BioWare Did Right By Us

Scars Unseen

^ ^ v v < > < > B A
May 7, 2009
3,028
0
0
NinjaDeathSlap said:
Scars Unseen said:
WoahDan said:
Bioware did right by us by at least attempting to fix their mess that was the ending, but they would have done even better by us if they had simply made a good ending in the first place.

For me the extended cut didnt fix any of the real problems I had with it, the problem for me was never that the Starkid wasnt explained or didnt provide closure, it was that the Starkid existed in the first place. I understand that it was their choice to do things that way and I respect that, but that doesn't mean that I don't think that that was the wrong choice to make and their work suffers as a whole from it.

Scars Unseen said:
I'm fairly certain that the intended implication was that even the Normandy's bleeding edge stealth system wasn't good enough to fool Reaper technology.
But is the SR2 ever spotted while in stealth mode? I can't remember it being. Plus in ME3 the Reapers only spot you when you use your sensors to scan for stuff, I'm pretty sure that implies that if you hadn't done that they couldn't have detected you.
The SR2 uses the same stealth system as the SR1, or at least there is nothing in the game that explicitly claims an upgrade(while there are several other systems that are listed as having been upgraded). As for the scanning thing, that could be explained by one of two possibilities. It's possible(likely, in fact) that sensors are not as accurate from beyond the range of a single star system, but that active scanning necessarily produces a signal more easily detected. Alternatively, and there is evidence to back this up, Bioware sucks at maintaining consistency from game to game, or even within the same game.
Another possible explanation is that Harbinger just doesn't prioritise Shepard or the Normandy as targets at that time. His main objective is to guard the beam, and while you are evacuating you wounded team you aren't at that moment trying to get to the beam, while there are still several single units that are and thus need to be dealt with first. Just because he's not firing at Shep or the Normandy doesn't mean he's stopped firing altogether.
That's a pretty weak explanation(and therefore perfectly within reason for an BiowarEA game). Normandy has weaponry and targeting systems that are sufficient to at least distract Harbinger enough for someone to slip by, which is why the Reaper forces had been destroying or crippling every other vehicle that came close. Aside from that, if there was a single ship that should be prioritized by the Reapers, it would be the Normandy. That ship houses the only people to enjoy repeated success against the Reapers both before the war and throughout it. The ship is grounded and boarding personnel; the shields are down. There would be no easier time to take out Shepard and crew than right then.
 

Sprong

New member
Nov 17, 2009
54
0
0
Scars Unseen said:
... That might explain why EDI isn't listed among the people that died at the end(as would typical Bioware carelessness).
Alas, I just watched the destroy ending - EDI is on the memorial list of the dead, in the right-hand column. I noticed because her name is so much shorter than all the others.
 

Scars Unseen

^ ^ v v < > < > B A
May 7, 2009
3,028
0
0
Sprong said:
Scars Unseen said:
... That might explain why EDI isn't listed among the people that died at the end(as would typical Bioware carelessness).
Alas, I just watched the destroy ending - EDI is on the memorial list of the dead, in the right-hand column. I noticed because her name is so much shorter than all the others.
Ah... missed that then. Thanks for the correction.
 

aaron552

New member
Jun 11, 2008
193
0
0
Scars Unseen said:
anthony87 said:
Scars Unseen said:
Diana Kingston-Gabai said:
Scars Unseen said:
Oh, and one minor nitpick about the EC... I see that in addition to Multi-Core Shielding, we have added some serious Plot Armor to the Normandy. Or did Harbinger just decide that the ship that carries the people that have been screwing with the Reapers' plans at every turn just wasn't worth shooting at? Maybe Joker had a Red Cross painted on the hull?
I actually attributed that to the Normandy's stealth systems - they've said many times that the only way you could detect the ship would be if you were looking at it, and Reapers don't have "eyes"... :)
The problem with that assumption is that the Reaper-created Collector ship could detect the Normandy just fine, even in stealth mode.
That was the original Normandy though. Not the one from Mass Effect 2/3.
Just checked the Codex entries, and while the Normandy SR2 did receive several upgrades, an improved stealth system(which was already cutting edge) was not one of them.
If you talk to Engineer Adams in ME3, he mentions that the stealth system was improved, notably, the Normandy SR2 can shift out of FTL without any emissions.
 

The Lunatic

Princess
Jun 3, 2010
2,291
0
0
Scars Unseen said:
Oh, and one minor nitpick about the EC... I see that in addition to Multi-Core Shielding, we have added some serious Plot Armor to the Normandy. Or did Harbinger just decide that the ship that carries the people that have been screwing with the Reapers' plans at every turn just wasn't worth shooting at? Maybe Joker had a Red Cross painted on the hull?
Reaper IFF.

You collected it during ME2.

Reapers think the Normandy is a Reaper ship, apparently.
 

Fr]anc[is

New member
May 13, 2010
1,893
0
0
Almost missed this thanks to the new layout. Yes it is a definite improvement and I give them credit. But Bioware is still circling the drain. Chobot is still there, that Cerberus ninja dude is still there, the gambling based multiplayer is still there. The quality of their games just dropped like a rock. I paid $60 for DA2 based on this sites review, and have never felt more ripped off. Not making that mistake again. Call me when ME3 is in the bargain bin.
 

The Heik

King of the Nael
Oct 12, 2008
1,568
0
0
Dennis Scimeca said:
BioWare Did Right By Us

You don?t lose artistic integrity if you?re just trying to get your point across.

Read Full Article
I disagree with your article Mr. Scimeca.

The Extended Cut DLC was not Bioware doing right by the fans. If this was the case, then Bioware would have put out a formal apology from the get go. This did not happen. They acted all defensive, saying that we missed the point (though we very clearly didn't) and that they had artistic right (which I can and have called bullshit on).

No the EC was made to appease the fans. It's damage control. They really don't care about what we think, they just want to ensure that their company isn't run into the ground by this most inglorious of screw ups. If they had cared about us, then the ending would have been redone from the ground up. It hasn't. All they've done is elaborate on the things that they've already established in the original version, doing as little effort to make the fans stop complaining. And while it is appreciable to finally see the effects of our character's actions, those effects are still based upon the same fundamentally flawed premise of the singularity.

Now that the EC is out my issue with this idea is threefold. It used to be only twofold, but the EC actually managed to add another whole problem to the Singularity premise (see point #2 for that one).

First is the fact that the singularity premise is a paradox. Had it occurred, then it is reasonable to think that the Reapers would never have been created seeing as the Synthetics are supposedly so superior to organics, and as such would have won before the Reapers could have been created to stop them. But the Reapers do exist, so the Singularity never truly occurred. This means that the Reaper cycle, the mass genocide that the eons have wrought, was done over an academic notion. Do you have any idea how much that trivializes this whole sordid affair? Billions upon billions of sentient lives have fought and died over effectively nothing, all because some twits a few million years ago could keep their damn AI in check.

Second is the fact that the Reapers shouldn't have been able to defeat their creators. Reapers are not easy to build. They require a lot of time of resources (people) to create (as was shown in ME2's main plot), and I am damn sure the these precursors would have noticed if millions of their people were being kidnapped and enslaved long before the Reaper force was large or mature enough to face them. And unfortunately the Reapers wouldn't be able to use their usual technological advantage in this case as their opponents would have the very same technological prowess, with the added advantage of being far more numerous from the onset of the confrontation. The Reapers simply would not have won under those conditions.

Third and finally is the simple fact that the Reapers may have actually become the very thing they supposedly are protecting organics against. Think about it. The Reapers are an advanced synthetic-based organization led by artificial intelligence that seeks to (effectively) kill all sentient organic species. That makes their whole endeavor a self-fulfilling prophecy, making the Catalyst's efforts a complete and utter failure. At that point the Reapers stop being a threat and become a tragic joke. And if the primary antagonist in a serious narrative is seen as a joke, then something has gone horrendously wrong and the developer NEEDS to fix it, not simply try and hide it behind some pretty pictures.

So yes, the Extended Cut DLC may have rectified some of the more minor issues with Mass Effect 3's ending, but the underlying problem is still there. This ending does not work within it's own core ideals, and that makes the whole Mass Effect series a failure, even just as a simple idea. And that is really the biggest disappointment with this series. They had almost succeed in reaching the stars with their creation, only to fail because they couldn't see the flaws in their own foundation.
 

Rack

New member
Jan 18, 2008
1,379
0
0
cerebus23 said:
Still me3 is a great game excluding the ending, sitting it out is kind of silly because there is so much great game there only marred by the last 10 15 minutes of it, well if you got the ec i guess it would be 30 to 40 minutes more, then i guess that means u need to play the ec and decide for yourself if it ties things up better or not.
It really really isn't. It's a stodgy mess of terrible writing, nonsensical plot holes and more Deus ex machina than a whole pantheon of gods should be able to handle. If you do try it though I reckon you need to take a whole bunch of anti-depressants for every scene Cerberus appear in and just before as you enter the ship that signals the end of the game, or at least just before you go up the elevator just quit out and watch the refusal ending on youtube. If you really feel like you deserve a happy ending watch destroy but be prepared for another volley of idiotic nonsense.
 

LTK_70

New member
Aug 28, 2009
598
0
0
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought the motivation of the Reapers was perfectly explained by the fact that they just got really stupid orders from their really stupid creators.
 

Dennis Scimeca

New member
Mar 29, 2010
217
0
0
Zagzag said:
If I remember correctly Jennifer Hale said that she didn't do any more voice acting for the extended cut, (implying that none was done at all, since her voice is used for Shepard and the Catalyst.) This would imply that all of this content was produced for the game and then cut. If so, then why?
what i heard was that she mentioned she wasnt contected for voiceacting. but after she made the statement voice actors were called back. although i suspect you may be partially right in that some cut content was added back in.

they fixed it enough for me to ignore the rest of the plotholes.

the only question its raised for me is that if the EC explains what the writers originally intended, how the hell were we meant to guess that from the original ending?
 

NinjaDeathSlap

Leaf on the wind
Feb 20, 2011
4,474
0
0
Scars Unseen said:
NinjaDeathSlap said:
Scars Unseen said:
WoahDan said:
Bioware did right by us by at least attempting to fix their mess that was the ending, but they would have done even better by us if they had simply made a good ending in the first place.

For me the extended cut didnt fix any of the real problems I had with it, the problem for me was never that the Starkid wasnt explained or didnt provide closure, it was that the Starkid existed in the first place. I understand that it was their choice to do things that way and I respect that, but that doesn't mean that I don't think that that was the wrong choice to make and their work suffers as a whole from it.

Scars Unseen said:
I'm fairly certain that the intended implication was that even the Normandy's bleeding edge stealth system wasn't good enough to fool Reaper technology.
But is the SR2 ever spotted while in stealth mode? I can't remember it being. Plus in ME3 the Reapers only spot you when you use your sensors to scan for stuff, I'm pretty sure that implies that if you hadn't done that they couldn't have detected you.
The SR2 uses the same stealth system as the SR1, or at least there is nothing in the game that explicitly claims an upgrade(while there are several other systems that are listed as having been upgraded). As for the scanning thing, that could be explained by one of two possibilities. It's possible(likely, in fact) that sensors are not as accurate from beyond the range of a single star system, but that active scanning necessarily produces a signal more easily detected. Alternatively, and there is evidence to back this up, Bioware sucks at maintaining consistency from game to game, or even within the same game.
Another possible explanation is that Harbinger just doesn't prioritise Shepard or the Normandy as targets at that time. His main objective is to guard the beam, and while you are evacuating you wounded team you aren't at that moment trying to get to the beam, while there are still several single units that are and thus need to be dealt with first. Just because he's not firing at Shep or the Normandy doesn't mean he's stopped firing altogether.
That's a pretty weak explanation(and therefore perfectly within reason for an BiowarEA game). Normandy has weaponry and targeting systems that are sufficient to at least distract Harbinger enough for someone to slip by, which is why the Reaper forces had been destroying or crippling every other vehicle that came close. Aside from that, if there was a single ship that should be prioritized by the Reapers, it would be the Normandy. That ship houses the only people to enjoy repeated success against the Reapers both before the war and throughout it. The ship is grounded and boarding personnel; the shields are down. There would be no easier time to take out Shepard and crew than right then.
If, however, that would allow just one other soldier to get to the beam under Harbinger's nose, then that would be a failure in his eyes. He may well have a personal vendetta against Shepard and the crew of the Normandy, but he's still a Reaper. His purpose is to enact and preserve the cycle no matter what, which makes anyone actively trying to get to the Citadel to activate the Crucible, no matter how small or insignificant they might have been to him before, priority targets over even the Normandy.

Although yes, the meta explanation is basically plot armour. However it's not like there's absolutely no way it can be explained within the context of the game.
 

TsunamiWombat

New member
Sep 6, 2008
5,870
0
0
Stop telling me I'm wrong because my opinion is different from yours. Stop harping on this. Every goddamn mainstream "gaming news" site dog piled on us then, and they're dog piling on us now.

That ending was terrible. Full stop. It ruined the game, full stop. And Bioware made a dogs breakfast of the whole affair by demeaning and offending it's outraged community. FULL. STOP. The arguments have been made innumerable times and in innumerable places. I'm too damned tired to go back into it.
 

Griffolion

New member
Aug 18, 2009
2,207
0
0
Tiamat666 said:
I still haven't touched ME3 because I'm still waiting for the smoke to clear.

And because I'm afraid I will be very disappointed from all I've heard about the suckish ending. Maybe it's better to relish the memories of ME1 and 2 and pretend Sheperd died from a ruptured hemorrhoid on a particularly explosive toilet break.
As much as people will say to the contrary, the ending does not invalidate the previous how-ever-many hours of fun you had previously. I'd say now is the time to play it, since you'll get to experience the EC without having to go through the original ending first like many others did.

I personally am just glad Garrus didn't die.
 

Scars Unseen

^ ^ v v < > < > B A
May 7, 2009
3,028
0
0
TsunamiWombat said:
Stop telling me I'm wrong because my opinion is different from yours. Stop harping on this. Every goddamn mainstream "gaming news" site dog piled on us then, and they're dog piling on us now.

That ending was terrible. Full stop. It ruined the game, full stop. And Bioware made a dogs breakfast of the whole affair by demeaning and offending it's outraged community. FULL. STOP. The arguments have been made innumerable times and in innumerable places. I'm too damned tired to go back into it.
Your opinion does not invalidate his opinion. Complete Cessation of Movement.
 

Crimsane

New member
Apr 11, 2009
914
0
0
The best ending is still alt f4ing at the end of the conversation with Anderson. Most everything beyond that point is still terribad, 'cept Zaeed being boss as always.
 

TsunamiWombat

New member
Sep 6, 2008
5,870
0
0
Scars Unseen said:
TsunamiWombat said:
Stop telling me I'm wrong because my opinion is different from yours. Stop harping on this. Every goddamn mainstream "gaming news" site dog piled on us then, and they're dog piling on us now.

That ending was terrible. Full stop. It ruined the game, full stop. And Bioware made a dogs breakfast of the whole affair by demeaning and offending it's outraged community. FULL. STOP. The arguments have been made innumerable times and in innumerable places. I'm too damned tired to go back into it.
Your opinion does not invalidate his opinion. Complete Cessation of Movement.
Exactly. Stalemate. -These articles are pointless-.
 

Redingold

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Mar 28, 2009
1,641
0
0
Scars Unseen said:
WoahDan said:
Bioware did right by us by at least attempting to fix their mess that was the ending, but they would have done even better by us if they had simply made a good ending in the first place.

For me the extended cut didnt fix any of the real problems I had with it, the problem for me was never that the Starkid wasnt explained or didnt provide closure, it was that the Starkid existed in the first place. I understand that it was their choice to do things that way and I respect that, but that doesn't mean that I don't think that that was the wrong choice to make and their work suffers as a whole from it.

Scars Unseen said:
I'm fairly certain that the intended implication was that even the Normandy's bleeding edge stealth system wasn't good enough to fool Reaper technology.
But is the SR2 ever spotted while in stealth mode? I can't remember it being. Plus in ME3 the Reapers only spot you when you use your sensors to scan for stuff, I'm pretty sure that implies that if you hadn't done that they couldn't have detected you.
The SR2 uses the same stealth system as the SR1, or at least there is nothing in the game that explicitly claims an upgrade(while there are several other systems that are listed as having been upgraded). As for the scanning thing, that could be explained by one of two possibilities. It's possible(likely, in fact) that sensors are not as accurate from beyond the range of a single star system, but that active scanning necessarily produces a signal more easily detected. Alternatively, and there is evidence to back this up, Bioware sucks at maintaining consistency from game to game, or even within the same game.
I could've sworn that Adams said something about the IES having been upgraded to store higher wavelengths of radiation, and being able to store them for longer.

Anyway, there was a fan-made epilogue creator floating around a while back. I say this does a rather better job than the Extended Cut, though the best of both would of course be nice.

http://shannon.users.sonic.net/masseffect/
 

rcs619

New member
Mar 26, 2011
627
0
0
The destroy ending would likely be the canon one if/when they continue the franchise.

Something I noticed, and I wonder if I might be over-analyzing here or not, is that in the destroy ending, they never address EDI, and the geth at all. You'd think the complete destruction of an entire species would be worth a mention by Admiral Hackett. You'd think that if EDI were killed, not only would the Normandy become more difficult to fly, but there'd at least be some hint at Joker mourning.

Considering that Shepard survived with all of of that cyber-stuff hooked into her, and that there's no mention of the geth or EDI being destroyed... I think it's very likely that the Catalyst was full of shit, and that it was only saying those things to try and save itself from complete destruction.

Either way, it would be nice for the geth to survive the destroy ending :) They still need to help the Quarians get out of those suits and such.
 

Atlas13

New member
Jan 4, 2011
64
0
0
I would have preferred Karpyshyn's ending to be honest, it just sounds so much better than what we have now.
The Dark Energy was a force that was going to consume everything. According to Karpyshyn, "The Reapers as a whole were 'nations' of people who had fused together in the most horrific way possible to help find a way to stop the spread of the Dark Energy. The real reason for the Human Reaper was supposed to be the Reapers saving throw because they had run out of time. Humanity in Mass Effect is supposedly unique because of its genetic diversity and represented the universe's best chance at stopping Dark Energy's spread."

The original choice was between killing the Reapers and trying to find a way to stop the Dark Energy threat with what little time was left before it consumed the galaxy, or, "Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."
 

RobotDinosaur

New member
Feb 27, 2012
57
0
0
Atlas13 said:
I would have preferred Karpyshyn's ending to be honest, it just sounds so much better than what we have now.
The Dark Energy was a force that was going to consume everything. According to Karpyshyn, "The Reapers as a whole were 'nations' of people who had fused together in the most horrific way possible to help find a way to stop the spread of the Dark Energy. The real reason for the Human Reaper was supposed to be the Reapers saving throw because they had run out of time. Humanity in Mass Effect is supposedly unique because of its genetic diversity and represented the universe's best chance at stopping Dark Energy's spread."

The original choice was between killing the Reapers and trying to find a way to stop the Dark Energy threat with what little time was left before it consumed the galaxy, or, "Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."
I like the Dark Energy plot as well, but the big issue is that it doesn't end Shepard's story - you'd really need a Mass Effect 4 now to see how the dark energy stuff gets sorted out, and they wanted to end Shepard's story with ME3. It's not a good ending for a trilogy, but at the same time doesn't seem to leave enough left for a very good ME4.