| noname2200 said: This is a continuation of a discussion from the OT. Excuse the non-sequitir. But then, if you've seen the ending, you're used to that. *bad-um-tish!* *ahem* ________________________________________________________________________________________ yo_john117 said: Well I liked the twist at the end and I think it made more sense then just having the crucible fire and you never really knowing who was behind the cycles and why it happened every 50,000 years or so. I just wish that the ending would have contained more background on the race of the little boy. The whole ending got me thinking and wanting more (which is good). After the credits came up I got the "wow that was really cool" feeling that is so rare in video games. I would love for someone to make a Mass Effect book explaining that race and their decision to make cycles. (It would be much like the Forunner books for Halo) _________________________________________________________________________________________ You're actually putting a finger on one of my issues with the ending. Simply put, we DON'T know who was behind the cycles, or why it happened every 50k years. All we know is that some starchild, who resembles some kid you may have been hallucinating since the start of the game, tells you that he's in charge of the Reapers, and that every 50k years they (synthetic machines made from organics) slaughter all the advanced organics in the galaxy because they don't want synthetics to slaughter all the organics in the galaxies. We don't know who this kid really is, what prompted him/her/it to think that synthetics will inevitably wipe out organics (making peace with the Geth, who've existed peacably in their corner of the galaxy for over 300 years, is just hand-waved away), or much of anything, really. Stop and ask yourself the following: is the kid a machine? An AI? A VI? Something else? This is relevant, because he's sat inert, in the Citadel, since at least the time of the Rachni Wars. In that time, the Geth (and other AIs) have been created and have established themselves. If the threat of synthetics is really the problem, why has he done precisely nothing? For that matter, what evidence do we have that synthetics will eventually wipe out organics in every galaxy if left unchecked? The only hostile AIs we've seen, in three separate games, are the Reapers and a rogue AI on the Citadel that wanted to escape Citadel space because it wanted to live. On the flipside we have EDI, Legion, and the Geth. We're told at the last seconds of the final game that there's a problem, but we've spent the past two games being told the exact opposite. Now, let's expand on this lack of closure. You say the end got you thinking, and wanting more. Well, we've been told the series will never chronologically advance beyond this game. So tell me, what happened after the end to anyone or anything in the galaxy? |
By the looks of it the reason why so many people disliked the ending is the same reason why I liked it. It pretty much opened up the doorway to a whole new Mass Effect experience (much like Halo 3 to Halo 4, 5 and 6). I know they say there won't be any more Mass Effect but I know in some way, shape or form there will be more. The ending did tie up Shephards story but opened up an opportunity for a whole new story line.
As for the bolded: For all we know whoever the race is that is in charge of the cycles may be in other galaxies as well and have seen it happen countless times or it almost happened in our galaxy and they just managed to stop synthetics before they wiped out organic life and created the cycle as a safeguard so that can never happen again.
