Is this a better Mass Effect 3 ending?

Recommended Videos

Austin Manning

New member
Apr 10, 2012
198
0
0
Hello everyone

For those of you who don't know (probably all of you) I am an aspiring video game writer (a greatly vaunted position, I know). To this extent I analyze the plots of different videogames, seeing what the developers did right or wrong and learning from their mistakes. Normally this would seem like cake (this is video game writing we're talking about) until I played Mass Effect 3. I won't go into detail about my negative experience with that game (enough has been said on that), suffice to say I was left wanting. In an effort to get more out of what was almost my favourite video game series (it couldn't topple Final Fantasy) I came up with two additional endings that I wanted to share with you.

NOW NOBODY TURN THIS THREAD INTO A RANT AGAINST THE CURRENT ENDINGS OR RETAKE MASS EFFECT! All I want is your opinion on what I came up with and maybe a logical breakdown of what I have written, pointing out any logical fallacies / out of character behaviour that exists within in it.

Please note that these exist alongside the originally offered ending and are alternate choices for the player. They do not replace Mac Walters' and Casey Hudson's vision of the ending.

Paragon Ending: Conviction
This ending is only unlocked if Shepard saved both the Quarians and Geth, completed both Legion and Tali's loyalty missions and completed the Luna AI side quest in Mass Effect 1.

When offered the three choices by the Catalyst, Shepard takes a paragon persuasion option. They reference the resolution of the Geth/Quarian conflict and how the Hannibal AI is now not only actively assisting organics, but is also romantically involved with one. They offer this as proof that the Catalyst's reasoning is flawed and that the Reapers are unnecessary.

The Catalyst refutes this by pointing out that every set of data has outliers and that the organic/synthetic alliance will dissolve the moment the Reapers are gone. It then reiterates the three Crucible options and demands Shepard choose.

If Shepard had a full Paragon reputation in all three games then they are given one final Paragon persuasion choice: They tell that Catalyst that the cycles have changed the nature of evolution and caused synthetics and organics to unite against their true enemy: the cybernetic Reapers. They assert that the Catalyst's ultimate goal of preventing organic/sythetic conflict has been achieved as neither form of life will attack the other so long as the Reapers exist.

The Catalyst, satisfied that it's directive has been completed, withdraws the Reapers and leaves the Galaxy, though it promises to return if synthetics every attempt to wipe out all organic life. Shepard survives and the fleets recover the survivors from the Citadel.

The epilogue shows Shepard living with their love interest and mourning the ones that died for their victory. An intragalactic Parliament consisting of every species (organic and synthetic) is created to replace the Council. They run the unified galaxy as a democracy and stockpile their weapons technology in anticipation of the Reapers return. If necessary this can be used as a jumping off point for future games. The epilogue finally ends with the star gazer scene.

Renegade Ending: Defiance (aka Fuck You!)
Assuming Shepard completed all of the requirements for Conviction and full EMS but either did not have full paragon or did not choose the final paragon option, then this choice becomes available.

After the Catalyst outlines the Crucible options a second time, Shepard proceeds to say something along the lines of "Fuck this, fuck you and everything you fucking stand for. One way or another these cycles end today!" They then proceed to radio Admiral Hackett, telling him that the Crucible was just a trap set by the Reaper hive mind, located at their position at the base of the Citadel. Shepard orders Hackett to focus the fleet's fire there.

The star child dissolves as explosions tear through the presidium, screaming "SHEPARD!" in it's scary Harbinger voice at the protagonist as the explosions engulf them both. This triggers an series of cutscenes similar to what appear in the actual endings. The exceptions being that the explosion is gold (Harbinger's colour)and the relay's aren't destroyed. As the gold light washes over the Reapers, the destroyed Catalyst's control over them is broken. The Reapers and husks then begin to both violently attack each other and mount a disorganized retreat while the fleets and armies pelt them with fire. Similar circumstances happen on planets around the galaxy. The few surviving Reapers either commit suicide by flying into stars/black holes or they leave the galaxy.

Shepard and most of the survivors on the Citadel die in this ending and the epilogue shows the Normand crew as well as the entire galaxy giving them a giant funeral. One of the characters suggests that the Reapers' final actions were a result of gaining independence from the Catalyst and deciding to fight against the beings that enslaved/destroyed them, namely their fellow Reapers. Those that committed committed suicide were horrified by both their actions and what they had become.

The united races establish an intragalactic Parliament consisting of members from every species, organic and synthetic, that rules the galaxy as a democracy. Outside of their meeting room is a giant statue of Shepard, the human who united them all and gave the ultimate sacrifice so that they could live. The game finally ends with the star gazer scene.(The surviving Reapers can be used as a jumping off point for a future sequel, such as them discovering an even more monstrous threat in another galaxy)

So what do you guys think? I know the suggested dialogue is cheezy (I'm still learning) and Hackett taking orders from Shepard might seem out of place (though Shepard did lead the fleet into battle) but I think I managed to keep it fairly consistent with the ME universe and didn't destroy any characters to do it.

So... Feedback anyone?
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Mar 15, 2008
15,016
2,676
118
Well I'll start this on a note that may cause you to just disregard my opinion immediately :)

I liked the original ending (haven't touched the Extended Cut).

I don't mind your paragon ending. It makes sense that Shepard should have the option to convince the robits that destroying everyone is kind of a shitty thing to do considering you have a couple instances of proof that their logic is flawed. It's kind of (really) cheesy but it's not the worst ending in the world. I still prefer the game's ending over your paragon one though...

The renegade option I really don't like. The entire point of the third game (and to a lesser extent, 1&2) is that you CAN'T win a conventional war against the reapers. You are out-gunned, out-numbered, and completely out-matched. You can not win in a fist fight against the Reapers. It is drilled into your head the moment you find out about the mechanical monsters that are The Reapers.
 

Infernai

New member
Apr 14, 2009
2,605
0
0
Holy shit...here i was thinking i was the only person to realize that if they wanted to defeat the reapers in the refusal style ending then just blow up the citadel. I mean it's basically the reaper control hub, so naturally i don't know why it never clicked with Bioware to have Shepard call in a bombardment. Hell, i even made a paragon AND renegade ending based around that sole concept....although i admit mine is in desperate need of a rewrite or two and likely an editor: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.401646-BioWare-Says-Farewell-With-Mass-Effect-3-Citadel-and-Reckoning?page=6#16583897

OT: I think it's good, only thing i didn't like about the defiance ending is the gold light: I always forsaw it as being the Reapers just kind of keel over as they did in destroy or stop working, falling over or just collapsing on themselves while the husks just die. I didn't see it as grand, i saw it as flicking the off switch on a robot.
 

Infernai

New member
Apr 14, 2009
2,605
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Well I'll start this on a note that may cause you to just disregard my opinion immediately :)

I liked the original ending (haven't touched the Extended Cut).

I don't mind your paragon ending. It makes sense that Shepard should have the option to convince the robits that destroying everyone is kind of a shitty thing to do considering you have a couple instances of proof that their logic is flawed. It's kind of (really) cheesy but it's not the worst ending in the world.

The renegade option I really don't like. The entire point of the third game (and to a lesser extent, 1&2) is that you CAN'T win a conventional war against the reapers. You are out-gunned, out-numbered, and completely out-matched. You can not win in a fist fight against the Reapers. It is drilled into your head the moment you find out about the mechanical monsters that are The Reapers.
Well, in a way it's not a conventional war in the renegade ending, it's literally a case of "ATTACK THE WEAK POINT WITH EVERYTHING WE'VE GOT!". I do agree direct ship to ship warfare would be damned near impossible without mass casualties. Even if the galactic races won, the casualties would be so great that i doubt recovery would be possible.
However, the Citadel is basically the central control center in a way and the home of the A.I that basically runs the reapers. So take out the control center, and all you're left with is a whole lot of metal husks containing slurpified remains of other races.

In the case that it didn't kill the reapers or shut them down, it would undoubtedly be a big blow against them to destroy the hive-mind.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Mar 15, 2008
15,016
2,676
118
Infernai said:
I suppose but I never saw The Citadel like that (maybe I'm wrong and didn't pay enough attention). This isn't The Reapers first time murdering everything in sight so I can't imagine that they would have that as the ONLY spot where their super AI controller lives.

Best case: That is the only spot and now you just have a bunch of mindless robots murdering everything (though I suppose you could tweak the story earlier in the game to make sure it's obvious that blowing this place up would shut everything down...). Although a robot murder spree might be kind of cool :)

Worst case: Star Child is uploaded from Mega-Upload back to the Reaper main-frame and no longer gives you a peaceful option...

Eh. I'm still not a big fan of these endings (though again, I really liked the original endings so I'm sure I'm in the minority here). I still think the Paragon ending is too...cliche? (cliche might be the word but I'm not sure so I'll go with it). I don't think the Renegade option makes sense (but again, that could be fixed pretty easily in-game though).
 

Austin Manning

New member
Apr 10, 2012
198
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Well I'll start this on a note that may cause you to just disregard my opinion immediately :)

I liked the original ending (haven't touched the Extended Cut).

I don't mind your paragon ending. It makes sense that Shepard should have the option to convince the robits that destroying everyone is kind of a shitty thing to do considering you have a couple instances of proof that their logic is flawed. It's kind of (really) cheesy but it's not the worst ending in the world. I still prefer the game's ending over your paragon one though...

The renegade option I really don't like. The entire point of the third game (and to a lesser extent, 1&2) is that you CAN'T win a conventional war against the reapers. You are out-gunned, out-numbered, and completely out-matched. You can not win in a fist fight against the Reapers. It is drilled into your head the moment you find out about the mechanical monsters that are The Reapers.
To start with: I don't mind that you enjoy the original endings, that's your right. Personally I don't like them or the Extended cut though I do love a lot of bad movies (like the star wars prequels) that everyone else hates. My problem is that when I really love something I analyze it on a borderline cellular level which, in the case of Mass Effect 3, causes the whole thing to collapse like a burning house of cards. Really the only lasting good parts of the game (for me at least) are the Rannoch, Tuchanka and Grissom Academy levels, as well as the atmosphere. Everything else is just so much meh, though the gameplay was solid.

About the Reapers though, the only reason the game repeatedly bangs you over the head with "we can't defeat the Reapers conventionally!" is to justify everyone's irrational desire to rely on the farce that is the Crucible (I can go into more detail with that if you want) and set up the final choice. ME1 actually implies that you can beat the Reapers conventionally as their strategy has always been to show up at the Citadel, decapitate the Galactic military and government, shut down the Relays, only opening them to let their own troops through and slowly exterminating everyone without facing a united galactic war effort like they are in 3.

As for 2, well they aren't really in it, but when you wipe out their entire slave army with just 12 people (10 without DLC), kill one with just 3 people and stop them AGAIN in arrival, you get the feeling that they're more fallible then they claim.

In 3 your killing them left right and centre, to the point where it causes a fair bit of whiplash when you can't just win on your own. One of these ultimate life forms got taken down a worm, you one-hit-KO another with the Cain, and the one on Rannoch dies after a few hits to the giant glowing weak spot (and no it was not the entire Quarian fleet that did that, it went down after eight shots not 50,000). There's also the potential in this scenario that you actually outnumber and outgun the Reapers during the final battle for Earth, especially if you have the Leviathan DLC which gives you the power to kill Reapers by thinking about it.

One last thing, would you mind telling me what about the original endings you like? I'm trying to learn from the good as well as the bad.
 

Austin Manning

New member
Apr 10, 2012
198
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
Infernai said:
Best case: That is the only spot and now you just have a bunch of mindless robots murdering everything (though I suppose you could tweak the story earlier in the game to make sure it's obvious that blowing this place up would shut everything down...). Although a robot murder spree might be kind of cool :)
I actually explain in the Renegade ending why a mindless robot murder spree doesn't happen.
 

Austin Manning

New member
Apr 10, 2012
198
0
0
Infernai said:
Holy shit...here i was thinking i was the only person to realize that if they wanted to defeat the reapers in the refusal style ending then just blow up the citadel. I mean it's basically the reaper control hub, so naturally i don't know why it never clicked with Bioware to have Shepard call in a bombardment. Hell, i even made a paragon AND renegade ending based around that sole concept....although i admit mine is in desperate need of a rewrite or two and likely an editor: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.401646-BioWare-Says-Farewell-With-Mass-Effect-3-Citadel-and-Reckoning?page=6#16583897
I read over your script and it's not bad (at least from my perspective at 2:40 am). They only thing I'd change is a line near the end where Shepard says "That's for us to fix". Personally, I'd put "Did you ever think that just because you rebelled against your creators doesn't mean every synthetic has to?" instead.

PS. I love your avatar, Berserk is one of my favourite manga.
 

bug_of_war

New member
Nov 30, 2012
887
0
0
Austin Manning said:
Paragon Ending: Conviction
This ending is only unlocked if Shepard saved both the Quarians and Geth, completed both Legion and Tali's loyalty missions and completed the Luna AI side quest in Mass Effect 1.

When offered the three choices by the Catalyst, Shepard takes a paragon persuasion option. They reference the resolution of the Geth/Quarian conflict and how the Hannibal AI is now not only actively assisting organics, but is also romantically involved with one. They offer this as proof that the Catalyst's reasoning is flawed and that the Reapers are unnecessary.

The Catalyst refutes this by pointing out that every set of data has outliers and that the organic/synthetic alliance will dissolve the moment the Reapers are gone. It then reiterates the three Crucible options and demands Shepard choose.

If Shepard had a full Paragon reputation in all three games then they are given one final Paragon persuasion choice: They tell that Catalyst that the cycles have changed the nature of evolution and caused synthetics and organics to unite against their true enemy: the cybernetic Reapers. They assert that the Catalyst's ultimate goal of preventing organic/sythetic conflict has been achieved as neither form of life will attack the other so long as the Reapers exist.

The Catalyst, satisfied that it's directive has been completed, withdraws the Reapers and leaves the Galaxy, though it promises to return if synthetics every attempt to wipe out all organic life. Shepard survives and the fleets recover the survivors from the Citadel.

The epilogue shows Shepard living with their love interest and mourning the ones that died for their victory. An intragalactic Parliament consisting of every species (organic and synthetic) is created to replace the Council. They run the unified galaxy as a democracy and stockpile their weapons technology in anticipation of the Reapers return. If necessary this can be used as a jumping off point for future games. The epilogue finally ends with the star gazer scene.
Interesting ending, however there are a few plot details that you seem to have glazed over. For one, just because the Reapers stop attacking, doesn't mean we would not. Another thing, the ghost child thingy would not be convinced by the reasoning as the unity between the Geth and Quarian/EDI and Joker is simply not enough considering how long the Reapers have been Reaping the galaxy. The ghost child would also come to the conclusion that the Reapers HAVE to be there for unity between Synthetic and Organics and would continue the cycle as is. If they leave, we no longer have a common enemy, and soon there would likely be tension between the two, thus why would the Reapers leave this cycle for any longer if the likelihood of Synthetic vs Organic would be too high.

Austin Manning said:
Renegade Ending: Defiance (aka Fuck You!)
Assuming Shepard completed all of the requirements for Conviction and full EMS but either did not have full paragon or did not choose the final paragon option, then this choice becomes available.

After the Catalyst outlines the Crucible options a second time, Shepard proceeds to say something along the lines of "Fuck this, fuck you and everything you fucking stand for. One way or another these cycles end today!" They then proceed to radio Admiral Hackett, telling him that the Crucible was just a trap set by the Reaper hive mind, located at their position at the base of the Citadel. Shepard orders Hackett to focus the fleet's fire there.

The star child dissolves as explosions tear through the presidium, screaming "SHEPARD!" in it's scary Harbinger voice at the protagonist as the explosions engulf them both. This triggers an series of cutscenes similar to what appear in the actual endings. The exceptions being that the explosion is gold (Harbinger's colour)and the relay's aren't destroyed. As the gold light washes over the Reapers, the destroyed Catalyst's control over them is broken. The Reapers and husks then begin to both violently attack each other and mount a disorganized retreat while the fleets and armies pelt them with fire. Similar circumstances happen on planets around the galaxy. The few surviving Reapers either commit suicide by flying into stars/black holes or they leave the galaxy.

Shepard and most of the survivors on the Citadel die in this ending and the epilogue shows the Normandy crew as well as the entire galaxy giving them a giant funeral. One of the characters suggests that the Reapers' final actions were a result of gaining independence from the Catalyst and deciding to fight against the beings that enslaved/destroyed them, namely their fellow Reapers. Those that committed committed suicide were horrified by both their actions and what they had become.

The united races establish an intragalactic Parliament consisting of members from every species, organic and synthetic, that rules the galaxy as a democracy. Outside of their meeting room is a giant statue of Shepard, the human who united them all and gave the ultimate sacrifice so that they could live. The game finally ends with the star gazer scene.(The surviving Reapers can be used as a jumping off point for a future sequel, such as them discovering an even more monstrous threat in another galaxy)

So what do you guys think? I know the suggested dialogue is cheezy (I'm still learning) and Hackett taking orders from Shepard might seem out of place (though Shepard did lead the fleet into battle) but I think I managed to keep it fairly consistent with the ME universe and didn't destroy any characters to do it.

So... Feedback anyone?
This one I find less interesting. The dialogue does not fit Renegade Shepard at all (I don't think we ever hear Shepard say fuck), he would sound pissed for sure, but I can't Shep throwing the F-bomb around like it's a tennis ball. Also, all 3 endings that we have now destroy the Citadel, so basing this on the in-game universe's precedent having Hackett fire on the Citadel would likely just cause the Destroy ending to occur, but as in the BAD destroy ending (As the more damaged the Citadel is, the less effective the radiation EMP thing is). They're not bad fan fic endings, but you need to go in depth more and make sure that your endings would gel with what we have (As your endings technically are extensions if players did well in previous games and the original endings are still present).

Personally, I'll stick to the Original endings. I prefer them, and I'm happy with how the game ended.
 

CloudAtlas

New member
Mar 16, 2013
873
0
0
Austin Manning said:
Paragon Ending: Conviction
This ending is only unlocked if Shepard saved both the Quarians and Geth, completed both Legion and Tali's loyalty missions and completed the Luna AI side quest in Mass Effect 1.

When offered the three choices by the Catalyst, Shepard takes a paragon persuasion option. They reference the resolution of the Geth/Quarian conflict and how the Hannibal AI is now not only actively assisting organics, but is also romantically involved with one. They offer this as proof that the Catalyst's reasoning is flawed and that the Reapers are unnecessary.

The Catalyst refutes this by pointing out that every set of data has outliers and that the organic/synthetic alliance will dissolve the moment the Reapers are gone. It then reiterates the three Crucible options and demands Shepard choose.
My memories might betray me here, but can't you mention the peaceful resolution of the Geth-Quarian conflict? Even if not, would adding 2-3 lines of dialogue fundamentally change the endings?
Either way, it wouldn't proof anything to the VI. Just because there's one instance where organics and synthetics live peacefully together doesn't have any bearing on the probability of future conflicts.

Either way, I don't know if simply talking the reapers into surrender by superior reasoning would feel very satisfying to many. In the original endings, that the VI lets you, one puny human, decide the fate of the reapers and the galaxy for some contrived reasons is what bugged many people, and I don't think this would be a big improvement here.

As for your renegade ending, you would need to convincingly explain why destroying the Citadel would actually result in the results you outline. You would need to explain that the VI doesn't regard trying to destroy it as the ultimate act of aggression, and orders the reapers to proceed, as last command if you wish. You would also need to explain that the reapers are so unautonomous that everything breaks down when the central VI breaks down. Or that the VI is unable to transfer itself - at least the most rudimentary functions - into the reapers computing units.

Also, I don't think the final ending choice should be so heavily dependent on a number of individual choices you made over the course of the three games. The consequences of the individual choices are not always clear throughout the game (nor should they!), and withholding one ending just because you didn't make all the "right" choices does not seem like a good move. There's also the issue that what one personally considers as "good" or "noble" course of action is not always the same as what the game coins "paragon". I would have been mad if I was, say, not able to choose destroy because I was a paragon Shepard, but the game considers Destroy as renegade option.


So, all in all, while I don't think you did a bad job with your endings, I think I too stick to the original ones. Which I quite liked. For all their flaws I still think there's more to them than some people realize.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Mar 15, 2008
15,016
2,676
118
Austin Manning said:
To start with: I don't mind that you enjoy the original endings, that's your right. Personally I don't like them or the Extended cut though I do love a lot of bad movies (like the star wars prequels) that everyone else hates. My problem is that when I really love something I analyze it on a borderline cellular level which, in the case of Mass Effect 3, causes the whole thing to collapse like a burning house of cards. Really the only lasting good parts of the game (for me at least) are the Rannoch, Tuchanka and Grissom Academy levels, as well as the atmosphere. Everything else is just so much meh, though the gameplay was solid.

About the Reapers though, the only reason the game repeatedly bangs you over the head with "we can't defeat the Reapers conventionally!" is to justify everyone's irrational desire to rely on the farce that is the Crucible (I can go into more detail with that if you want) and set up the final choice. ME1 actually implies that you can beat the Reapers conventionally as their strategy has always been to show up at the Citadel, decapitate the Galactic military and government, shut down the Relays, only opening them to let their own troops through and slowly exterminating everyone without facing a united galactic war effort like they are in 3.

As for 2, well they aren't really in it, but when you wipe out their entire slave army with just 12 people (10 without DLC), kill one with just 3 people and stop them AGAIN in arrival, you get the feeling that they're more fallible then they claim.

In 3 your killing them left right and centre, to the point where it causes a fair bit of whiplash when you can't just win on your own. One of these ultimate life forms got taken down a worm, you one-hit-KO another with the Cain, and the one on Rannoch dies after a few hits to the giant glowing weak spot (and no it was not the entire Quarian fleet that did that, it went down after eight shots not 50,000). There's also the potential in this scenario that you actually outnumber and outgun the Reapers during the final battle for Earth, especially if you have the Leviathan DLC which gives you the power to kill Reapers by thinking about it.

One last thing, would you mind telling me what about the original endings you like? I'm trying to learn from the good as well as the bad.
Your squad seems to be the only ones who can actually fight against the Reapers thanks to their Plot Armor but it felt pretty clear that everyone else was getting their asses handed to them by the Reaper threat. I suppose you could say that your squad demonstrates that the Reapers are not all powerful but I think that's just the fact that having them kick your ass every time you run into them would make a bad game. It's the same reason why you can single handedly destroy the entire middle-eastern army in a Call of Duty game...

As to why I liked the ending, I will gladly let you know why I liked it but it probably won't help you much. It's a post I did a while ago but it mainly talks about the themes and the "artisticness" of the games; an argument that a lot of people have called copping out and whatnot :)

A lot of people complain that the point of the series is choice and that the ME3 ending took that away from them. HOWEVER, I see it as the exact opposite: The point of the entire series has been fate, not choice, which the ending fits perfectly.

Let me explain...

What choices did you have to make in the Mass Effect series? Let's look at the big ones...
1. Rachni Queen
2. Wrex
3. Who you make sweet space love to

Now, what differences did these make?
1. Rachni are still fighting you in ME3
2. Wrex is alive or Wrex is dead
3. Shepard can swap partners more often than the Jersey Shore cast

Ultimately, no matter what you do, your path is set. You will fight Saren, you will fight a Reaper baby, and you will have a play-date with Star Child to determine what color explosion you get. You have superficial changes made in the story based on your decisions but ultimately, you are on a set course that will not change (unless you get yourself killed I suppose...)

THAT's what the ending, to me, represents: You can't escape the fate that the universe has for you. No matter what you do in the game, you HAVE to negotiate to survive (see colored explosions). I actually would have preferred NO choice at the end but I'll take what is there. The logic Star Child used to decide that everyone must die is computer logic; it makes sense to something that is a cold, calculating machine (see Knives from Trigun for another great example of this with the butterfly).

Now maybe I had the perfect play-through that supports my way of thinking and any minor change would have completely changed my outlook but this is how I see the ending.

It's very likely that you now have a book long list of things that prove me wrong but I don't really care. I greatly enjoyed the ending and there's nothing you can do about it! :) Take THAT society!

I don't know how helpful I've been in your writing but I hope it was at least a little.
 
Apr 5, 2008
3,736
0
0
The paradon ending described is interesting. I like the Reapers-as-detterent angle, although it's predicated on the Reapers making a decision rather than simply repeating the cycle.

Saying that, as a paragon, my Shepard would still have destroyed the reapers outright, as well as the Geth and further, making sure Joker and EDI were never a thing. I never really "forgave" the Geth for following Saren in the first game and even Legion wasn't enough to change that. Synthetic life (and in Joker's case, a sexbot) is as bad an idea to me as the game suggests. I actually found it a little creepy that the game plays Joker/EDI's relationship so casually and makes the "nice" response the "Sure, go for it" option rather than the "Seriously dude, she's a fu****g machine" option.
 

Splitzi

New member
Apr 29, 2012
105
0
0
@KingsGambit I don't think that their relationship was that creepy. To me it felt that the relationship stressed how AI can be just as human as us. EDI was learning how to be a real person, which was shown through her questions as the game went along. Because of Joker's brittle bone disease it's not like the relationship will be physical.

I really love OP's ideas on fate over choice. I think rather than the FU! ending, Shepard could somehow consume or integrate with the Star Child. Since he's been rebuilt and upgraded with cybernetics, a few lines of dialogue between Miranda and the Illusive Man could have referenced how a small computer was added to counterbalance some brain damage they couldn't fix completely. If he could consume Star Child and then kill himself he would end the Hive Mind and keep the Citadel intact, not causing the destroy option accidentally.
 

Misterian

Elite Member
Oct 3, 2009
1,827
1
43
Country
United States
As indifferent as I was toward Mass Effect 3's ending (if only because I personally pretend it's non-canon) I personally like those endings you brought up. I'd go as far to say I'd like Bioware to look at those endings and to give their response.

But from what I gather, Bioware is done with Shepard's story in Mass Effect, so I doubt a change to the story is gonna happen.

On the other hand, I doubt they'll use that sort of ending they gave ME3 in future games, so if nothing else, here's my advice to all Bioware fans;

Pray that Bioware doesn't have a similar ending planned for Dragon Age III.
 

Souplex

Souplex Killsplosion Awesomegasm
Jul 29, 2008
10,308
0
0
tippy2k2 said:
The renegade option I really don't like. The entire point of the third game (and to a lesser extent, 1&2) is that you CAN'T win a conventional war against the reapers. You are out-gunned, out-numbered, and completely out-matched. You can not win in a fist fight against the Reapers. It is drilled into your head the moment you find out about the mechanical monsters that are The Reapers.
Actually, if you read the codex the war seems quite winnable. Small reapers can be taken down by cruisers. (Normandy 2 is a cruiser for reference) Boss Reapers cannot turn effectively in combat due to their scale, and as such are vulnerable to flanking tactics. Reapers have impressive barriers, but Thanix weaponry are more about heat than force, and therefore are unaffected by barriers. (Most fighters have Thanix weaponry.)

As to the OP:
I like both the endings moreso than the options the game presented us, but the problem is they're still based on the bullshit with the starchild and his backwards logic about robot apocalypses requiring the reapers to kill everyone so they won't be killed by synthetics.
In the "Fuck You" ending, they would need to destroy the Citadel, not the Crucible, and that would probably mess up the relay network as the citadel controls the relay network.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Mar 15, 2008
15,016
2,676
118
Souplex said:
Actually, if you read the codex the war seems quite winnable. Small reapers can be taken down by cruisers. (Normandy 2 is a cruiser for reference) Boss Reapers cannot turn effectively in combat due to their scale, and as such are vulnerable to flanking tactics. Reapers have impressive barriers, but Thanix weaponry are more about heat than force, and therefore are unaffected by barriers. (Most fighters have Thanix weaponry.)
Well in a straight up fight, the humans can win in a one-on-one. However, I thought that the main threat of The Reapers isn't just their power but the sheer numbers. They're like Zerglings with the technical powers of the Protoss.

Now granted, I generally don't read the Codex so maybe there is more info in there that over-rides the information the game gives you.
 

Tom_green_day

New member
Jan 5, 2013
1,383
0
0
I think victory depending on one certain mission isn't a great idea.
I didn't mind the ending a whole deal, playing as I type.
In my eyes the ending wasn't the bad thing that needed to be changed, it was that all your decisions through the series didn't appear as anything other than names on a list of war assets. If, say the rachni helped if you saved them, and if not you have to do an extra thing, that would be your decisions coming through in gameplay. I would have liked that.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Mar 15, 2008
15,016
2,676
118
the hidden eagle said:
The reaper's numbers aren't that big there's a few thousand of them at most, not the unlimited numbers some people like to believe.
I cannot think of the term right now to save my life but I'm sure once I describe it, someone here will be able to tell me what I'm thinking of...

It seemed to me that even if we were to somehow win the war on Reapers, we would be SO decimated that we would end up losing anyway. There is a certain term for it when you win the war but your side is so destroyed that you both end up dying anyway but I just can't think of it...

Throughout Mass Effect 3, they made it pretty clear that what you were doing was more or less THE last stand. Every planet that went up against The Reapers was absolutely decimated and only a handful were able to hold off (not win; just not have everyone die).

That's why I'm not a big fan of his Renegade ending. There are story changes that you could make so that it DOES work but to replace that ending with the original I don't think would work.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Mar 15, 2008
15,016
2,676
118
the hidden eagle said:
I believe the term you're thinking of is pyrrhic victory where the winning side of the battle takes so many losses that they lose anyway.
YES! Thank you!

That's been driving me nuts. I spent about ten minutes before posting trying to Google the answer or figure it out :)
 

mad825

New member
Mar 28, 2010
3,379
0
0
Austin Manning said:
So... Feedback anyone?
Yeah.

Remove the Catalyst

Everything that began to go wrong started with the catalyst. In fact, remove there ever being a "decider" because this would need an explanation for what we "cannot comprehend" and some grandiose solution which is apparently beyond our means of control. Keep it simple. A labyrinthine ending does not make it a good ending.

What about the Leviathans? They kicked some serious reaper arse. Hell, they mind controlled a brute and brought down a reaper ship with just a thought. They could win the war themselves.

In all honestly, ME3 cannot be fixed, ME itself cannot be fixed. It needs re-writing, stuff from ME1 could be salvaged.