We all agree the ME3 ending sucked. Let´s hope Mass Effect 4 will be brilliant again
d21lewis said:
|
I came to the conclusion that every one who complains about the ending of Lost did not understand a thing that happened. Like, did they tie up all lose ends? No. Did they explain everything? No. Did they tie up the story? Yes sir. And that's the most important thing, they ended the story/journey. That's why the ending to Mass Effect doesn't bug me, it's the end of Shepard's journey, and to be frank, the last decision really made me think. I spent an hour pondering and reflecting on just what the outcomes meant to the galaxy. Do I take over the Reapers and risk getting having power corrupt me? Do I destroy all life and implement synthesis and start life all over, and in fact, become God? (Atleast that's what I thought the synthesis ending would do). Or do I just destroy the Reapers, screw over the Quarians who I just reuinited with the Geth, and just pray we don't start another war? It really made me sit down and think. I really felt like I was Shepard at that moment and the fate of the galaxy rested in my hands; not Shepard's (Which is why the indoctrination thoery is silly to me).
| d21lewis said:
|
A very good comparison. And an equally poor and unfitting ending.
darkknightkryta said:
Best Show EVER! |
(...except the ending).
| WiiBox3 said: I really think the Indoc. theory for the ending is correct. I thought the ending was ingenious, meant for the hardcore fan. All 3 games emphasize Indoctrination of whoever has contact with the Reapers and Shepard has a heck of a lot of contact with them. Just before the final scene he comes in contact with Harvenger, the most bad ass of the Reapers. As for closure with your friends, I felt that was what Mass Effect 3 was up until the end. You find closure with everyone you had come in contact with over the last three games before taking on the final mission, the suicide mission. |
I think you mean Harbinger ;)
Ingenious? I'd say I'm pretty hardcore, having completely ME1 and 2 previously and not having kept a save for ME3 and still taking the time to complete ME1 and 2 again including ALL side missions...Baring in mind I have hardly completed any games whatsoever in the past few years.
Am i not a hardcore ME fan? I'm as hardcore as they come when it comes to ME and your drawing interpretations from absolutely nothing, much like a child would draw interpretations from sonic the hedgehog and wonder why robotnik didn't just build a 20 foot brick wall in the green hill zone and stop sonic progressing.
Your theory on indoctrination doesn't wash, plot props like that are made obvious, in any fiction. You don't leave stuff like that open to interpretation without aluring to it in some way at the end, even if aimed at intelligent people. If your theory were to be correct the ending would be even worse than it is because of that. I think you're missing the point with what people are actually complaining about.
fillet said:
|
Ironically the developers promised that ME3 endings wouldn't be like Lost. Of course they were trolling us.
One thing I've noticed about all the plot-holes in ME3 is that really most of them are just occurrences that weren't explained. Now I'm not saying there aren't some pretty big plot-holes in the game, because there are. But I just wasn't bothered by said plot-holes. In my experience there are very few games, movies or TV shows of Mass Effects scope that don't haven numerous plot-holes in them.
| Kantor said: I suppose it's possible that a race managed to turn itself into AI, because we don't know how long they had - perhaps millions of years of civilization. However, this race is quite clearly extremely wise. They can't just assume that synthetics will always rise up and obliterate organics. It didn't happen to them. Don't they realise that they have become a race of synthetics who obliterate organics? They claim to be perpetuating life, but all they're really doing is setting it down a predetermined path and eradicating it before it can become advanced. It is impossible for any sensible race to honestly believe this, so once again, that cannot possibly be an earnest statement of the truth. |
Not turned but progressed into digital memory storage. We've seen this is science fiction before in many mediums, it's not hard to comprehend that a race could develop the technology. It would be artificial inteligence based on real inteligence (see Vision from Avengers).
What they feared was chaos brought on by other advanced species. Not as advanced as them but advanced. This is the key point they were making, that organics caused the chaos while the synthetics resolved it, the synthetics in this case create by them. That may be what they were doing but that was their point, don't let it get to a stage where the 'chaos' reaches a level even they cannot contain.
You are basing this on modern thinking. A race far more advanced with technology to do all they did might resort to such a thinking if it thought it the best option, to preserve their own life and help progress the life of less species.
The problem with all this though is I am assuming based on my limited understanding of it all. It this that should have been explained in the final scenes, if that scene went of for another 15 minutes of talking, then I sure less people would have moaned.
Hmm, pie.
| darkknightkryta said: I don't feel that's the case though. My interpretation was that the citadel was created to work with the crucible, the blue prints for the crucible were left for organics by that A.I. If they ever reached the point for the crucible and the citadel to be united then organics have evolved enough to the point that they can make a new solution. I personally believed that the idea was that you'd have to be united to hold off the reapers long enough and to build the crucible, if species evolved to the point of working together they're mature enough to create a new solution cause the old solution isn't valid (They've resolved chaos for life in the current galaxy, all that's left is to decide what to do with the reapers). Is there lazy writing behind my interpretation? Yes, but I feel that's what the lead writer was going for with the ending, though they just should have left a 4th ending where if you're really disjoint you don't even make it up to the Citadel. |
That makes a lot of sense, while other cycles the races did not survive as they were not united (last cycle Protheans were on their own apparently). A sensible idea and one that makes more sense the 'just because'. Your lazy writing? Not really, it's an idea and one that makes sense, what seemed lazy is the writing for the writers in the game to not explain the last scene in more detail.
Hmm, pie.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
