I don't want to get too deep into this, but basically it swaps genre from an awesome stealth game to a terrible FPS. Depending on your previous preferences and experiences it's possible to get through and enjoy these, but they are a major break point where it's very easy for them to turn into boring and/or frustrating messes. As evidenced by the way half the world hated them.DioWallachia said:
Hulk liked the ME3 ending
- Thread starter tautologico
- Start date
Recommended Videos
More like it he recognises that it improved some aspects, where 2 of 4 of the overall issues were even "Kind of Fixed".Dendio said:
I'd hardly say he's saying its better in almost every way. Its improved in a number of places, but not great overall.
Same problem: Skips over plot holes, lack of closure and everything else, and then goes on to say that he thinks the two ending options that probably make the most sense shouldn't even be in the game because they're not the 'best' ending that he liked - and ergo not the right ending.Bhaalspawn said:
That guy did give a good review of his viewpoint of the games and ending after playing them. I don't agree with him and it sounds to me like he didn't pay enough attention to the game's setting, plot and individual stories to notice the flaws it has. But his review of the ending was good in it's own right.Bhaalspawn said:
To each their own, but I can say that so many people seeing the ending as incredibly wrong means that there's at least something to it. That it isn't as rose-colored and good as that reviewer makes it out to be, even if he doesn't necessarily lie about the ending.
Ah, it's nice to read a well reasoned argument.
I tried to point out many of these very things when the ending first came out, but often got distracted by certain issues of clarity (one failing of the original endings were a lack of clarity about exactly what was happening in a few places).
I have always hated that "ten things" video guy - listening to him makes me physically ill. Thank you, Hulk, for telling him what to go do with himself.
From what I've seen, the Extended Cut mostly fixes clarity issues. Note - I've only seen clips on You Tube, since I didn't feel the need to replay the ending after downloading the content. I'll see it next time I play through with my Renegade character. I will keep my full opinion of the Extended Cut for that time, once I've seen the whole thing.
I tried to point out many of these very things when the ending first came out, but often got distracted by certain issues of clarity (one failing of the original endings were a lack of clarity about exactly what was happening in a few places).
I have always hated that "ten things" video guy - listening to him makes me physically ill. Thank you, Hulk, for telling him what to go do with himself.
From what I've seen, the Extended Cut mostly fixes clarity issues. Note - I've only seen clips on You Tube, since I didn't feel the need to replay the ending after downloading the content. I'll see it next time I play through with my Renegade character. I will keep my full opinion of the Extended Cut for that time, once I've seen the whole thing.
Yeah, pretty much this. The entirety of the series is about establishing three things: Free will is good, diversity is good, and homogeneity(represented by the Reapers) is bad. These aren't just ideals that Shepard happens to believe in, but are actually established and proven time and time again. The entire game is about getting all the diverse races to make peace to fight the Reapers. AND YOU FUCKING DO IT. Then, at the end, this kid comes along and says "Nope, the only way you'll stop killing each other is if you're all alike.", thus the "Synthesis" ending. So the "good" ending represents a betrayal of EVERYTHING the series has been about: The only universe that can survive is a homogenous one. This would be fine, except for the fact that Shepard just spent THREE GAMES proving the kid wrong. That's why "Indoctrination Theory" cropped up: Because Shepard, and in the "best" ending, the whole universe, accepts the Reaper's ideals whole-heartedly and seemingly for no reason. Worse then that, he does it in the face of logic and experience.SmashLovesTitanQuest said:
The ending is bad because it makes a thematic 180 for absolutely no reason at all, creating about a million plot holes in it's wake. It makes NO SENSE and doesn't fit with the rest of the series in any way. That's why it's bad. Not because it's "too deep" and I wanted a "porn ending". I seriously doubt this guy has any extensive experience with the series, and that's fine but...Why did he choose to write an essay about it anyway?
Shitty reasons eloquently stated. I'm not surprised he chose to defend highfalutin nonsense with more highfalutin nonsense because I don't know any other way to go about it. I think this is my favorite line "...THERE IS NO DENYING THAT THE ENDING IS A SINGLE, ECONOMIC THOUGHT AND PURE EXPRESSION OF THE CREATORS." No denying, indeed.
I also am not surprised he chose a bad video to beat up on, as if to admit he cannot contend with the better arguments that explain why the ending was a huge load. He even beats up straw-man versions of the bad video. Way to pick the low-hanging fruit. And then there is vague remonstrance about the times we live in. Fucking *yawn*.
Oh great, and then the creators right to create what they want is conflated with a supposed right to charge for pure dog shit and not get called out for it.
Cycles, cycles, cycles, cycles, cycles. Nothing you say is valid because cycles. So how come everything up to this point has been a nuanced look at the effects of cycles on our lives but at the end I'm just a slave to them? That makes no fucking sense even if I agree to frame the story in that bullshit way. It's a huge thematic 180'. And like I say, it's bullshit. There are far more important themes than 'cycles'.
So the ending demonstrates that mankind is doomed to repeat its history, to always suffer the same fate in its turn no matter what they may choose. Having three identical endings drives home the futility of contradicting cycles (fate). WHAT THE FUCK??? Does that sound like Mass Effect to anyone? What the hell games have you been playing since 2007? Look, this shit needs to be consistent in it's message or my brain starts coming out of my ears.
I love how people who want to not get cynical, insulting garbage shat out to sell DLC are the ones who are killing stories. Not the defenders of cynical, insulting garbage shat out to sell DLC. And why? Because if we complain when we are made to choke down a fat load of shit, creators will forever be servants to some kind of mob rule. Even though that has never happened, ever, not in one instance, and even though companies fix their fuck-ups all the goddamn time and it has never been a fucking issue, ever. But that is the rule that applies to THIS instance, but no other, because this is the instance that I want it to apply, because it allows me to affect histrionics and scream bloody-murder at people I don't agree with.
They obviously pumped out some awful pretentious bullshit hoping idiots would think it was 'deep'. It's not really shameful to get fooled by that, but to defend it in such an over-the-top insane manner makes me wonder what they would have to do before Hulk will realize it's shit.
FUCKING CAPS LOCK. I GET IT. HE'S THE HULK. INTENTIONALLY HARD TO READ IS STILL HARD TO READ.
I also am not surprised he chose a bad video to beat up on, as if to admit he cannot contend with the better arguments that explain why the ending was a huge load. He even beats up straw-man versions of the bad video. Way to pick the low-hanging fruit. And then there is vague remonstrance about the times we live in. Fucking *yawn*.
Oh great, and then the creators right to create what they want is conflated with a supposed right to charge for pure dog shit and not get called out for it.
Cycles, cycles, cycles, cycles, cycles. Nothing you say is valid because cycles. So how come everything up to this point has been a nuanced look at the effects of cycles on our lives but at the end I'm just a slave to them? That makes no fucking sense even if I agree to frame the story in that bullshit way. It's a huge thematic 180'. And like I say, it's bullshit. There are far more important themes than 'cycles'.
So the ending demonstrates that mankind is doomed to repeat its history, to always suffer the same fate in its turn no matter what they may choose. Having three identical endings drives home the futility of contradicting cycles (fate). WHAT THE FUCK??? Does that sound like Mass Effect to anyone? What the hell games have you been playing since 2007? Look, this shit needs to be consistent in it's message or my brain starts coming out of my ears.
I love how people who want to not get cynical, insulting garbage shat out to sell DLC are the ones who are killing stories. Not the defenders of cynical, insulting garbage shat out to sell DLC. And why? Because if we complain when we are made to choke down a fat load of shit, creators will forever be servants to some kind of mob rule. Even though that has never happened, ever, not in one instance, and even though companies fix their fuck-ups all the goddamn time and it has never been a fucking issue, ever. But that is the rule that applies to THIS instance, but no other, because this is the instance that I want it to apply, because it allows me to affect histrionics and scream bloody-murder at people I don't agree with.
Sweet straw man. But beside that, this is not something you would apply generally if it did not just happen to benefit your histrionic panic attack in this one instance. Art is a hell-of-a-lot more than that. Everything he said about the indulgent nature of bullshit or the indulgence of whatever is just sophistry. I don't know how to rebut something that means nothing except 'you're wrong cuz you're wrong'. "True art never indulges" is bullshit. I hardly feel I need to explain why. But I will offer the following rebuttal: 'almost everything that is widely recognized as art, including, say, the Mona Lisa.'
They obviously pumped out some awful pretentious bullshit hoping idiots would think it was 'deep'. It's not really shameful to get fooled by that, but to defend it in such an over-the-top insane manner makes me wonder what they would have to do before Hulk will realize it's shit.
FUCKING CAPS LOCK. I GET IT. HE'S THE HULK. INTENTIONALLY HARD TO READ IS STILL HARD TO READ.
There is nothing wrong with liking something. However, when someone tries to defend something that is such complete and utter scheit, that the entire argument is one big strawman, than I lose all respect for the poster.tautologico said:
Hulk should have just said: "I like it.", and leave it at that.
Well, I read that review (not all of it, just as much as I could stomach in that absolutely awful writing style) and I have to say I disagree with him.
Now, I'm one of those who despised the endings of ME3, but that's not why I disagree. I've actually read some comments by people who liked them and some of them have been able to express interesting and reasonable reasons for liking them. This guy hasn't. He's basically going "you're dumb for not liking what I did". I can appreciate good arguments even when I don't agree with them, but I don't think this guy's arguments are good at all. He completely ignores all the plot holes that the original endings made, the fact that they were bad ripoffs of the original Deus Ex endings, the disrespect EA showed for gamers and the commercial reasons the endings were so lackluster.
In fact, either he hasn't played the ME games, he did speed runs, ignored the cutscenes or watched someone else's playthrough, because he clearly wasn't invested in the story when he came up with such a ridiculous reason for the endings being so dumb. I don't say he's a bad reviewer. Actually, yes, I say that. That writing style is terrible. I understand kids being entertained by it, like some are entertained by Fred in Youtube, but for people who like to read, this writing style gets obnoxious almost instantly. But anyway, maybe the guy is perfectly capable of constructing compelling, interesting and intelligent arguments. He's just not doing it here.
Now, I'm one of those who despised the endings of ME3, but that's not why I disagree. I've actually read some comments by people who liked them and some of them have been able to express interesting and reasonable reasons for liking them. This guy hasn't. He's basically going "you're dumb for not liking what I did". I can appreciate good arguments even when I don't agree with them, but I don't think this guy's arguments are good at all. He completely ignores all the plot holes that the original endings made, the fact that they were bad ripoffs of the original Deus Ex endings, the disrespect EA showed for gamers and the commercial reasons the endings were so lackluster.
In fact, either he hasn't played the ME games, he did speed runs, ignored the cutscenes or watched someone else's playthrough, because he clearly wasn't invested in the story when he came up with such a ridiculous reason for the endings being so dumb. I don't say he's a bad reviewer. Actually, yes, I say that. That writing style is terrible. I understand kids being entertained by it, like some are entertained by Fred in Youtube, but for people who like to read, this writing style gets obnoxious almost instantly. But anyway, maybe the guy is perfectly capable of constructing compelling, interesting and intelligent arguments. He's just not doing it here.
I... really don't know what to make of this. It seems to make sense when I read it, but I've read at least three explanation/defense pieces (all written by seemingly smart people) of the Mass Effect 3 ending, all claiming to get it but still offering significantly different interpretations of it. I don't even know what I think of it myself, even aside from the fact that I don't remember what I thought before I started reading all the complaints.
Was it really all about cycles from the beginning meaning the themes were too subtle for a simpleton like me to get? Or was the story an incoherent mess written by a bunch of headless chickens and it's vagueness left it open for this guy to read something into it that wasn't there? At this point both seem equally likely to me.
It reminds me a bit of Southland Tales (though not nearly as extreme), I remember thinking as I was watching it that it's fully possible that I'm watching a well thought out masterpiece here, just that it's passing over my head along with 99.99% of everybody else watching it. It's also possible that everyone jumped to the right conclusion and it's a royal mess of a movie.
The question is though, if you've written a beautiful story with richness in both themes and meaning (assuming, hypothetically that that's the case here), but 99/100 people watching it either don't get the point of it or mistake the point for something else, can you still say it's well written?
Ah sh*t! The Mass Effect 3 ending hurts my head, I'll go think of something else instead :-/
Was it really all about cycles from the beginning meaning the themes were too subtle for a simpleton like me to get? Or was the story an incoherent mess written by a bunch of headless chickens and it's vagueness left it open for this guy to read something into it that wasn't there? At this point both seem equally likely to me.
It reminds me a bit of Southland Tales (though not nearly as extreme), I remember thinking as I was watching it that it's fully possible that I'm watching a well thought out masterpiece here, just that it's passing over my head along with 99.99% of everybody else watching it. It's also possible that everyone jumped to the right conclusion and it's a royal mess of a movie.
The question is though, if you've written a beautiful story with richness in both themes and meaning (assuming, hypothetically that that's the case here), but 99/100 people watching it either don't get the point of it or mistake the point for something else, can you still say it's well written?
Ah sh*t! The Mass Effect 3 ending hurts my head, I'll go think of something else instead :-/
I neer heard of this critic until now and he sound too smart to be Hulk. In saying so he does give good points on why he didn't hated the original ending.
I'm kind of in the middleground on the whole ending controversy and try to stay off of forums about it, but I do want to support one thing Hulk pointed out: The final moments of Mass Effect 3 is not the game's only ending. Lots of story lines, character arcs, and relationships are concluded DURING the game. Also, a bad final moment leaves a sour taste, but it in NO WAY makes the 3 games worth of epicness and choice worthless. I think those two points are incredibly important.
So yes, if you don't like the ending (I was disappointed at the end too), if you see plot holes, great. Point that out. But don't say BioWare didn't give you a game worth playing or tell you where characters were.
So yes, if you don't like the ending (I was disappointed at the end too), if you see plot holes, great. Point that out. But don't say BioWare didn't give you a game worth playing or tell you where characters were.
You're right, it doesn't make everything that came before worthless. It doesn't rob everything that came before of the craft that went into it, nor does it retroactively steal the experiences you have had. But it may rob what came before of it's emotional impact now, or put it in a bad or disappointing light. A story is one of those things that is more than the sum of it's parts. Sometimes audiences forgive certain failings, sometimes they don't. Hard for me to say exactly why, even for myself. A multitude of reasons, probably.NpPro93 said:
EDIT: I probably should add that a story with good individual parts can be bad because those parts contradict or disagree somehow.
Just for curiosity, if you HAD to make an statement on how history repeats itself on the last 10 minutes of the game then how would you do it? A slap on the face that actually IS consistent with everything displayed on the series?Rooster Cogburn said:
No, obviously I would not do that. I don't know how I would do it. Does it matter? I don't understand what you are asking of me.DioWallachia said:
Leaving aside the fact that he probably wanted to make an article on it just to cash in on the fiasco, lets just pretend for a minute that he ACTUALLY did a speed run on the last game, only because he found the characters and the story so boring that he HAD to make it to the end so he can ***** about it later. My question is, do you thing that the 3rd game is the most "boring" or "uninteresting" from the perspective from a newcomer to the series that only played THAT game? Because if the guy just speed ruined everything to the end, then it IS possible that the game came out as lifeless and boring to the point that skipping maybe be the best choice.Dreadjaws said: