Mass Effect 3 SPOILERS THREAD

[stewartjm]

It isn't. They confused dark with profound and intellectual with satisfying. The endings are anything but.

I completely agree, you'll note I said "tried".

 

[soulsavior]

I keep seeing posts like these every so often and I never see these opinions expanded upon. Ever. Personally because I don't think they can be but maybe I'm wrong.

How and why did you like that ending in its present form?

I'm honestly mystified how anyone let alone could draw any satisfaction from that mess. Believe me: I tried.

I'm not trying to single you out or anything. I'm honestly understand what folks like you saw that I didn't.

I've found that a lot of people that were OK with the endings often chose destroy (or to a lesser extent, control) initially. Looking back, I think I'd have been slightly less flabbergasted had I done so.

I initially chose synthesis (as it was presented as the ending that took the most "work"). My dislike for the ending began growing at a rapid pace as I was lifted up the "god elevator", but I didn't reach "WHAT THE **** IS THIS ****" mode until I saw blue cyborg plants and glowy green cyborg Joker.

After that point, I began picking apart everything that was said and began to hate it more and more and more. Maybe, just maybe, had I not chosen synthesis, I wouldn't have been upset enough to notice all the inconsistencies between the ending and the rest of the games. Maybe. Probably not. But maybe.

 

[stewartjm]

I initially chose synthesis (as it was presented as the ending that took the most "work"). My dislike for the ending began growing at a rapid pace as I was lifted up the "god elevator", but I didn't reach "WHAT THE **** IS THIS ****" mode until I saw blue cyborg plants and glowy green cyborg Joker.

Synthesis is definitely the most stupid ending, especially since it really drives home the Adam and Eve were astronauts allusion *retch*... Not to mention completely turning the strength through diversity theme on it's head... ...but the other 2 aren't far behind.

My first "WTF is this" moment, was the first dream sequence. Though I also did a double take when the crucible deus ex machina was introduced. I could've shrugged the crucible off if it turned into a death star or was somehow destroyed or failed to work. But the way it actually played out just piled up more BS on top...

 

[Solitude]

I chose destroy on my first play. It took a few minutes. Pretty emotional. I took it for face value at the time (before I looked at all the evidence pointing to IT) I almost chose control.

 

[J W]

They didn't have time to do it right, so they tried to do it profoundly/artsy.

The more I read about it, the more I agree with this.

Basically, they threw something out there and thought, "We're BioWare, people will love it no matter what." When people starting bitching about it, they got all defensive and pulled the "artistic integrity" card. And shit.

I don't think the extended content will do much to make people happy/satisfied. The EC will only try to fix plot holes that shouldn't have been there in the first place. Realistically, lots of people are still going to die, even if they show me some slide that says otherwise. BioWare wrote in certain precedents in the game that cant be discounted for sake of convenience at the end (e.g. exploding relays all of a sudden don't cause supernovas).

 

[soulsavior]

The odd thing is that what should be good news (a free DLC) may end up hurting them more than helping if they don't pull it off right. If the new DLC is just "here's how joker got your crew, here's how Anderson beat you to the console, here's three actually different cutscenes for your final choice" I think many people will feel more insulted than anything. It fixes the easy stuff, but ignores the reasons that made the ending fundamentally broken.

Honestly, I wish they'd make a full paid ending DLC. Maybe they won't half ass this given it's free, but I'd rather them have a full budget to work with. Frankly, I got more than my 60 bucks worth out of the game. I'd gladly give them another 10-15 bucks to get the ending right.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

Here are my thoughts on the ending now that some of the dust has settled. I, too, was an active supporter of the Retake Mass Effect movement. I joined the BSN to voice my support for the movement - that was a minor miracle in itself, fan forums normally scare the hell out of me. I donated to the Child's Play link before it got taken down (and didn't ask for my money back when the controversy around that erupted). I voted in the polls, watched the videos, was swayed but ultimately unconvinced by the Indoctrination Theory arguments.

In the week leading up to my announcement my resolve began to waver. There was one thread on the Escapist in particular which, while it in no way transformed the endings into a model for video game storytelling everywhere, convinced me that throwing out the starchild or adding additional endings might not be necessary for the ending to shine. There was also a wonderfully written fan-made epilogue site - you input your choices, and it generated an ending for you. It managed to make even the Synthesis ending seem beautiful.

Then the announcement came. No throwing out the starchild and no new endings, just clarification on what was already there. I don't think anyone who was paying attention was surprised. That's not what a lot of people wanted to hear, but I think it could make the game a lot better. At the very least I would hope it could take the game from "That was a horribly written ending!" to "That's a surprising and somewhat disappointing direction to take the story." in the eyes of those who hate the ending.

I'm a bit more optimistic than that. I think that some additional clarification can make the ending a lot better. Here's why.

1. A good number of the problems people have with the ending can be fixed with a few sentences from Bioware.

It's an understatement to say that the ending is short on details. I think a lot of people are filling in the blanks with the worst possible option. Here are a few examples:

1. Joker is a coward now for running.
2. Shepard's fleet all starves in Sol.
3. Galactic civilization is destroyed by the lack of viable FTL.
4. The exploding mass relays vaporize most inhabited systems.
5. Tali and Garrus starve on Gilligan's planet.
6. Quarians and biotics die in Destroy since they have technological implants.
7. Everyone on the citadel dies.

Bioware could knock most of these out of people's arguments with a one-sentence official statement: "No they didn't." Instead we're going to get an epilogue that (depending on your choices) shows the races Shepard united working together to overcome the obstacles before them.

I consider the lack of details a huge problem with the current ending, but, barring the "EA made them rush it" argument, I can understand why they did it. They said time and time again before release that ME3 is the end of Shepard's story. All the items above? Arguably not part of his story. It was an artistic choice they made, and it's one they've admitted is wrong by providing this DLC free of charge.

2. The starchild's logic doesn't make any sense!

I think that's the whole point.

He's an AI. To him, the cold calculus of reality demands that organics be allowed to evolve to a certain point. Any further, and he runs the risk of an AI stamping out all organic life in the galaxy forever. The horror of his solution ("preservation") is lost on him because he doesn't really get what it means to exist as an organic.

What if the Catalyst is ancient AI that actually succeeded at stamping out all organic life at one point, but came to realize the horror of his atrocities? What if the Reapers were responsible for wiping out organic life, and he reprogrammed them to serve as his solution instead, working with the limited tools available?

We've digressed almost into fanfic here, but these are examples of why the Catalyst is not irredeemable. Again, this is an example of BioWare being intentionally light on the details. There are numerous interviews where they talk about how they felt Shepard didn't need to know all the details to make his choice. They miscalculated. I really, really hope that the Extended Cut gives us not only epilogue scenes, but additional dialogue with the Catalyst as well.

3. But Synthesis is Saren's choice! Control is TiM's! IT'S A TRAP!

The Reapers were lying to Saren and using him as a tool. They grafted him with cybernetics to make him a more useful tool, not to improve his quality of life. They lied to him. Synthesis on the Reapers' terms leads to death, because they will kill your or enslave you when they are done with you. Synthesis on Shepard's terms uplifts the galaxy, ascends them into something new.

Same with Control and TiM. The Reapers were deluding TiM in order to control him, to use him for their own ends. He was never going to be able to control the Reapers. You can.

Control directly defeats the Reapers by having Shepard ASSUME DIRECT CONTROL. Synthesis removes the need for the Reapers. Either way, they are defeated.

4. Starchild is Space Hitler! Shepard should be trying to defeat him, not cooperating!

Shepard did defeat him. That's what the whole game has been about. You've not only fought your way past the Reapers to wrest control of his Solution away from him, but (depending on your choices) you've proven him wrong by showing synthetics and organics can coexist peacefully.

4a. But I want an ending where I can tell the starchild off!

Each ending tells him off in a different way. Destroy kills him and his Reapers. Control wrests control of his solution away from him (if he even had control at that point?) - it's your way of saying "I can do it better." Synthesis provides an elegant solution to the problem that any godlike AI should be smacking themselves for not thinking up first.

5. The choice is stupid! No matter what I choose I feel like someone gets screwed over!

I think that the ability to get a perfect ending in ME2, dark as it was, made people come into this game with misplaced expectations. In ME1, either Kaidan or Ashley had to die, and Wrex died unless you were insanely well prepared. At the end you could save the Council, but only at the cost of a massive loss of human life.

The ending of ME3 is a trade-off too. You can end the cycle forever and ascend the galaxy to a new form of existence, but Shepard dies. Shepard can take control of the entire Reaper armada, but he loses his human body. Shepard can survive and go on to have babies with his LI, but his synthetic allies will die along with the Reapers (though apparently EDI survives).

 

[Dan_D]

I agreed with a lot of what you said, but this part makes my blood boil:

"It managed to make even the Synthesis ending seem beautiful."

No it didn't. That's flat out impossible. That ending is the biggest piece of shit in fiction I've ever seen. I'd dare say it's worse than time travel. It pisses me off that much. The solution to the problem of synthetics vs. organics is medicrity? For one thing, this goes AGAINST the very themes of Mass Effect itself. The entire time Shepard has been bringing aliens, humans, men and women, regardless of background, sexual orientation and hell even political ideals together so they can work towards a common goal. Think about that for a second. United, but different. As in, not the same. They are still able to preserve what they are, but work together. Without invididual identities, everything is boring. While some physical differences would remain, we don't know the extent of what the sythesis does to them. Even assuming people kept their personalities, who the fuck wants to be turned into a goddamn cyborg? Forcing a choice on people who already have common ground and are united to make them further homogenized is absolute horse shit.

And Shepard not a minute before that said; "We'll keep our own form thanks."

Synthesis is in a way what Reapers do when they harvest a species. Synthesis is disproven by the fact that you can reunite the Geth and Quarian people. This struggle is and achievement are literally ignored, discarded, belittled, and insulted by the sythesis choice. This very concept pisses me off. I'm not saying the guy who came up with it needs to be fired, but he needs to get punched in the face and sent off to go think about what he's done for a good long while. Again this ending also means that Shepard has to do a 180 on his or her statement made just seconds before. It also discards Javik's warning about a race of biomechanical beings whom he described as "monsters." It also means forcing a unilateral choice on the galaxy without consulting anyone or asking if anyone will retain their identities or if it will happen through a Genesis wave like effect which reformats and replaces all the life with new life. Obviously the latter isn't something we saw, but you'd figure asking if something like that was going to happen was probably a good idea.

This choice above all others required a lot more questions for understanding before making it. Shepard never asked if the people of the galaxy would end up like him, like the Borg, or looking like Reapers, or Husks, and didn't even consider what people might do after a wave of energy flows over them and leaves them with cyborg bits? He couldn't have known about the bioluminescent trace paths in everyone's skin. I know if I woke up or looked over and saw that on my arm I'd freak the hell out. I'd think mass suicide and other problems would occur because of stuff like that. People flooding medical facilities that still remain wanting that shit ripped out. Instead when they are told that they are now dependent on the implants, they may end up suicidal, depressed, or god knows what. Forcing this choice not only destroys the Citadel, but impacts people in a way which could be worse than the destruction of the Geth and other synthetic life could be. As for how much biomechanical hardware exists in a Quarian and whether or not biotic amps count is another mystery. Just what is the cut off for this?

I don't know how anyone could support this shit ending. Philisohpically I get the ending, I understand that this type of crap is popular in so called "high science fiction." But it's just bullshit. It's bad on so many levels I doubt I've even touched on half of them. It's the single worst ending for any film, story, book, or game I've ever seen. Oh yeah, we saw this before on a smaller scale. It's called Star Trek the Motion Picture. Even worse is that this is the ending that will prevent us from EVER seeing another Mass Effect which is a direct sequel (even with significant time having passed) to Mass Effect 3. This ending damned near, and pretty much does force BioWare to go the prequel route with everything.

It's bullshit. I've decided, it is worse than time travel in science fiction.

The short reason why this precludes a sequel is due to the fact that BioWare has always avoided citing anything as canon in any of the Mass Effect games leaving the player's own experiences to fill in the vague gaps. So when Shepard is referred to in passing, Shepard's gender and appearance, race, etc. are always ignored. Events from the games are only referred to if they are common to all playthroughs, and each time this happens, specific details which are variable in the games are left out. With renegade and paragon options the story is usually close enough that they can explain variances or work them into the games pretty easily. In Mass Effect 1 the ending was virtually the same. Some characters were simply replaced if they died such as the council. Anderson and Udina were made more or less interchangeable as well.

In Mass Effect 2, we got to keep the collector base or destroy it. While this should have been more important, Mass Effect 3's dialog alters very little as do your war assets for keeping the Collector base or destroying it. In Mass Effect 3, the real difference is the Citadel and whether or not Shepard has even a chance of waking up or not in the rubble in London. As a result, those two choices are very workable in a game set far enough ahead. Is the Citadel still around? Or was another, built in it's place? The difference is really how long it took the relay network to recover. Set far enough ahead, it won't matter, because you can explain both. Or hell you could create an alternate station or place to go entirely if you wanted to. Still things more or less work out similarly enough that there isn't too much challenge from a programing standpoint. Synthesis (or as I like to call it the Mass Trek 1) ending throws a huge wrench into the works. How do you deal with that from a creative perspective combined with the other possibilities? How do you code the outcomes of all three major choices and make it work for all three?

As far as I'm concerned, stories that take place in the future should always move forward, and almost never backward. While prequels seem to be the in thing right now, due to nihilistic, fatalistic, and depressing endings in which you blow up your own franchise so bad it can't move forward being the in thing to do, prequels all suffer from limited scope due to being confined to established mythology, lore, and individual story guidelines. This makes prequels problematic and unviable over the long run. I think Battlestar Galactica (the new crappy one) is the best example of this. At this point I think writing your way out of this and explaining all three ending types is just next to impossible. The only fix is for BioWare to pick a canon ending for the series and move forward into the next one with lessons learned. However, I'm going to bet what we'll see next is most likely a prequel, or something set so far into the future, it will ignore the previous games to such a degree that we may not even recognize it as Mass Effect any longer. Neither is something I'm looking forward to seeing or playing.

Ugh, this topic is draining. That's about all I can take right now.

 

[TwistedAegis]

The odd thing is that what should be good news (a free DLC) may end up hurting them more than helping if they don't pull it off right. If the new DLC is just "here's how joker got your crew, here's how Anderson beat you to the console, here's three actually different cutscenes for your final choice" I think many people will feel more insulted than anything. It fixes the easy stuff, but ignores the reasons that made the ending fundamentally broken.

Honestly, I wish they'd make a full paid ending DLC. Maybe they won't half ass this given it's free, but I'd rather them have a full budget to work with. Frankly, I got more than my 60 bucks worth out of the game. I'd gladly give them another 10-15 bucks to get the ending right.

I agree with this. Their statements are completely contradictory - if IDT is true, then you can't do an ending DLC that has no gameplay, because the reapers aren't truly defeated. Unless you do it as a tie-in to Mass Effect 4, which again judging by all their spin about this ending and rushing out an unplanned DLC (which is what it seems to me) doesn't seem likely at all.

I know I should just STFU and wait to see what they come out with. But what, exactly, will more cinematics do? We see Joker magically swoop in and grab up people on Earth - including people that should have been killed by Harbingers beam, as they were standing right next to you ( ), and then...right back to the retarded relays exploding and racing out to some random planet. And somehow, without a viable sized gene pool, it fast forwards to Buzz Aldrin telling the legend of Shepard with the strong implication a long time has passed.

Goddamnit, Bioware/EA.

 

[Dan_D]

I agree with this. Their statements are completely contradictory - if IDT is true, then you can't do an ending DLC that has no gameplay, because the reapers aren't truly defeated. Unless you do it as a tie-in to Mass Effect 4, which again judging by all their spin about this ending and rushing out an unplanned DLC (which is what it seems to me) doesn't seem likely at all.

I know I should just STFU and wait to see what they come out with. But what, exactly, will more cinematics do? We see Joker magically swoop in and grab up people on Earth - including people that should have been killed by Harbingers beam, as they were standing right next to you ( ), and then...right back to the retarded relays exploding and racing out to some random planet. And somehow, without a viable sized gene pool, it fast forwards to Buzz Aldrin telling the legend of Shepard with the strong implication a long time has passed.

Goddamnit, Bioware/EA.

I already explained why they can't fix the ending with DLC unless they want to scrap the entire Priority: Earth mission.

 

[J W]

Yep, I'm moving on to other games. That's a huge shame as ME is a terrific franchise, but I'll hold off on any more playthroughs till the EC comes out this summer. Also, unless the EC is great, I'll probably not be buying any more Bioware games for a while.

Right now I'm having plenty of fun with Crusader Kings and The Witcher.

 

[MorgothPl]

The ending could be much worse.... like this: http://www.actiontrip.com/comics/at_comic478.phtml

Anyways, seems that the PAX theories of breaking news about ending were not true... the DLC won't change much. So I guess, it's "take it or leave it". But, it screws a bit idea of "end of Shepard, but not end of ME universe", which they were promising. With Citadel and mass relays destroyed, there is no chance to see anything further, like possibly MMO or RTS homeworld style.

 

[CrimsonKnight13]

I already explained why they can't fix the ending with DLC unless they want to scrap the entire Priority: Earth mission.

I want that mission to be gone completely. All it consisted of was shitty gameplay in addition to the nightmare endings.

 

[Kinsaras]

Why does everyone assuming Mass Relays are gone so everyone is forever stuck wherever they happened to be? Mass Relays were created by Protheans, maybe someone will find a way to copy it. Or they can develop their own warp drives Star Trek style. Or any 1000 possible sci-fi solutions.

I got it, the Relay explosions ripped open worm holes ships can travel.

 

[Dan_D]

Why does everyone assuming Mass Relays are gone so everyone is forever stuck wherever they happened to be? Mass Relays were created by Protheans, maybe someone will find a way to copy it. Or they can develop their own warp drives Star Trek style. Or any 1000 possible sci-fi solutions.

I got it, the Relay explosions ripped open worm holes ships can travel.

No sir. You have no idea what you are talking about. The Reapers created the Mass Relay network and the Citadel. This is confirmed by Sovereign and later by Javik. The Protheans did however manage to replicate a Mass Relay in the form of the conduit between Ilos and the Citadel. That relay monument is actually a scaled down version of a Mass Relay.

And in every single ending, all supposed 16 of them the Mass Relays all explode. In the SyntheStarTrekTMPsuck ending and the destroy endings the Citadel is destroyed as well. The control ending is the only one that leaves open a possibility for studying an existing relay. There are Prothean archives on Mars yes, and data that could lead to duplication of Mass Relays does exist. No one who knows what they are talking about is suggesting that relays can't ever be recreated.

What you aren't understanding is the time it would take for the relay network to be rebuilt, even to a state which would allow major star systems to be reached in a reasonable amount of time. It would take decades, perhaps centuries using ship's onboard FTL drives to go between worlds. And relays are point to point. So you have to have two corresponding relays in order for them to be any use. The Asari have a lot of Prothean data depending on how well they survived the Reaper invasion. While they are advanced as hell compared to the other races, they were hit very hard by the Reapers. But assuming they can make more relays, as Matriarch Atheyta indicated being a possibility in Mass Effect 2, it would still take centuries to recover a fraction of the old networks functionality.

Get it now?

As for creating new drives, using other technologies etc. the game is founded around the concept of the Mass Relays and the Mass Effect field. Therefore, changing all that means that you might as well drop this, let it die and start a new IP. The fact of the matter is that with totally different technology, what you'd have wouldn't feel like a Mass Effect game anymore. There in lies the problem. You can't just logically continue a story. It has to have the same feeling and to some extent the same look of the earlier installments or there will be a disconnect. That's not something you want.

 

[TheWeazmeister]

ME3 DLC now available.
http://www.curse.com/news/mass-effect-3/44951-resurgence-dlc-now-available-for-mass-effect-3

 

[CrimsonKnight13]

ME3 DLC now available.
http://www.curse.com/news/mass-effect-3/44951-resurgence-dlc-now-available-for-mass-effect-3

MP only

 

[JustinCorrigible]

I went into Mass Effect 3 very wary of everything, from gameplay to story.

First off, I love the first game. Not for the gameplay mecahnics, but for its story and the universe that it built. I went into Mass Effect 2 excited beyond belief. I bought it on release, and beat it within one week before I took a trip to Germany, lest my plane crashed and I didn't get to continue the series.

You see, Mass Effect 1 was so successful to me with regards to story because you had a definite enemy, Saren, and subsequently Sovereign. You take care of the threat, and it's set up well for the sequel. Then, we out of nowhere get the Illusive Man and his seeming to know (or alluding to the fact) that Shepherd is going to die. Then Shepherd dies. They recover his body, and while I was still thinking, "WTF," I assumed they'd make it more believable. Yet when you visit the Normany crash site, the planet's got a sizable gravitational field. At that point you couldn't convince me they knew how to write as well as I thought they could. Back to the Illusive Man, I have always thought since ME2 that he was a tool of the reapers. Assuming the reapers are as intelligent as they are, the way the games play out he's definitely been indoctrinated the entire time we are met with him (a slower indoctrination). Again, this is just my opinion on his character. It all stunk to me, and they took way too long to conclude that bit of story. It was all lame, too. If it was all Shepherd's dream at the end, however the fuck you want to interpret it, why concluded it there?

ME3 began very poorly for me. The whole child thing was way too forced. It could have worked, but given their development time they failed miserably. I loved that you finally got to fight with Anderson, but it was way too brief. I mentioned it in another thread, but I absolutely loathed that Vega character. He felt so out of place, like they were catering to all the meat heads that may play the game. And why two Hispanic characters? Not that there's anything wrong with that, but was it solely so they could have a little bit of back and forth in Spanish? It felt that way. Can't say I cared for Vega one bit, and did not speak to him or use him unless I was forced to do so.

My number two most hated part of ME3 were the constant spawning of enemies during Cerberus battles. It was annoying beyond belief. However, my number one most hated part of ME3 was the Crucible. An absolutely cheap and useless plot device that essentially negates the Citadel's original use. So, it's a relay AND a weapon? The Protheans died out just barely making a smaller relay from Ilos to the Citadel to assist future species. Would the VI have not also mentioned something about that "Hey, we also have these weapon plans if it all goes to shit," fact as well since it was already so willing to help? No ending could rectify that horrible plot hole for me.

It was a fun game minus respawning and terrible plot devices.

 

[Dan_D]

I went into Mass Effect 3 very wary of everything, from gameplay to story.

First off, I love the first game. Not for the gameplay mecahnics, but for its story and the universe that it built. I went into Mass Effect 2 excited beyond belief. I bought it on release, and beat it within one week before I took a trip to Germany, lest my plane crashed and I didn't get to continue the series.

You see, Mass Effect 1 was so successful to me with regards to story because you had a definite enemy, Saren, and subsequently Sovereign. You take care of the threat, and it's set up well for the sequel. Then, we out of nowhere get the Illusive Man and his seeming to know (or alluding to the fact) that Shepherd is going to die. Then Shepherd dies. They recover his body, and while I was still thinking, "WTF," I assumed they'd make it more believable. Yet when you visit the Normany crash site, the planet's got a sizable gravitational field. At that point you couldn't convince me they knew how to write as well as I thought they could. Back to the Illusive Man, I have always thought since ME2 that he was a tool of the reapers. Assuming the reapers are as intelligent as they are, the way the games play out he's definitely been indoctrinated the entire time we are met with him (a slower indoctrination). Again, this is just my opinion on his character. It all stunk to me, and they took way too long to conclude that bit of story. It was all lame, too. If it was all Shepherd's dream at the end, however the fuck you want to interpret it, why concluded it there?

ME3 began very poorly for me. The whole child thing was way too forced. It could have worked, but given their development time they failed miserably. I loved that you finally got to fight with Anderson, but it was way too brief. I mentioned it in another thread, but I absolutely loathed that Vega character. He felt so out of place, like they were catering to all the meat heads that may play the game. And why two Hispanic characters? Not that there's anything wrong with that, but was it solely so they could have a little bit of back and forth in Spanish? It felt that way. Can't say I cared for Vega one bit, and did not speak to him or use him unless I was forced to do so.

My number two most hated part of ME3 were the constant spawning of enemies during Cerberus battles. It was annoying beyond belief. However, my number one most hated part of ME3 was the Crucible. An absolutely cheap and useless plot device that essentially negates the Citadel's original use. So, it's a relay AND a weapon? The Protheans died out just barely making a smaller relay from Ilos to the Citadel to assist future species. Would the VI have not also mentioned something about that "Hey, we also have these weapon plans if it all goes to shit," fact as well since it was already so willing to help? No ending could rectify that horrible plot hole for me.

It was a fun game minus respawning and terrible plot devices.

As Javik and Vigil put it, the Protheans were separated. Communication networks were destroyed quickly and they were scattered, not knowing what the others were doing. How did you not pick up on this? I am not saying anything else you said was wrong, though I don't agree with a lot of it. There are some plot holes yes, but 99% of them start at the Priority Earth Mission.

 

[LstBrunnenG]

I agreed with a lot of what you said, but this part makes my blood boil:

"It managed to make even the Synthesis ending seem beautiful."

You say that but I'm not sure you're familiar with the material I was referencing

No it didn't. That's flat out impossible. That ending is the biggest piece of shit in fiction I've ever seen. I'd dare say it's worse than time travel. It pisses me off that much.[/url]You've made your objections to time travel very clear in other threads. Yet Doctor Who is an extremely popular science fiction series beloved by many. I'm as much for a reasoned debate as anyone, but you risk sliding into "Stop enjoying what I don't like!" territory.

The solution to the problem of synthetics vs. organics is medicrity?

Where do you get mediocrity out of the Synthesis ending?

For one thing, this goes AGAINST the very themes of Mass Effect itself. The entire time Shepard has been bringing aliens, humans, men and women, regardless of background, sexual orientation and hell even political ideals together so they can work towards a common goal. Think about that for a second. United, but different. As in, not the same. They are still able to preserve what they are, but work together. Without invididual identities, everything is boring.

I think you're thinking of this. I didn't get that impression whatsoever. Again, check out those unofficial ending slides for an idea of a positive spin.

While some physical differences would remain, we don't know the extent of what the sythesis does to them.

This is the problem right here. Despite the fact that I have a gut feeling that BioWare didn't intend the Synthesis ending to be some kind of horrific cyborg socialist dystopia, I have no proof because they were so frustratingly short on details.

After reading those epilogue slides I assume it's more the cyberpunk version of SG-1/SGA's concept of ascension.

Even assuming people kept their personalities, who the fuck wants to be turned into a goddamn cyborg? Forcing a choice on people who already have common ground and are united to make them further homogenized is absolute horse shit.

This is one reason I prefer the ending to the original Deus Ex (which this so blatantly rips off) rather than the ME3 synthesis ending. JC merges HIMSELF with the AI at the end of DE, turning himself into the cyberpunk version of Jesus, rather than forcing everyone to be merged. (Don't worry, the sequel to DE that nobody likes to talk about gives you that chance.)

I think their intention was that Synthesis led to such a higher plane of existence that nobody minded, and everyone saw it as a net good for the galaxy.

And Shepard not a minute before that said; "We'll keep our own form thanks."

I think that was in response to being offered the chance to be ground up into paste and "preserved" as a reaper.

Synthesis is in a way what Reapers do when they harvest a species. Synthesis is disproven by the fact that you can reunite the Geth and Quarian people. This struggle is and achievement are literally ignored, discarded, belittled, and insulted by the sythesis choice.

The Geth/Quarian peace can disprove the Catalyst's problem. I don't see how it proves that Synthesis is a bad option.

This choice above all others required a lot more questions for understanding before making it. Shepard never asked if the people of the galaxy would end up like him, like the Borg, or looking like Reapers, or Husks, and didn't even consider what people might do after a wave of energy flows over them and leaves them with cyborg bits?

This is why I think clarification can help. Synthesis has the potential to be pretty horrific. A few clarifications from the Catalyst could change the conversation completely.

 

[prelag]

The synthesis option makes no sense.

Space magic aside, if you choose synthesis, you are merely making everyone half robot. If that wasn't punishment enough for these people, what stops these new hybrids from creating synthetics again?

"I turned everyone into half robots so you could build new robots but now you are part robot!"

Laughably bad.

 

[soulsavior]

No amount of explaining will ever make the synthesis ending acceptable in the mass effect universe. A certain level of absurdity is allowed in a sci-fi game. But the notion of a green pulse wave being able to merge everything in the galaxy (including plants apparently) into cyborgs is outlandish. It simply does not fit into the game. Technology has limits in Mass Effect. Even the reapers don't have such technology, or they'd have just invented a "magical pulse that kills all advanced organics in the galaxy" so they didn't have to even lift a finger. Rules and limits in sci-fi can be bent if they serve an interesting plot point. In this case, the plot point is outrageous and the rules are entirely shattered.

What's worse, is that it doesn't even solve anything. As people have pointed out a million times, more synthetics can still be produced. Unless somehow all metals are also organic now and somehow become alive whenever assembled into some kind of machine. In that case, does my toaster now have feelings? The more you think about synthesis, the dumber it gets.

There was no reason for them to attempt to get "philosophical" at the end. The game had been relatively straight forward up until then. Reapers bad. Must blow up. I like my friends. I didn't want to have to "think about the message maaaaaan" at the end of the game. I wanted to either blow up the reapers, or get blown up myself and have that be that. It did not need to be any more complicated than that. I really, really, really can't understand why they felt the need to try and have a "deep" ending. By doing nothing more than cutting out the godchild scene, the ending improves tenfold.

 

[JustinCorrigible]

As Javik and Vigil put it, the Protheans were separated. Communication networks were destroyed quickly and they were scattered, not knowing what the others were doing. How did you not pick up on this? I am not saying anything else you said was wrong, though I don't agree with a lot of it. There are some plot holes yes, but 99% of them start at the Priority Earth Mission.

True, it's not that I didn't pick up on it, it's that I don't buy it. There were two separate groups with research involving the Citadel? It just doesn't sit with me too well, and you'd (well, I would) think that any research involving the Citadel would be known somehow by whoever works on it, even if they don't know all the details. Something like the Crucible would take a long time to build, well before they would be absolutely separated.

 

[Dan_D]

True, it's not that I didn't pick up on it, it's that I don't buy it. There were two separate groups with research involving the Citadel? It just doesn't sit with me too well, and you'd (well, I would) think that any research involving the Citadel would be known somehow by whoever works on it, even if they don't know all the details. Something like the Crucible would take a long time to build, well before they would be absolutely separated.

There were not two separate groups doing research on the Citadel. Remember, the Citadel fell FIRST in the earliest days of the Reaper invasion. It is a relay itself and the Reapers come through it first. The station is activated as a relay when a signal is sent to the Keepers.

The Protheans building the Crucible never finished it. Even if they knew the Citadel was the Catalyst, they never were able to deliver the device. The way I understood Vigil, the group on Ilos came to the Citadel much, much later. Thousands of years after the Reaper's returned to dark space most likely. As Vigil recounted, the stasis pods began running out of power and failing as they weren't to be activated until after the Reapers had gone. That process of atrition took centuries and as time passed, stasis pods were sacrificed until only the best and brightest scientists were left.

As I recall from Vigil's conversation with Shepard, the scientists were thawed out, either released as part of the protocol, or released to take their chances when the pods ran out of power, I do not recall off hand. Once they realized they hadn't enough resources left to rebuild their society, they went to the Citadel to sabotage it so that the Reapers couldn't come back by way of the Citadel relay. Javik was almost totally unaware of the group on Ilos, believing it to be only a myth. He seemed only vaguely aware of the Crucible as well, recounting the story as a tale of their scientists building a great machine to stop the Reapers. Most likely this plan failed far before he went into stasis.

We also do not know when they started the Crucible, given that it was never finished, we can only assume that they ran out of time. Whether they discovered what the Catalyst was or not is a moot point. It wasn't delivered.

 

[Plague_Injected]

Fuck this game.

What pisses me off the most is that decisions that you make in the previous games about the Rachni, the genophage, the fate of the Council, who joins the council out of Anderson/Udina and the human Reaper have absolutely no fucking impact on anything. In the case of the Rachni, the human Reaper and Udina, Bioware went ahead and rewrote what I chose anyway. Why bother allowing choice if you're just going to undo it anyway?

I was expecting the people who died at Virmire and the Omega Relay to turn up at some point with some lame "oh I got out just in time lolz" excuse.

...I'm nerdraging hard.

 

[MacLeod]

Those things did matter in terms of EMS score did they not? If you didn't keep Morleans data, Eve dies and you lose out on extra systems that she could rally. You get extra EMS for keeping the Collector base and you get extra points for saving the Rachni queen.

Now that doesn't mean they make a huge difference though but I think they were going more for a game that you didn't have to play all 3 to have a good experience with 3 but if you did play all 3 then you got a bonus or two.

I don't really have a problem with that. I think it would suck if I had to go all the way back and replay 1 so I could save the Wrex because if you don't, the Krogan wont join you and you lose out on 1000 EMS.

Overall I had no problem with the continuity of the games. I got some extra goodies, plot line and story lines from my 1 and 2 playthru's and never feltni was getting ripped off for my decision making in the previous episodes.

 

[Dallows]

Holy shit the geth rocket troopers are the gayest thing in this whole fucking game.

 

[Dan_D]

Fuck this game.

What pisses me off the most is that decisions that you make in the previous games about the Rachni, the genophage, the fate of the Council, who joins the council out of Anderson/Udina and the human Reaper have absolutely no fucking impact on anything. In the case of the Rachni, the human Reaper and Udina, Bioware went ahead and rewrote what I chose anyway. Why bother allowing choice if you're just going to undo it anyway?

I was expecting the people who died at Virmire and the Omega Relay to turn up at some point with some lame "oh I got out just in time lolz" excuse.

...I'm nerdraging hard.

If you didn't spare the Rachni Queen in ME1, the queen in ME2 is a construct from Rachni DNA to suit Reaper purposes. It's heavily implied, if not outright said that they are responsible for unleashing the Rachni on the galaxy earlier. So this isn't that far fetched. If you spare this second queen, it will become a war asset, then it will turn on the Alliance, losing you the Rachni asset, and weakening other assets working on the Crucible. I think that's pretty cool actually. Curing the genophage results in stronger Krogan numbers, weaker Salarian numbers. But the consequences mean little in that regard. Where it matters most is whether or not you have to betray a friend to accomplish the task. If you betray Wrex, you are forced to kill him. If you betray Mordin, you may have to kill him. Or you can save mordin if Wreav is in charge and Maelon's data was destroyed, as it will result in Eve's death. The other implications of curing the genophage or not, are too long term for the scope of this game.

The differences on that front are small, but personal. The Rachni issue is larger in scope in some respects, but is a shorter term and impersonal issue.

One area, where I do agree is the Udina thing. I realize why they did it, and I'm sort of glad, but still, it doesn't matter if you chose Udina or Anderson really. It impacts the second game slightly, but not the third. What you do have to understand is that Paragon and Renegade Shepards do what they do for the same reasons. Their purposes are generally noble. It is the means by which they accomplish their tasks which differ. One is uncompromising in the pursuit of their goal. The ends justifies the means at any price. The other believes that if the price is too high, then it isn't worth doing. And that's really it. You guide Shepard through this using your own blend of choices putting your own style on the story. Though I generally prefer the Paragon route for most actions, some Renegade actions are just too good and bring me too much joy. I'm sure that everyone else does things a little bit differently.

 

[MacLeod]

Holy shit the geth rocket troopers are the gayest thing in this whole fucking game.

They are a definite pain when there are more than 1 of them. One by themselves isn't that big a hassle if you've got cover cause you can see the shot coming from a mile away. But if there are a couple of them you can get plastered by one while you're aiming on the other.

 

[SWMeierkord]

Seriously, no matter what I chose through 3 games the ending is the same exact 3 options as everyone else who plays? Especially when all the 'tough' subjects and decisions ends up being meaningless in the end. Now that I read that every option in the game I made is meaningless because they just interject some sort of alternate solution to make everyone on the same page is utter crap. Why advertise that you control your character when everything is predetermined to be the same in the end no matter what (with the exception of a line or two)?

 

[MacLeod]

Seriously, no matter what I chose through 3 games the ending is the same exact 3 options as everyone else who plays? Especially when all the 'tough' subjects and decisions ends up being meaningless in the end. Now that I read that every option in the game I made is meaningless because they just interject some sort of alternate solution to make everyone on the same page is utter crap. Why advertise that you control your character when everything is predetermined to be the same in the end no matter what (with the exception of a line or two)?

They are not meaningless, they're just not deal breakers. Would you be happier if you had to go back and replay 1 and 2 just so you could save the Rachni queen because if you didn't the Normandy is destroyed in the opening attack on earth and you bad to trudge around the galaxy in a Cessna? They wanted this game to appeal to and be playable by people that didn't play the first two. If you did, you get some bonus points and some cool extra plot lines. The game wouldn't sell very well if you told everybody you first had to spend 70+ hours playing the first two games. Not everybody are [H]ardcore ME fans like us.

 

[prelag]

They are not meaningless, they're just not deal breakers. Would you be happier if you had to go back and replay 1 and 2 just so you could save the Rachni queen because if you didn't the Normandy is destroyed in the opening attack on earth and you bad to trudge around the galaxy in a Cessna? They wanted this game to appeal to and be playable by people that didn't play the first two. If you did, you get some bonus points and some cool extra plot lines. The game wouldn't sell very well if you told everybody you first had to spend 70+ hours playing the first two games. Not everybody are [H]ardcore ME fans like us.

I know your question wasn't directed towards me, but the answer is yes, the game should have punished players for the choices they made in the previous games. While your take is one of extreme, a player could theoretically go back and replay an older title to achieve the ending they desired. I don't see how making decisions have actual repercussions equals a bad thing, no matter how vast those repercussions may be.

As for new players, ME3 defaults to a pre-made save if you have never played the previous games. Simply give them a pre-made save that allows them to reach the end of the game.

Doesn't seem that difficult to me.

 

[Dan_D]

Holy shit the geth rocket troopers are the gayest thing in this whole fucking game.

Not even close. Geth Pyro's are much worse.

 

[Dan_D]

Seriously, no matter what I chose through 3 games the ending is the same exact 3 options as everyone else who plays? Especially when all the 'tough' subjects and decisions ends up being meaningless in the end. Now that I read that every option in the game I made is meaningless because they just interject some sort of alternate solution to make everyone on the same page is utter crap. Why advertise that you control your character when everything is predetermined to be the same in the end no matter what (with the exception of a line or two)?

The biggest problem I have with this is that a feature advertised earlier for this game was radically different endings because it didn't need to tie into a sequel. Right now your choices all change the way the game feels, but don't really impact the ending.

 

[JustinCorrigible]

There were not two separate groups doing research on the Citadel. Remember, the Citadel fell FIRST in the earliest days of the Reaper invasion. It is a relay itself and the Reapers come through it first. The station is activated as a relay when a signal is sent to the Keepers.

The Protheans building the Crucible never finished it. Even if they knew the Citadel was the Catalyst, they never were able to deliver the device. The way I understood Vigil, the group on Ilos came to the Citadel much, much later. Thousands of years after the Reaper's returned to dark space most likely. As Vigil recounted, the stasis pods began running out of power and failing as they weren't to be activated until after the Reapers had gone. That process of atrition took centuries and as time passed, stasis pods were sacrificed until only the best and brightest scientists were left.

As I recall from Vigil's conversation with Shepard, the scientists were thawed out, either released as part of the protocol, or released to take their chances when the pods ran out of power, I do not recall off hand. Once they realized they hadn't enough resources left to rebuild their society, they went to the Citadel to sabotage it so that the Reapers couldn't come back by way of the Citadel relay. Javik was almost totally unaware of the group on Ilos, believing it to be only a myth. He seemed only vaguely aware of the Crucible as well, recounting the story as a tale of their scientists building a great machine to stop the Reapers. Most likely this plan failed far before he went into stasis.

We also do not know when they started the Crucible, given that it was never finished, we can only assume that they ran out of time. Whether they discovered what the Catalyst was or not is a moot point. It wasn't delivered.

EDIT: Actually, I didn't imply that they were physically on the citadel, if that's what you meant.

However, it doesn't change the fact that I do not like the choice the writers made with the Crucible. I never once felt... from the first discovery of the Crucible to the revelation of the catalyst being the Citadel, to the final moments, I just never felt any excitement regarding those elements. I like bringing the species together, I did like getting some closure with old companions, but that's about it. Maybe I'll like it more as I do more playthroughs, I have no idea yet.

 

[Monkey God]

Fuck this game.

What pisses me off the most is that decisions that you make in the previous games about the Rachni, the genophage, the fate of the Council, who joins the council out of Anderson/Udina and the human Reaper have absolutely no fucking impact on anything. In the case of the Rachni, the human Reaper and Udina, Bioware went ahead and rewrote what I chose anyway. Why bother allowing choice if you're just going to undo it anyway?

I was expecting the people who died at Virmire and the Omega Relay to turn up at some point with some lame "oh I got out just in time lolz" excuse.

...I'm nerdraging hard.

+11ty billion
I was waiting for a scene of Rachni swarming over husks, and a fleet of Geth taking on the Reapers in space. Nope. "Some Rachni showed up to help build the crucible." Thats it? That's the end result of my decisions? Nice.

 

[Dallows]

Not even close. Geth Pyro's are much worse.

No way. Pyros have a hugely limited range. Rocket Troopers on the other hand seem to be able to know where you are at all times, and instantly lock on and fire rockets at you.

Where the fuck are my heat seeking missiles?

 

[Dan_D]

No way. Pyros have a hugely limited range. Rocket Troopers on the other hand seem to be able to know where you are at all times, and instantly lock on and fire rockets at you.

Where the fuck are my heat seeking missiles?

The difference is I can take a couple of rockets. You can't take but about 2 seconds of a Pyro's attack. They also have a way of walking up on you while you are fighting something else.

 

[Dallows]

The difference is I can take a couple of rockets. You can't take but about 2 seconds of a Pyro's attack. They also have a way of walking up on you while you are fighting something else.

Yeah that happens if you lose awareness. But getting bombarded by 2-3 rockets at a time is nuts.

 

[Dan_D]

Yeah that happens if you lose awareness. But getting bombarded by 2-3 rockets at a time is nuts.

The rocket troopers usually stay at range and that's fine. I can handle them. They suck, but aren't the worst. The worst ones for me are still the Pyro's. I think they are more dangerous than Geth Primes. Now I generally watch my back but they take quite a few hits to put down much of the time. Depending on your weapons load out at least. Of course a lone Pyro isn't bad either, but much of the time they aren't alone either. There will be two or three of them fairly close.