Austin Manning said:
jklinders said:
It tried to legitimize the idea that artists cannot control their own work. the endings were what they were and people still moan about it over a year afterwards.
Bioware already legitimized that artists can't control their own work when they took Drew Karpyshyn(the series lead writer) off of Mass Effect 3 and replaced him with people who ignored all of the plot devices, foreshadowing, and character arcs that he'd set up.
There's my biggest problem with ME3: most of the characters acted what I perceived then as "strange" and not how that character would usually react. The ending was just the tip of the iceberg: it was disappointing and didn't show anything that happened afterwards (well, nothing significant, anyway).
An example:
The Illusive Man, even if indoctrinated, wouldn't have acted this way... something the new writers neglected, thoroughly. To the old Illusive Man, Shepard was an invaluable asset for humanity that he didn't want to lose at any price, that he wanted to have on his side to work with him rather than against him. Even indoctrinated, he would have tried to hold Shepard as long as possible, and continued his normal behavior of not telling Shepard more details than the ones she needed to know. This was the most "odd" part of TIM's behavior in Mass Effect 3: he spoke to Shepard, and actually explained stuff... reasoned. Something the old Illusive Man wouldn't have done. He would have provided Shepard with just enough data to go on to work for him rather than against his cause.