[vanuza]

Am I the only person annoyed by the ubiquitous use of the word "synthetic"?

I think it's just used as an antonym to "natural". In other words, "synthetic" means "built, not born".

[Matt Bee]

Only if I kiled you, took the minerals from your corpse, did that to 10000000 others, then made a machine out of it. It wouldnt be organic.
If they wanted to preseve dna it would make more sense to build a ship, then stor lots of that species DNA inside. Or make some sort of prison/home, the species lives on, but they are trapped inside the ship.
The current idea just makes no sense.

Thats a poor way to do things. Would me much smarter, to have the parts all assembled seperately then put together at the end. Or just lie the damn thing down, where it wont be at risk of falling and breaking.

Only the collectors had no purpose. They spent 2 years harvesting to buld half a reaper.
By then the reapers were almost at the galaxy, the reaper wasnt needed. All they did was loose a bse, and give away information.

The Reapers wouldnt store the DNA because they believe they are transcending humans to perfection by turning them into a Reaper. Preserving them. DNA is still at least part organic, and they believe that machines (and humans when they are transcended) are eternal, and organics are not. The Collectors did more than build the Reaper. They had purpose. And the Reaper was needed too. If they dont create more, then they will eventually all be gone.

[Gen Daley]

I too am disappointed with the ending although that's not my biggest problem with ME3, the overuse of autodialoge and horrible Journal would have to take the cake. The Autodialoge makes roleplaying useless and how can you have a Role Playing game without the Role Playing.

The agian I hated soverign in ME1 revealing his identity, and telling you about the reapers. That could have been handled by virgil, but nope.

I got to disagree, that was probably one of the better moments within Mass Effect 1. That sequence made Sovereign feel more awesome and further proved that Saren was an idiot for following him. A shame it all goes down hill after Mass Effect 1.

[Natalie Taylor]

I don't think this controversy is so much about a fan's right to be critical, so much as to what degree the fanbase's sense of ownership is valid, and where you draw the line on what they can conceivably demand in a game like this.

I'm not the first one to bring up comparisons between this situation with the more militant upset fans, and Stephen King's Misery. That story is all about a writer's greatest fears - a fan going too far in their ownership of the property, and (literally) forcing the writer to make changes to the integrity of their art.

Which is an absurd overreaction. It would be an apt comparison had Kathy Bates been upset and posted a blog post about how upset she was. It strikes me as utterly ridiculous to argue "people are being too extreme in their disappointment" by making an extreme comparison to a character who abducted and tortured a man.

For comparison - if a focus group had reacted really badly to the plot twist in The Sixth Sense, they wouldn't have suddenly decided that Bruce Willis was alive the entire time. Because that's the point of that movie - without the plot twist, you don't have a movie, as everything's leading up to that reveal. However, if you weren't always building up to a specific plot twist, and the end wasn't really the main focus of your artistic drive; then I don't really see much of a problem.

Comparing this to a film is missing the mark, I think. Games aren't movies. Especially games of this sort where the direction of the narrative can be influenced by the player in ways big and small. Again how is this any different from criticizing game mechanics? No one has ever defended criticism of game mechanics by saying, "Hey, it's artistic license. If they implemented mechanics differently it wouldn't be their real artistic vision." Why does writing get to hide behind "it's art"?

[Juan Suarez]

My whole post is a spoiler. So if you're here for some reason to read a spoiler topic without reading a spoiler, forego my entire post.

I really didn't like the ending. I get it, I guess, in some ways. It's a series about stalling then beating the extinction of humanity, and most other large races that we come to know and love throughout the series. It's supposed to be an emotional adventure, and it especially was in this one, but the ending was especially dark. I think that in a trilogy like this, where we come to love so many of the characters, maybe such a dark ending was a bad idea. I'm a fan of bad guys pulling through, important characters dying (look at my name and you can tell I'm a fan of GRRM's works) for reasons good or bad, and even endings where everything you wanted didn't happen. I loved the ending of Inception, because it was done well, despite it being one that left so much open.

But this one should have ended better, especially after everything you went through to make sure it ended better than it actually did. Normandy, regardless of a better ending or not, shouldn't have crash landed on a random jungle planet. Why was Normandy going through a Mass Relay when they were in the battle for Earth? They should have been stranded on Earth. I didn't like the Mass Relays blowing up at all. It sort of ruins the entire setting of the series when we lose connection with the aliens we became allied with. And it totally svcks that the entire fighting force is stranded in the Solar System, orbiting an Earth that may or may not even be able to sustain life anymore.

And the boy-hologram? WTF WAS THAT? It creates more than just a plot-hole when you say that a hologram-god child created the Reapers to destroy all life because if he didn't, they'd create machines that would kill them anyway. Reapers are synthetics, who kill races that build synthetics to ensure that those synthetics don't kill off the races that created them?

Harbinger: SHEPARD! We do this for reasons your PUNY HUMAN MIND CANNOT EVEN COMPREHEND!!

Shepard: No, bro. I can comprehend it perfectly. It just makes no sense and your synthetic mind doesn't have reason, so you just can't comprehend how much of an [censored] you are.

Harbinger: THIS HURTS YOU!

It means that literally THE ENTIRE SERIES is based off bullcrap. This entire series has been Shepard vs the Reapers, and the Reapers have NO REAL LOGICAL reason to exist or attack. I'm sure that if I sat down with ANYONE in this thread for 8 hours, we could brainstorm and come up with a better reason than this for the Reapers existing, and doing this cycle of extermination.

Those are my only three issues with the ending. First, how they made the wrong choice to make it a sad ending to begin with. This isn't the type of series to have a sad ending, I feel like they felt they needed to when they shouldn't have. Second, how the Normandy crashed and gave us no sense of closure when it shouldn't have even crashed to begin with. Third, how there are such epic flaws in the Reapers purpose, which is the premise for the series to begin with.

Also, the whole "Shepard is indoctrinated" theory is pretty legit, but it doesn't change the fact that the endings did indeed happen, the Mass Relays exploded and much of the ME universe was [censored] up.

[Damned_Queen]

It means that literally THE ENTIRE SERIES is based off bullcrap. This entire series has been Shepard vs the Reapers, and the Reapers have NO REAL LOGICAL reason to exist or attack. I'm sure that if I sat down with ANYONE in this thread for 8 hours, we could brainstorm and come up with a better reason than this for the Reapers existing, and doing this cycle of extermination.

I think the reaper's motivations for the cycle can be salvaged if we dump absolutely everything about synthetics from the ending. The whole "Galactic history is a cycle, reapers use harvest to prevent the end result of that cycle" thing basically works, it's just that the end result their trying to prevent (evil synthetics) is absurd.

A few alternative motivations for the reapers:

1. Dark Energy, wooooo! The Reapers have determined that the Universe is in store for the big rip, that is, the sundering of all matter by universal expansion. The Reapers believe that the manipulation of Dark Energy is vital to controlling and eventually preventing the effects of the Big Rip and Universal expansion. They use the galaxy as a giant lab, encouraging the test subjects to develop Mass effect technology and other means of manipulating Dark matter in the hopes of gathering up innovations that the Reapers themselves have been unable to devise. The Reapers use the biomass of the various species in each cycle for reproduction in order to ensure the continuity of their project. The reapers do not simply inform intelligent life of what their doing because they believe that the galaxy's inhabitants are too short-sighted to actually work towards a solution for a problem they won't be dealing with for billions of years.

2. arrogance: The Reapers believe themselves the pinnacle of everything, the ultimate anything that anything could be. You should be honored to be harvested and turned into a reaper. Their doing life a favor by bringing it up to the glorious pedestal of reaperdom. It's just so much better than being a squishy humanoid. You just can't understand how wonderous it is.

3. The Ultimate predictive model for life: The Reapers seek to create an all encompassing scientific model of life itself. The galaxy is their laboratory, and in each cycle the reapers change one or two variables, while keeping things like Mass Relays as constants. The reaper harvest is the ending of the experiment, where the reapers wipe the board for the next set of test subjects, and reproduce. No one told them they can simply work backwards from 42.

[Rachel Hall]

I'm sure that if I sat down with ANYONE in this thread for 8 hours, we could brainstorm and come up with a better reason than this for the Reapers existing, and doing this cycle of extermination.


Also, the whole "Shepard is indoctrinated" theory is pretty legit, but it doesn't change the fact that the endings did indeed happen, the Mass Relays exploded and much of the ME universe was [censored] up.

Wanna give it a shot? I'd be up for it
Also, the indoctrination theory would mean the end was all in shepards mind

EDIT: ME3's ending reminds me of this song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVTXPUF4Oz4&ob=av3e

[Emma]

Also, the indoctrination theory would mean the end was all in shepards mind

The only thing that contradicts that theory is that the ghost boy said TIM couldn't control the reapers because he was already Indoctrinated, unless that's what you were refering to.

[Tracey Duncan]

The only thing that contradicts that theory is that the ghost boy said TIM couldn't control the reapers because he was already Indoctrinated, unless that's what you were refering to.

If he's trying to mislead Shepard then it could just be a case of "well he would say that, wouldn't he", I think: "of course you're not indoctrinated, honest!"

[DAVId Bryant]

The only thing that contradicts that theory is that the ghost boy said TIM couldn't control the reapers because he was already Indoctrinated, unless that's what you were refering to.

Part of you is indoctrinated, so you couldnt control them. The ending and the 3 choices is the final battle of Reaper Indoctrination vs. Shepard's Willpower

[xx_Jess_xx]

I don't understand why Bioware would make such a sad ending if it was all in Shepard's imagination. Why would Shepard even imagine all of that, and if he woke up, wouldn't the war still be going on, just without him being controlled by the Reapers so he could continue fighting them?

[Farrah Barry]

I don't understand why Bioware would make such a sad ending if it was all in Shepard's imagination. Why would Shepard even imagine all of that, and if he woke up, wouldn't the war still be going on, just without him being controlled by the Reapers so he could continue fighting them?

http://cdn2.gamefront.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mass-effect-dlc-message-2.jpg

[Monika Fiolek]

Not what I meant. Why would they make such a bleak ending if it was just Shepard's imagination? Seems like a waste of time.

He just wakes up to continue a fight they may or may not win, but we don't even know whether or not that's actually what happened.

Bioware, you bastards. I confuse myself just trying to make reason out of your crap ending.

[Angus Poole]

Not what I meant. Why would they make such a bleak ending if it was just Shepard's imagination? Seems like a waste of time.

He just wakes up to continue a fight they may or may not win, but we don't even know whether or not that's actually what happened.

Bioware, you bastards. I confuse myself just trying to make reason out of your crap ending.

If the indoctrination theory is the one Bioware is gonna run with then the dlc will have him wake up in the ruble and finish the fight. Te general consensus is that it was not supposed to end that way but either EA, Bioware, or both decided to end it and sell us the real ending as dlc.

[Benji]

Not what I meant. Why would they make such a bleak ending if it was just Shepard's imagination? Seems like a waste of time.

Because it's "artistic" and as such they need to avoid the cliché of a happy ending by employing the even bigger cliché of an artificially miserable ending.

[Nicole Elocin]

As I said, though, there's no real reason to end this series in a bleak, bittersweet way. This series prides itself on being an epic adventure against an epic foe, but the real greatness lies in the relationships you have with everyone who's shared that adventure and fought that foe.

Make Shepard the true hero who fights off the Reapers and lives his days with whatever romantic interest you chose, getting hammered at the bars in Rio with Jacob and Garrus. This series should have an overall happy ending, coming from somebody who usually hates them. There's a time and a place for a sad ending, and this one was forced down our throats and poorly executed.

[Dan Scott]

This is EA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoYWdHe4tQ4

[Michelle davies]

The series should have the OPTION of a happy ending. The series itself should have a variety of ending befit a series based on choice. Pigeon holling a happy/sad ending is not what should be done. It should be based on your choices, your war readiness and your paragon/renegade status. It should not give us 1 ending, be it happy or sad, and call it "artistic licence" or whatever. It cheapens everything you have done up until then.

[Taylrea Teodor]

Well simply have all the choices, or options without having to play and letting multiplayer to stand on its own two feet, one of these days it will have to leave home and how will it survive without singleplayer.

[Tanika O'Connell]

http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/12/128995/2155107-2155105-s205z.png

I did say I was going to try to get into it again for a third time, but I can't be bothered. I don't remember ME2's combat, camera and conversations being as unsatisfying... Think I'll fire that up next time I visit a friend and see how it plays. It may just be the mistiness of distant memory, but I swear ME2 was better overall...

[Vera Maslar]

http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/12/128995/2155107-2155105-s205z.png

It works for Dragon Age 2 as well.

[Wane Peters]

It works for Dragon Age 2 as well.

And Bethesda's games aswell. Except you don't always get two dialogue options

[Wanda Maximoff]

http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/12/128995/2155107-2155105-s205z.png

Not really. It's too exaggerated. In ME your decisions in dialogue affect outcomes quite often. Only in personal situations and other non-vital encounters it just affects peoples' moods but in bigger schemes your attitude decides who lives and who dies.

[Courtney Foren]

The series should have the OPTION of a happy ending. The series itself should have a variety of ending befit a series based on choice. Pigeon holling a happy/sad ending is not what should be done. It should be based on your choices, your war readiness and your paragon/renegade status. It should not give us 1 ending, be it happy or sad, and call it "artistic licence" or whatever. It cheapens everything you have done up until then.

Not only that, it should also be determined by what you have done over the previous 2 games as well.

[Philip Lyon]

If the indoctrination theory is the one Bioware is gonna run with then the dlc will have him wake up in the ruble and finish the fight. Te general consensus is that it was not supposed to end that way but either EA, Bioware, or both decided to end it and sell us the real ending as dlc.

I really doubt BW will go with indoctrination. If they did that, "Destroy" would be the only correct choice at the end of the 'regular' game. That choice requires you to choose to wipe out synthetics - which runs counter to the whole synthetic / organic sentience are of equal value theme that took up at least a third of ME3 and a nice chunk of ME2. It just doesn't make sense to canonize that as the 'correct' choice.

I also doubt they want to completely neuter the endings they already gave us by having them all be dreams. And if you did pick Destroy, why would you still get a dreamy ending of the relays detonating, the Normandy crashing, and a non-space-faring grandfather talking to his grandchild 10,000 years later. . .the same ending you get no matter what you choose. . .that doesn't make sense. You should just wake up the moment you made the 'correct' choice.

Not to mention, you'd have just destroyed the reapers using the crucible. Now you're going to wake up and destroy the reapers by using the crucible again. But for real this time. Ludicrous.

I believe the only thing BW has said is that DLC may clarify the ending. Not give us a new ending. I think that means BW will simply illuminate why the Normandy went through a relay. It might show the consequences of the red/blue/green choice. Maybe it'll be from the POV of a squad mate, and you'll get to see what happens to every member of your crew and all of the races after the crucible goes online. They will just fill in the gaps, and try to give everything more closure, while leaving the ending you chose intact.