- Aug 24, 2010
The fact that something like this is even in issue is proof that nobody writing Mass Effect 3 had any respect for, or clue about what the first two games were doing.Suncatcher said:Anderson retired his post as Councilor between 2 and 3, partly because he was as tired as you of the "ah yes, 'Reapers'" and partly because he always hated paperwork and politics and wanted a military position. Udina was his best option for a successor on the Council because all the others were worse, and say what you will about the asshole but he's good at politics. I was actually a bit more surprised by the jump from Captain Anderson to Admiral Anderson, but I guess the Alliance can't exactly drop the first human Councillor down to command of a single frigate without it being the talk of the galaxy for months.Mikeyfell said:Mass Effect 3.
Not any particular part of it just the whole game.
You know like "How did Councilor Anderson become Admiral Anderson in the blink of an eye?"
Okay I'll stop beating that dead horse.
A player controlled narrative where your choices decide the fate of the galaxy!
But in practice only 2 choices you made had any remote baring on the course of the finally. Minor ones at that that ultimately only effected numbers on a chart.
Did you save Mellon's data (Not did you stop Mordin from shooting him, no. Just did you save his data)
and what did you do with the Geth Heretics (And questionably at that, I've managed to get peace with them destroyed and rewritten)
But here's the biggest choice you made in the first game are you going to pick the sleaze ball politician to be the most powerful human in history, or are you going to pick the honorable military Capetian.
So we wait 5 years to see the consequences of our choice come to fruition and Bioware, all by themselves, decided it wasn't important enough to follow up on.
Yes, that's low. But not a plot hole.
The thing that does make it a plot hole is a line Councilor Anderson says in Mass Effect 2
"As much as I complain I have an important job to do here."
That's not something you say before you quit.
And running away from obligation doesn't suit Anderson's character. Bioware expects us to take for granted that when the going gets tough Anderson just throws in the towel and completely checks out? I don't buy it.
Furthermore Anderson didn't like Udina. (It's just speculation but) It seems to me that Anderson would try his damnedest to appoint anybody else as his successor.
There's a problem with that view point.Not a plot hole. Cerberus was always evil, and the continued to be evil (blatantly) through ME2 (they try to hide it from Shepard while he's working with them, but it's still pretty obvious in a lot of side missions, loyalty missions, and DLC).Joseph Harrison said:I'm not sure if what James said about Cerberus was a plot hole but that did piss me off.
ME1 Cerberus is bad
ME2 Actually no Cerberus is really cool and good and are just misunderstood
ME3 Scratch that Cerberus is bad again
Make up your damn minds Bioware
But it relies heavily on the understanding that Mass Effect 2 was a game. Not a movie, not a book, not a campfire story, but a game. And that player choice was a core mechanic of that game.
Throughout Mass Effect 2 you were allowed to decide whether you agreed with Cerberus or not.
If as you think is, was, and forever will be "evil" that effectively makes anyone who played Renegade in ME2 canonically incorrect. Basically rewriting the Renegade personality into the "Stupid Shepard"
(Even though the Renegade personality was revised in ME3 into the much nicer, much less racist Shepard with more political foresight and weird empathy for some kid she doesn't even know, but that's a story for another time)
Even though everything they're doing in ME3 disagrees with their MO (Which is to help humanity)
Setting up a fake refugee camp so they can experiment on the very humans they're trying to protect is off...
Attacking Alliance bases for... reasons?
They must be indoctrinated... but they aren't because they were investing all their resources into trying to figure out how indoctrination works so they could use it against the Reapers. And if the Reapers were controlling their brains why would they let them do that? So one of those things is a plot hole
And when you can't even tell which part is plot and which part is hole that speaks wonders for how bad the writing is.
Bioware should stop making games, They had a good run from Baldur's Gate to Mass Effect 2. They were really good when they stayed in their comfort zone. Nobody did the Hero's Journey better. But then they decided they had enough of the Hero's Journey and everything went to hell. Dragon Age 2 was a complete Narrative mess and ME 3 was a complete shitstorm.
Their last 2 games are proof that they're incapable of incorporating any level of player choice into a narrative more complicated than "Go there. Kill thing. Save day."
The second they try to add family drama or political intrigue everything goes strait down the drain