Human Revolution's ending and why gamers are looking inconsistent.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

As you all know, everyone and their dog has been complaining, whining or all out attacking EA/Bioware over the Mass Effect 3 ending. I agree, it wasn't as good as I hoped and I hope the FREE DLC fixes that by telling us what the hell happens to everyone.
What I'm a bit concerned about is the fact that everyone is complaining about ME3's ending because of it's plot holes, Deus Ex Machina ending and lack of choices affecting the ending. But, nobody at all made even close to a fuss about the ending of another big entry to a well loved franchise. I'm obviously talking about the ending to Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Spoilers below so be warned.
The ending to Human Revolution was basically: you choose between wiping out augments, keeping augments or controlling augments or letting humanity do it's stuff. You come to a room with a Deus Ex machina style 4 buttons, and you press one. You then are shown a cutscene of crappy stock footage showing NOTHING about what actually happens to anyone after the events and nothing about what happens to anyone on the oil rig, or anyone with augments, or anyone at Sarif industries or most importantly, what happens to Adam Jensen. The only ending that gives any hint at what happens is the one where you destroy and kill everyone at the oil rig you are on. But even then there is still thousands of people with augments who we have no idea anything that happens to them.
Basically what I'm saying is that the Human Revolution ending was crap, it has all the same problems as the ME3 ending, massive plot holes, a Deus Ex machina pick your ending style of ending and a few more. Yet noone whined and moaned at Eidos Montreal to make an "Extended Cut DLC" or change the ending. This fact just makes me think that gamers are people who like to pick their own battles, say they are fighting against bad art and then not bother with another ending that was terrible because well, it wasn't the ending of a trilogy. If gamers really wanted to have the integrity they deserve then you must stop picking your battles to what best suits you, there's been countless endings that have been crap, not just the HR ending. Yet none of them caused such a stir.
So Escapist what do you think of all this, is the HR ending good in your eyes, are gamers really being inconsistent and why the hell didn't anyone complain about this ending.

The Human Revolution ending isn't good, but it's still better than ME3's. HR's ending choices, while a bit of a cop out ending-wise, are all well built up and represent the arguements of the game's 3 corperate leaders and their ideas for humanity. The story of the game allows the player to make up their own mind about who is correct by seeing many different sides to life with augmentations. In the final level those 3 characters make their cases for their ending to Jensen who can ultimately decide what happens. I spent much longer deciding the ending to HR than ME because the choice was actually based on what you had felt over the course of the game.

Meanwhile in Mass Effect, the ending choices are pretty much pulled from nothing and have nothing to do with what has happened over the course of the game and the series. Also, ME has always been about the choices the player makes and their impact on the galaxy and the characters the player meets with. None of that mattered in ME's ending and people are understandably pissed off because of that.

I can see why you compare the 2 game's endings and I don't like that sort of ending either, but HR managed to cover for the cop out ending by making the choices actually matter, while it seems ME's final choice really makes no difference and doesn't tie into the rest of the series in any way. I could be completely wrong, but that's my opinion.

ToastiestZombie:

But, nobody at all made even close to a fuss about the ending of another big entry to a well loved franchise. I'm obviously talking about the ending to Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Spoilers below so be warned.

Perhaps I'm just a minority here but I thought the endings to Human Revolution were amazing, philosophical and thought provoking. In my opinion the world of Deus Ex: HR was not about seeing how your choices affected the world, it was simply exploring the ethics of trans-humanism through the eyes of a badass! I always thought that in traditional Sci-fi the idea was to take a concept, usually philosophical, and explore it with the Sci-fi setting as the "background." Human Revolution does this perfectly.

This contrasts to Mass Effect which is all about the idea that your character's (usually moral) choices radically affect the world around you and so allow each player to experience their own narrative. The complaint with Mass Effect's conclusion is that the choice the player makes stop affecting the narrative once you reach the ending - or if they do, in a minimal trivial way so that each player gets the same ending.

the endings in the deus ex games are always forshadowed you get to see all the different sides up to the end where you make your choice.. mass effects ending on the other hand there is no forshadowing, the ending comes out of left field, and for a series that prides itself on choice you cant even point out the flaws in the AI's logic.. um geth and quarians fighting side by side.

HR's ending fit the story. ME3's was full of plot holes. plus lifting the ending to deus ex and adding it to ME3.. yeah didnt work so crash hot

nikki191:
the endings in the deus ex games are always forshadowed you get to see all the different sides up to the end where you make your choice.. mass effects ending on the other hand there is no forshadowing, the ending comes out of left field, and for a series that prides itself on choice you cant even point out the flaws in the AI's logic.. um geth and quarians fighting side by side.

HR's ending fit the story. ME3's was full of plot holes. plus lifting the ending to deus ex and adding it to ME3.. yeah didnt work so crash hot

Actually I do agree with this. I reckon that if ME3 had some foreshadowing to what would happen in each of the choices. Say have a character that's a synthetic/human and maybe showing if their life has improved or not would of given reason to pick that one.

DE:HR's ending were justified.that's the big difference.After talking to Sarif, Darrow and Taggart, you have to really decide which choice you're gonna make.And since it was a prequel, i already knew the choices couldn't have played out in the end.But Eidos Montreal atleast had the decency to put in a monologue in every ending, wholly justifying each ending.ME3 had an ending which was completely non justified, and felt very forced.Frankly, it was utter bullcrap.No explanation, nothing.Which is why not many gamers are upset over its ending, because ME3 toppled that.

Human Revolution isn't built on making a variety of story choices throughout the game, Mass Effect (3 or the entire series) is. That is the crucial difference.

edit: Also Human Revolution can live without the closure you feel it needs because it's a prequel. If you want closure, play the first Deus Ex game.

Because Human Revolution wasn't the end of a trilogy.

Being a prequel gives it a break.

You can't just end a trilogy without actually ending it.

Because the endings in HR kinda flowed with the same themes and foreshadowing aforethought anyway. It was sorta shit, but you could see how it fits.

ME3 was just shit. Also, Deus Ex isn't as big as ME3, of course people are going to bitch about ME3 more if it had more coverage.

Human Revolution never really had any choices throughout the game though. Yes there were plenty of ways to approach things, and there were extra objectives you could choose to do, but your choices never had a direct effect on the overall storyline.

Mass Effect, on the other hand, embraced choices, allowed you to have a hand in shaping the universe, then took all of that away at the end. That's why it works for Human Revolution, but is revolting is Mass Effect.

Well I was quite vocal on the all around cheap design in Human Revolution, but the rosy goggles everyone wore were quite thick so it never came through.

But with EA was putting people on the fence before ME3 even came out so they had a 50/50 split of hate and support from the start.
However the ending in ME3 isn't just cheap it is downright contradictory to the entire series, I'm willing to bet it wasn't done by the same team as the rest of the game.

And most importantly, another game being shit does not make the one you like any better, I'm sure you would want it to be so but it plainly isn't.

I feel my opinion has already been demonstrated fully.

Crucially, the story of Deus Ex:HR leads you up to a point where you are very likely to be given the power to choose A, B or C. One of the main characters was a mass media program whose sole purpose was to control the flow of information to the world for God's sake. It makes perfect sense to the story. Jenson stumbles through the story, linking together the clues which lead him to witness the two opposing arguments. Your experience as a human, as a player is meant to give you all the sides of the story you need to judge the situation for yourself. Through the use of your avatar, Jenson, you are empowered to choose which truth is the one the people need to hear.

I can't think of a more interesting way to end a game than to philosophically break the fourth wall and ask the player "Well what do you think?".

Mass Effect kind of attempted the same thing but fails because of the execution. The choices felt a little too (okay almost completely) similar. At least the context was there staring in Shepards face. No-one believed him in the first game, he is forced to team up with the bad guy in the second one because no-one will help him. By the third game, not only is he witnessing the destruction of the homeworlds of the galaxy's most prominent and powerful species, but he actually suffering nightmares and feeling the strain of accepting there is probably no chance of stopping it.

As much of a raw deal the endings felt, in a way, it was inevitable. Its a matter of some consulation that the star-brat even offered a chance of ending the cycle. That is what shepard set out to achieve. The price was his cycle's civilisation...

Considering the main theme of the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, shepard sacrificed the few when you think about the sheer number of cycles that came before, and the sheer number of species that will thrive in peace for countless millennia to come.

Hopefully, the DLC will reflect the magnitude of this sacrifice appropriately.

I only played DE:hr could someone spoil how the end affects the first DE? How are these titles tied together?

From what i heard (and seen, yup spoiled it for me)about ME3 the endings of DE:hr make more sense.

why DX:HR did get as much heat:

1.It's a prequel
2. it loosely connects to DX1 and DX2 (borderline reboot)
3.Nobody was expecting an "epic" story from Eidos
4.It was streamlined (the industry has all grown-up)
5.It wasn't as popular
6.It was many people's first DX.
7.there were 4 not 3 endings
8.there were no choices that could've impacted the ending
9. the endings were different as opposed to a change of colour.
10. there was a lower production budget.

...I think that's about just it.

Edit: OP, I'm not going to read that wall.

I can't believe you're comparing the two.

I can say it's as simple as: Mass Effect 3 was the end of a series that had been going on for the last 5 years. Many people put hundreds of hours (and thousands of galaxies! or was it the other way around?) into the Mass Effect games. While the time we put into anything else like Fallout 3, Bioshock, DE:HR and anything recent pales in comparison to the time we put into ME. That's the difference.

Yep, although the HR endings were rather abysmal, the game was less an RPG with many choices than a stealth gane with many options. So, no good comparing it with the ME Trilogy.

Human Revolution's means of ending *was* criticised; it was just overshadowed by the mountain of hate regarding the hilariously out of place boss fights.

I'm not sure the two things are really comparable, however I've not actually played ME3.

OldDirtyCrusty:
I only played DE:hr could someone spoil how the end affects the first DE? How are these titles tied together?

From what i heard (and seen, yup spoiled it for me)about ME3 the endings of DE:hr make more sense.

Well, what happens is already decided. The ending to deus ex HR only affects what the people think. This does not matter because its still the illuminati who are in control behind the scenes.

There is one last cutscene after the credits where bob page (who works for the illuminati) says: "There nothing we can't manage, given time"

It is this organisation that REALLY shapes the world and makes it into deus ex 1 :)

And for the 500th time:

Human Revolution's ending is inelegant. It still conveys the message that is perfectly thematically in-tune with the rest of the game.

In Mass Effect, the onus is always on the consequence of your actions. In Human Revolution, the onus is on what you believe, you personal philosophy; the game is a debate, the ending is your final judgement (there's even an 'abstain' option).

What happens after is irrelevant, we know what happens: what's important is what you've taken from the debate the game has presented to you, and your justifications for it.

It is also takes the question of Jensen's humanity further. Earlier in the game there's underlying questions about his physical enhancements making him more or less human; in the ending, this extends to the power he holds to potentially decide the fate of humanity. (So again, it's thematically and narratively cohesive.)

Funnily enough, I don't particularly hate ME3's ending, although I can see why people do. But people have started to make this comparison, and all they're doing is showing they don't understand (as they did when the game came out) the narrative purpose of the ending. As I've said, the difference is that the focus in Mass Effect has always been the consequences of your choices, and people feel the ending didn't satisfy that.

Again, it is inelegant. It is not a bad ending. In fact, I'd say it's a very good ending.

Apparently a 'satisfying' ending for gamers is one that covers every minute detail and ignores the point of the whole game.

Woodsey:
And for the 500th time:

Human Revolution's ending is inelegant. It still conveys the message that is perfectly thematically in-tune with the rest of the game.

In Mass Effect, the onus is always on the consequence of your actions. In Human Revolution, the onus is on what you believe, you personal philosophy; the game is a debate, the ending is your final judgement (there's even an 'abstain' option).

What happens after is irrelevant, we know what happens: what's important is what you've taken from the debate the game has presented to you, and your justifications for it.

Funnily enough, I don't particularly hate ME3's ending. But people have started to make this comparison, and all they're doing is showing they don't understand (as they did when they came out) the narrative purpose of the ending.

Again, it is inelegant. It is not a bad ending. In fact, I'd say it's a very good ending.

Apparently a 'satisfying' ending for gamers is one that covers every minute detail and ignores the point of the whole game.

Plus, I'd be willing to bet that final choice will have an impact on the game's sequel, if there is one. After all, Human Revolution was one of the very few games that actually made Square Enix money, so it'd make sense for them to make a sequel.

Plus, they did a game with "JC", and a prequel with "Adam". I predict the next game will star a female named "Eve". Or, if they had balls, a man named "Steve".

To be far i didn't like that ending at all just the whole story line of that game seemed like shit to me to me so i didn't bitch about it.

Irridium:

Woodsey:
And for the 500th time:

Human Revolution's ending is inelegant. It still conveys the message that is perfectly thematically in-tune with the rest of the game.

In Mass Effect, the onus is always on the consequence of your actions. In Human Revolution, the onus is on what you believe, you personal philosophy; the game is a debate, the ending is your final judgement (there's even an 'abstain' option).

What happens after is irrelevant, we know what happens: what's important is what you've taken from the debate the game has presented to you, and your justifications for it.

Funnily enough, I don't particularly hate ME3's ending. But people have started to make this comparison, and all they're doing is showing they don't understand (as they did when they came out) the narrative purpose of the ending.

Again, it is inelegant. It is not a bad ending. In fact, I'd say it's a very good ending.

Apparently a 'satisfying' ending for gamers is one that covers every minute detail and ignores the point of the whole game.

Plus, I'd be willing to bet that final choice will have an impact on the game's sequel, if there is one. After all, Human Revolution was one of the very few games that actually made Square Enix money, so it'd make sense for them to make a sequel.

Plus, they did a game with "JC", and a prequel with "Adam". I predict the next game will star a female named "Eve". Or, if they had balls, a man named "Steve".

Personally, I'm hoping they try and pull off naming a character Lazarus or Solomon (code-names don't count!) in a game set in the 2030's.

Or Bernie. I'd love me a Bernie.

Because the endings were actually psychologically provoking and didn't come out of nowhere like ME3's ending. You spent the whole game listening to arguments for and against human augmentation. It was never really clear who was the "bad guy" in all of this and the player was left to decide the fate of augmentation. You had pro-augmentation good guys (Sarif), pro-augmentation bad guys (Tai Yong Medical), anti-augmentation good guys (Humanity Front I guess), anti-augmentation bad guys(Purity First) and a whole lot of other things in the middle. Now, it's up to you to decide the fate of human augmentation.

You mean a massive amount of people that have no affiliation other than perhaps playing the same games now and then aren't presenting a united front?

NEEEEEEVVVVVVEEREEEEREREREERRRRRR!

HR....gah, I wish I'd never bought it! For once, a game actually worth the €12 discount I got it for off Steam. :/ I'm not going to bother hiding any spoilers for this:

My fault, I'd built it up in my head, this was going to be Deus Ex but shiny..er. Stuffed to the gills with inconsistent and inconsequential characters. Either/or choices, and I'm not just talking about the end, I mean every single quest. Ultimately linear hubs with the bare minimum of interaction both with the environment and NPC's. Not to mention god awfully stupid enemy AI...but then maybe I've just been playing games for too long. The boss fights were execrable sure, but the original's weren't really thought intensive, I mean Walton Simons's is basically strafing him and popping him with the GEP gun, Gunther, hah, getting him to walk into a pile of TNT or LAMs is just cake.

I guess the only thing that's really bad about HR's boss fights is that they're so obviously telegraphed as boss fights, not to mention that to a t focus on you being locked in a room and being forced to run around in a circle in a room inexplicably filled with ammo, weapons and explosives for you to use until the boss falls over.

What's worse...is they had -multiple- opportunities to make you care about those characters, or even hate them within the context of the game rather than just the meta realisation that these are just shittily written characters. At one point when you kill the female assassin aug, in the ensuing cutscene, Jensen is talking to the AI and it comes up briefly that he is thinking about saving her (the aug) before she dies. Okay, you think, I get to make an important decision?

Not a fucking chance. She bleeds out on the floor and Jensen is free to escape to the next level and not a word more is said about her or eyelid batted. Oh, oh, but you know, I actually dragged her body out to the exit, because I thought, hey, -maybe- she was still alive and the game would recognise this.

Almost the same fucking thing happens with Namir, though he's more obviously going to die no matter what you do. But they have the AUDACITY to try and pull a 'he had his reasons to do what he did' speech from him before he kicks it. NO SHIT, I WISH I COULD HAVE BEEN PRIVY TO THAT AT SOME POINT. Maybe he wouldn't have felt like another pointless enemy boss fight just like all the rest.

Oh, but worst of the worst. Zeke Sanders. He's the Purity First guy you meet in one of your earlier missions during the hostage situation. In one of the few excellent segments of the game you can talk him down and convince him he's been betrayed. In return he helps you out with some info later. You think, now here's an interesting character, I wonder if I'll be seeing more of him throughout the game? Yeah. Twice. When he gives you the info., he tells you you're even now. And he means that. Because when you meet him next toward the end of the game, he ambushes you in an apartment building. No talking, nothing, you can kill or incapacitate him, but at this point he's just a mindless enemy like all the other non-important character NPC enemies.

There's much, much more that pissed me off about this game, but I can't even continue typing. HR just really really pisses me off right now. And it's worse because it's the kind of pissedoffness I think a parent would feel for a disappointing child. That you expected so much better of them and they let you down.

Moth_Monk:

ToastiestZombie:

But, nobody at all made even close to a fuss about the ending of another big entry to a well loved franchise. I'm obviously talking about the ending to Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Spoilers below so be warned.

Perhaps I'm just a minority here but I thought the endings to Human Revolution were amazing, philosophical and thought provoking. In my opinion the world of Deus Ex: HR was not about seeing how your choices affected the world, it was simply exploring the ethics of trans-humanism through the eyes of a badass! I always thought that in traditional Sci-fi the idea was to take a concept, usually philosophical, and explore it with the Sci-fi setting as the "background." Human Revolution does this perfectly.

This contrasts to Mass Effect which is all about the idea that your character's (usually moral) choices radically affect the world around you and so allow each player to experience their own narrative. The complaint with Mass Effect's conclusion is that the choice the player makes stop affecting the narrative once you reach the ending - or if they do, in a minimal trivial way so that each player gets the same ending.

you are definitely not alone. i felt the same way, i just wish it would explain how each ending changes what happens with deus ex 1, and which of the endings is considered canon.

Hey I really liked the ending to Deus Ex: Human Resources* So stop spreading your diseased filthy wrong opinion! XD

It has closure since you have enough information to easily piece together what's going to happen in the future depending on your choices.

I chose the "blow yourself up" option since it was the only one that didn't involve making sweeping, planet changing decisions. Come on, stop all scientific advancement? Overregulate the economy? Push augmentation way too far? Or none of the above, nuke the place from orbit and just let everyone just get over it.

Yes please!

It's been basically just presenting you with theories, ideas, hypotheticals, ideas in practise etc etc and saying "well, choose your favourite!" the entire game. The ending takes this theme and runs with it. Like all good theming should do.

And some people just have a problem with "Endingtron 3000s" in general. No idea why. It was used pretty well in HR.

ME3's theming was really good in general, though some people insist that all theming was destroyed in five minutes in the ending. That's up for debate I think.

*I'll stop using that joke when it stops being funny dammit!

The Wykydtron:
Hey I really liked the ending to Deus Ex: Human Resources* So stop spreading your diseased filthy wrong opinion! XD

It has closure since you have enough information to easily piece together what's going to happen in the future depending on your choices.

I chose the "blow yourself up" option since it was the only one that didn't involve making sweeping, planet changing decisions. Come on, stop all scientific advancement? Overregulate the economy? Push augmentation way too far? Or none of the above, nuke the place from orbit and just let everyone just get over it.

Yes please!

It's been basically just presenting you with theories, ideas, hypotheticals, ideas in practise etc etc and saying "well, choose your favourite!" the entire game. The ending takes this theme and runs with it. Like all good theming should do.

And some people just have a problem with "Endingtron 3000s" in general. No idea why. It was used pretty well in HR.

ME3's theming was really good in general, though some people insist that all theming was destroyed in five minutes in the ending. That's up for debate I think.

*I'll stop using that joke when it stops being funny dammit!

Let's get this out of the way that I actually loved the endings to Human revolution. But, they had their flaws which to me are exactly the same as what ME3's endings had.
Also, you have a different opinion to me! You massive retard lulz! (That was a joke, hating on people for an opinion is more stupid than kicking a horse in the balls)

Haven't talked to a single person who liked the Human Revolution ending. The key difference is when asked if they were doing something similar to the ending-o-matic of Human Revolution, Bioware responded by saying that they'd never do that and their game will have real meaning. Then they did it.

Additionally, the Human Revolution endings actually fit into the context appropriately even if they're not very good; they all dealt with transhumanism, etc. Whereas with ME3 it seems like they saw that ending and said "Let's turn this story into a big transhumanism thing right at the end even though synthetic rights have only been a subplot up until now. Except let's not even change the speech, let's just change the explosion colour."

Also, Human Revolution doesn't have a magical god child.

The point I'm getting at here is that Human Revolution actually had a somewhat meaningful ending.

Woodsey:
Apparently a 'satisfying' ending for gamers is one that covers every minute detail and ignores the point of the whole game.

The ME3 ending took all the points raised in a trilogy and threw them out of the window.

Sexy Devil:
Also, Human Revolution doesn't have a magical god child.

This part royally pissed me off. You can be a total dick during the whole game, but BioWare forces your Shepherd to be worried about a brat who died.

It's not even your Shepherd anymore. It's BioWare's.

ElPatron:

Woodsey:
Apparently a 'satisfying' ending for gamers is one that covers every minute detail and ignores the point of the whole game.

The ME3 ending took all the points raised in a trilogy and threw them out of the window.

Take the 30 seconds necessary to actually read my entire post. I made it perfectly clear that I understood people felt the finale didn't address what they felt were the main themes of the story, and that they felt their choices didn't matter in the way they wanted.

The part you've quoted was about Human Revolution (you know, the thread topic) and the gaming community's habit of creating a blanket definition for what it defines as a satisfying ending, regardless of a game's themes, narrative and purpose.

What the OP is trying to do is say the ending to HR and ME3 are the same thing, which they are not.

Woodsey and Mad8 have written really good reasons on why the endings simply don't compare. Additionally, I also want to point out just how the PR was handled in both games.

In response to the ending criticisms, Eidos flat out admitted that they ran out of money and time during late production so I think people were more understanding to their situation.
Bioware on the other hand or at least the Producer said that he deliberately wanted the ending to be controversial and let's not forget the "You won't get an A,B and C ending! You will have a lot more!". Seriously, if Bioware just admitted that they rushed the game to meet EA's release date, people would've been somewhat more forgiving.

ToastiestZombie:

The Wykydtron:
Hey I really liked the ending to Deus Ex: Human Resources* So stop spreading your diseased filthy wrong opinion! XD

It has closure since you have enough information to easily piece together what's going to happen in the future depending on your choices.

I chose the "blow yourself up" option since it was the only one that didn't involve making sweeping, planet changing decisions. Come on, stop all scientific advancement? Overregulate the economy? Push augmentation way too far? Or none of the above, nuke the place from orbit and just let everyone just get over it.

Yes please!

It's been basically just presenting you with theories, ideas, hypotheticals, ideas in practise etc etc and saying "well, choose your favourite!" the entire game. The ending takes this theme and runs with it. Like all good theming should do.

And some people just have a problem with "Endingtron 3000s" in general. No idea why. It was used pretty well in HR.

ME3's theming was really good in general, though some people insist that all theming was destroyed in five minutes in the ending. That's up for debate I think.

*I'll stop using that joke when it stops being funny dammit!

Let's get this out of the way that I actually loved the endings to Human revolution. But, they had their flaws which to me are exactly the same as what ME3's endings had.
Also, you have a different opinion to me! You massive retard lulz! (That was a joke, hating on people for an opinion is more stupid than kicking a horse in the balls)

Maybe HR gets more of a break since it's a prequel? People know what the overall outcome is building towards anyway. The "nuke it from orbit" ending looks to be canon since all the other endings seem to stray from the path to Deus Ex 1. The ambiguity there was either forgiven or apprieciated. Or at least less rage inducing for the unpleaseable types XD

ME3 was the end to a trilogy so the epic level of ambiguity it leaves you with is kinda unacceptable since trilogies are meant to end with some closure.

The ending isn't bad certainly, The absolute bullshit rage about it over these few weeks has escalated to such an extent where I can only say "guys, it's not that bad... Oh you're filing a formal complaint to a higher authority over an ending? Excuse me while I go rage in a corner over the stupidity of it"

Let me butcher a quote to outline my point.

"Context, dear Zombie, it's time we did something about context"

The Wykydtron:
Snip

But you do have to remember that they are making a DLC just to give closure, people seem to be forgetting that. Maybe the DLC does F all to fix anything, but maybe it shows us what happens to shephard, the normandy crew and the races.

Probably because everyone expected Human Revolution to be a lazy cash in on an old franchise (i.e. the syndicate reboot) which was made for a quick buck (Square has not been doing well financially, and HR singlehandedly pushed it into the black last year).

Mass Effect on the other hand was meant to be the greatest story ever told in video games, and it was financed by the second largest publisher around. It was allegedly so great that EA could use it and BF3 to duel handedly make us accept origin.

However when they both came out they were actually quite even (personally I thought HR was the better of the 2).

Now when the lazy cash in turns out to be good, people are obviously going to cut it a lot of slack, I remember being astonished by the level of detail, and care that had been put into HR, the first time I played it.

However when the "Best game ever" turns out to be only quite good, and has an ending that blatantly cut corners (i.e. Liara appearing instead of Tali/Jack/whoever) people are going to be annoyed.

Another thing that doesn't help ME3 is the way Bioware, EA and the gaming media have reacted to fans reactions to the ME3 catastrophe.
Calling people entitled or homophobes for not liking your game does not fly and it's no wonder people responded with anger.

Eidos Montreal on the other hand have apologized for the boss fights.

Tldr: HR was an underdog and made by nice people where as ME3 was a real Goliath made by people who seem to have lost their copies of 'PR for dummies'

EDIT: One last thing.

The endings of HR had more context than ME3, this is especially obvious when it comes to ME3s control ending and HRs illuminati ending.

In HR

gives a compelling speech in favor of the illuminati ending where as in ME3 the child just kinda mentions that you could control the reapers.

If say when you choose the ending in ME3 you had Anderson, TIM and I dunno Legion? argue in favor of each ending before you choose people would have been happier.

Everywhere you go in HR the consequences of augmentation are being shoved in your face, meaning that by the time the player reaches the buttons, they will have formed an opinion.

In ME3 the organics Vs synthetics theme only really comes up once and even then you can resolve in peacefully. Suddenly being told that the Geth will destroy everyone doesn't really ring true especially after ME2 so organics Vs synthetics being the crux of the narrative doesn't really work.

Also the merge ending in ME3 makes no sense in biological terms and this felt kinda jarring after Bioware at least tried to be scientific in the rest of the series.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked