps you stop the Reaper cycles, even if it involves means that it does not approve of itself. Calling it a different name doesn't magically undo foreshadowing.

No. You were told that The Catalyst is needed to complete The Crusible, not that the antagonist (the collective intelligence of all Reapers and who controls them), that somehow is in The Citadel, is needed.

Here is Vendetta explaining at 0:54 that: "At some point, it is difficult to input when, the Crusible plans were
adapted to include the use of The Catalyst (The Citadel)"

The Citadel was never part of the plan, it was just added later to take adventaje of it. So "The Catalyst" as he refers himself to (AKA Star Child, Casper The Genocidal Ghost, Godchild), was never The Catalyst to begin with. He is only the Catalyst now because the new design demands The Citadel to be part of The Crusible, meaning that he, the Godchild, was never created with the express function of being The Catalyst. He is instead just an AI that was created a long time ago that, somehow, happens to be part of The Citadel and that somehow just happens to be the antagonist and the one who control the Reapers too.

The 1 foreshadowing of "The Reapers are not in control of the cycle" only means that something is controlling them. It takes a giant leap in logic to say: "The one who controls them IS The Citadel, and The Citadel is The Catalyst. Therefore it is The Catalyst" but again, that is because it just happens to be there IN The Citadel, not because he was part of the design all along, or that he nessesary at all, to the point that even he says "The Crusible changed me. Created new possilibities, but i cant make them happen"

So, if he isnt nessesary then why is it here? Its like The Appendix of a human body, we dont know why the body even NEEDS this thing if it doesnt do anything. In this case, The Body (The Citadel that is The Catalyst as Vendetta says it is) is the home of The Appendix (the Godchild), but somehow The Appendix calls himself "The Body" even when its just a PART of The Body (The Godchild calling himself The Catalyst even when The Citadel IS the Catalyst)

No sane person (human or not) would waste time in designing a part of a weapon that doesnt do anything useful. And that is basically what this Godchild is, but somehow he refers itself as The Catalyst even when its only a technicality that serves no function for him or anyone.

Also, as expected from you, you a "think" that people mean Main Antagonist as: "The guy that its always on your nerves. The guy that antagonises you like the "trolls" on the forums". But sadly, that is the same logic that a Twilight fangirls would use. Why? well, because these people, when defending Bella against the argument of "she is not a strong female lead" they respond with: "That is pure lies!! she has super vampire strenght. Therefore she IS a strong female lead"

You are taking the argument literaly instead of thinking the context or the meaning.

"The Antagonist" is, by definition of every story ever written EVER, the thematically and ideologically opposite of "The Protagonist" OR the opposite theme or idea of what your story is about.

If, for example, Final Fantasy VI is about the celebration of life, as reflected by every main character motivation to keep going in their lives even after the world is destroyed (there is no single protagonist because everyone do their part), then the opposite is the meaningless of life as reflected by Kefka.

For Bioshock, it is reflected in the arc words of "A man chooses. A slave obeys". And the game also takes adventaje of the political overtones to demostrate the both extremes of each ideology with Andrew Ryan and Fontaine. Who by the way, were antagonist to each other in every sense of the word.

Lawful Good Vs Chaotic Evil
Vorlon Vs Shadows

The Godchild is the antagonist thematically and ideologically, even if he doesnt antagonise you directly. Hell, most famous and memorable villains end up being the ones that manipulate everyone into thinking that HE is a friend of them, while hidding their true motivations that ultimatelly reflect the opposite of the message of the story.

But sadly, as much as you want to admit, since Godchild is the collective intelligence of all Reapers and controls them, that means that when we were talking with Sovereing and Harbinger, who antagonised us in a more traditional way by taunting us and rambling about how superior they are, it means that Godchild was there talking through them since they are part of him. Therefore, he DID antagonise us, but played it safe when we meet him in the ending. If he controlled the Reapers but wasnt talking through them, then he could have forced Sovereing and Harbinger to speak the truth directly instead of going on about how "Independant, free of all weakness" they are, the plan of The Godchild would have been revealed in ME1 inmediatelly instead of the last hour.

- Mass Effect always contained the theme of organics vs. synthetics/created vs. creators, and other themes came up mere minutes before meeting the Catalyst (Anderson and the Illusive Man). It's ending-bashers who want people to believe that you're expected to agree with one character's opinion

Wrong. You took the wrong complain and twisted it, as expected. The complain is the "Absolutism" of The Catalyst when refering to this conflict.

"The Created WILL ALWAYS rebel against their creators"
"Without us to stop it, synthetics WILL destroy ALL organics"

Absolutism is explained futher in here at 11:39 :

The conflict is there, but never happens the way The Catalyst mentions it. The Geth only rebelled when the organics Quarians attacked FIRST. And when the Quarians left, the Geth didnt went apeshit and starter planning the doom of organics, they just went in isolation until Sovereing convinced them years later.

Even in ME3, you see in the Geth VR machine how the Geth were completely innocent on the conflict with their organic creators.

And do not forget that you CAN make peace between Quarians and Geth to the point that they fight the Reapers together. Thus proving the Godchild wrong that it doesnt ALWAYS happen. Most synthetic uprising that happened before were triggered by the organics, and were easily resolved by organics, like the Rogue VI on the Moon:
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/UNC:_Rogue_VI

And of course, the Geth conflict in ME3, the only way that they could have EVER won against their organic creators is by uploading the code of the Reapers so they become AS smart as they when they were controlled by the Reapers. Meaning that, once again, it was Reaper intervention that fucked everything thing up. If the Geth were by themselves without the upgrades, the Quarians just wipe them out without problems, and proving the Godchild wrong that the Reapers arent needed to "protect and preserve" organics because they can do just fine without them.

Godchild has to show evidence of this even ALWAYS happening, or else he is just making shit up. Kinda like how he sees the Destroy ending as not a permanent solution but somehow Synthesis IS, even when the new race of synthetised people could STILL make Synthetics as always if they find an obstacle in their lives that they cant surpass or need synthetics for.

The problem is not solved either way, and a machine that has lived for almost an eternity doesnt notice this glaring problem? or he is actually lying to us so they can survive at all cost either with Control or Synthesis??

JellySlimerMan:

- Mass Effect always contained the theme of organics vs. synthetics/created vs. creators, and other themes came up mere minutes before meeting the Catalyst (Anderson and the Illusive Man). It's ending-bashers who want people to believe that you're expected to agree with one character's opinion

Wrong. You took the wrong complain and twisted it, as expected. The complain is the "Absolutism" of The Catalyst when refering to this conflict.

"The Created WILL ALWAYS rebel against their creators"
"Without us to stop it, synthetics WILL destroy ALL organics"

Absolutism is explained futher in here at 11:39 :

The conflict is there, but never happens the way The Catalyst mentions it. The Geth only rebelled when the organics Quarians attacked FIRST. And when the Quarians left, the Geth didnt went apeshit and starter planning the doom of organics, they just went in isolation until Sovereing convinced them years later.

Even in ME3, you see in the Geth VR machine how the Geth were completely innocent on the conflict with their organic creators.

And do not forget that you CAN make peace between Quarians and Geth to the point that they fight the Reapers together. Thus proving the Godchild wrong that it doesnt ALWAYS happen. Most synthetic uprising that happened before were triggered by the organics, and were easily resolved by organics, like the Rogue VI on the Moon:
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/UNC:_Rogue_VI

And of course, the Geth conflict in ME3, the only way that they could have EVER won against their organic creators is by uploading the code of the Reapers so they become AS smart as they when they were controlled by the Reapers. Meaning that, once again, it was Reaper intervention that fucked everything thing up. If the Geth were by themselves without the upgrades, the Quarians just wipe them out without problems, and proving the Godchild wrong that the Reapers arent needed to "protect and preserve" organics because they can do just fine without them.

Godchild has to show evidence of this even ALWAYS happening, or else he is just making shit up. Kinda like how he sees the Destroy ending as not a permanent solution but somehow Synthesis IS, even when the new race of synthetised people could STILL make Synthetics as always if they find an obstacle in their lives that they cant surpass or need synthetics for.

The problem is not solved either way, and a machine that has lived for almost an eternity doesnt notice this glaring problem? or he is actually lying to us so they can survive at all cost either with Control or Synthesis??

Big wall of text that was confusing to read and seemed to trip up all over its self in the first half so not really going to talk about that. But I will talk about the second part referring to Organic vs Synthetic.

The argument that the Geth/Quarian peace proves the catalyst wrong is just not valid. It does not matter what the Quarians did to the Geth or that they shot first, in the end the fact remains that the Geth rebelled against their creators. That is enough to mark of that check box.

So you achieved peace between the two belligerents? So what, we have no idea if the peace achieved in ME3 will be lasting or not. The fact that it occurred at all is a result of Shepards direct involvement. The Intelligence already said that Shepard changed the variables so it only goes to illustrate that this peace is the exception not the rule. Prior to the involvement of the Reapers in Geth affairs no manned ship ever returned from their space, thats 300 years of killing anyone who tried to even communicate with them. The only reason the Geth got in touch with Shepard was because he sent Sovvy packing and he interested them.

Would the Geth have initiated offensive actions against organic life at some later date with out the Reapers popping up? Well considering the hostility against them by the other organic threats it is most likely, they may be acting out of self preservation but the end result would probably be the same ie the destruction of organics by synthetics. The motivations of the attacks are irrelevant as the end result is the same.

As to why synthesis works to alleviate the issue of Organic vs Synthetic as compared to destroy, its because it closes the gap that the synthetics have over organics. Synthetics are able to operate in a more diverse set of environmental conditions, are able to communicate faster and do not suffer for fatigue. Synthesis offers these advantages to organics ensuring that in the event of a bust up between the two no one side gains the upper hand. Synthesis also allows synthetics to better understand the irrationality of organics, experience empathy and other organic emotions which would allow them to evolve without coming across as a clear and present threat to organics (to simplify they will understand why that park would be important to organics despite it being a sub optimal use of space). Destroy just puts an end to the current problem but future synthetics will still have the upper hand.

Lily Venus:

I've seen ending-bashers "showing" the ending. I've even seen a video comparing the endings. And having seen the different endings, I know it was blatantly edited to remove distinct scenes and splice in parts of the other endings into the other options or lower EMS endings (not to mention being at such a low resolution that making out the differences would be more difficult).

Here is an idea for you: Prove it.

Get your ass into making a video, WITHOUT edits, showing:
-Your current EMS
-Each War Asset. Even the ones applied to the Crusible if they ACTUALLY affect the ending in any way.
-To make more easy to see if you did edits on purpose, you have to record your game with a video camera near the TV to show us, the filthy liers, the unfatomable true of your words with un-altered evidence.

Is either that or picking up one of the hundred of videos on Youtube that isnt "edited" as you said they are. Its the ONLY way to demostrate that there is a conspiracy of "ending-bashers" out to make every single video on of ME3 edited to their purposes.

- they are making claims and attacks that they know are false, based on later stating the a different version contradictory to their previous arguments (I've even had ending-bashers contradict attacks they've made in their very next sentence)

So they are doing just like you. You know, contradicting yourself with every sentense and post. Like when you said that The Catalyst ISNT a Reaper, and then in another post you bash people by saying that Refusal ending is the retarded ending for people who cant make choices. Then, you go ahead and undo your own post by quoting The Catalyst "SO BE IT!" in a Reaper voice, after Shep refuses him.

Gee Catalyst, for someone who ISNT a Reaper, you sound a lot like a Reaper with that tone of condesention and hatred. I was under the impresion that you were just a monotone AI like Vendetta or Vigil that was made to assist the person who used the Crusible, but instead you are very emotional for rejecting your choices that are suspiciously like the Reaper methods. If i didnt know any better, i would have said that, for someone who is there to help me, you didnt say: "I am afraid that there is nothing i could do if those options arent good enough" you sound more like "HOW DARE YOU FOR NOT FALLING INTO MY TRAP!"

Yep, totally not a Reaper.

Wait, didnt i had a converzation with Leviathan about The Catalyst being that AI that created the Reapers? must be my imagination.

saleem:

Big wall of text that was confusing to read and seemed to trip up all over its self in the first half so not really going to talk about that. But I will talk about the second part referring to Organic vs Synthetic.

Simple. Lily says that the foreshadowing of Vendetta is enough to say that The Catalyst is behind the Reapers AND that he is just doing what it was intended by desing all along, and therefore we have no reason to complain.

But all Vendetta says is that something is controlling the Reapers, that The Citadel is The Catalyst, and that this was not part of the original design and The Citadel as The Catalyst was added later.

This means that The Godchild calling itself The Catalyst makes no sense except on a more "tecnical" level. As in, since The Citadel is part of him, and The Citadel is The Catalyst, The Godchild thinks he is The Catalyst. If that was remotely true all along, then he could have control over the options of The Crusible because, after all, isnt he PART of the design? he could have allowed only Synthesis and remove the other 2 endings from the equation because that is the ideal solution and the other 2 are shit. But he was never part of The Crusible design, The Citadel was. That is why i call him The Appendix, he is part of the body but that doesnt make him the WHOLE body.

He isnt part of the design, he is just an observer, something extra. Therefore, his function was never foreshadowed at all because he is an external factor without power over The Crusible or The Catalyst. But he does control the Reapers though.

The argument that the Geth/Quarian peace proves the catalyst wrong is just not valid. It does not matter what the Quarians did to the Geth or that they shot first, in the end the fact remains that the Geth rebelled against their creators. That is enough to mark of that check box.

It defies probability, a concept that a MACHINE should know better than anyone else. If they are that paranoid about just the 0.0000000000000000001% chance of something happening, then why not take it even further? why not stay in the galaxy and close to planets because (lets say for the sake of argument) there is 0.019019019% chance that organic life may become extinct before even reaching civilization stage, because of cosmic rays, volcanos, polar shifts and meteorites hitting the planet. So they harvest them right now and then, just to be sure.

But wait!! organics create synthetics that dont have sentience but can still kill them. Sort off like how a computer may give you electricity if it is badly built and even explode. Does that mean that the Reapers will take this impossibly low chance seriously and harvest everyone just in case?

So you achieved peace between the two belligerents? So what, we have no idea if the peace achieved in ME3 will be lasting or not. The fact that it occurred at all is a result of Shepards direct involvement. The Intelligence already said that Shepard changed the variables so it only goes to illustrate that this peace is the exception not the rule.

Shepard didnt change the variables nor was the Geth Quarian conflict resolution. It was The Crusible docking with The Citadel that made the changing of the variables. Even The Catalyst (i am going to refer to it as Godchild from now on) mentions it regardless if you solved it or not.

Nevermind that even if the variables have changed and the Godchild tells you that is looking for a new solution, he STILL blows up The Crusible if you wait too long (in "The Crusible has been destroyed" ending), and he STILL uses the same old solutions after you reject him even after admiting that the old solutions dont work anymore.

Prior to the involvement of the Reapers in Geth affairs no manned ship ever returned from their space, thats 300 years of killing anyone who tried to even communicate with them. The only reason the Geth got in touch with Shepard was because he sent Sovvy packing and he interested them.

So were the Geth lying or is this another Retcon? In ME2, Legion mentions that the Geth DO want to understand organics, but it also says that it has nothing to do with their desire of coexistance. They accept organics even if they understand them or not. Understanding was never the problem, nor something that all synthetics want as Godchild says.

Would the Geth have initiated offensive actions against organic life at some later date with out the Reapers popping up? Well considering the hostility against them by the other organic threats it is most likely, they may be acting out of self preservation but the end result would probably be the same ie the destruction of organics by synthetics. The motivations of the attacks are irrelevant as the end result is the same.

It is still faulty and lazy logic even for a machine. They may as well practice this trope:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AllCrimesAreEqual

They dont care HOW it happens and the reasons for it, they only care that it HAPPENS. That makes them useless as guardians. It makes faulty logic like the one of the Control ending even worse, remember that? the "needs of the many outweights the needs of the few" kind of speech? what happens if the many (or the mayority), over certain dispute, are The Krogan, who reproduce superfast and are war lovers? if they outnumber the Salarians, does that mean that The Reapers will subjugate the Salarians to the will of the many Krogans?

As to why synthesis works to alleviate the issue of Organic vs Synthetic as compared to destroy, its because it closes the gap that the synthetics have over organics. Synthetics are able to operate in a more diverse set of environmental conditions, are able to communicate faster and do not suffer for fatigue. Synthesis offers these advantages to organics ensuring that in the event of a bust up between the two no one side gains the upper hand. Synthesis also allows synthetics to better understand the irrationality of organics, experience empathy and other organic emotions which would allow them to evolve without coming across as a clear and present threat to organics (to simplify they will understand why that park would be important to organics despite it being a sub optimal use of space). Destroy just puts an end to the current problem but future synthetics will still have the upper hand.

How is understanding the other side going to literaly STOP the Synthetics from destroying organics? i can understand, for example, the motives of my enemy as for why is he trying to conquer my lands, but that doesnt mean i will not fight him when he comes to take my lands.

What about new life that evolves from a bacteria to a civilization after millions of years? will it be organic or the new mixed race? wont the new race become the new "Synthetic" to this new life?

Hell, what happens to the Leviathans? would they benefit from this? would we, the new race of cyborg/husk/synthetised people be strong enough as a Leviathan? i doubt that our upgrades would be enough to defeat them or that it would make us immune to their own brand of indoctrination. I guess that we have to fight war agaisnt them if they dont cooperate, maybe we could even..............build synthetics to help us fight them. And, you know, the life on other galaxies because sooner or later there must be organic/synthetic life in those places, no? the synthesis beam didnt reach them after all.

See the problem now? In one case, they take this extremely low % chance and make it a serious bussiness, and the other take this extremely inefficient solution to a problem that applies to all life in the universe, and consider it a success.

Worse of all, The Catalyst as to yet tell us why forcefully preserving life in Reaper form is better than:
1)Giving biological upgrades to the organics instead of technology to fight Synthetics
2)Make organics consider other paths of science away from solutions that Synthetic may solve (you know, like the MASS EFFECT technology that Reapers leave behind and that might lead to Organics making Synthetics even FASTER?)
3)Blowing up synthetics as soon they appear (instead of allying with them, just wipe the Geth out, Sovereing)
4)Become a "Galactic Body Disposal Service". You want preserve life? then just pick up the bodies fresh from the conflicted races and preserve the mind and body before it becomes fully rotten.
5)If all that fail, just become techno dictators permanently and impose order by being vigilant over Organics CONSTANTLY. And blowing up every tecnology that leads to synthetics ASAP. I doubt that the Organics would be able to forcefully dissagree with The Reapers at that stage.

"Shepard! The Reapers are coming!"

"I know!"

"Let's go to the arcade and play some pinball!"

"Yeah!"

I don't know, but the thought of these extra Citadel additions is both awesome... and a bit humorous. Leviathan and, to an extent, Omega made some sense, since Shepard had to go research the Reapers or gain allies to fight the Reapers, but while I can understand foiling a conspiracy that I'm assuming wants Shepard dead (because, you know, galactic annihilation is so therapeutic), the arcade and the living quarters are... far less so. Exactly what do you say to the guy you buy furniture from after Cerberus almost takes over the Citadel?

Shepard: I'd like to buy some furniture.

A Vorcha (because why don't we have Vorcha salesmen?): You! Shepard! Why are you buying furniture from me?

Shepard: Because I'd like to buy some furniture for my living quarters.

A Vorcha: The Cerberus humans came in and almost took over the Citadel! One of their insane Biotics nearly gave me a lobotomy with my own sign, and you're more concerned about what damn couch you relax and play video games on?!

Shepard: Yes. Can I buy some furniture?

A Vorcha: Sure. Here's a look at my wares.

Still buying it, this is really what I wanted. Hate me now, I'mma buy this when it comes out.

JellySlimerMan:

Simple. Lily says that the foreshadowing of Vendetta is enough to say that The Catalyst is behind the Reapers AND that he is just doing what it was intended by desing all along, and therefore we have no reason to complain.

But all Vendetta says is that something is controlling the Reapers, that The Citadel is The Catalyst, and that this was not part of the original design and The Citadel as The Catalyst was added later.

This means that The Godchild calling itself The Catalyst makes no sense except on a more "tecnical" level. As in, since The Citadel is part of him, and The Citadel is The Catalyst, The Godchild thinks he is The Catalyst. If that was remotely true all along, then he could have control over the options of The Crusible because, after all, isnt he PART of the design? he could have allowed only Synthesis and remove the other 2 endings from the equation because that is the ideal solution and the other 2 are shit. But he was never part of The Crusible design, The Citadel was. That is why i call him The Appendix, he is part of the body but that doesnt make him the WHOLE body.

He isnt part of the design, he is just an observer, something extra. Therefore, his function was never foreshadowed at all because he is an external factor without power over The Crusible or The Catalyst. But he does control the Reapers though.

It definitely helps if you consider the Citadel and the Intelligence to be one and the same. One thing we need to remember is that the Intelligence's physical connection to its body was severed by the Protheans via their reprogramming of the Keepers, there are parallels here in EDI who was shackled in ME2 and unable to do anything on the Normandy that she wasnt authorized to. If we equate the two as being one then Vendetta's statements still hold true.

As for the Intelligence not limiting your choices well again if its connection to its physical form (the Citadel) was severed then there really is nothing he CAN do - except talk to you of course and try to explain what options are available to you. That would certainly explain why he needs Shepard to make the choice. The choices available to you are dependent on what upgrades you were able to pack into the Crucible

JellySlimerMan:

It defies probability, a concept that a MACHINE should know better than anyone else. If they are that paranoid about just the 0.0000000000000000001% chance of something happening, then why not take it even further? why not stay in the galaxy and close to planets because (lets say for the sake of argument) there is 0.019019019% chance that organic life may become extinct before even reaching civilization stage, because of cosmic rays, volcanos, polar shifts and meteorites hitting the planet. So they harvest them right now and then, just to be sure.

But wait!! organics create synthetics that dont have sentience but can still kill them. Sort off like how a computer may give you electricity if it is badly built and even explode. Does that mean that the Reapers will take this impossibly low chance seriously and harvest everyone just in case?

Except in this case the machine has seen the cycle repeat itself over and over again. The whole point behind its creation was that the Leviathans kept having to deal with their tributaries being wiped out by AI's that they developed. We dont know how long the Intelligence was running before it decided on the reaper course of action so it is entirely possible that it saw the rise and fall of civilisations as a direct result of AI creation occur repeatedly.

There is no reason to harvest immature civilisations nor is there any reason to protect them from an exploding PC lol, the whole purpose of the cycle was to prevent the extinction of organic life as a whole not act as benevolent guardians and protectors to individual species. If a race kicks the bucket in between cycles then thats their tough luck, there is no threat to the existence of organics in the grand scheme of things. If an advanced civilisation created a hostile AI and lost in an armed conflict against it any less advanced races would undoubtedly get steam rolled into oblivion when they eventually start expanding in search of resources - that is what the Intelligence and by extension the Reapers are preventing.

By culling advanced civilisations the Reapers are actually giving space to younger civilisations and preventing technological developments from exceeding a point which they can control.

JellySlimerMan:

Shepard didnt change the variables nor was the Geth Quarian conflict resolution. It was The Crusible docking with The Citadel that made the changing of the variables. Even The Catalyst (i am going to refer to it as Godchild from now on) mentions it regardless if you solved it or not.

Nevermind that even if the variables have changed and the Godchild tells you that is looking for a new solution, he STILL blows up The Crusible if you wait too long (in "The Crusible has been destroyed" ending), and he STILL uses the same old solutions after you reject him even after admiting that the old solutions dont work anymore.

No the Intelligence didnt do anything to the Crucible, once you reach the rotunda where you confront TIM, Hackett tells you in no uncertain terms that they cant hold the Reapers for long. The Crucible is destroyed by the Reapers out in space not from within - I draw this conclusion based on the fact that the Intelligence does not seem to have direct control over the individual Reapers but rather acts more like a manager compiling data and determining overall strategic goals. The reapers seem to be autonomous and capable of making individual tactical decisions without need of instruction from the Intelligence. The Intelligence cant do anything about it you refuse to choose, that decision forces it to fall back on its old flawed solution as it needs you to start the process which you wont do.

JellySlimerMan:

So were the Geth lying or is this another Retcon? In ME2, Legion mentions that the Geth DO want to understand organics, but it also says that it has nothing to do with their desire of coexistance. They accept organics even if they understand them or not. Understanding was never the problem, nor something that all synthetics want as Godchild says.

The Geth want to understand Organics as of ME2, with the Geth collective effectively split they are faced with a prospect previously unknown to them division in the ranks and failure to adhere to consensus. The Heretic Geth have also developed a religion that revolves around the Reapers. Prior to the Reaper intervention they were happy to stick in their own corner of the universe.

However as I mentioned before they have shown that they will react violently when their survival is threatened. As illustrated in the Rannoch arc when the Quarians amassed a huge warfleet that threatened the Geth collective the were rethinking their decision to let them survive and were considering wiping them out. In fact if you choose to support the Geth on Rannoch without the required prereqs they do exactly that. If it werent for the Reapers you can bet your bottom dollar that the rest of the Citadel fleet would move to exterminate the Geth out of fear that the Geth would do the same to them. That in turn would trigger a war of extermination as the Geths own experiences have taught them you cannot bloody an opponent and let them escape without expecting some sort of retaliation down the road.

JellySlimerMan:

It is still faulty and lazy logic even for a machine. They may as well practice this trope:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AllCrimesAreEqual

They dont care HOW it happens and the reasons for it, they only care that it HAPPENS. That makes them useless as guardians. It makes faulty logic like the one of the Control ending even worse, remember that? the "needs of the many outweights the needs of the few" kind of speech? what happens if the many (or the mayority), over certain dispute, are The Krogan, who reproduce superfast and are war lovers? if they outnumber the Salarians, does that mean that The Reapers will subjugate the Salarians to the will of the many Krogans?

Why are you assuming that the Reapers are guardians, they arent. The reapers are merely preventing galaxy wide extinction at the hands of runaway AI's. The control ending is Shepard taking the role of the intelligence and trying his hand at the balancing act - the Intelligence is probably assuming that an AI based off an organic mind might be able to make decisions it did not consider before. The Krogan subjugating the Salarians probably would not result in extinction of the entire species let alone all organic life in the galaxy. Also lets not forget that Krogan culture took an abrupt shift as a result of the genophage cure - something that would not have happened if the reapers never invaded and if you didnt cure them they were going to die out in a couple hundred years.

JellySlimerMan:

How is understanding the other side going to literaly STOP the Synthetics from destroying organics? i can understand, for example, the motives of my enemy as for why is he trying to conquer my lands, but that doesnt mean i will not fight him when he comes to take my lands.

What about new life that evolves from a bacteria to a civilization after millions of years? will it be organic or the new mixed race? wont the new race become the new "Synthetic" to this new life?

Hell, what happens to the Leviathans? would they benefit from this? would we, the new race of cyborg/husk/synthetised people be strong enough as a Leviathan? i doubt that our upgrades would be enough to defeat them or that it would make us immune to their own brand of indoctrination. I guess that we have to fight war agaisnt them if they dont cooperate, maybe we could even..............build synthetics to help us fight them. And, you know, the life on other galaxies because sooner or later there must be organic/synthetic life in those places, no? the synthesis beam didnt reach them after all.

See the problem now? In one case, they take this extremely low % chance and make it a serious bussiness, and the other take this extremely inefficient solution to a problem that applies to all life in the universe, and consider it a success.

Worse of all, The Catalyst as to yet tell us why forcefully preserving life in Reaper form is better than:
1)Giving biological upgrades to the organics instead of technology to fight Synthetics
2)Make organics consider other paths of science away from solutions that Synthetic may solve (you know, like the MASS EFFECT technology that Reapers leave behind and that might lead to Organics making Synthetics even FASTER?)
3)Blowing up synthetics as soon they appear (instead of allying with them, just wipe the Geth out, Sovereing)
4)Become a "Galactic Body Disposal Service". You want preserve life? then just pick up the bodies fresh from the conflicted races and preserve the mind and body before it becomes fully rotten.
5)If all that fail, just become techno dictators permanently and impose order by being vigilant over Organics CONSTANTLY. And blowing up every tecnology that leads to synthetics ASAP. I doubt that the Organics would be able to forcefully dissagree with The Reapers at that stage.

Ok it seems that you have completely skipped over the part where I mentioned that synthesis would close the gap between organics and synthetics in the fields of communication speeds, the ability to process data, endurance and adaptability to hostile environments. Lets not forget the fact that synthetics would understanding the forces that drive organics and their motivations would assist them in diplomacy and negotiations especially when it comes to territory and resources. You have just demonstrated the typical "lets hate on synthesis" by taking a point completely out of context and focusing it so narrowly that it comes across as ludicrous.

As for the leviathans, they are a non issue. Their numbers by their own admission are so few that they are no longer the threat they once were, not to mention everything the leviathans were and know would now be within reach of all the other races that were synthesized. The reapers as we are told in the epilogue share all the knowledge of races past with everyone.

You also skip the part where I mentioned if and when any future synthetics rebelled they would no longer have any significant advantage over organics. So if you built synthetics to fight some future war and they suddenly turned on you you wouldnt be up the creek without a paddle.

As for life that evolves from bacteria, we have to assume that the base building blocks they use would incorporate hybridized elements. Failing that they would be one of the now few pure organic societies in the universe which in and of itself would be an interesting juxtaposition in future explorations of the universe. Also for all we know the synthesis only really effected civilisations based around the Mass Relay network which incidentally was where the reapers were doing all their work.

Finally to answer your questions 1 to 5

1.Biological upgrades would probably not be as efficient as technological upgrades.
2.If civilisations before the Relay network built them (which incidentally they did since the network was built later by the reapers themselves)then ME tech really has nothing to do with the development of synthetics. In all possibility it is ME technology that is limiting the development of synthetics since is was built by the reapers to control a species development.
3.The Reapers are dormant in between cycles they arent really a rapid reaction force. Additionally as demonstrated by the Geth missions in ME3 they will eventually subjugate and destroy them anyway. In the mean time they are just another tool to be used in the completing the cycle.
4.Again see number 3. Additionally it is possible that the reapers only harvest space faring civilisations because of evolutionary factors.
5. Again see 5. Additionally having a constant presence would allow for organized resistance and eventual rebellion, not to mention being able to suss out the reapers weaknesses and exploit it.

Anyway it was nice being able to respond to someone who can discuss this with someone who doesnt resort to personal attacks.

You silly people can keep whining about nothing all you want. I'm damn excited.

Can't wait to get back in the action with my big red buddy.

Also a bit curious about which romances they're bringing back.

JellySlimerMan:
snip

You seem upset.

Take some Prozac.

Lie down for a while.

Lily Venus:

Another shining example of logic: "because ending-bashers scream and whine about the ending, the ending must be bad!"

Now you are just straight up strawmanning my argument. Not that I am surprised, I know am probably going to get nowhere with someone like you, but I haven't quite gotten my daily dose of mental masochism, so here goes:

Unless the ending was meant to anger a large part of their audience, then it was a failure. A piece of writing can never completely satisfy anyone, and you can chalk that up to people being people. But when around 90% of the intended core audience for something are unhappy, then you have a very strong indication that the fault lies with the writer.

saleem:

It definitely helps if you consider the Citadel and the Intelligence to be one and the same. One thing we need to remember is that the Intelligence's physical connection to its body was severed by the Protheans via their reprogramming of the Keepers.

Now you are walking straight into one of my favorite can of worms. As far as I know that it is never stated that the Catalyst is connected to the Keepers. It is an assumption on your part or does it actually have a basis in the games?

And even if it is (and even if it isn't), it still open the question of why the oh-so-important cycle is dependant on such a convoluted system, like the Keepers and Vanguard Reapers, out in the open were it is much easier to potentially be discovered and tampered with?

JellySlimerMan:

It doesnt make Shadows of the Empire irrelevant because Vader's death was build up to its logical conclusion. Its the point of the whole journey. I think the best way to sum it up is by looking at Star Wars and Mass Effect like part of the Epic Literature, so you can understand why the later failed:

http://drayfish.wordpress.com/2012/09/02/its-not-just-the-journey-mass-effect-3-and-why-endings-matter/

Now see, that article would be far more impressive if I weren't a lit PhD candidate. For one, inaccuracies: the illustration near the bottom? Yeah, I gew up with Gustav Schwab's books, and he wasn't an illustrator. That said, the real problem is the use of Odysseus's example as a reason why Shepard shouldn't die. Um, you know, last I checked, Mass Effect wasn't the story of an A to B journey, but a tale of an epic, genocidal WAR. Hmm, what examples do we know in epic literature of such tales? Oh, here's one: The Song of Roland, a mediaeval heroic poem about a small force of heroes protecting their homeland from foreign invaders (sound familiar?). Spoiler alert: the eponymous hero dies.
Or, since the author of that blog post felt the need to bother Homer, what else besides the Odyssey did that geezer write? A grand epic of a massive conflict, maybe? Oh, right. That epic poem which starts, "Sing, goddess, the wrath of Achilles, Peleus's son"; now, in most legends (although not in the Iliad itself), Achilles, well (spoiler alert if you've lived on Illium for the last 3,000 years), DIES. Hector, the greatest hero of the Trojans? Dies.
Jason, the leader of the Argonauts (a story MUCH closer to the Mass Effect mythology than the Odyssey is - gathering companions, a mythical Macguffin, a filicidal überbitch, something that rhymes with Corinth)? Dies.
Hercules, demigod and greatest hero in Greek mythology? Dies and attains a higher state of being (blue ending, anyone?).

So for the author to cherry-pick examples of epic heroes who survive in order to illustrate that only tragic heroes die and epic heroes live is, pardon the French, fucking retarded.

While we're at it, anybody remember the Avatar from the Ultima RPGs (whose inspiration is felt all over the Mass Effect series)? Yeah, guess what happens to him in the end.

Bioware is know for making THAT kind of games since they were first created, the fans are just asking for consistency that Bioware brought up in the first place. To tie up all the loose ends like they SAID they would.

I dont see why complaining about it is a problem. Hell, right now, critics and consumers are complainig abut Aliens: Colonial Marines doing the same thing as BW did.

Yeah, but you know what Colonial Marines DIDN'T do? Deliver a great game, let alone three of them.

Let me put it like this. Mass Effect is like a superstar basketball player who, over a Playoff series, gives you one stellar performance after another. 30 points here, 60% shooting there, 15 rebounds here, and a performance for the ages there (I still contend that ME2 is one of the best games ever made). And while keeping up a very high standard, he is entrusted to take the game winning shot in the final game - and misses.
Do you judge him by the performance throughout the series, or by that last miss? It's pretty sad when sports fans appear to be vastly more reasonable than gamers.

Archangel357:

While we're at it, anybody remember the Avatar from the Ultima RPGs (whose inspiration is felt all over the Mass Effect series)? Yeah, guess what happens to him in the end.

And guess what? It was the most poorly received game in the Ultima series, and the fanbase decried that game as a injustice towards the series. It pretty much caused Richard Garriott to leave the company, and shortly after that Origin Systems went under as EA closed it down.

Except for that last part (which I won't expect to be a difference for long), does any of that sound familiar?

Let me put it like this. Mass Effect is like a superstar basketball player who, over a Playoff series, gives you one stellar performance after another. 30 points here, 60% shooting there, 15 rebounds here, and a performance for the ages there (I still contend that ME2 is one of the best games ever made). And while keeping up a very high standard, he is entrusted to take the game winning shot in the final game - and misses.
Do you judge him by the performance throughout the series, or by that last miss? It's pretty sad when sports fans appear to be vastly more reasonable than gamers.

What happened is more akin to him constantly fumbling the ball in the final game, and then going on to score the winning goal. For the opposite team. And then he pompously claims to the press that he did everything perfect.

Blachman201:

And guess what? It was the most poorly received game in the Ultima series, and the fanbase decried that game as a injustice towards the series. It pretty much caused Richard Garriott to leave the company, and shortly after that Origin Systems went under as EA closed it down.

Except for that last part (which I won't expect to be a difference for long), does any of that sound familiar?

People, me included, bitched about the game, which was poorly programmed, convoluted, and reduced long running and beloved characters like Iolo and Shamino to bit players - the latter complaint, btw, is perfectly valid for ME3, as well. However, my point was this retarded notion that epic heroes cannot die at the end of a major series, and if I remember correctly, people didn't bitch about the Ascension itself.

Btw, I still preferred UIX over UVIII: Pagan.

What happened is more akin to him constantly fumbling the ball in the final game, and then going on to score the winning goal. For the opposite team. And then he pompously claims to the press that he did everything perfect.

Constantly? Really? Yeah, ME3 has its issues (the virtual insignificance of most ME2 characters being chief among them - which, incidentally, this DLC has set out to correct), but constant fumbling? No. It's a very good game instead of a properly spectacular one like its predecessor, but to call it "bad" is stupid. Also, "pompous"? They apologised to fans in a major way with the - free - Extended Cut.

Archangel357:

People, me included, bitched about the game, which was poorly programmed, convoluted, and reduced long running and beloved characters like Iolo and Shamino to bit players - the latter complaint, btw, is perfectly valid for ME3, as well. However, my point was this retarded notion that epic heroes cannot die at the end of a major series, and if I remember correctly, people didn't bitch about the Ascension itself.

I do agree on Hercules fitting the bill. But what about the fatal mistakes of the other heroes? Like Hector's "fatal pride", Achilles desecrating Hector's body, and Jason breaking his vow to love Medea forever?

Does Shepard really have a fatal flaw?

Also, "pompous"? They apologised to fans in a major way with the - free - Extended Cut.

They still claim it was just "clarification", even though there were some serious retcons in it.

And it is more that they have ever actually addressed any of the harder questions and criticisms (like "Do you know why the fans are talking about abandonment of central themes in the ending?", "Do you understand why people think that Synthesis have a lot of unfortunate implications?") They have only answered soft-ball questions in safe and friendly environments (like Mac and Casey being "interviewed" by a community manager), and their answers has only been variations of "You just didn't get it", "It is just because you can't let go of Shepard", and "Artistic Integrity!™"

It comes across like they are trying very hard to avoid admitting any kind of mistake (even accidentally).

Mausthemighty:
Ok, Bioware.. I still had hope you would really fix the mess you made with the ending. I guess it was a fool's hope.
I will delete Mass Effect and Dragon Age from my computer and get on with my life. I don't care about you anymore. I wish you all the best.

It's a shame. Mass Effect could have been the Star Wars of our generation.

Do prequels not count?

Blachman201:

Archangel357:

People, me included, bitched about the game, which was poorly programmed, convoluted, and reduced long running and beloved characters like Iolo and Shamino to bit players - the latter complaint, btw, is perfectly valid for ME3, as well. However, my point was this retarded notion that epic heroes cannot die at the end of a major series, and if I remember correctly, people didn't bitch about the Ascension itself.

I do agree on Hercules fitting the bill. But what about the fatal mistakes of the other heroes? Like Hector's "fatal pride", Achilles desecrating Hector's body, and Jason breaking his vow to love Medea forever?

Does Shepard really have a fatal flaw?

Shepard doesn't even have a character beyond what we arbitrarily assign him, so no.

Dlc would make sense if they truly affected the gams story like they did in 2, they do nothing in 3.

Bioware's method of handling the shitstorm they created was both rude and childish. I won't have anything to do with them anymore and I sincerily hope, in honor of what they were before, that their next games bomb spectacularly so that EA puts a bullet in the head of a downed, sick shadow of it's former self.

I promised myself when the endings hit that until Bioware fixes the endings (never) I won't buy any of their products. I thought this would be hard, considering I was a major veteran Bioware fanboy, but I couldn't be asked to give a shit for any of the former DLCs, and this one is no exception.

Too little, too late BiowarEA. I wanted to believe you indocrinated us all, but in the end, you were the ones indocrinated. You won't see me ever again, and none of your products will ever see my money.

OlasDAlmighty:
Anyone else find it awkward to play DLC set some time in the middle of the game like a year after beating it? The final farewell should have been the game's actual ending, not some smaller mission set before it. Though if people say it's good I'll still probably buy it.

I'm fine with the mid-game stuff - but then I've always looked at the series at being more about checking out the universe with some entertaining companions than it was about the plot.

Post-ending material wouldn't make sense. Aside from the fact that most people don't even finish games and wouldn't buy post-ending content - the end-state of the world is too final to have it make sense in terms of having enough content for every possible scenario. Not to mention that because so much of the discussion of the post-ending possibilities that they'd never be able to meet the expectations on that one.

Whats the point since your choices don't matter?

Still not pulling me back EAWare. Stop trying.

Meh. I was more excited for the ME2 DLC. Knowing what happens at the end isn't justifying me buying anything from them. I might try the MP since it is free, but otherwise, it was a good run, Mass Effect. I loved you up until you decided to suck.

The ending to the series as a whole was fine, quit complaining. I will not get into that here though (I blogged about it if you check my profile, posting a link would be against the rules :().

Anyway, the game has unfortunately long passed from my grasps as I no longer have my xbox with me. I'll just have to youtube this stuff.

Remember when nerds used to enjoy and celebrate their fandoms? And when did the Escapist community become so toxic? Seriously...

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here