Mass Effect 3 ending SPOILERS!

[wicket42]

I give up trying to explain the endings to everyone. If you genuinely are interested in considering the endings from a perspective other than the knee jerk 'it didn't end with a slide show about how everyone lived happily ever after' feel free to PM me and we can discuss what possible futures are in store for the mass effect universe.

Your post indicates you either aren't reading or aren't understanding some of these well thought out and intelligently argued posts!

 

[synobal]

I give up trying to explain the endings to everyone. If you genuinely are interested in considering the endings from a perspective other than the knee jerk 'it didn't end with a slide show about how everyone lived happily ever after' feel free to PM me and we can discuss what possible futures are in store for the mass effect universe.

Your post indicates you either aren't reading or aren't understanding some of these well thought out and intelligently argued posts!

please tell me that is sarcasm, if it isn't I'll simply say I have answered everything anyone brings up some place, I just get tired of saying the same thing over and over. If people are curious as to what I'd say they can just go back and read my past posts in this beast of a thread.

 

[flipthepool]

I give up trying to explain the endings to everyone.

Err...you're not really explaining anything though? You're getting fanwanky with "Well maybe the Guardian was lying and that's why what he says goes completely against the themes of the series," and "Well the Reaper are aliens and so we can never really ~understand~ their motives!" Despite the fact that yes, we do understand them, we just think they're obviously and hilarious stupid.

The fact that you boil everyone who has a legitimate problem with the story down to, "U just mad cuz u didn't get a happy ending!!!" Is just disingenuous, silly, and obviously untrue.

 

[synobal]

I give up trying to explain the endings to everyone.

Err...you're not really explaining anything though? You're getting fanwanky with "Well maybe the Guardian was lying and that's why what he says goes completely against the themes of the series," and "Well the Reaper are aliens and so we can never really ~understand~ their motives!" Despite the fact that yes, we do understand them, we just think they're obviously and hilarious stupid.

The fact that you boil everyone who has a legitimate problem with the story down to, "U just mad cuz u didn't get a happy ending!!!" Is just disingenuous, silly, and obviously untrue.

You sir are absolutely right your analysis of my arguments are entirely 100% correct, excuse me while I go away in shame.

 

[flipthepool]

You sir are absolutely right your analysis of my arguments are entirely 100% true, excuse me while I go away in shame.

I thought you were done arguing?

So. You know, unless you're going to start agreeing with everyone there's...not really much point in you continuing to post.

 

[scorptatious]

I've just beaten ME3 about an hour ago. Fantastic game in my opinion, a little buggy from my experience sure, but otherwise, still great.

I'll admit, I certainly wasn't expecting the direction the ending took. The big decision at the end certainly made me think for a few minutes. But ultimately, I chose to destroy the Reapers and all their technology.

From what I see, by doing this, organic life has a chance to start over. Perhaps the survivors will pass on what they have learned to their children and this whole Reaper business won't happen again. Who knows, perhaps the Catalyst will be wrong.

I do kind of wonder what would have happened if I decided to control the Reapers though... Would things have been any better? Would the Reapers have stayed under control for long?

I don't know. I'm still taking this all in. I would have preferred a happier ending, but considering the odds stacked against Shepard, something like what happened in the ending was more than likely going to happen. Maybe things would turn out better if I got all the war assets?

captcha: "little bird told me"

What did the little bird tell you captcha?

 

[easternflame]

what about harbringer, he was pretty important, we didn't even get the chance to meet him.

Harbinger was the big reaper with 4 eyes and 4 lasers that was shooting at you while you were running to the citadel beam on Earth. But that's about it.

I know, that's exactly my point, we didn't meet him. I was really excited to talk to him once more. Maybe get some answers or just tell him how badass I was. Nothing.

 

[Zeetchmen]

This Hitler reacts vid sums it all up very well.

 

[synobal]

You sir are absolutely right your analysis of my arguments are entirely 100% true, excuse me while I go away in shame.

I thought you were done arguing?

So. You know, unless you're going to start agreeing with everyone there's...not really much point in you continuing to post.

Indeed, you sir are right again. You should really start a news letter or something so I can subscribe to it.

 

[Ifrit7th]

Look if you like the ending, feel free to disagree, but don't act like the ending we got 'went over the heads' of those of us who have a legitimate complaint. We didn't expect sunshine and roses, we just wanted some more closure on the setting as it is now. Smugness and sarcasm just hurt your argument more then they help.

 

[flipthepool]

Indeed, you sir are right again. You should really start a news letter or something so I can subscribe to it.

This is embarrassing. Please, don't feel like you need to stick around for little ol' me. How about you "explain" the endings to everyone again? You know, for old times' sake. I could use a laugh.

 

[AlternatePFG]

Loved the game from start to finish, but I'd be lying if I said that the ending wasn't a kick in the balls. I don't mind the downer nature of it all (Shepard doesn't have to survive, and I don't think he should unless you get a large amount of war assets) but the really problem is that none of your choices vary the endings much at all, and there is no proper epilogue. Same problem Fallout 3 had, that in my opinion, Broken Steel didn't fix. There was no closure. It doesn't even have to even be in motion, a slideshow epilogue like Fallout: New Vegas or Dragon Age: Origins would be fine.

Not to mention the continuity issues with your two squadmembers suddenly appearing on the Normandy even though they presumably were left behind in the final charge or possibly vaporized.

It's a shame too, because the segment preceding it was great. I could get over the Illusive Man and Kei Lang stupidity, and up until the point after Anderson died, I was really into it. I'm not even that great of a fan of the series, but the way they tied everything up was terrible.

Only other game that has that bad an ending in recent memory would be Neverwinter Nights 2, but that didn't have a whole trilogies worth of story to squander.

Least the multiplayer is fun enough to keep me coming back to it. Don't think I really want to make another run through the single player anytime soon.

 

[Ifrit7th]

Indeed, you sir are right again. You should really start a news letter or something so I can subscribe to it.

This is embarrassing. Please, don't feel like you need to stick around for little ol' me. How about you "explain" the endings to everyone again? You know, for old times' sake. I could use a laugh.

Same argument about smugness and sarcasm go for the side arguing against the endings too. Honestly, no matter how they ended this game, they were going to piss a large group of people off. Nothing fits better then what each fan wanted to occur, and there's no way they could have possibly seen to all of it.

 

[chibivash]

after watching that ending, i don't know if i'll be able to play through my other imports. i wasn't expecting shepard to live, being this was the end of shepard's story. i brought along expendable party members, just in case the whole party i took was gonna die. but wow, just wow. it's like they pulled that ending from no where.

 

[flipthepool]

Honestly, no matter how they ended this game, they were going to piss a large group of people off.

I think this is pretty much the worst argument ~for~ the endings, ever. I find even the asinine "The people who think the endings are terrible just don't get it!" reasoning more satisfying than this.

Because, sure, there are people who would probably be upset at whatever ending existed. There always are. But "you can't please everyone!" does NOT, in any way, excuse bad writing. And the endings, as they are, are poorly written. They directly contradict the internal logic of the game, they contradict what you see and play in the game itself, they contradict the character development that the ME games have built up through the series.

I would rather you actually believe that everyone who hates the ending is simple than to be content with what there is just because "*throws hands up* people would be upset anyways!"

Also, saying that just lumps everyone into an "unpleasable fanbase," which allows you to ignore any legitimate complaints that people might have.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

I was annoyed that you didnt get to face and destroy Harbinger at the end of the game being that he was you number one enemy throughout ME2.

 

[Agayek]

I was annoyed that you didnt get to face and destroy Harbinger at the end of the game being that he was you number one enemy throughout ME2.

Harbinger shows up right at the end. He's the Reaper that blasts Shepard right before he reaches the teleporter thing.

Also, after discussing the ending with a friend of mine, we've come to the conclusion that the last 15 minutes of the game didn't actually happen. It was all a near-death delusion Shepard came up with to comfort himself after Harbinger fried and fatally wounded him. The Reapers actually won, killing Shepard and dooming the Crucible project, before proceeding to murder the rest of the galaxy and retreat back into darkspace.

 

[Avatar Roku]

I give up trying to explain the endings to everyone. If you genuinely are interested in considering the endings from a perspective other than the knee jerk 'it didn't end with a slide show about how everyone lived happily ever after' feel free to PM me and we can discuss what possible futures are in store for the mass effect universe.

Please read this post:

I think one of the biggest problem with the endings, and why they are so unsatisfying, is because they seriously break the rule of "show, don't tell." You have this Guardian come out of nowhere, and tell you that organic life is (for some reason) destined to kill synthetic life. The issue with this is that we've seen through the game that organic life and synthetic life don't necessarily be at odds. They can even co-exist peacefully. In fact, Shepard can actively broker a peace between a synthetic species (Geth) and organics (the Quorian). This is also disregarding the fact that EDI, an AI, never had any conflict with organics, and always tried to help them and "her crew." So, we've SEEN through the game that organics can get along with synthetics, so being TOLD that they must ALWAYS end in conflict and that synthetics are destined to end organic life...well, that rings as false.

What's even worse is that the only synthetics we've seen trying to destroy organics...are the Reapers, and the Geth who follow the Reapers. So once more, being told, "No wait, those guys you've been fighting the whole time...THEY'RE ACTUALLY THE GOOD GUYS! They're trying to SAVE organic life!" Well...that's a pretty hard pill to swallow. The series didn't set up synthetics vs. organics. The series set up Reapers vs. ~everyone who isn't a Reaper!~

Also, it makes me a little uncomfortable that the ending of ME3 just seems to take at face value the fact that synthetics vs. organics is always a thing, will always be a thing (as long as they're not all merged into one big magic being), and that synthetics will ALWAYS wipe out organic life form. I find some unfortunate implications with this. Not only is it stupidly Luddite, but the fact is that a big theme in ME2 is, "do synthetic beings 'count' as lifeforms?" And it comes overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that, "yes, yes they DO count." Legion and EDI are shown to be more than just mere machines. They have feelings. They are a part of Shepard's crew. They fight for Shepard. They fight for organic life.

So, to have the game say, "Yes, these do count as a species," and then have the series say, "And they will ALWAYS take this sort of action NO MATTER WHAT," well...that's just dumb.

Think if the game came to the conclusion that, "Humans will ALWAYS destroy any other species that they come into contact with, because it is part of their nature." I'm pretty sure people would have a problem with it. Because it is a dumb statement. It would be even worse if we still had Shepard (a human) going around trying to save ALL life on the galaxy. Just like we can have EDI and Legion (synthetics) fighting FOR the organics. We see synthetics fighting for organics, so hearing that they will always be in conflict and ALL synthetics will ALWAYS take a certain destructive coarse of action...well, within the constraints of the series it seems a little...racist? Speciesist? Stupidly closed-minded? I don't know, but whatever it is, it rubs me the wrong way.

Plus, doesn't the Guardian invalidate his own logic by...you know...being a synthetic? If synthetics always try to kill organic life, why would he be trying to save ANY organic life? Wouldn't he just try to end it all?

Also, weren't the Reapers setting everyone up to be culled? It seems like, by keeping around the Mass Relays they are ensuring that technology will always evolve the same way (because, you know, that's how technology work), which ends with organics creating synthetics and the Reapers coming in and eating everything. This seems like a rigged deck to me.

Anyways, I don't have any problem with "bittersweet" endings, or even "dark" endings. I kind of figured from the beginning of the third game that Shepard was going to have to sacrifice herself, and I even figured that the Earth was probably doomed. The problem with the endings wasn't that Shepard didn't punch every Reaper in the face to death, then jump into the Normandy hot-tub and pop a bottle of Cristal.

No, the problem with the endings is that they are bad storytelling. They blatantly violate the "show, don't tell," rule to their detriment by consistently showing us one thing, and at the end telling us another (and any time you have to have an "Explainer" character at the end, your writing is suspect. Hitchcock only got away with it because he's freaking Hitchcock."). It violates one of the larger thematic elements of the last game ("Synthetics are people to! People who will ALWAYS KILL YOU."). AND, it violates its own internal logic ("Synthetic life will always destroy ALL organic life! Disregard the fact that I, a synthetic, am telling you this to try to save organic life. And the fact that Reapers, synthetics, were apparently created to save organic life.").

I'm not upset that the endings weren't happy. I wasn't expecting a happy ending. I'm just upset that the endings were stupid.

You can have a satisfying conclusion to a story and still have questions. Not everything needs to tie up into a neat little bow. In fact, frequently, "and everyone lived happily ever after" is more of an asspull than anything else. But endings DO need to fit the rest of the story. And these...don't.

Shepard has always been the patron freaking saint of self-determination. Saren says that Reapers are fated to destroy the galaxy, the only way to save everyone is to join them, Shepard says "FU," and blows Sovereign away. ~Everyone~ in ME2 says, "This is a suicide mission! You're all fated to die!" Shepard says, "FU," and lives through it, even potentially bringing his/her entire squad out the other side with him. This is the character that, against all odds, can bring together every race of the galaxy to fight a unified threat. So, you're telling me that this character, who has always done things the way he/she saw fit...this character is just going to lie down and take it when "The Guardian" says, "The galaxy is fated to end this way...because I say so!"

That just goes completely against the rest of the series! It goes completely against Shepard's character.

Look, I can understand destroying the Mass Relays. That way, the galaxy can finally be free from the Reaper influence and can have self-determination for the first time in...forever. That, thematically, makes sense. But the rest of the endings are based on a premise that I just can't believe within the context of the story. I just can't believe, from what I've seen in the games, that synthetic life will ~always~ rise up against organics. Nobody can say that they ~must~ or ~must not~ do anything, because the game pretty much determines that synthetics do have free will, and saying that any creature with free will is then ~fated~ to act a certain way just...doesn't add up.

This explains every problem I have with the ending, except the pacing issues I outlined earlier.

I was annoyed that you didnt get to face and destroy Harbinger at the end of the game being that he was you number one enemy throughout ME2.

Harbinger shows up right at the end. He's the Reaper that blasts Shepard right before he reaches the teleporter thing.

Also, after discussing the ending with a friend of mine, we've come to the conclusion that the last 15 minutes of the game didn't actually happen. It was all a near-death delusion Shepard came up with to comfort himself after Harbinger fried and fatally wounded him. The Reapers actually won, killing Shepard and dooming the Crucible project, before proceeding to murder the rest of the galaxy and retreat back into darkspace.

I prefer to think that, after defeating the Illusive Man, Shepard sat down next to Anderson and slowly drifted off as the Crucible did its job. The whole thing with the Catalyst was, as they say, her brain's final light show.

Or hell, maybe she drifted off as the Crucible didn't do its job and the Reapers won. I'm ok with sad endings (although that still has the problem of your choices not counting, but maybe they could give an epilogue where we see how successful people were against the Reapers without the Crucible, based on how much you gathered) and the Reapers winning, I just also think the confrontation with the Illusive Man was worth keeping.

 

[Jaeke]

I give up trying to explain the endings to everyone. If you genuinely are interested in considering the endings from a perspective other than the knee jerk 'it didn't end with a slide show about how everyone lived happily ever after' feel free to PM me and we can discuss what possible futures are in store for the mass effect universe.

Please read this post:

I think one of the biggest problem with the endings, and why they are so unsatisfying, is because they seriously break the rule of "show, don't tell." You have this Guardian come out of nowhere, and tell you that organic life is (for some reason) destined to kill synthetic life. The issue with this is that we've seen through the game that organic life and synthetic life don't necessarily be at odds. They can even co-exist peacefully. In fact, Shepard can actively broker a peace between a synthetic species (Geth) and organics (the Quorian). This is also disregarding the fact that EDI, an AI, never had any conflict with organics, and always tried to help them and "her crew." So, we've SEEN through the game that organics can get along with synthetics, so being TOLD that they must ALWAYS end in conflict and that synthetics are destined to end organic life...well, that rings as false.

What's even worse is that the only synthetics we've seen trying to destroy organics...are the Reapers, and the Geth who follow the Reapers. So once more, being told, "No wait, those guys you've been fighting the whole time...THEY'RE ACTUALLY THE GOOD GUYS! They're trying to SAVE organic life!" Well...that's a pretty hard pill to swallow. The series didn't set up synthetics vs. organics. The series set up Reapers vs. ~everyone who isn't a Reaper!~

Also, it makes me a little uncomfortable that the ending of ME3 just seems to take at face value the fact that synthetics vs. organics is always a thing, will always be a thing (as long as they're not all merged into one big magic being), and that synthetics will ALWAYS wipe out organic life form. I find some unfortunate implications with this. Not only is it stupidly Luddite, but the fact is that a big theme in ME2 is, "do synthetic beings 'count' as lifeforms?" And it comes overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that, "yes, yes they DO count." Legion and EDI are shown to be more than just mere machines. They have feelings. They are a part of Shepard's crew. They fight for Shepard. They fight for organic life.

So, to have the game say, "Yes, these do count as a species," and then have the series say, "And they will ALWAYS take this sort of action NO MATTER WHAT," well...that's just dumb.

Think if the game came to the conclusion that, "Humans will ALWAYS destroy any other species that they come into contact with, because it is part of their nature." I'm pretty sure people would have a problem with it. Because it is a dumb statement. It would be even worse if we still had Shepard (a human) going around trying to save ALL life on the galaxy. Just like we can have EDI and Legion (synthetics) fighting FOR the organics. We see synthetics fighting for organics, so hearing that they will always be in conflict and ALL synthetics will ALWAYS take a certain destructive coarse of action...well, within the constraints of the series it seems a little...racist? Speciesist? Stupidly closed-minded? I don't know, but whatever it is, it rubs me the wrong way.

Plus, doesn't the Guardian invalidate his own logic by...you know...being a synthetic? If synthetics always try to kill organic life, why would he be trying to save ANY organic life? Wouldn't he just try to end it all?

Also, weren't the Reapers setting everyone up to be culled? It seems like, by keeping around the Mass Relays they are ensuring that technology will always evolve the same way (because, you know, that's how technology work), which ends with organics creating synthetics and the Reapers coming in and eating everything. This seems like a rigged deck to me.

Anyways, I don't have any problem with "bittersweet" endings, or even "dark" endings. I kind of figured from the beginning of the third game that Shepard was going to have to sacrifice herself, and I even figured that the Earth was probably doomed. The problem with the endings wasn't that Shepard didn't punch every Reaper in the face to death, then jump into the Normandy hot-tub and pop a bottle of Cristal.

No, the problem with the endings is that they are bad storytelling. They blatantly violate the "show, don't tell," rule to their detriment by consistently showing us one thing, and at the end telling us another (and any time you have to have an "Explainer" character at the end, your writing is suspect. Hitchcock only got away with it because he's freaking Hitchcock."). It violates one of the larger thematic elements of the last game ("Synthetics are people to! People who will ALWAYS KILL YOU."). AND, it violates its own internal logic ("Synthetic life will always destroy ALL organic life! Disregard the fact that I, a synthetic, am telling you this to try to save organic life. And the fact that Reapers, synthetics, were apparently created to save organic life.").

I'm not upset that the endings weren't happy. I wasn't expecting a happy ending. I'm just upset that the endings were stupid.

You can have a satisfying conclusion to a story and still have questions. Not everything needs to tie up into a neat little bow. In fact, frequently, "and everyone lived happily ever after" is more of an asspull than anything else. But endings DO need to fit the rest of the story. And these...don't.

Shepard has always been the patron freaking saint of self-determination. Saren says that Reapers are fated to destroy the galaxy, the only way to save everyone is to join them, Shepard says "FU," and blows Sovereign away. ~Everyone~ in ME2 says, "This is a suicide mission! You're all fated to die!" Shepard says, "FU," and lives through it, even potentially bringing his/her entire squad out the other side with him. This is the character that, against all odds, can bring together every race of the galaxy to fight a unified threat. So, you're telling me that this character, who has always done things the way he/she saw fit...this character is just going to lie down and take it when "The Guardian" says, "The galaxy is fated to end this way...because I say so!"

That just goes completely against the rest of the series! It goes completely against Shepard's character.

Look, I can understand destroying the Mass Relays. That way, the galaxy can finally be free from the Reaper influence and can have self-determination for the first time in...forever. That, thematically, makes sense. But the rest of the endings are based on a premise that I just can't believe within the context of the story. I just can't believe, from what I've seen in the games, that synthetic life will ~always~ rise up against organics. Nobody can say that they ~must~ or ~must not~ do anything, because the game pretty much determines that synthetics do have free will, and saying that any creature with free will is then ~fated~ to act a certain way just...doesn't add up.

This explains every problem I have with the ending, except the pacing issues I outlined earlier.

I was annoyed that you didnt get to face and destroy Harbinger at the end of the game being that he was you number one enemy throughout ME2.

Harbinger shows up right at the end. He's the Reaper that blasts Shepard right before he reaches the teleporter thing.

Also, after discussing the ending with a friend of mine, we've come to the conclusion that the last 15 minutes of the game didn't actually happen. It was all a near-death delusion Shepard came up with to comfort himself after Harbinger fried and fatally wounded him. The Reapers actually won, killing Shepard and dooming the Crucible project, before proceeding to murder the rest of the galaxy and retreat back into darkspace.

I prefer to think that, after defeating the Illusive Man, Shepard sat down next to Anderson and slowly drifted off as the Crucible did its job. The whole thing with the Catalyst was, as they say, her brain's final light show.

Or hell, maybe she drifted off as the Crucible didn't do its job and the Reapers won. I'm ok with sad endings (although that still has the problem of your choices not counting, but maybe they could give an epilogue where we see how successful people were against the Reapers without the Crucible, based on how much you gathered) and the Reapers winning, I just also think the confrontation with the Illusive Man was worth keeping.

About the part especially in regards to Agayek's post, if you chose Destruction with over 5000 EFM and 100% Galactic Rediness, at the very end it shows a cutscene of a pile of rubble surrounding a crude blackened round shape that is slightly showing, and through the breaks of the rock, a dim but noticable reflection is present, upon closer inspection, it is a pair of dog tags with N7 engraved into them. Off in the distance the sound of several large explosions and Reaper audio is played, just before the scene cuts into black... the figure moves suddenly and you hear Shepard make his first breath.



After a few hours ive taken to get over the massive butthurt over the ending, ive now come to one of two conclusions.

One, which i think the most likely:
Harbinger shot Shepard, destroyed the ground Hammer Forces (at least 95% of them at the scene that charged for the portal that took them to the Citadel), the last 15 minutes of the game with Shepard didn't PHYSICALY OCCUR, the bit with Shepard confronting the Illusive Man and the Catalyst, Shepard's conciousness broke down and that's why the Catalyst is showed as the child that Shepard has nightmare's about, but infact the endings of the game are roughly reflective of Shepard's personal decisions and serve as a proxy that is indicative of what happens when Shepard does finally regains conciousness. The reason this secret ending is shown exclusive for the Destruction choice is because you chose that his will to stop the Repears is so great that he will plunge into chaos to stop them in the name of humanity's future.

or Two:
Shepard did get to the Citadel, the Illusive Man died, and Shepard and Anderson, sitting down side-by-side, not as soldiers of a long, depressing, and horrible war, but as old friends as they watch the sacrifice they made, not once, but time and time again finally pay off. Just as Shepard witnesses Anderson passing away after Anderson tells him of how proud he of Shepard, an event similar to the first conclusion I gave occurs where his conciousness collapses under the weight of the loss of his friends, years of arduous fighting, and the relief of it all ending, he hears Hackett through his radio, and in his trance of near death hallucinates Hackett distressing that something has gone wrong and as Shepard struggles to the console, something is indeed activated and he is teleported back to Earth

I just hope that the ending they gave us is not the true shit-stain of an excuse that was given to us.

 

[SajuukKhar]

After a few hours ive taken to get over the massive butthurt over the ending, ive now come to one of two conclusions.

One:
Harbinger shot Shepard, destroyed the ground Hammer Forces (at least 95% of them at the scene that charged for the portal that took them to the Citadel), the last 15 minutes of the game with Shepard didn't PHYSICALY OCCUR, the bit with Shepard confronting, Shepard's conciousness broke down and that's why the Catalyst is showed as the child that Shepard has nightmare's about, but infact the endings of the game are roughly reflective of Shepard's personal and serve as a proxy that is indicative of what happens when Shepard does finally regains conciousness.

or Two:
Shepard did get to the Citadel, the Illusive Man died, and Shepard and Anderson, sitting down side-by-side, not as soldiers of a long, depressing, and horrible war, but as old friends as they watch the sacrifice they made, not once, but time and time again finally pay off. Just as Shepard witnesses Anderson passing away after Anderson tells him of how proud he of Shepard, an event similar to the first conclusion I gave occurs where his conciousness collapses under the weight of the loss of his friends, years of arduous fighting, and the relief of it all ending.

I just hope that the ending they gave us is not the true shit-stain of an excuse that was given to us.

-Says original ending is bad.
-Makes up equally bad endings that make no sense within the story
-Says they are better then the original ending which, while it did strand the Normandy far away, fit within the themes of the game

Contradictions much?