Mass Effect 3 [Spoilers]

nomad

"Bring the light of day"
Synthesis was my choice for the simple reason that I was going for full fledged Paragon and did not wanted to kill the Geth and EDI. But one has to wonder if that was the direction the ME universe was heading. Seeing Shepard accomplish peace between Geth and Quarian, Joker and EDI doing the naughty dance... Don't get me wrong, I'm not implying that the entire universe would mixed themselves up with Synthetics and create this new DNA. But it just felt proper having all those results in mind. Personally, for my second play-through I am choosing destruction of the Reapers. For one it gave us that little extra scene that I consider valid for future possible ME tittles? No? Ok! Moving on!

I think it would be proper to mention, that on top of what Aazealh said about people confusing the fact that their are options to choose from, they may just not be the ones we personally would agree to... The entire ME trilogy was always one sided. If Wrex died you had Grunt. If Samara died you had her daughter and so on. There were very little moments that I can remember on the top of my head that would actually be considered extreme changing elements to the story. Perhaps the Rachni was one of them, and people expected more than just a number of supporters in a list of "Galactic Readiness" that can be replaced with a couple of multiplayer rounds if the numbers were low. And speaking of low... What about Kelly Chambers eh? eh? I felt nothing but pitty for that girl even after I found her in the Citadel and found out her mental state was never the same after the Collectors. I guess that explains her stripping on lingerie in Shepard's quarters after the suicide mission. She was confused :troll:

Time for the million dollar question... Did the Mass Relay in fact destroyed all the planets around each Relay, or was this a magical explosion that delievered the code or data... or mythical signal that would express Shepard's decision?
 
This thread looks hilarious with its grey block posts. Do we continue like that?

After shooting the kid and walking into invisible walls unsuccessfully searching for the hidden fourth choice
I just went with red, because huskify-/reaperfying the galaxy (how do programs become part organic? or is it something like this?)
was not an option and "Yeah, YOU can totally control us! here are the keys. Now have a nice day and go electrocute yourself." seemed rather stupid.
I like the synthesis option in theory but a bit more effort than cyber-leafs and Joker's cyber-hat would be nice.
What about Kelly Chambers eh? eh?
After saving her from her worst nightmare, preventing her from being shot, not scolding her into suicide, she finally has to relive her worst memories when Husks grab her and she knows all screaming, crying and begging won't save her.
Nice, I like that.
Time for the million dollar question...
Did the Mass Relay in fact destroyed all the planets around each Relay, or was this a magical explosion that delievered the code or data... or mythical signal that would express Shepard's decision?
Well, green is DNA changing space magic, red is a mighty powerfull EMP, blue is a signal override...
Then again, the explosion the Normandy tries to outrun seemed rather destructive...
I'll go with d) LOTS OF SPECULATION FROM EVERYONE as intended by the author
 
royoak said:
This thread looks hilarious with its grey block posts. Do we continue like that?

Totally agree. :ganishka: Oh, well:

I tried shooting the kid too. Didn't everyone? The little creep was sinister as hell, though I don't think much more should be read into that (such as that the kid was lying).

I went with the synthesis ending, mainly because, when left to the imagination, it just sounds like the coolest thing to be. :zodd: (being able to count as well as a calculator, etc.)

BTW, what do you guys think happened to Shepard at the end? Everyone seems to be talking about it like he dies in most of the endings, but personally, I'm hard-pressed to see how he would have died in any of them. Clearly not in the control ending, since he's now in control of the reapers (replacing the kid maybe?). He even survives the ending where the fucking citadel blows right in his fucking face, so it's weird to think jumping into the harmless synthesis beam would spell his death where the other two options didn't.

Nomad said:
Personally, for my second play-through I am choosing destruction of the Reapers. For one it gave us that little extra scene that I consider valid for future possible ME tittles? No? Ok! Moving on!
Well, I doubt (hope?) they're going bring back Shepard. It would be weird, his saga is complete, give the guy a rest! If there's going to be post-reaper ME stuff, though, I wonder if we can already see the "real" canon of the franchise in ME3, in the form of the "cinematic mode" (where the game makes the choices for you)? Most choices you make in the game can be left ambiguous in the future of course, but they're going to have to pick one or the other when it comes to the big stuff (mostly the ending).

PS. Poor Kelly Chambers. :judo: They really didn't spare her any love in this game.
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
Oburi said:
Also I later found out that since I didn't play multiplayer I don't know exactly how my destruction ending would have turned out if I chose that? Is there a way to destroy only the reapers?

Yes, in my playthrough I only destroyed the Reapers. Earth and everybody on it was left intact by the wave. And Shepard breathed in at the end. :slan:

Nomad said:
I think it would be proper to mention, that on top of what Aazealh said about people confusing the fact that their are options to choose from, they may just not be the ones we personally would agree to... The entire ME trilogy was always one sided. If Wrex died you had Grunt. If Samara died you had her daughter and so on. There were very little moments that I can remember on the top of my head that would actually be considered extreme changing elements to the story.

Definitely. Although in the case of Wrex, he's replaced by his brother in ME2, not by Grunt, who appears as a new team member either way. But yeah, most of the choices in the series are token ones. They only give the illusion of choice. And some of the complaints I've read are downright ridiculous in that they expected every little choice they made to make a huge difference in the end. It's supposed to be making a difference in who joins you in the fight against the Reapers, but when it comes to dealing with the Reapers themselves, the options we got are pretty much all we were ever going to get.

Nomad said:
Perhaps the Rachni was one of them, and people expected more than just a number of supporters in a list of "Galactic Readiness" that can be replaced with a couple of multiplayer rounds if the numbers were low.

Yeah, the Rachni episode was a bit of a letdown to me. More on that later. :iva:

Nomad said:
What about Kelly Chambers eh? eh? I felt nothing but pitty for that girl even after I found her in the Citadel and found out her mental state was never the same after the Collectors. I guess that explains her stripping on lingerie in Shepard's quarters after the suicide mission. She was confused :troll:

When Kelly first introduced herself to me in ME2, I told her it'd be "Yeoman Chambers", let's keep it professional, thank you very much. I already had a girlfriend (or thought I did :schierke:) and didn't want an overfriendly Cerberus spy to be snooping around. As a consequence our relationship never really developed, and she never even showed up in ME3. :ganishka:

Nomad said:
Time for the million dollar question... Did the Mass Relay in fact destroyed all the planets around each Relay, or was this a magical explosion that delievered the code or data... or mythical signal that would express Shepard's decision?

As far as I'm concerned it didn't destroy the nearby environments. What people out there seem to be completely ignoring is the fact in Arrival you slammed an asteroid into the relay, so the relay's energy was released and that was what destroyed the system. In our case the energy is being sent away to other relays and from what we see of the Citadel's destruction (in the cases where it is destroyed) it doesn't damage the nearby surroundings aside from the energy wave itself that destroys the Reapers. So in short: no, I'm pretty sure it didn't destroy anything other than what was intended/shown (since not refining the Crucible enough can result in damaging Earth).

royoak said:
This thread looks hilarious with its grey block posts. Do we continue like that?

Until we decide the spoilers can fly.

royoak said:
I like the synthesis option in theory but a bit more effort than cyber-leafs and Joker's cyber-hat would be nice.

Joker himself is cyber-enhanced, if you check carefully.

royoak said:
Well, green is DNA changing space magic, red is a mighty powerfull EMP, blue is a signal override...
Then again, the explosion the Normandy tries to outrun seemed rather destructive...

I interpreted the "explosion" pursuing the Normandy as traveling through a relay, hence the destructive effect it had on the Normandy. Only way it can make sense in a context where the wave spared everything on Earth except Reapers.

IcePuck said:
I tried shooting the kid too. Didn't everyone? The little creep was sinister as hell, though I don't think much more should be read into that (such as that the kid was lying).

His very position as the Reapers' master makes him liable to be a liar, regardless of creepiness. :iva:

IcePuck said:
BTW, what do you guys think happened to Shepard at the end? Everyone seems to be talking about it like he dies in most of the endings, but personally, I'm hard-pressed to see how he would have died in any of them. Clearly not in the control ending, since he's now in control of the reapers (replacing the kid maybe?). He even survives the ending where the fucking citadel blows right in his fucking face, so it's weird to think jumping into the harmless synthesis beam would spell his death where the other two options didn't.

Uhhh, he's shown being disintegrated, so he's pretty much dead. The kid says so as well. And that goes for the Control ending too. He probably still exists as a ghostly construct or something, but he wouldn't be the same. Again, he's shown being disintegrated, so to me he's dead as we knew him.

IcePuck said:
Well, I doubt (hope?) they're going bring back Shepard. It would be weird, his saga is complete, give the guy a rest!

Yeah... Unless it's set in the past, I don't see Shepard being brought back for another game.
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Nomad said:
Synthesis was my choice for the simple reason that I was going for full fledged Paragon and did not wanted to kill the Geth and EDI.

I don't know, I thought it was in-between for a reason.
Sure, you're doing it for some higher purpose and ultimate good, but you're also you're unilaterally messing with the DNA of everyone in the galaxy without their permission, so there's a little renegade in that.

I feel like that's probably supposed to be the preferred, big profound grand finale, but like I said... destroy is the fitting one. That's the ME1 ending, Control is ME2 ending, and like in every other aspect, ME3 is about Synthesis.

royoak said:
I just went with red, because huskify-/reaperfying the galaxy (how do programs become part organic? or is it something like this?)
was not an option and "Yeah, YOU can totally control us! here are the keys. Now have a nice day and go electrocute yourself." seemed rather stupid.

Yeah, but if you can't trust the kid or it's all a big manipulation, why would you ever be given the real option to destroy the Reapers? Wouldn't he completely misdirect you instead? "Oh, that red switch, yeah, that's the one that kills all humans, don't touch that!"

IcePuck said:
BTW, what do you guys think happened to Shepard at the end? Everyone seems to be talking about it like he dies in most of the endings, but personally, I'm hard-pressed to see how he would have died in any of them. Clearly not in the control ending, since he's now in control of the reapers (replacing the kid maybe?). He even survives the ending where the fucking citadel blows right in his fucking face, so it's weird to think jumping into the harmless synthesis beam would spell his death where the other two options didn't.

I know he lived in mine. :badbone: Well, not initially, when I blew up the fucking Earth! :ganishka: As far as Shepard's sacrifice in the other endings, particularly synthesis, it's foreshadowed in part by Legion's sacrifice for the Geth. Obviously, if you decide to wipe out the Geth one way or another, there's no need for such thematic parallels.

IcePuck said:
Well, I doubt (hope?) they're going bring back Shepard. It would be weird, his saga is complete, give the guy a rest!
Aazealh said:
Yeah... Unless it's set in the past, I don't see Shepard being brought back for another game.

Yeah, playing as a crippled up Shepard fighting the remnants of Cerberus or something would be quite the come down. Plus, the context of any post-ME3 set game is basically going to overrule the choice of two-thirds of the players. Talk about your options being meaningless (maybe they'll find a way to make it so it doesn't matter either way again; don't address what happened to the Reaper's, whether Shepard's alive or dead, or if everyone's secretly part-synthetic =) Of course, this may all become moot in the coming months anyway; who knows what the new apology DLCs will bring?
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
Griffith said:
Sure, you're doing it for some higher purpose and ultimate good, but you're also you're unilaterally messing with the DNA of everyone in the galaxy without their permission, so there's a little renegade in that.

Yeah, that's also why I didn't choose it. It changes everything and everyone in ways you can't predict.

Griffith said:
Yeah, but if you can't trust the kid or it's all a big manipulation, why would you ever be given the real option to destroy the Reapers? Wouldn't he completely misdirect you instead? "Oh, that red switch, yeah, that's the one that kills all humans, don't touch that!"

Why is there even a big pipe that kills all the Reapers if you shoot it a few times? Sitting just across from the ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL handles, too. If we start asking these questions... Better stock on food because it's going to be a long night. :void:

Griffith said:
As far as Shepard's sacrifice in the other endings, particularly synthesis, it's foreshadowed by Legion's sacrifice for the Geth.

And Shepard telling EDI that there's more to organics than self-preservation and all that. They lay it on pretty thickly throughout the game.

Griffith said:
Yeah, playing as a crippled up Shepard fighting the remnants of Cerberus or something would be quite the come down.

Mass Effect 4: The Dark Tower. :troll:
 

nomad

"Bring the light of day"
Griffith said:
I don't know, I thought it was in-between for a reason.
Sure, you're doing it for some higher purpose and ultimate good, but you're also you're unilaterally messing with the DNA of everyone in the galaxy without their permission, so there's a little renegade in that.
I guess that for the greater good, I much rather all living things and organisms to be able to breathe another day and being mad at me rather than not exist at all. But yeah it is a very good point. I guess the thought of what I just posted overwheights the thought of changing evolution as we all know it without permission. Because of this, why oh why I have a mental image of Shepards memorial tombstone with a graffiti of "Fuck you Shepard" or something now :ganishka:

Griffith said:
I feel like that's probably supposed to be the preferred, big profound grand finale, but like I said... destroy is the fitting one. That's the ME1 ending, Control is ME2 ending, and like in every other aspect, ME3 is about Synthesis.
You know... That's a very good point of view. I like that.
 
[quote author=Aazealh]
Joker himself is cyber-enhanced, if you check carefully.
[/quote]
And EDI has human eyes and is cyber-enhanced as well.

[quote author=Aazealh]
I interpreted the "explosion" pursuing the Normandy as traveling through a relay, hence the destructive effect it had on the Normandy. Only way it can make sense in a context where the wave spared everything on Earth except Reapers.
[/quote]
Isn't traveling through a relay instantaneous?

[quote author=Griffith]
Yeah, but if you can't trust the kid or it's all a big manipulation, why would you ever be given the real option to destroy the Reapers? Wouldn't he completely misdirect you instead? "Oh, that red switch, yeah, that's the one that kills all humans, don't touch that!"
[/quote]
SPECULATIONS
Red ending: Since the dead reapers are just lying around on earth and they still "dream" don't they indoctrinate everybody to rebuild the reapers ? :troll:

[quote author=IcePuck]
BTW, what do you guys think happened to Shepard at the end? Everyone seems to be talking about it like he dies in most of the endings, but personally, I'm hard-pressed to see how he would have died in any of them. Clearly not in the control ending, since he's now in control of the reapers (replacing the kid maybe?). He even survives the ending where the fucking citadel blows right in his fucking face, so it's weird to think jumping into the harmless synthesis beam would spell his death where the other two options didn't.
[/quote]
Shepard died. But the servants of the Reapers, the Collectors, are still around. And they avenge their masters death by rebuilding them using humans and so mocking Shepard's efforts. Only Cerberus under the guidance of TIM realized this threat and revived Shepard in order to stop the Reapers once and for all.
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
royoak said:
And EDI has human eyes and is cyber-enhanced as well.

Didn't notice the eyes, but if you say so. Joker's eyes are glowing though.

royoak said:
Isn't traveling through a relay instantaneous?

That's how it's described... But it might just be near instantaneous compared to conventional FTL speeds! Otherwise it's just a big plothole. :iva:

royoak said:
Red ending: Since the dead reapers are just lying around on earth and they still "dream" don't they indoctrinate everybody to rebuild the reapers ? :troll:

Doesn't look like they'll be able to "dream" in the state they're left in. :iva:
 
H

hellrasinbrasin

Guest
The Indoctrination Theory makes since think about it The Illusive Man could not choose because he was all ready under Reaper Control. Where as Shepard while not under their control was the only candidate to influence events. The being that visits Shepard throughout the game is a being from the last cycle who
chose "Control" to guide the Reapers into the next Cycle.

- Synthesis would force all races to evolve into a Star Child
- Control would simply cause the cycle to repeat
- Destroy would be no different that Control as both options create a looping cycle

Shepard's only choice is to chose evolution by evolving beyond a physical form the need for conflict would be shed. While I agree that things should have been more elaborated after Shepard made his "choice" leading up to the destruction of the relays. By destroying them he was in effect forcing all the races to evolve on their own.
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Aazealh said:
Why is there even a big pipe that kills all the Reapers if you shoot it a few times? Sitting just across from the ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL handles, too. If we start asking these questions... Better stock on food because it's going to be a long night. :void:

That's why I can't really subscribe to any of these tortured ruse scenarios (though I appreciate and fully support the added apocryphal mythology). I think it was supposed to be painfully straightforward
: Make your final choice on the giant symbolic paragon/renegade machine!

Aazealh said:
Mass Effect 4: The Dark Tower. :troll:

As I told you, the tone of the epilogue seriously reminded me of the DT epilogue. And I can one up your grossness here by pointing out that the way they tried to make the ending this pseudo-spiritual experience on top of everything else reminded me of...

fightforthelost2.jpg


Nomad said:
Because of this, why oh why I have a mental image of Shepards memorial tombstone with a graffiti of "Fuck you Shepard" or something now :ganishka:

That's why they should have said in my epilogue, "The shithead said he was going to save Earth, but his dumbass destroyed it in the process! That's why we live on this idealized warm fuzzy ending planet, my sweet."

Nomad said:
You know... That's a very good point of view. I like that.

Yeah, there's lots of reasonable, satisfying ways to look at it. People are choosing not to though, being reactionary. I maintain that a lot of this negative sentiment is merely being misdirected at the ending rather coming from it. Not because it's actually so good, but because nobody should be that upset by it either.

royoak said:

:ubik:

REAPERS: "OUR MOTIVES ARE INCONCEIVABLE TO ORGANICS."

Shepard: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
hellrasinbrasin said:
The Indoctrination Theory makes since think about it The Illusive Man could not choose because he was all ready under Reaper Control. Where as Shepard while not under their control was the only candidate to influence events. The being that visits Shepard throughout the game is a being from the last cycle who chose "Control" to guide the Reapers into the next Cycle.

...That goes directly against what we're shown and told. The kid specifically tells Shepard he's the first organic to ever set foot there, and then proceeds to speak about "his" solution and all that.

hellrasinbrasin said:
- Synthesis would force all races to evolve into a Star Child

Hahaha, did you just rip that off straight from 2001: A Space Odyssey? Because that makes no sense at all. We're shown what Synthesis does and it's not that. The evolution into a single being that you mention is much closer to the Reaper process.

hellrasinbrasin said:
- Control would simply cause the cycle to repeat

Why would Shepard do that? Makes no sense, as shown by the Reapers leaving Earth.

hellrasinbrasin said:
- Destroy would be no different that Control as both options create a looping cycle

So says you. Baseless assertion. In my game the Geth and the Quarians got along eventually. Not all synthetics are bound to declare war on organics by invisible rules. Don't take what the kid says at face value. Shepard himself certainly emitted doubts.

hellrasinbrasin said:
Shepard's only choice is to chose evolution

Shepard has 3 choices. Period.
 
Aazealh said:
That's how it's described... But it might just be near instantaneous compared to conventional FTL speeds! Otherwise it's just a big plothole. :iva:
That's a nice way of putting it.

Griffith said:
:ubik:
"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

:ganishka:
 

Walter

Administrator
Staff member
Since everyone's hot to trot on spoilers ahead of the April 1 embargo I set, I'll just go ahead and relinquish it. I've changed the thread title to include [Spoilers], so everyone should have been duly warned upon entering this thread.

That means no complaining if you've ruined your experience by reading things in this thread.

That also means that unless it's some extreme example, don't worry about spoiler tags. Use discretion, but I can't really think of a scenario where spoiler tags would be necessary anymore.

I enjoyed the game very much. I'd put it well ahead of ME2 in the series, but a few steps behind ME1. There are some breathtaking scenarios in Mass Effect 3 that blow everything else in the series out of the water. Namely, Tuchanka. Exploring ancient Krogan tunnels, curing the genophage, initiating Dune-esque sound hammers and watching a sandworm Thresher Maw take down a reaper? Fucking awesome! An incredible mission with a very emotional payoff for those who chose the paragon route. The renegade outcome involving Mordin is... dark. Either way was pretty heartbreaking for me. I also really enjoyed the Geth Dreadnaught scenario, and everything leading up to learning more about the Geth, and resolving their conflict with the Quarians. I never really thought I'd see the end of these huge events in the span of the trilogy.

These events, by my estimation, far outweigh the fundamental problems I have with the game. Now, on to the complaints.

As soon as I finished that Tuchanka mission, I knew in the back of my head that it wouldn't be topped, and I was unfortunately correct. The final mission to Earth felt like an afterthought to me. It's basically a few wave-based, killing-spree missions slapped together, and from what I've read, it's artificially lengthened if you take too long to initiate the Earth mission (2 waves vs up to 5). Quite lame for what amounts to the final battle. Slowly lumbering past Harbinger's laser can hardly be considered gameplay.

I was very disappointed in the total lack of Harbinger drama. He was set up in ME2 to be the final boss of the reapers. What do we get in ME3? He blows his horn and fires his laser a few times in your general direction, and melts off a few inches of your armor, then flies away. Fucking lame.

The Illusive Man was a waste of time for all involved. I felt truly bad for Martin Sheen, portraying a character who never fulfilled his potential as a villain. In the end, the Illusive Man merely repeated the fate of Saren, only with less emotional resonance. As a villain, Saren could be somewhat sympathized with. I believed that he believed in his goals, but he became twisted along the way. The Illusive Man's final plea just sounded pathetic. His plan was bullshit all along, and always sounded like bullshit. There was never any character development with him. When he was finally out of the picture, there was no emotional resonance with me. I was just relieved that he was no longer a leech on the plot.

Many have complained about the final scenario, involving the overseer of the reapers. Didn't bother me. I enjoyed hearing him elaborate on the function of the reapers and what the reasoning behind their existence was. However, it was forced and not explained very well considering the gravity of what was trying to be conveyed: The underlying conflict between organic and synthetic life. One would think such a fundamental issue would have been addressed a little more. Instead, the game implies that this theme has been told before through the Geth and the Quarians. But that's not an adequate analog to the predicament described by the boy. Those two races were able to resolve their differences. Long story short, I believe a form of this conversation with Shepard could have come at the end of Mass Effect 2, and been built upon throughout Mass Effect 3, instead of being tacked on at the very end of the trilogy.

As for the "ending" itself. I found it interesting in a few ways, and comical in others. While some may complain that it leaves the fate of the Sol system up in the air, with the fleets of every race in the galaxy stranded in a single star system, I find that a fascinating predicament to consider. Imagine the stories that could come from that. But it was the very end that really felt comedic to me. Joker and the Normandy crew bail out at some point before Shepard makes his decision. Real classy. And Joker just has to ride another fucking palette-swapped explosion wave. Why? That's just his thing, that's why! And so (some of) the crew of the Normandy get stranded on a random planet, that may or may not, depending on your choice, be covered in synthesized techno-skin. Also, Joker's hat gets "synthesized" too. I found that a little weird, but whatever. I presume they fuck their brains out on said planet while reminiscing about how awesome that Shepard guy was?

I understand that the parting image was meant to be symbolic of the scenario the galaxy now faces: stranded in a new world, they have to find a new way to live. But it's awkward, and not very memorable. There are a number of things they could have done to leave a more impactful final image in the players' minds.

I uninstalled Mass Effect 3 shortly after beating it. I'm done with it. I'm not dissatisfied, but I'm also not compelled to give it another run through with a different character, taking a different route. It was a great game, and a great trilogy. But I genuinely had hoped for more out of the finale to such a great series.
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Alright, let us converse spoiler tag free.

Walter said:
I enjoyed the game very much. I'd put it well ahead of ME2 in the series, but a few steps behind ME1. There are some breathtaking scenarios in Mass Effect 3 that blow everything else in the series out of the water.

I don't know about that, and by the same token I think it's more than a few steps back of ME1 (I'm citing the rest of your enthused review as support =). It's becoming more amazing to me just how much more there was to Mass Effect than 2 and 3. If not for the combat engine, you'd think the first game was the pinnacle they built up to as far as gameplay goes rather than the other way around, since they practically stripped away everything else (and literally do at the end, as you point out). The series devolved from this expansive open world into a corridor shooter. Like it went from Ocarina of Time to Link's Crossbow Training. If they do make ME4, it might just be a sidescrolling beat'em up.

Walter said:
As soon as I finished that Tuchanka mission, I knew in the back of my head that it wouldn't be topped, and I was unfortunately correct.

That wasn't my experience. While that particular mission most closely resembled the more complex and involving long-form missions of the first game, both in action and the choices you need to make, it certainly wasn't better than them, and it didn't overshadow the rest of ME3 but kind of set the tone. All the missions sort of ran together to me, but in retrospect they probably rode the wave of that one, so I didn't feel a lot of extreme highs or lows with the missions after, but maintained steady engagement thereafter.

Walter said:
The final mission to Earth felt like an afterthought to me. It's basically a few wave-based, killing-spree missions slapped together, and from what I've read, it's artificially lengthened if you take too long to initiate the Earth mission (2 waves vs up to 5). Quite lame for what amounts to the final battle. Slowly lumbering past Harbinger's laser can hardly be considered gameplay.

I was expecting more as well, particularly on the Citadel. Again, I was hoping it would be like ME1, which again, just kept piling on the awesome scenes and action set pieces. Instead, like everything in the series since, it felt relatively truncated. I suppose if you count the Cerberus mission beforehand and everything it was pretty elaborate, but it didn't feel like enough. Also, London came off like a stupid gimmick, like when a sequel "goes to New York!" or something. I would have preferred it just be a random Earth city, explained as being as close as they could get to the conduit. What somewhat made up for all this to me was the unexpected direction it went in once Harbinger showed up (as I've said, I still appreciated his appearance and role, brief as it was).

Walter said:
The Illusive Man was a waste of time for all involved. I felt truly bad for Martin Sheen, portraying a character who never fulfilled his potential as a villain.
Walter said:
The Illusive Man's final plea just sounded pathetic. His plan was bullshit all along, and always sounded like bullshit. There was never any character development with him. When he was finally out of the picture, there was no emotional resonance with me. I was just relieved that he was no longer a leech on the plot.

I agree with your diagnosis of Illusive Man, but don't feel bad for Martin Sheen, because he's what that role was really all about. He brought weight to every scene he was in, as thin and pulpy as his material was, Sheen's involvement almost single-highhandedly validated it. His presence made that end game scenario far better than it had any business being, he carried it, just on the basis of spectacle and whimsy. Speaking of which...

Walter said:
Many have complained about the final scenario, involving the overseer of the reapers. Didn't bother me. I enjoyed hearing him elaborate on the function of the reapers and what the reasoning behind their existence was.

...the kid sure didn't have it. Stock concept, perfunctorily satisfying execution (the most significant thing about it might be the implication they were in Shepard's head). On that note, I can't get the idea of Sovereign as the avatar of the Catalyst out of mine. I don't care if it totally changes the tone and significance of the role and scene, it does it for the better. It could have been a great twist (at the risk of being cheesy), and made a lot more intuitive sense in its own way; Sovereign by his name(s), attitude, dialogue, and former role already had the appropriate air of importance, and I feel it could have taken the ending to a whole other level and brought the series full circle (as well as mitigating Harbinger's relatively small role). It sure would have felt a lot more significant to the series overall than the meaning of the kid tacked on in this game. Or... maybe it really would just be a cheesy distraction that spoils the point. Oh well.

/fanfic

Walter said:
Joker and the Normandy crew bail out at some point before Shepard makes his decision. Real classy.

I would make the most sense if they bailed when the initial blast came from the Citadel.

Walter said:
I understand that the parting image was meant to be symbolic of the scenario the galaxy now faces: stranded in a new world, they have to find a new way to live. But it's awkward, and not very memorable.

Yeah, new world, Eden, rebirth... whatever. Nobody is thinking that when they see it in the moment, they're thinking, "What the fuck?" and wondering why the ending includes what amounts to an impromptu tropical vacation. "It's going to be OK, because we crash landed... in Hawaii!" Talk about feeling out of place.

Walter said:
There are a number of things they could have done to leave a more impactful final image in the players' minds.

You chose the wrong ending. :badbone:
 
Aazealh said:
Uhhh, he's shown being disintegrated, so he's pretty much dead. The kid says so as well. And that goes for the Control ending too. He probably still exists as a ghostly construct or something, but he wouldn't be the same. Again, he's shown being disintegrated, so to me he's dead as we knew him.
Ahhh, you're right. I replayed the ending just for that, and he does spell it pretty clearly: "Everything you are will be absorbed, and then sent out..." Well, that's a bummer. :ganishka: (when I played the game I figured the disintegration might be a part of the process of turning into a new organic/synthetic hybrid thing - I was also doing my best to just enjoy the ride and not think about stuff too much)

About the control ending, sure, he "dies" as a human as we know him. If he still exists as a sentient entity though, I wouldn't consider him dead (being changed into some immortal grandmaster of the universe can't be all bad, anyway. :femto:)

Griffith said:
I know he lived in mine. :badbone: Well, not initially, when I blew up the fucking Earth! :ganishka: As far as Shepard's sacrifice in the other endings, particularly synthesis, it's foreshadowed in part by Legion's sacrifice for the Geth. Obviously, if you decide to wipe out the Geth one way or another, there's no need for such thematic parallels.
Aazealh said:
And Shepard telling EDI that there's more to organics than self-preservation and all that. They lay it on pretty thickly throughout the game.

I have to agree Bioware wanted Shepard dead; I guess it just irks me that the other endings are seen as a bleak fate to Shep, while the ending where he clearly totally dies is the one after which we see him survive. (Where's my short clip for the synthesis ending?! Ohhh, that's right, it's on its way. :iva: :iva: :iva:)
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
http://www.gametrailers.com/side-mission/2012/03/30/bioware-releases-details-of-new-mass-affect-3-ending/


Also, this is pretty cool:

http://kotaku.com/5897486/was-the-ending-of-mass-effect-3-telegraphed-five-years-ago


Another pretty cool thing I noticed in the credits when I beat the game again the other day was, "Stargazer... Buzz Aldrin." So yeah, the old man in the epilogue is Buzz Aldrin, which explains why I thought the voice acting sounded uncharacteristically amateurish, but at the same time kind of validates the whole thing. =)
 

SlimeBeherit

[FIGHT][SPELL] [SACRIFICE][ITEM]
I just finished ME3 mere hours before i listened to the podcast, and the only reason I couldn't choose the "destroy" option was because I felt bad for the Geth and EDI. They both reach a new stage in their existence and I have to destroy them? Why couldn't the Reapers be the only ones that were destroyed :sad: It seemed a bit arbitrary that all synthetic life must be destroyed. Many of the complaints I've heard really do bother me, Joker booking it for some reason, (how did you get on the ship Liara? You were next to me when Harbinger Blasted me.) all the galaxy's armed forces are stranded in our solar system, did the relay's have to be destroyed.

I'm also a bit confused as to what the crucible even did. The Catalyst mentions the Crucible changed it, so did the past civilizations figure out what the catalyst was and developed a machine that can alter this creator, and the consensus was that synthesis is the only option? Suffice to say the ending left me with a lot of questions :sad:
 

Saephon

Die young and save yourself
Finally got around to checking back on this thread. I feel like Griffith just gave me a renegade "Illusive-Man" like speech, explaining why a disappointing ending is consistent with the second half of the series. :ganishka:

I think you're all perhaps right about me assigning too much value to Shepard's dialogue wheel. Maybe it's just luck, but for whatever reason, most of the major forks in the road had an option (Usually Paragon) that I felt comfortable about with few objections. That changed for me in the final decision. I only grudgingly chose Destroy because A: Destroying the Reapers is what I set out to do, and I'm going to do it, damn it. B: Control is what TIM wanted, and I've spent two games trying to explain to him why he's wrong. Why change my mind randomly? and C: I don't trust the CatalystKid and he seemed to be pushing me towards the Synthesis choice. I honestly would've been happy if it'd ended right before the Magical Elevator of Sudden Plot Twist; cheesy? Yeah. But kind of fitting!

I must disagree with people who feel there was enough closure though. Are the reapers destroyed? Yeah, in my case, they are. But I didn't invest 150+ hours into this series because of a burning desire to eliminate faceless, amoral enemies. I did it because of my crew, the friends Shepard made from various races, and the person I chose to fall in love with. My favorite moments from Mass Effect aren't shooting something, blowing something up, or what have you. It's usually talking to someone. I want to know what happened to those 8 or 9 people, beyond a binary "are they alive or dead". If that makes me an anomalous fan, or I'm "doing it wrong", then sue me. Because that's what mattered most to me.

In the end, it is a video game. The sequels will never be as good as the original Mass Effect, but they still have their merits, and I consider them to be enjoyable experiences. Should I be irked that Casey Hudson specifically said the endings would not be as simple as "A, B, and C"? Maybe. Perhaps the real problem is that ME has been lauded by both its creators and fans as something more than it is, where your choices really matter. It's all really an illusion of choice, and sometimes it's written so well I forget that fact. I suppose the final culminations of plot decisions (Rakhni, Genophage, squad deaths) made it more difficult to maintain the fantasy. Hell, if anyone dies in your game, their role in the story is replaced by a practically identical stranger of the same race.


Maybe BioWare promised a bit more than they could deliver. But maybe I expected too much too, and that's my fault. I still love this universe. Time to replay ME1 I think. :badbone:
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
Slime_Beherit said:
the only reason I couldn't choose the "destroy" option was because I felt bad for the Geth and EDI. They both reach a new stage in their existence and I have to destroy them? Why couldn't the Reapers be the only ones that were destroyed :sad: It seemed a bit arbitrary that all synthetic life must be destroyed.

What if the kid lied? What if they didn't actually get destroyed? He also said Shepard was part synthetic himself, implying he might die. And it didn't happen.

Slime_Beherit said:
(how did you get on the ship Liara? You were next to me when Harbinger Blasted me.)

Your squadmates don't appear during the final rush towards the Conduit.

Saephon said:
I didn't invest 150+ hours into this series because of a burning desire to eliminate faceless, amoral enemies. I did it because of my crew, the friends Shepard made from various races, and the person I chose to fall in love with. My favorite moments from Mass Effect aren't shooting something, blowing something up, or what have you. It's usually talking to someone. I want to know what happened to those 8 or 9 people, beyond a binary "are they alive or dead".

Bioware's not going to show you the entirety of their lives until they die. At some point you're going to have to use your imagination to fill in the blanks. Might as well start now. :casca:

Saephon said:
Perhaps the real problem is that ME has been lauded by both its creators and fans as something more than it is, where your choices really matter. It's all really an illusion of choice, and sometimes it's written so well I forget that fact.

Like I said in the podcast, the series is just about customizing your experience. That's what you get, and that's what you always got. Mass Effect 1 was no better or worse than the following games in that regard. Much like you never get to choose exactly what Shepard is going to say, you don't choose exactly what is going to happen. You can only influence it, make it lean one way or the other.
 

Griffith

With the streak of a tear, Like morning dew
Saephon said:
Finally got around to checking back on this thread. I feel like Griffith just gave me a renegade "Illusive-Man" like speech, explaining why a disappointing ending is consistent with the second half of the series. :ganishka:

I don't dispute that interpretation. :guts:

Saephon said:
I honestly would've been happy if it'd ended right before the Magical Elevator of Sudden Plot Twist; cheesy? Yeah. But kind of fitting!

I know what you mean, but I really doubt you'd feel the same way without the next part, of which all you said is pretty subjective, like, "It's unsatisfying if you look at THIS way, which I definitely do." Well, then try looking at it the numerous other ways it can be interpreted that we've discussed. If you want choices, choose one of those other choices. =) Anyway, if it ended there without something "worse" to compare it to, we'd just be saying "that's it!?" to their little pseudo-Mexican standoff (if people found the explanations to come unsatisfying, all the nothing beforehand probably wouldn't cut it either). Actually, now I'm disappointed the opportunity was missed to make that the "worst" ending, even if some would prefer it. No elevator ascends, the crucible never activates, Shepard dies inches short of the goal line and better luck next cycle. Come to think of it, that would have been great, especially for those that discovered the "real" ending. Then it would have been liked on principle since this all seems to go back to people's perceived sense of self-determination and accomplishment.

Anyway, my simple philosophy here is more is more, if you really would have been happy with the standoff, then you shouldn't have been upset by getting a hell of a lot more than that. Which is why I'm not particularly opposed to augmenting the ending as long as they don't contradict/betray it completely, "that was all a Reaper dream, here's the new EVEN WORSE ending!" (and that's what everyone is waiting to say; and perhaps, like your relative satisfaction with the standoff, the only way BioWare can make the old ending considered better is by releasing one considered worse). At least they were literally reaching for the stars here, but short of actually revealing the meaning of life, they were doomed to be shat on for going out on a limb that broke under the weight of their desired pretensions.

Saephon said:
I must disagree with people who feel there was enough closure though. Are the reapers destroyed? Yeah, in my case, they are. But I didn't invest 150+ hours into this series because of a burning desire to eliminate faceless, amoral enemies. I did it because of my crew, the friends Shepard made from various races, and the person I chose to fall in love with. My favorite moments from Mass Effect aren't shooting something, blowing something up, or what have you. It's usually talking to someone. I want to know what happened to those 8 or 9 people, beyond a binary "are they alive or dead". If that makes me an anomalous fan, or I'm "doing it wrong", then sue me. Because that's what mattered most to me.

Well, first of all, it's a little jarring the way you unintentionally (I hope) distinguished between Shepard's friends and the "person" you fell in love with. :iva: That aside, as the cliche goes, it's the journey, not the destination. The whole game is basically discovering what becomes of all those characters, and most importantly it's that they didn't become dead so you can long for their future at all. Beyond that, or outside the scope of the playing experience, it really isn't that important; it just becomes made up biographies with no anchor. But here, Nomad sent this for those in need:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vG4EyfXOTJ4

Saephon said:
In the end, it is a video game. The sequels will never be as good as the original Mass Effect, but they still have their merits, and I consider them to be enjoyable experiences. Should I be irked that Casey Hudson specifically said the endings would not be as simple as "A, B, and C"? Maybe. Perhaps the real problem is that ME has been lauded by both its creators and fans as something more than it is, where your choices really matter. It's all really an illusion of choice, and sometimes it's written so well I forget that fact. I suppose the final culminations of plot decisions (Rakhni, Genophage, squad deaths) made it more difficult to maintain the fantasy.

See, I just don't get that, because I never thought about it in terms of my choices really mattering, but judged it by what choices were given, what could happen (which is a far more accurate perception). There was no pure agency here on our part, only options within certain parameters. Also, if you care about character exploration/conversation, that's what ME2 an 3 emphasize most, at the expense of overall plot (especially ME2). The first Mass Effect's advantage there is that it wasn't self-aware and a little more natural, so the conversations weren't so perfectly constructed, at worst contrived, to play to the audience's expectations of the character's, etc. I feel like certain characters in ME2 and 3 aren't themselves anymore so much as playing themselves on TV, "Hey everybody, it's Garrus!" *applause*

On the subject of decisions and closure, we actually get to see and have a hand in, as Walter pointed out, the culmination of the Genophage and the Geth/Quarian conflict respectively. That was major broad stroke, world building background information stuff that came extraordinarily to the foreground. When was that closure ever promised? The real life equivalent would be like if you happened to solve historically significant problems like curing Cancer and brokering peace in the Middle East within our lifetime, and neither was the most important thing you did in your life (just side projects =)! I guess that stuff happened too early to be counted toward a satisfying ending.

Saephon said:
Hell, if anyone dies in your game, their role in the story is replaced by a practically identical stranger of the same race.

That's if you're lucky, it might just be literal carbon copy! :troll:

Saephon said:
Maybe BioWare promised a bit more than they could deliver. But maybe I expected too much too, and that's my fault. I still love this universe. Time to replay ME1 I think. :badbone:

Once again, look at it another way. Maybe they actually delivered something more than they promised. More than they even knew or one could even expect in those 100+ hours. Something that can't quite be quantified, which is precisely why bringing "closure" to a project of such scale is bound to feel unsatisfactory and limited; because that's what closure is by nature; it's closing off the possibilities, winding something down, quantifying it, limiting it, finishing it off. That's counter-intuitive to the previous Mass Effect experience, and the people asking for more, more, more and branching choices (that'd have nowhere to go, since it's not like this was leading into another game) don't seem to have fully accepted this going in. As if it really was "to be continued," or there was a way to properly capture the substance of an open world in a closed end. It's no wonder if the final choices felt contradictory or upsetting, even like a betrayal: Mass Effect 3 was ostensibly about saving a galaxy, but its true purpose was to end one.
 
H

hellrasinbrasin

Guest
Homophobes Slam EA With Thousands of Letters Over Same-Sex Romance

The past year has seen a great deal of discussion about the existence of same-sex romance options in EA and BioWare's Mass Effect franchise and their MMO Star Wars: The Old Republic.

One recent, particularly irrational anti-gay "family values" campaign has kicked off a wave of thousands of letters to EA disapproving of the addition of same-sex romance options to The Old Republic, reports GamesIndustry. The letters chide EA for being "pressured" into adding LGBT-friendly content and claim that the availability of options for players somehow forces homosexuality onto impressionable young children. One such example letter reads:

The overwhelming number of players on Star Wars games is children who do not need to be forced as a captured audience to participate in homosexual content.
We ask that you please adhere to your long term policy of omitting and steering clear of this type of advocacy representation in your games. Please do not include LGBT content in Star Wars video games that will impact so many children.


Thank you. Remember Sodom.

Aside from BioWare clearly having no such long standing policy — the Dragon Age franchise includes both male and female same-sex romance options, and the Mass Effect franchise has always included female same-sex romance — the letter-writer is also incorrect about The Old Republic being primarily marketed to or played by children.

Speaking with GamesIndustry, EA VP of Corporate Communications Jeff Brown accurately called out the letter-writing campaign, saying, "Every one of EA's games includes ESRB content descriptors so it's hard to believe anyone is surprised by the content. This isn't about protecting children, it's about political harassment." Brown also added:

EA has not been pressured by any groups to include LGBT characters in our games. However, we have met with LBGT groups and sponsored industry forums to discuss content and harassment of players in online forums. In short, we do put options for same-sex relationships in our games; we don't tolerate hate speech on our forums.

GamesIndustry also spoke with a representative from GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation), Matt Kane, about the letter-writing campaign. Kane confirmed that campaigns driven by hate are now generally outweighed by support from the LGBT community and allies, citing the recent brouhaha over Ellen DeGeneneres being selected as JC Penney's new spokeswoman as a recent example. Specifically regarding video games, he added:

A lot of game makers are realizing that in order to create a believable universe it has to be a universe that is very diverse, and in some ways it sort of reflects the make-up of the culture we live in as well. I think it's very logical that you'll start to see more LGBT characters appearing in games."

This is also not only a reflection of the culture, but also in part of their consumer base - at least a segment of their consumer base. Certainly Star Wars is a good example. EA listened to the people who were intending to purchase the game and saw that there was a real desire to see same-sex relationships included within the romantic options.

And the same-sex romance options in The Old Republic, which have still not actually yet been added to the game and have no set date for appearing, are just that: options. As are any and all romance options in the Mass Effect franchise. No player is forced to choose any particular partner for their player characters any more than they are forced to purchase the game.

EA may be the worst company in America, but in standing up for diversity and standing against hate speech, they're doing the right thing.

Source: http://kotaku.com/5899246/homophobes-slam-ea-with-thousands-of-letters-over-same+sex-romance
 

Aazealh

Administrator
Staff member
So as expected, Bioware is releasing additional cinematics and epilogue cutscenes that will provide more closure to the ending(s) of Mass Effect 3 in the form of a free "Extended Cut" DLC. It'll be released this summer.

Casey Hudson said:
We have reprioritized our post-launch development efforts to provide the fans who want more closure with even more context and clarity to the ending of the game, in a way that will feel more personalized for each player.
Ray Muzyka said:
We are all incredibly proud of Mass Effect 3 and the work done by Casey Hudson and team. Since launch, we have had time to listen to the feedback from our most passionate fans and we are responding. With the Mass Effect 3: Extended Cut we think we have struck a good balance in delivering the answers players are looking for while maintaining the team's artistic vision for the end of this story arc in the Mass Effect universe.
 
H

hellrasinbrasin

Guest
So Bioware lives to Troll the community again. I knew they wouldn't change the ending I figured at least Bioware would release an extended cut for the ending & epilogue.

When cupcakes, don't warm the hearts of studios into releasing a new ending to a game -- the battle is decided.
 

SlimeBeherit

[FIGHT][SPELL] [SACRIFICE][ITEM]
I don't see the troll. I'm quite glad theat they aren't changing the ending in dramatic way. Bioware made it clear that they would support ME3 with additional content, and maybe this is where it blew up in their face. Because they knew there would be content that elaborates on the event of the ending in the works, then the blunt ending doesnt seem that jarring. But they have the benefit of knowing what it is and when it's coming. While the players were left wondering.

I can see these new scenes addressing the actions that lead to Joker escaping with your squad mates. Maybe even show a sinister smile from the Catalyst. At least at that point they make it clear that there's more stuff on the way, by making it obviously open ended...... This might be wishful thinking on my part though.
 
Top Bottom