Mass Effect 3

[mimartin]

Can defenders of the endings stop with the whole "happy ending" BS?

I'll stop the happy ending BS, when the people moaning quit asking for stuff that is already in the game...Just because it isn't in the last five minutes does not somehow make it invalid. If people keep moaning about stuff that is there then what choice do I have, but to surmise that either 1. They did not play the game, but are only trolling with bogus information they read online or watched on a youtube video, 2. are moaning about it because they wanted their happy ending, 3. Hate all vidya 4. Have a legit complaint and just can't focus it into the proper sentence structure to communicate it.

 

Someone writing it didn’t answer my questions, but then Achilles showing where the game actually did or someone saying that it is a huge plot hole and someone pointing out a video showing for a fact that it isn’t a plot hole, but in fact was mentioned prominently in the game do not make bad endings. Gamer inattention is not a valid argument for saying a game sucked. They are valid argument for saying YOU did not like a game because it did not hold your attention.

 

Saying none of your choices matter in the entire trilogy isn’t valid either, since they clearly did in giving you the war assists that gave you the three choices at the end of the game. Those choices you made throughout the entire trilogy also clearly mattered in other parts of the game too.

Saying the degree of choices at the end was bad and provided nearly identical ending is to me a valid argument too. I also find it semi-disingenuous to say there was no paragon ending as some have mentioned when galactic peace for all-time seems pretty paragon to me.

 

I will say it again for the cheap seats…I did not like the ending… The kid AI did bother me. The almost identical outcomes of all three choices I’ve seen, bothered me. However, I have not seen where bioware lied to me like some on the internet have said. 1. My Shepard took back Earth. 2. I had to make difficult choices (which ending I thought was most accepting among them). 3. They answered my questions.

 

So I will stop the BS. Wish the haters would too.

 

[DarthParametric]

OK, one simple but fairly important (i think) point: (not sure if spoilers are necessary, but better safe than sorry)

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

how the festering **** are they meant to a(explain the Reapers whilst b) tying up all the loose ends and still c) keep everyone happy.

Well your first point is part of the problem.

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

Explaining the reasoning behind Reapers was something they should never have done, especially not by Casper the Friendly Ghost in 3 lines of dialogue in the last 5 minutes of the game. Sovereign says in ME1 that the Reapers are beyond our comprehension. That's fine - they should have stuck with that. The nebulous big bad with unfathomable motives that cannot be bargained or reasoned with worked perfectly fine for the other 99% of the series.

 

As to your other point, we had actually tied up most of the loose ends already in the previous 30-odd hours of the game. The problem is the end actually undoes all that by throwing in a curve ball of blowing up all the relays, trapping pretty much the entire galaxy's military in the Sol system, etc. etc. So now there are a whole bunch of new loose ends that weren't there 5 minutes before. And the end doesn't wrap those up. Some people are satisfied seeing Joker plus crew members A and B/LI miraculously making it to some unknown garden world and apparently siring some new population (an interesting biological dilemma if crew A and B are both guys/non-human). Other people are not.

 

As to your last point, well you can't make everyone happy obviously, and it's a fool's errand to try. I think they could have done it better though. It must have been patently obvious months ago that this was going to leave a lot of people dissatisfied.

 

Um...wtf?

Sounds like a bug of some sort. What platform? PC/360/PS3?

[jedi_consular16]

360. Haven't had any problems up to now. But, after looking at a few spoilers now I feel like I just watched the Sopranos series finale all over again.

[DarthParametric]

There should be an autosave either just before or just after that sequence. Try loading it again I guess. If it persists, might want to try clearing the 360's cache - I hear that can sometimes magically fix issues. Failing that, have a look over at the official forum. There should be a 360 tech help sub-forum.

[mimartin]

Well your first point is part of the problem.

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

Explaining the reasoning behind Reapers was something they should never have done, especially not by Casper the Friendly Ghost in 3 lines of dialogue in the last 5 minutes of the game.

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

 

Somehow you must have miss talking to or lost attention while talking to the Prothean VI on Thessia. No it does spell it out, but it does help you understand what the kid is saying, that is if you paid attention to it. Funny how I figured most of this out from clues within the first two games and 2/3 of this game even before talking to him...It was all there. Casper just confirmed what I already knew and fixed the few things I got wrong.

[DarthParametric]

That wouldn't be with Prothy in the party by any chance? I hear the dialogue for that whole sequence is expanded with him present.

[jedi_consular16]

Thanks DP. A simple reload solved the problem. Although, I must say that though I do not think the ending was terrible I was left hanging.

 

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

I'm confused about several things. The AI/kid in the Citadel, he says that the point of the Reapers was to maintain order over chaos. He seems to imply that once a civilization reaches the point where it can create synthetics then it is time to call it quits. But...what is the threshold for chaos? What I mean is...how is the creation of "life" the point of no return? The Rachni Wars? The Krogan Rebellions? Those were huge destructive wars on a galactic scale that left many world destroyed or uninhabitable. Those were just from one species to another. Was that not chaotic? Am I missing the point? I'm really trying to wrap my head around what Bioware was trying to get at here I'm open to your guys' thoughts because I'm sort of baffled.

 

Additionally, as others have said, I disliked the ambiguity with the Normandy crew/party characters.

[mimartin]

That wouldn't be with Prothy in the party by any chance? I hear the dialogue for that whole sequence is expanded with him present.

 

 

 

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

You get what I mean with or without him, but you get beat over the head with the data with him in your group. He also talks about it on the ship if you catch Javik converstation about Legion. Here though he is only talking about the pattern in his time and your time.

 

(This BBCode requires its accompanying plugin to work properly.)

 

This is the conversation that really made me think the Reapers were not evil, but only following their purpose. It was strengthen by conversations with EDI, which I will find if someone wants them, but I'm doing my second playthrough now.

 

Most of the stuff Javik says is also mentioned elsewhere, but it is more beaten into your head by him. That is why I've told everyone to get this DLC if they want any chance to understand what just happened at the end. I can totally understand someone not fully understanding ME3 without it. If anything people should be more upset that it wasn't included with the game since it is so important to understanding the story especially the last five mins . I understand the information is in other parts of the game, so they are correct it is not essential, but without it you almost have to take notes.

 

So I roll my eyes when people complain that they could not question casper, but I had no questions for him to other than why the hell do you look like that kid, but I’m satisfied with that answer too thanks to Achilles. Still don’t like it, but it makes sense after remembering the Legion mission. Would have rather he looked like Tali. Think it would have been better to the story had they had it look like whoever died on Virmire (Ash or Carth Jr.). Also would have made some of the fanboys happy (like me).

[Lynk Former]

I know I'm tired of DLC that complete parts of an incomplete game.. which remains incomplete until more DLC is released.

[DarthParametric]

Fancy all those people being so ignorant. The answer was there staring them in the face all along - if they'd just paid an extra $10 to unlock it.

 

But that's besides the point. The explanation they provided, regardless of where or to what degree it was foreshadowed, was not only illogical, it was completely unwarranted. As I said before, it would have been far better left unexplained.

[mimartin]

Although, I must say that though I do not think the ending was terrible I was left hanging.

It is confusing, I will grant anyone that…You will have to piece it together from conversation throughout the entire trilogy.

 

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

First of all from conversations with EDI and others (namely Legion) you know that AI are not infallible. They have limitations and make miscalculations. EDI tells you this straight out, the Geth show you this several times by following the Reapers not once but twice and Legions miscalculation on what the rewrite would do.

 

So the AI controlling the Reapers is fallible. The AI has decided since organics once they reach a certain technological stage will create AI and that AI will eventually rebel against its masters. So that is the chaos the AI controlling the Reapers is talking about. It has happen time and time again. There is a pattern. However, that is also the AI controlling the Reapers mistake.

It did not see a time when AIs and their creators could coexist. (now this will depend on your outcome in the Quarian vs. Geth battle. The AI could even be correct about this cycle. I was being fallible the way I was going) If Shepard stopped the Quarian/Geth war, then the AI is completely wrong, because it did not predict Shepard ending the conflict. Should the Geth or Quarians win then he right. It is most likely to happen again.

 

However, AI’s solution is still flawed because his solution to stopping the chaos between organics and their AI creations is to destroy everything advanced enough to create AI. He is protecting organics by killing them, to prevent other AIs from destroy all organics even those that are not advanced enough to create AI. The last cycle, when the Reapers harvested the Prothean they did not touch the humans, Asari, Hanar, Salarians, krogan or Truians because they were not advance enough to create AI. They even talk about one species not being touched in ME3 because they are not advanced enough.

 

This is where it would have been nice for them to explain how they got this purpose. Did the first AI, the ones in the Citadel make that mistake? Did they destroy all organic life and then waited thousands upon thousands of years for organic life to reappear? So in order to prevent that from happening again, they decided to give themselves this purpose? In conversations with EDI you learn that AI’s can be repurposed. After all you meet EDI in Mass Effect 1, you know that if you paid attention on the Cerberus base. She also changes based on conversation with Shepard and there is an interesting conversation between EDI and Javik that beats this theme into your head.

 

TLDR: the Chaos according to Reaper AI logic is that organics will create AI, that AI will rebel and if left unchecked that AI will extinguish all organics. So the reapers are not killing organic, they are saving organics.

[Lynk Former]

Changing gears... some info about the Mass Effect animu: http://www.japanator.com/first-look-at-mass-effect-anime-releasing-this-fall-22432.phtml

[DarthParametric]

Are they meant to be Krogan?

 

Interesting that they say everyone hates Vega. I admit I wasn't keen on him when he was first announced, and I would still much rather have one of the old squad members back instead of him, but he didn't turn out to be too objectionable. Not that I ever really used him more than once or twice in combat. Pretty much used Garrus and Liara the whole time, except where you are forced to take certain chars.

[jedi_consular16]

Ya I sort of pieced together what you said Mimartin, but thank you that untangles a bit of the questions I had.

 

I liked Vega, although I disliked how few party members you had this time around. I read that they went with a smaller number so as to have a more intimate character development with each one...I didn't get that so much. Actually I thought some of the characters were dry.

 

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

As a side note, I would have liked to have had Zaeed on my ship again. The man was a badass, and his war stories always made me chuckle.

[DarthParametric]

Yeah they said a lot of things they didn't carry through with.

[Red Hessian]

Are they meant to be Krogan?

 

They look more like Elites from Halo.

[DarthParametric]

Spotted this. I think it covers most of the major issues pretty well. Spoilers obviously.

 

http://www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/

[mimartin]

I liked Vega, although I disliked how few party members you had this time around. I read that they went with a smaller number so as to have a more intimate character development with each one...I didn't get that so much. Actually I thought some of the characters were dry.

I not really sure how much development really need to be done with the crew, especially the two that have been with Shepard since ME1, the Shepard, Gurras day out was both lol funny and one of my favorite moments in the Mass Effect trilogy and the Tali “Emergency Induction Port” conversation (glitches and all) was still funny as hell. It is also one glitch I hope they don’t fix.

 

I was annoyed with the party members moving around the Normandy, until I realized they were interacting with each other. Some of the best most well written insightful dialogue in the game comes from Shepard listening to party members interact with each other. Was also really annoyed that Shepard couldn’t take people on the Citadel with him, until I had my first conversation with one on the Citadel, it was a nice touch. Also love that Bioware did a better job in Mass Effect 3 than ME2 in not letting romances happen while just being nice and then pretty much closing that character down from future meaningful conversations.

 

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

My Shepard had romanced Liara in ME 1 and Tali in ME 2. Shepard pretty much told Liara that they were over right off the bat, but still friends…Other than one tense moment in the Geth/Reaper ship between the two of them, with a little help from EDI, my Liara Shepard relationship was a very deep friendship between two people that obviously love each other, but circumstances caused them to grow apart and Shepard fell for the Tali.

Also really love the part just before the final mission on the Normandy. If you go to Gurras normal spot you will find one of two things. One is lol funny, if you are not romancing either, the other the one I got is very touching were the three acknowledge their unique relationship.

 

So while I respect your opinion, my opinion is the polar opposite.

 

Spotted this. I think it covers most of the major issues pretty well. Spoilers obviously.

 

http://www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/

 

One question DP, you do agree that Number 3 the part about the Normandy, is not a plot hole? Right?

 

I love how it has been shown to be a false plot hole, but people still site it. All of 3 are wrong and have been proven wrong, but I just want to know your feelings on the Normandy one.

[DarthParametric]

Whatever you want to call it, it's completely illogical. I'd say I'm in agreeance with what the article says. I believe I posted pretty much the same thing, albeit a briefer version, a few pages back. If by "shown to be a false plot hole" you believe that

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

the physical transit time to break from combat in orbit, re-enter the atmosphere, pick up some or all of the crew members variously scattered around the London combat zone, leave the atmosphere, pass through the middle of the galaxy's biggest naval battle (this whole time dodging Reapers presumably), then head through the solar system out beyond Pluto, jumping through the Charon relay is theoretically possible, that still doesn't explain why Joker would run away in the first place. I believe you cited the audio where Major Coats (trailer sniper guy) calls for a fall back and regroup? That was for the Hammer ground forces, not the Sword naval forces (which the Normandy was part of and who were in active combat with the Reapers). Now leaving aside the fact that Joker would be under the direct command of Hackett, not Coats, I think it has been fairly well established by this point that Joker would pretty much need a gun to his head to willingly abandon Shepard (and potentially half the squad) like that. The only way it would happen is if either Hackett or Shepard directly ordered him to do it (and even then it would seem unlikely), and there's no indication that either of them gave such an order.

[Achilles]

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

Explaining the reasoning behind Reapers was something they should never have done, especially not by Casper the Friendly Ghost in 3 lines of dialogue in the last 5 minutes of the game. Sovereign says in ME1 that the Reapers are beyond our comprehension. That's fine - they should have stuck with that. The nebulous big bad with unfathomable motives that cannot be bargained or reasoned with worked perfectly fine for the other 99% of the series.

I disagree. I think it's a cheap device that's used too often in order to shield crappy writing. I would have been disappointed if they hadn't answered that. My opinion only.

 

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

As to your other point, we had actually tied up most of the loose ends already in the previous 30-odd hours of the game. The problem is the end actually undoes all that by throwing in a curve ball of blowing up all the relays, trapping pretty much the entire galaxy's military in the Sol system, etc. etc. So now there are a whole bunch of new loose ends that weren't there 5 minutes before. And the end doesn't wrap those up. Some people are satisfied seeing Joker plus crew members A and B/LI miraculously making it to some unknown garden world and apparently siring some new population (an interesting biological dilemma if crew A and B are both guys/non-human). Other people are not.

A lot of assumptions here.

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

First, we don't know that they were trapped in the Sol system. We know that a retreat was called. I think it's safe to assume that the remaining fleet would've used the relay to leave the system. That's what a retreat is. You exit the field of battle. In this case, the field of battle was the Sol system.

 

Second, the Citadel AI states that synthesis is the pinnacle of evolution. This is a quote, not speculation. For some reason, people seem to want to introduce biological issues as potential plot holes to a species that is no longer entirely organic. I guarantee people would bitch if Casper tediously explained all the fine print via several minutes of unnecessary exposition. I maintain that not much imagination is required to figure out how a race organic/synthetic hybrids would overcome some of these issues.

In other news, I finished my second playthrough last night and picked up a couple of things that I missed (or got wrong) previously.

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

1) The Citadel is the Catalyst. They stated it and I heard it the first time, but for some reason interpretted as misdirection (the implication being that Shepard is the Catalyst), however the Citadel AI clearly states that the former is true not the latter. Got that one wrong, big time.

 

2) The AI states that synthetics would wipe out all organic life (advanced and non-advanced) and that "The Solution" spares the non-advanced. Plot point clarified.

[mimartin]

Show spoiler

(hidden content - requires Javascript to show)

My Shepard did not have a watch, how long was knocked out the first time and the second time after coming out of the beam?

You don't know what orders were given in the space battle either or was you Shepard monitoring that too while knocked out.

[DarthParametric]

So my assumptions based on things not explicitly stated are wrong, yet your assumptions based on things not explicitly stated are correct?

[Achilles]

One set of assumptions creates plot holes. *shrugs*

 

You state that you're not asking to be spoon-fed, yet at every turn, very minor gaps are used to prop up some "not good enough" argument. I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, but I'm having a hard time seeing how you're not trying to have it both ways.

[mimartin]

Where did I say that? And most everything I have stated has been explicitly stated. Here I'm not saying you are wrong, but I am explicitly stating that it is not fact.

[Red Hessian]

I'm not one for long arguments (even though I prefer DarthParametric's theories) so I think I'll just go and give Skyrim a few turns and leave all things regarding ME3 shelved for now.