| yo_john117 said: 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. |
Actually, my post was merely Part 1, Section 1 of why I don't like the ending. I entitle Part 1 the "Not At All Set Up" portion of my answer. Section 2 of Part 1 was going to mention the fact that, if Starchild is correct and synthetics from other galaxies would eventually come here to do what he claims, it logically should have happened already, since there are a ton of galaxies and everything indicates that the Reapers only operate in ours.
Of course, all this raises the bigger issue, namely that we have to guess and hypothesize with next to zero data, because in three separate and lengthy games the possibility we're told about in (just) the ending is never set up, but oft-contradicted. At the very least, this goes counter to the old adage of "show, don't tell." We've been shown A, but at the final moment we're told it's actually B. It's poor storytelling, and it was not at all necessary to set up any sequels.
Now, if you'll answer the question I asked at the end of the last post, we can transition to Part 2, "What's closure?" I've started that conversation with Zim, although we've also bled over into Part 3, "Watch the Plotholes!"
