Are you satisfied with EC
Yes
48.1% (714)
48.1% (714)
No
27.1% (403)
27.1% (403)
I don't care anymore
24.2% (360)
24.2% (360)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: ME3 EC didn't fix anything

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT
 

I think, in addition to the "Where are they now" montage, they needed to add cutscenes showing our War Assets fighting. Show Miranda and Jacob leading ex-Cerberus mechs. Show Wrex or Wreav leading the Krogan against an army of Marauders. Show Balak doing batarian things. Show Jack and her squad of Biotic Badasses taking out a bunch Cannibals. Better yet, show Jack saving Miranda from a Brute in order to show that, thanks to Shep's help, she's put revenge behind her. That's what we mean when we say "Make our choices matter", not this "you didn't do mission 25X so you fail" bullshit that idiots think we mean.

So, no. The EC ending still sucks.

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

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

First, Bioware never called fans that.

2nd, did they fuckin kill your family member? The fuck is wrong with you, calm down. Bioware is more than a corporate entity; it's a collection of people. And those people, to put it in a cliche, have feelings.

Don't be an asshole

everythingbeeps:

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

Eh, I've seen this argument and I'm not buying it. Most of your previous actions DO affect the outcome, it's just that the effect is felt much earlier in the game, and isn't necessarily as impactful as you might have expected (but then, it's just unreasonable to expect ALL those decisions to have a huge impact.)

No, the problem with the ending is that there's no happy ending whatsoever. That's my problem with it. And the writers can fuck right off with their stupid "life doesn't always have happy endings" bullshit, because this is a game, not life. I played a badass superhero in this game, and I expected to save the universe in a more significant way than merely preventing the extinction of all life.

You ever hear that Rolling Stones song "You Can't Always Get What You Want."

If you want videogames to grow as an art form, then you have to allow them to challenge you and your tolerance for unhappiness, because when a game reflects something honest about life, that you won't always get a happy ending, that's art.

I think the ending does a bad job of this and other things (like good storytelling), but I still love the series. I can deal with a bad ending because I have real problems in real life.

Bat Vader:

Adam Jensen:
There's been some development. Fans have already found something interesting in some of the DLC files that might hint to another DLC focusing on the origins of the Reapers, featuring a rogue Reaper and possibly a new squad mate. Now the only question is, is this going to be a DLC, a full expansion or a new game? Or maybe nothing. And if it is a DLC, is it a prequel or post-end DLC. Check it out it's interesting.
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/12777408/5

That does sound pretty interesting. I would love to get a Rogue Reaper on my side to help in the fight for Earth. That or build a bunch of Star Destroyers,

Considering the relative sizes and weaponry of Mass Effect and Star Wars, having a fleet of Star Destroyers would have negated the need for the crucible anyways. Star Destroyers are just shy of a Sovereign Reaper in length, and they pack turbolasers, which operate as large scale particle weaponry. Reaper beams are particle weapons as well, so having a couple hundred ISDs would even the playing field.

Adam Jensen:
I saw EC endings on YouTube, and now I'm here to vent.

Did you all forget that the existence of starchild practically turns the entire plot of Mass Effect 1 into one giant plot hole? Why did Sovereign need Saren to fix the Citadel signal if starchild was always there? How did the protheans manage to sabotage the Citadel if the starchild has the ability to get into your head? Should we simply assume that a bunch of protheans were able to do all that and there was nothing the starchild could have done to stop them? We shouldn't assume that, because most people know by now what the original plot was supposed to be. And there was never any starchild in it.

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

Don't watch only the ending listens the new dialogue of the Star Childs he explain a lot of your questions

008Zulu:

endtherapture:
What about Dragon Age then...

Kill the Dragon...marry the Queen...live happily ever after, that's one of the endings you can get.

Was that in one of the DLC's? As I recall once the "Dragon" was dead, the world was still a step or two away from ending. And I aimed for the best possible outcome.

That's in origin, original ending, with male human noble warden it's possible to do that and by dragon he meant the archdemon i assume

CaptOfSerenity:

everythingbeeps:

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

Eh, I've seen this argument and I'm not buying it. Most of your previous actions DO affect the outcome, it's just that the effect is felt much earlier in the game, and isn't necessarily as impactful as you might have expected (but then, it's just unreasonable to expect ALL those decisions to have a huge impact.)

No, the problem with the ending is that there's no happy ending whatsoever. That's my problem with it. And the writers can fuck right off with their stupid "life doesn't always have happy endings" bullshit, because this is a game, not life. I played a badass superhero in this game, and I expected to save the universe in a more significant way than merely preventing the extinction of all life.

You ever hear that Rolling Stones song "You Can't Always Get What You Want."

If you want videogames to grow as an art form, then you have to allow them to challenge you and your tolerance for unhappiness, because when a game reflects something honest about life, that you won't always get a happy ending, that's art.

I think the ending does a bad job of this and other things (like good storytelling), but I still love the series. I can deal with a bad ending because I have real problems in real life.

1. They are not "challenging me and my tolerance for unhappiness". That's like saying Twilight challenges you. No. It's shitty writing. That's all. I don't have to allow them to write shitty stories or shitty endings. There's no excuse for that. While I would prefer a happy ending, I'd at least be satisfied with one that isn't poorly written. This was neither.

2. I don't buy the whole "real problems in real life" bullshit. That's not an excuse to put up with shitty entertainment. Quite the opposite. Entertainment's supposed to help you cope with/forget your "real problems", and when it fails so completely as ME3 did, that's especially bad. I also hate the argument, implicit in your statement, that just because there are things that are worse than ME3 endings, that doesn't let ME3 off the hook.

The EC did explain Joker flying away as it was an ordered retreat.

Plus it showed that the catalyst kid is wrong, using circular logic as opposed to be ambiguous as to whether is was just shit writing.

Do wish there were more different endings and could be much better.

I made an otherwise completely shitty ending into a decent, if fundamentally flawed one. I'd say that's an improvement. Since I knew going in that god-child and space magic weren't going to be fixed, I'm satisfied with the Extended Cut overall.

raptor1181:
In my ending shephed slaps the star child and tells him to get the hell out of our universe!!!!

And then what? You get the Refusal ending, and everyone dies. Heh.

OT: The EC was okay. It fixed some of the things that bothered me and gave some closure. But the ending itself is still pretty weak. I expected much better from BioWare.

It should have been clear that it won't "fix" anything the moment they said they would "explain" that trainwreck of an ending rather than retaking it.

The only thing that really bothered me about the first endings was that they didn't explain why joker was fleeing with the Normandy and how my team mates got back to the ship. With the new endings, they cleared that up and that is all I really wanted.

I like all the additional cutscenes they gave us (love the memorial scene and shepard's monologue for the control ending) and the extra dialogue options with the Star Child, all in all I'm more then satisfied. Sure the Star Child could have been done better but I'm ok with it as it is, kinda wish we could of had a battle with Harbinger though...but whats done is done. Bioware redeemed themselves in my eyes and I will still continue to call this series the best gaming series I have ever played.

I have a question. If the Citadel is the home of the Star Child, and if the Star Child controls the reapers, then wouldn't it just be easier to blow the Citadel up? Wasn't that tried in a previous game by... someone?

everythingbeeps:

CaptOfSerenity:

everythingbeeps:

Eh, I've seen this argument and I'm not buying it. Most of your previous actions DO affect the outcome, it's just that the effect is felt much earlier in the game, and isn't necessarily as impactful as you might have expected (but then, it's just unreasonable to expect ALL those decisions to have a huge impact.)

No, the problem with the ending is that there's no happy ending whatsoever. That's my problem with it. And the writers can fuck right off with their stupid "life doesn't always have happy endings" bullshit, because this is a game, not life. I played a badass superhero in this game, and I expected to save the universe in a more significant way than merely preventing the extinction of all life.

You ever hear that Rolling Stones song "You Can't Always Get What You Want."

If you want videogames to grow as an art form, then you have to allow them to challenge you and your tolerance for unhappiness, because when a game reflects something honest about life, that you won't always get a happy ending, that's art.

I think the ending does a bad job of this and other things (like good storytelling), but I still love the series. I can deal with a bad ending because I have real problems in real life.

1. They are not "challenging me and my tolerance for unhappiness". That's like saying Twilight challenges you. No. It's shitty writing. That's all. I don't have to allow them to write shitty stories or shitty endings. There's no excuse for that. While I would prefer a happy ending, I'd at least be satisfied with one that isn't poorly written. This was neither.

2. I don't buy the whole "real problems in real life" bullshit. That's not an excuse to put up with shitty entertainment. Quite the opposite. Entertainment's supposed to help you cope with/forget your "real problems", and when it fails so completely as ME3 did, that's especially bad. I also hate the argument, implicit in your statement, that just because there are things that are worse than ME3 endings, that doesn't let ME3 off the hook.

1. ME3 might not have been challenging in a good way, but you do say you don't want games to challenge you. You say entertainment is an escape: art is more than that. It does help people with real shit, but just because you didn't like the way it went down doesn't mean nobody did.

It seems like a whole bunch of people had a very specific way the series should end in their heads, beyond the vagueness of good writing, and since that didn't happen, they got pissed. You have to realize that entertainment and art are not always going to give you what you expected, especially if you want specific things. We should have gotten better endings, yes, but to threaten, yell, and hurl every shitty insult at Bioware, who made two games you fuckers know you loved, is absolutely repulsive.

If only the reaction was "Hey, Bioware, can we talk a little bit about this ending," then we might not be in this shitstorm we're in now. Hell, they might have made a better extended cut. But, no...

CaptOfSerenity:

1. ME3 might not have been challenging in a good way, but you do say you don't want games to challenge you. You say entertainment is an escape: art is more than that. It does help people with real shit, but just because you didn't like the way it went down doesn't mean nobody did.

It seems like a whole bunch of people had a very specific way the series should end in their heads, beyond the vagueness of good writing, and since that didn't happen, they got pissed. You have to realize that entertainment and art are not always going to give you what you expected, especially if you want specific things. We should have gotten better endings, yes, but to threaten, yell, and hurl every shitty insult at Bioware, who made two games you fuckers know you loved, is absolutely repulsive.

If only the reaction was "Hey, Bioware, can we talk a little bit about this ending," then we might not be in this shitstorm we're in now. Hell, they might have made a better extended cut. But, no...

Again, "challenging" doesn't mean "challenging our tolerance for bullshit". It's supposed to mean "making us think and contemplate". ME3's ending doesn't do this. It does the first thing.

You're trying way too hard to defend that shitty ending, and you're overusing the word "art", as if it's a defense for laziness and carelessness. It's not.

Look, I've admitted plenty of times that when this backlash first started, I was planted firmly on Bioware's side, and it was almost entirely because of how unreasonable the venom was. Now that I have distance from it, I can say, without all that rage, that the ending fucking blew. Not because it wasn't what I wanted, but because it was a piece of shit by any measure. And given the chance to fix it, Bioware instead gave us this horseshit about "artistic integrity". It was pure stubbornness.

And your suggestion that Bioware deliberately skimped on the EC doesn't really help anything; it makes Bioware seem every bit as childish and petulant as that fuckface who complained to the BBB.

And for the record, Bioware didn't make two games I loved. They made like five. Five and a half, let's say. Which makes it all the more disappointing when they thoroughly fuck up the ending to ME3.

And hey Escapist, cut the shit with all these goddamn captchas.

while i'm surprised by the number of people ok with the EC (which is better then before, not that that's saying much, i liked the control and synthesis endings my self)

the number of people STILL but hurt over what amounts to nothing is ether really funny or really pathetic, i can't decide. games have had shit endings for years, games have ended with plot holes for years, hell games have had shitty endings with plot holes for years, Mass Effect ending as such isn't special, its normal.

'it didn't fix anything', really >.> did none of you read the releases about it? its an EXPANSION, on what was already there, not the total revision you seemed to have been hoping for. it was meant solely to explain what happened a bit better and that's it.

that said, i do have some issue with these new endings.
they all end with 'we rebuild' >.> .... now, i like the extra detail they put in the ends as far as explaining things go, but really >.> they went the 'rainbows and sunshine' rout?
fucking, lame

the 'refuse ending', fucking SUCKS. not cause every one dies, but because every one dies, OFF SCREEN. i was talking about this with a friend and we both pretty much decided that the better way to do this ending would have been like the end of Halo Reach, IE where you get thrown into a battle you have no chance of winning and you fight for as long as you can before they eventually get you. hell, a slide show detailing how bad you got your asses kicked would a been better then 'you lost :D haha' OR, throw you into a seemingly hopeless battle where your readieness level ya know, matters and you pull that upset win you wanted

ether way 'Refusal' had some potential to be good, but, it's Bioware, they kinda suck at they're jobs thus, the ball was again, dropped

I played through the endings, and while they're better than the originals they still failed to address the most pressing issue: the Star Child.

Ultimately, BioWare showed us how to treat cancer with a Band-Aid.

CaptOfSerenity:

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

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

First, Bioware never called fans that.

2nd, did they fuckin kill your family member? The fuck is wrong with you, calm down. Bioware is more than a corporate entity; it's a collection of people. And those people, to put it in a cliche, have feelings.

Don't be an asshole

1.- If you followed the Shitstorm and if you read my previous comments, then you would know what im talking about, go look up my post as I went into details to post links.

2.- Precisely because its a corporate entity I can wish it to go fuck itself without any god damn remorse.

Dont be a Biodrone

Adam Jensen:
snip

I'll just leave this here for everyone...

They shoulda let it die. They could have pleased more people by leaving it as it was. All those fans that believed in the indoctrination theory to the core could have believed that until the next Mass Effect game came out.

To respond to your post OP, it wasn't supposed to fix anything really.

It was just supposed to elaborate on the existing endings. (Basically sidestepping most of the point.)

Wuz really bad ending to series comrad, but EC wasn't gonna fix anything anyways. We knew that much.

That's how it be' yo.

Im Just pissed off because the ending do not fit into the game at all, the war assets do not matter at all, you just need to play all the priority missions and you get to make a choice to use space magic, turn the reapers blue, or blow up all the robots (or loose the war in this new patch)

everything in the trilogy (and worst so the third game itself) is forgotten and this starchild kid makes you choose three endings that all play out the same

Honestly I would have been more satisfied if the refusal ending was the only ending, that would be more artistic than the bullshit synthesis ending that makes everyone glow green
These endings go rather unexplained except "space magic we don't understand yet" in a universe that explains everything with an acceptable logic

and to those that say "well its BIOWARE'S story", I say, first off, their story sucks and I am gladly saying so, secondly I find that the first two games (especially the second)managed to have enough change based off my input to feel like it was my story

and I know that EC wasn't going to change anything, but I was hoping for a boss battle with more difficulty than a few enemies in slow motion

Here is what it is...

the Extended Cut was meant to EXPLAIN the endings more clearly not "fix" the story. Now what went wrong in ME3? Well that's rather simple, they wrote themselves into a corner and they needed a way out of that corner and what you see is what they got... It is still an amazing feat that over 2 previous games of individual decisions you get to see how many of the decisions play out in ME3 but what this does do is create too many potential outcomes and there is no real way they could of played them all out with the ending. Is it a good ending? Not at all, it has too many holes... but all things considered it is the best ending for the corner they wrote themselves in. I found the whole Catalyst idea to be incredibly convenient and odd because it did not fit into the universe but it was their magic ticket out of that corner so that's why it's there.

As for Shepard dying... well I went through all the stages of grief when i first finished the game but now when I think back on it, I think it would be a bit corny if Shepard some how lived through it all... granted not impossible but maybe just a bit too super hero like and having a character that is actually real goes a long way, especially in a video game.

Major Tom:

Zack Alklazaris:
I was ok with the original endings, thought I felt... well what could happen now.
That has now been answered. Look guys your taking a statement that was made early about how the endings were suppose to be and they changed that. You have a right to be angry, but its time to let it go. Can any of you come up with a better ending? Post it here. Complete with different endings based on what you've selected in the past. Then find a way to create a way to active these endings without using a selection screen of any kind.

Its harder than it looks, especially since ME1 and ME2 both had button endings. You either save the council or don't. You either destroy the base or don't.

Please stop... its just getting childish and your making me sad.

I don't normally stick my nose in fights in which I have no stake, but I thought of this almost immediately. It's a flowchart that makes what you do throughout the course of the game matter, with a number of different endings that range from 'yay we win' to 'everybody dies'.

I found it interesting.

Is this an official, though retconned, doc by Bioware, or is this Fan-made? Because this would fix the ending. I notice a distinct lack of star-child.

God I've noticed so many people whining about how Synthetics aren't killing organics and the apparent hypocrisy of the reapers methods, so I felt like clearing it up, and some other things.
1. The catalyst-child is NOT saying synthetics are killing organics now, or will soon, but eventually, they WILL. Which is true, over an infinite period some people WILL eventually make a synthetic that can reproduce itself and will begin to destroy organics, because that's how infinite periods of time WORK.
2. The reapers aren't stopping synthetics killing organics by killing organics, (Well they are, but that's simplifying it) they are killing SOME organics so they wont make a synthetic that kills ALL organics, Reapers wont be killing Yahg, they aren't in space, they are letting each race achieve the pinnacle of their evolution and lifestyle, before killing them so they wont cause harm, and keeping record of them via new reapers.
3. Space magic, God the title of the god-damn series is just space magic, SCI-FI IS ALL SPACE MAGIC! (Ignoring hard science fiction for now) The difference between this and the mass effect is that synthesis and/or the crucible is more complicated to understand, or explain.
4. Finally, your choices do matter, IF you expand what you see as the ending, it's more than just the last cinematic, it's the scenes up to it as well, with the Illusive man, the battle for earth, the cinematic of reaching earth, all of it, near all of your choices changed something throughout that game, but NONE of them are important enough to put the fate of the entire galaxies Synthetics, Space faring organics, or all organics and synthetics on, so you make one last choice, that ALSO matters and you get an ending, face it, Grunt being alive or dead or unlikely to father a child for a long time would not change anything.
To end my rant, some people have been saying the ending is bad and they want a happy ending, and some have said the EC makes all the original endings end with sunshine and rainbows. Argue with each other to find out what the problems are, or else its just one massive case of not being able to please everyone. Like every other story ending.

LunaticPanda:
The catalyst-child is NOT saying synthetics are killing organics now, or will soon, but eventually, they WILL. Which is true, over an infinite period some people WILL eventually make a synthetic that can reproduce itself and will begin to destroy organics, because that's how infinite periods of time WORK.

No, it really isn't true. And it's so fuckin' obvious to anyone who knows how logic works. Besides, nothing lasts FOREVER. Not even galaxies.

I don't understand how people aren't seeing the lack of logic in that little shithead's reasoning. What The Catalyst says isn't absolute truth. It can't ever be absolute truth, not only because it logically and mathematically isn't (which was proven on The Escapist when everyone went berserk about the ending), but due to the very nature of the Catalyst. The Catalyst isn't god, he's a god damn A.I. He has one set opinion on one subject and he's not gonna change it. It still doesn't mean that his opinion is correct. There is just no logical reason to accept his opinion. And since anyone can come up with a better solution than to turn organics into Reapers (like let's say, plant indoctrination devices throughout the entire galaxy in order to prevent organics from creating synthetics), it's pretty fuckin' stupid to simply accept his retarded opinion as the one and only truth.

And a creature that can do no wrong according to some of you, couldn't have come up with Synthesis earlier? He was doing this harvesting shit for millions of years! He wasn't smart enough to build a power source like The Crucible on his own, then bring one random organic up there to sacrifice him in order to synthesize everyone with green space magic? But he's smart enough to KNOW that eventually EVERY organic race will create a synthetic race and go to war with them? And you people are seriously buying this shit?

They even said that it wouldn't change the endings significantly, was stated multiple times, so I'm wondering how you thought it wouldn't have the same Starchild-ex-machina that already existed. I do agree that the overall ending is still poorly thought out and executed, it could be done much better, in a manner akin to Star Trek TNG etc. All that set aside, while I am not a fan of the ending, the Extended Cut does make it better. Not necessarily good, but better.

Shots are framed better, more scenes to keep the perspective of characters in mind, explaining bits like what happened to Shepard's squad (not in depth but at least an answer) All the while putting some new dialogue that just makes it easier to follow whats happening. TRYING to make their sudden change from Space Opera Sci-Fi to Hard Sci-Fi work out better in the time they had to make this.

Lots of flaws in the ending already, but I knew they would still linger on. With the Ending being Free, though, and adding those little pieces to frame the ending better, I'd say it was successful in what they stated it would do.

Like to add that Mass Effect 3 is still not the worst ending to a game I've ever seen, and it's a shame that it will likely be remembered that way. It's disappointing, but I certainly wasn't compelled to be a wanker and file a lawsuit against BioWare/EA or something ridiculously out of proportion. Come on guys, at least it had an ending with proper scenes, attempts at closure and tying up loose ends. It's not like the atrocious ending of KotOR II- where the whole game just goes to a full stop, then rolls credits. Only ending to a game that made me angry.

I don't get why EDI says she is alive in the Synthesis ending.
Wasn't the whole point of all AI subplots that AI's are "alive" in the first place?
EDI got romantically involved with Joker for crying out loud.

Navvan:

Adam Jensen:
Snip

I just finished it and all the changes are not in the final monolog(s). They are sprinkled between Cerberus base mission and the final monolog. While it isn't perfect it is at least a respectable and satisfying ending now. It covers most of the plot holes with outright explanations or changes and leaves room for the others (like why didn't Starchild open citadel) to be solved implicitly. Its a shame it wasn't like this when it was first released.

TL;DR: It delivers the closure that the original was missing and covers most if not all of the major plot hole crapapuluza the original ending had. While it isn't my ideal ending it is both satisfying and respectable now. It is just a shame this wasn't the original.

Pretty much this!

I hated the original ending but was left pretty satisfied with the Extended Cut...I guess that makes me an indoctrinated twat!

Yeah well, tough! The EC was pretty good in my eyes!

Adam Jensen:

He has one set opinion on one subject and he's not gonna change it. It still doesn't mean that his opinion is correct.

Thank you my friend, for this wonderful wonderful quote.

LunaticPanda:

Adam Jensen:

He has one set opinion on one subject and he's not gonna change it. It still doesn't mean that his opinion is correct.

Thank you my friend, for this wonderful wonderful quote.

Quote mining? Seriously? Are you that desperate? Prove me wrong if you can.

Adam Jensen:

LunaticPanda:

Adam Jensen:

He has one set opinion on one subject and he's not gonna change it. It still doesn't mean that his opinion is correct.

Thank you my friend, for this wonderful wonderful quote.

Quote mining? Seriously? Are you that desperate? Prove me wrong if you can.

Prove what wrong? shall I add on your comment about there being "No logical reason"to accept his opinion? (Despite me having no logical reason to accept yours, due to it being an opinion.) What exact part of the context am I leaving out? I just don't like copying walls of text when I'm only after two sentences. Even with that, It can still reflect. An opinion can be held stubbornly regardless of whether it is true, in fact, the nature of an opinion is that such a thing cannot be true else it becomes fact. This is true to the opinion of anyone or anything.
Furthermore, you seem to misunderstand a few points I was making that I should have countered in my previous post.
1. The reapers can't indoctrinate everybody, that's not what they want (I admit, this is theory and speculation) They want a species to have a meaningful existence, but not one that puts them in danger of what the reapers believe is inevitable, indoctrinating them deprives the meaning.
2. It may not be an inevitable thing to you, but the reapers disagree, you could bring up a thousand points of synthetics not killing organics, and an AI could just say, "Not This time" they believe it is inevitable, they are acting to stop it and you can't dissuade them because your lifespan, perception, and everything else is just too small to be of any meaning to the millennia old robots, there is no logical basis whatsoever for you having a more complete world-view than things that have watched countless worlds over hundreds of thousands of years, who knows, maybe, once they were a touch late and had to stop an army of synthetics from a galactic-omnicide, maybe many times, maybe they performed a galactic omnicide and know the consequences, and what is actually at stake. Whatever it is, something definitely makes them think of themselves as a better opinion on this than a human that isn't even one hundred.
3. Synthesis, and the crucible in general, quite possibly run on a different branch of science than the reapers comprehend, or more likely. They don't have the faintest idea what would happen if they did that, it is a reckless thing to do by any stretch of the imagination and its ignoring important questions even when there are only three other choices. Contrast, something that they have done, successfully, repeatedly.
4. it wont be that EVERY organic race makes a synthetic to go to war with, it may not even be one, it may not even be a war, it could be one guy that gets the idea and makes the code, and spreads it, like if somebody infected every Geth, to quickly dispatch everyone, to reproduce and destroy, if one person gets the idea, and the hardware is good enough, then that's all that's ever needed. So, the reapers choose to stop it, by making sure no one guy has access to the hardware, and has the idea, which means making sure there ISN'T one guy with access to the hardware, by removing ALL guys with access to the hardware.

everythingbeeps:

CaptOfSerenity:

1. ME3 might not have been challenging in a good way, but you do say you don't want games to challenge you. You say entertainment is an escape: art is more than that. It does help people with real shit, but just because you didn't like the way it went down doesn't mean nobody did.

It seems like a whole bunch of people had a very specific way the series should end in their heads, beyond the vagueness of good writing, and since that didn't happen, they got pissed. You have to realize that entertainment and art are not always going to give you what you expected, especially if you want specific things. We should have gotten better endings, yes, but to threaten, yell, and hurl every shitty insult at Bioware, who made two games you fuckers know you loved, is absolutely repulsive.

If only the reaction was "Hey, Bioware, can we talk a little bit about this ending," then we might not be in this shitstorm we're in now. Hell, they might have made a better extended cut. But, no...

Again, "challenging" doesn't mean "challenging our tolerance for bullshit". It's supposed to mean "making us think and contemplate". ME3's ending doesn't do this. It does the first thing.

You're trying way too hard to defend that shitty ending, and you're overusing the word "art", as if it's a defense for laziness and carelessness. It's not.

Look, I've admitted plenty of times that when this backlash first started, I was planted firmly on Bioware's side, and it was almost entirely because of how unreasonable the venom was. Now that I have distance from it, I can say, without all that rage, that the ending fucking blew. Not because it wasn't what I wanted, but because it was a piece of shit by any measure. And given the chance to fix it, Bioware instead gave us this horseshit about "artistic integrity". It was pure stubbornness.

And your suggestion that Bioware deliberately skimped on the EC doesn't really help anything; it makes Bioware seem every bit as childish and petulant as that fuckface who complained to the BBB.

And for the record, Bioware didn't make two games I loved. They made like five. Five and a half, let's say. Which makes it all the more disappointing when they thoroughly fuck up the ending to ME3.

And hey Escapist, cut the shit with all these goddamn captchas.

Twice, TWICE, I said the ending sucks. I'm not defending it; I'm merely saying art challenges you. You seemed to dismiss that notion completely. I even said ME3 was challenging in a bad way (bs detector), so please ditch this straw man argument you're clinging to.

Also, I just want you to think about this: if you were a writer, and you poured years of work into a product you thought to be good and well-made and brilliant, then released and people demanded you change the ending, how would you feel?

I think I get how writers can make something really bad after making good shit; they hide in a bubble to create their work. That's what I do. And I haven't even made anything good haha. Point here is, it's deceptively easy to lose sight of what is the "right" thing to do in storytelling when you surround yourself with one project, which might be the case here. It happened to me.

You know, this conversation has really been eye-opening for me. I'm having a sort of epiphany.

My two cents on the commentary between Adam Jensen and LunaticPanda (didn't want to quote and have a massive, massive wall of text.)

It's like this, from the established lore, story and narrative in the ME universe the Star Brat's logic is a hideous thing. It's flawed, wretched and so riddled with holes that said starbrat could drive reapers through them. It's the why that makes the logic so appalling. Throught the entire series we are NEVER once given a clue as to the reapers motives, who or what created them or insight into their internal discourse as a "species" that is, until the ending of ME3.

The above happens for a reason, namely it maintains the Reaper's as an unknowable, unsearchable and completely alien enemy. Revealing their motives, rationale and "logic" takes all that from them and they just lose all threat they have. Add to it the logic of the starchild and the reapers become a laughing stock of a main protagonist. It's horrible logic and wretched story telling.

Add to it that the starchild's logic breaks the narrative cohesion of the past 2.95 games and reveals information that either Shep doesn't need to know, the Starchild would not or could not know (unless he was an "godchild") and his (starchild) logic is revealed for what it is; a strawman to drive the plot to conclusion.

By the above I mean this, The Starchild's statement that eventually a organic species will create a synthetic species that will destroy all organic life everywhere is a logical fallacy. The Starbrat, while old, is NOT a god. Ergo, he cannot know this will be the outcome. Why? Because it has NEVER happened. He, and his minions, have not allowed it to. Because of that one simple fact the Starchild cannot say with any degree of certainity his ascertation will occur because has no proof that his opinion and logic are correct. All he has is an opinion/logic based on a faulty premise that has never once been demonstrably proven. Shep on the other hand can prove (if certain choices were made) that Synthetics and Organics can get along.

Furthermore, part of the argument and reveals about the reapers logic and starchild's creation only serve to underscore how idiotic the starchild's logic actually is. By his (starchild's) own admission in the EC, he "didn't give his creators a choice". He made them the first reaper. By his own words his logic is proved wrong and that he is probably insane or at the very least not capable of rational, coherent well thought out plans. His solution to the "problem" is mass genocide. This is clearly delusional thinking and highly suspect logic. Other sci-fi series have gone down this road with a "starbrat" type of character but they have never, ever, ever been revealed in the final moments of the book, tv show or movie. Mass Effect 3 shows us why.

worldruler8:

Major Tom:

Zack Alklazaris:
I was ok with the original endings, thought I felt... well what could happen now.
That has now been answered. Look guys your taking a statement that was made early about how the endings were suppose to be and they changed that. You have a right to be angry, but its time to let it go. Can any of you come up with a better ending? Post it here. Complete with different endings based on what you've selected in the past. Then find a way to create a way to active these endings without using a selection screen of any kind.

Its harder than it looks, especially since ME1 and ME2 both had button endings. You either save the council or don't. You either destroy the base or don't.

Please stop... its just getting childish and your making me sad.

I don't normally stick my nose in fights in which I have no stake, but I thought of this almost immediately. It's a flowchart that makes what you do throughout the course of the game matter, with a number of different endings that range from 'yay we win' to 'everybody dies'.

I found it interesting.

Is this an official, though retconned, doc by Bioware, or is this Fan-made? Because this would fix the ending. I notice a distinct lack of star-child.

As far as I can tell, this is a fan creation.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked