By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Mass Effect 3 ending sucks BIG TIME!!!

I wish people would stop complaining about this supposed "conclusion" to the Mass Effect franchise. A few years ago, we all hated the "ending" of Fallout 3, but the Brotherhood of Steel DLC more than made up for it. Despite those last few moments, I'm not the slightest bit convinced that Commander Shepard is actually dead.



Around the Network
lestatdark said:
haxxiy said:
lestatdark said:
haxxiy said:
Admit it guys, it was simply a bunch of FTL pixie dust that stands far from the codex explanations that made ME (almost, if you wish) hard sci-fi.

No need to play the apologist for Bioware or beat even further a dead horse. It is as it is.

It was given an explanation. A very poorly done and frankly lacking explanation, but it was given. Still not convinced that we have seen all that there's to see from ME3 final moments, especially since the events of Arrival were the true final moments to ME2 instead of just the Collector's Base destruction/purge.

Exactly, you said it yourself - the explanation lacks explanation.

Frankly, the only way they  they could get away with the crucible was making it somehow harness the staggering energy of the mass relays to shoot deathstar rays at the Reapers, and destroy the relays in the process if you please, that would explain why the reapers don't make use of such a weapon. Or maybe a different type of FTL drive who doesn't shut off nearing a collision, so all the allied ships just kamikaze on the Reapers. It is said in the codex that it would work, so... and even if someone designs a way to explain the red pixie dust, we'd still have a control who doesn't make any sense at all - Godkid controls the reapers, why he needs blue pixie dust and disintegrate Shepard to call them off?  - and the synthesis thing that is just atrocious and full of unfortunate implications. 

Yeah, the Control and Synthesis endings are far too poorly done to be accurately explained by anything ever said in the lore of the games. Frankly, the only scenario which is slightly plausible is the Destroy one, which as oddly as it seems, by believing the endings to be actual ocurrences is a renegade or bad ending, which kinda seemed "off" to me (well, that and that shepard awakens in the midst of rubble afterwards, but there's no way him or anyone could have survived to destruction of the Citadel)

Pretty much. The beginning of ME2 was clear on this one, and the logs at the Cerberus base made it clear Shepard survived because his helmet kept his brain cells mostly intact. He didn't even had one on the ending of ME3, and that's on top of a big ass explosion.



 

 

 

 

 

Oh and if this was all a hallucination. Screw you Bioware. False endings are really, really, lame.



I spent last 3 days playing it non stop, I was having so much fun and thought the first thing I would do after finishing it is to start a new game, but now I finished the game I don't want to touch it ever again because I don't want to see any of those endings again >_



 

lestatdark said:
Sal.Paradise said:
lestatdark said:
NotStan said:
Rath said:
NotStan said:
Rath said:

Spoilers follow

 

So my main problem with some of the endings is that I just can't make sense of them.

A synthesis between human and machines where everyone is suddenly converted to have little green lines all over them? My suspension of disbelief just can't go that far, it's too farfetched.

I also fail to understand why the Geth and EDI die in the ending where you destroy the reapers - they are in no way connected to the catalyst so how does it destroy them?


Maybe I'm missing something...

It's because they are synthetics, the geth, EDI etc are considered to be the next step in evolution, and will likely turn on their creators - the humans & aliens, therefore the best way to stop the cycle is to destroy the synthetics, the only reason, according to the little boy the reapers came is to destroy the races and help them ascend before they descended into chaos as a result of creation of synthetics.

 The ending could have been more tied in with the options that you've picked earlier during the game, but by the looks of it, these decision can come back to haunt you either during the next iteration of Mass Effect or the DLC.


Oh I get why they were destroyed, I just don't get how.

Likely the same ray that has spread through the mass effect relays and fried pretty much everything with a hint of technology in it's path, including the Normandy, what I found DAFUQ was the fact that Normandy was fleeing from the battle? And Garrus was on board? He was just only rushing tower with me, unless about a few days passed since when you get beamed inside, it just doesn't make that much sense. What I find annoying as hell though is, no matter which scenario you pick, mass effect relays are gone, methinks Bioware are looking for an easy way out should they proceed with this franchise, as the world they'll create will likely not need to be as big due to lack of fast transportation.

Actually, if the endings are indeed events happening and not some indoctrination/hallucination attempt (I still really, really doubt that what we have seen is the real deal, since they clearly show shepard to be alive at the end of the Destroy ending in the midst of concrete rubble, which can only be after Harbinger's laser nearly hitting him), there's an explanation for why that energy beam destroyed both the Geth and EDI along with the reapers.

If you read carefully through the War Assets and compiling what the Protean VI says to you in the Cerberus Base, the Crucible is just a massive Dark Energy generator which the Citadel then concentrates and sends out to the entire galaxy using the relays. Now, what do the relays, the citadel and every advanced synthetic in the galaxy have in common? They're all based on Quantum technology (either for shielding, processing power and/or overall structure). So it could be that the Dark Energy burst destroys anything that's based on Quantum technology (that would have to include the QEC's as well as some of Shepard's synthetic prostetics. 

Of course, I can be wrong, but that's what I recall from the lore. Anyway, I still get the feeling any theory we can come up for what were those energy rays is pointless, since we'll end up getting a more detailed ending scenario in the future.


Everything is' based on' quantum technology.  Quantum technology just exploits quantum effects present at the subatomic level of all particles, the same particles we and everything around us is made out of. You can't say something selectively destroys quantum technology.

Hey, I never said what I thought was a perfect explanation

As for quantic matter states, it's true that at sub-atomic levels it's present, but at very defined states. You cannot overlap quantum technology with what it's present in observable nature, because the quanta of matter are in defined and observable states. As I recall, quantum theories for computation deal with all possible states being overlapped and analyzed by a single qubit, which is something that doesn't happen naturally in matter, as all matter is observable thus it's "locked" to defined states. Schrodinger's theory is only appliable at Wave levels in matter, and even then in a very restrictive parameter set.

No.

We cannot observe quanta, their quantum state breaks down. That does not mean that they are not there. 

Quantum affects everything. Everything. It is not a selective theory, it is a universal theory for all matter. It absolutely happens in matter.

A qubit is simply a physical manifestation of something that can be in a quantum state, i.e. a subatomic particle. The process of superposition, where the qubit can be in two states at one time, can be achieved through many different approaches. One simple one is that a light pulse can make an electron move up or down a discrete energy level, and that very same light pulse when shone for half the duration can leave the electron in an 'in between' state between these two energy levels.

The reason you do not see quantum effects in everyday life, you do not see your table in superposition for example (as stupid as it sounds), is that these quantum effects are lost on a macroscopic scale in a thermodynamic soup, where all the individual properties of each particle average out in their constituent matter and the entropy of the microscopic world is turned into what looks like order in 'statistical thermodynamics'. On this  macroscopic level, we can accurately predict properties of matter. However, beneath this reliable statistical data, every particle is still behaving chaotically and probabilistically. That is to say, every particle is still behaving within the laws of quantum physics. 

So, going back to the original argument, no you absolteuly cannot target selectively to destroy quantum tehcnology, beacuse quantum is everything. 

 



Around the Network

I just finished it, and i really liked the ending! Everyone got what they deserved for that last few hours of insufferable pathos they made me play though.



“It appeared that there had even been demonstrations to thank Big Brother for raising the chocolate ration to twenty grams a week. And only yesterday, he reflected, it had been announced that the ration was to be reduced to twenty grams a week. Was it possible that they could swallow that, after only twenty-four hours? Yes, they swallowed it.”

- George Orwell, ‘1984’

Sal.Paradise said:

Everything is' based on' quantum technology.  Quantum technology just exploits quantum effects present at the subatomic level of all particles, the same particles we and everything around us is made out of. You can't say something selectively destroys quantum technology.

Think of it like EMP affecting all of today's electronics.



The BuShA owns all!

Yo_John begs to differ.



Vertigo-X said:
Sal.Paradise said:

Everything is' based on' quantum technology.  Quantum technology just exploits quantum effects present at the subatomic level of all particles, the same particles we and everything around us is made out of. You can't say something selectively destroys quantum technology.

Think of it like EMP affecting all of today's electronics.

Nope, not analagous at all. 



You know I kept seeing topics like this and thinking ''Oh it can't be that bad''. People complain about endings for everything.

Now some background for you. Mass Effect is my favourite game series. It may in fact be my favourite narrative series of any media (books, films, tv series etc). Garrus is again possibly my favourite character in anything. I loved every single moment of ME1, ME2 and ME3.........

Except the last 15minutes. I have never ever seen such a catastrophically bad ending. I mean even the Death Note anime which has one of the best first halves of any series then an embarrassingly terrible second half looks like a masterpiece compared to this.

It simply doesn't fit in with the trilogy in the slightest. Nor does it fit with what they said. They talked about how choices you made would mean the ending was special to you. However really there is just one ending with tiny variations. ME3 is FULL of amazing consequences. That one guy you spoke to for 10minutes, coming back up and how you treated him being important. Yet the ending nothing you did really matters. That ending had no relevance to MY Shepard.

Just crazy how poorly it's handled. For the ending to a trilogy it is shockingly short, it creates entirely new pieces of lore in this time that don't necessarily fit the universe, gives almost zero closure, is totally out of tone with the other 100 hours or so of games and ignores any player preference! Well and truly maddening. The lack of closure is the worse thing. The entire point of the game is getting support from different factions, then the ending doesn't even show what if anything has happened to them.

I don't even understand how they messed up so bad. The ending of ME2 was great. Relationships and how prepared you were mattered. You had to make choices that had consequences but you could choose based on how you viewed your character etc.

This and Tali's face really make me wonder if Bioware actually purposefully wanted to make some fans angry.



Turkish says and I'm allowed to quote that: Uncharted 3 and God Of War 3 look better than Unreal Engine 4 games will or the tech demo does. Also the Naughty Dog PS3 ENGINE PLAYS better than the UE4 ENGINE.