No girls in rage? lol, check the facebook page also
I would like to introduce you to my wife, I know heresy I have a wife and she plays games.. shocker. The whole go out get a girl sun thing has been done to death. Seriously.
I don't mean to be rude but if you don't understand why we are upset fine, but we don't need the over generalization insults.
It still somehow hard to believe that females can have this persistent level of hatred and rage.
And I wasn't insulting nobody, I was actually describing what I did after 20h non-stop ME marathon, because my goal was prepare yourself and play until it is done (BTW 20h of non-stop gaming is bad for you, trust me)
After finishing ME3 I went outside (no sun or girls though, because it was 2am) walk a little, sat on the bench, took a smoke, gazed upon the stars and tried to figure out what exactly in the ending was wrong. It helped me, maybe you should do the same. Then I went to bed and in the morning I wrote that comment.
Sorry if it insulted someone, but as usual it isn't objective fact, but only my opinion.
I loved the entire mass effect series. Read the books, comics, done it all. I'm completely fine with the ending. I'm not sure what everybody expected but it was the ending I predicted. I could see the writing on the wall fairly early on. A bit like Red Dead Redemption. Doom was in the air.
The fact that the "multiple endings" was a bit of a con is absolutely in keeping with Mass Effect 1 & 2. Maybe other people don't see it but each Mass Effect has been a series of bottle necks with some expansion of plot between each node.
No matter WHAT you decide the outcome for every single mission is basically the same. Everyone destroys Sovereign and Saren in the first game. Everybody fights the giant baby terminator in ME2. Everybody does the exact same story missions and the only variation is a bit of dialogue and the "concept" that you picked A instead of B. Killed Wrex? Fine, you get a different Krogan and a bit of different dialogue in ME2. Effect on missions and gameplay and the outcome of other missions? = 0! Nothing, nada.
The Blue Paragon/Red Renegade is the biggest con of all. You need to get person X to do Y. You can sweet talk them with Blue option, result = you get Y. You can intimidate them with Red option, result = you get Y. Where exactly is the massive change in decisions.
I know "the means" is the interesting part and no "the ends" but at no point as Mass Effect even shown anything but a cursory nod towards "multiple-choices". The impact of even the most important choices from previous games result in a bit of dialogue difference, and maybe a footnote in the codex or war assets. As far as concluding subplots I can't see a single thing they didn't answer. Not sure what closure people are missing but no story, film, book, or game is going to list what happens to every single character at the end of a series. Unless it's LOTR and that's the worst part of the books.
I love Mass Effect but I never played it for the "multiple-choices". That's fluff, a thin icing on very lovely cake. Anyone saying Mass Effect set an expectation of multiple endings or massive changes in plot due to choices made is a complete liar or a fool. They've always said this stuff and it's never been true before. It's like CoD going on about "loads of new weapons and perks" when it's the same stuff rebranded and tweaked a bit. They've said this stuff from day one and at no point has a decision made in ME ever made much difference to the major story line. At least not a single change to the chain of events.
I can only presume these people only played ME2, and not ME1 and believed the hype about carrying your decisions over to the next game. Coupled with the fact that the series is ending (sad face) and that it's pretty damn obvious only sad endings are going to occur (how many missions in ME end with "Yeah! Everybody is happy"??) that left them feeling sad. Unable to comprehend or reflect on this new emotion produced by art they had a temper tantrum. You know, like a child does if his hero in a film dies.
I haven't read the 15 pages of of text this thread has created just the last so forgive me of what I said has been said. But this post sums up a lot of what I was going to say.
The issue with Mass Effect 3 is that it breaks form, horribly. In both ME1 and ME2 there is really little difference to the end the driving story stays the same just the small details are what change. Whether you save the council or not, doesn't matter Sovereign dies. Whether you destroy the base or give it to the Illusive man doesn't matter, you have a dead collector base.
In truth though each has a mechanic that changes subtleties in the universe, loyalty effects whether or not team members live or die. Little actions are reminders that the things you've done in the past have effected the universe as a whole.
While the little reminders remain in the game, war assets essentially do... nothing. An entire mechanic created that does nothing. Compounded by a ending that gives us a choice that isn't really a choice.
All the more if you've ever read the indoctrination theory many tweets and hints in the game show the game is not the real ending, if this were true then my god. Why not just put in a real ending and avoid this. There is no way Bioware will ever rid themselves of the question whether this was intentionally planned or they gave in to consumer complaints. This will haunt them, forever. Moreso if they decide and most likely will charge for the ending.
The game would've been 100 times better if we were never really given a choice on how it ended and that War Assets actually made the final fight easier. Alternatively that the ending we have now is fake, and if your war assets where high enough you could wake up and continue to the real ending. How great would that have been? Awesome right, if thats how it was from launch and not some shoe-horned DLC whether it was planned or not.
Basically what erked me wasn't the ending, it was that War Assets had no real affect. Why induce a mechanic and stress that you go out of your way to do said mechanic then have it do nothing.
On reflection I see what you mean. The war assets are irksome and a complete cop out for Bioware. I remember playing the first game and fretting over whether to save or destroy the Rachni. In the end the impact it makes is miniscule, just a couple of points to add to the war asset chest. Points which I didn't need anyway because I did most things and completely exceeded the requirement to get the "better" endings.
But there's two reasons why I'm not mad about it. 1) I still fretted about it, I still enjoyed having the dilema of should I or shouldn't I. Granted, I've found out it didn't matter, but I'm not one of those people that feels my efforts were wasted because it didn't matter in the game. I still had the experience, whether it makes a difference or not. 2) Mass Effect 2 already broke my delusions about what would "carry over". When I realised how minimal, and superficial the decisions from ME1 were on ME2 I knew ME3 would only be more pointless.
But I found I didn't care that much. I still loved the game even though I'd realised it's a lot more linear than people realised. I was disappointed that despite all the talk of "your decisions changing the game" I still see they don't really make any difference to the sequence of events at all.
Also I found a game that DID make huge changes based on my decisions. Alpha Protocol. The combat is out-dated and clunky, the voice work a bit flat. The stealth power is horribly over-powered. But whoever set out the branching plot lines of that game was a frikkin' genius. I platinumed that game and it was a joy. Whole new scenes appear or disappear based on how you relate to other characters. Some missions change drastically based on your actions. Not just red/blue options but whether you did a mission without killing anyone, or went guns blazing. And the endings were quite varied based on your choices, and how much people liked or disliked you. Not just like/dislike but love/like/neutral/dislike/hate.
Of course it got fubared by New Vegas, Obsidian pulled all it's resources to pander to the licensed game. I felt it could have been as good or better than Mass Effect if they'd supported it better.
I WILL be mad if I have ot pay for the "real" ending. I'm already annoyed I paid 800 MS points for a 1-2 hour mission in From Ashes. That's 1/6th the price of 30 hour game? Complete rip-off.
I managed to save everyone.
No one died on the suicide mission, Wrex and Eve are safe, united the Geth and Quarians so this ending feels like a big ripoff. I wouldn't even call it an ending because the game just stops. As far as we know everyone is doomed because the mass relays were destroyed so that makes the entire story behind these games pointless in the end.
Thats why we're pissed. Not because we didn't get the happy rainbows ending or that we didn't get the ending we wanted.
It's that we didn't get one and we'll probably have DLC to see who died, who survived and what the fuck just happened.
First off dont take your frustrations out on Yahtzee, you bloody well know he is a gamer, his whole life is gaming related. Secondly you guys are JUST fans, not creators, authors, developers, own ANYTHING of the games IP. I understand you the story didn't end with flowers and sunshine flying out of Jokers crippled ass while Shepard and Liara do it on the most perfect rainbow. But they did say it is the end of Shepard's story and how else do you think it would end?
Not to be rude just really wondering cuz I must have missed it honestly. What plot holes? I want to know what Bioware messed up on cuz maybe I'm just missing the points.
Not to be rude just really wondering cuz I must have missed it honestly. What plot holes? I want to know what Bioware messed up on cuz maybe I'm just missing the points.
No worries, I'll post a link to that article [http://www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/] if you feel like a hench read.
I'll also explain a few of them myself in this spoiler tag.
1. The God Child - this isn't so much a plothole as a big WTF moment, we're introduced to a new character who contradicts a fair amount of previous dialogue, if he 'controls the reapers' as he so claims, this kind of makes a lot of Sovereigns quotes redundant.
2. The destruction of the relays - while watching the ending myself and I saw all the relays explode I thought, wait a second, every single alien I brought to help me destroy the reapers is now stranded above earth with no realistic way to get back to their planets in their lifetimes?
Well, they probably won't be too happy.
Other people, including that article, have pointed out that in the Arrival DLC, Mass Relays that explode ever so slightly destroy the entire system they're placed in, I assumed that because of the multicolored lasers, the energy was dispersed differently, but it's a good point that why weren't we told this?
3. Joker fleeing earth - Okay this one annoys me the most out of everything, up until now I could suspend my disbelief and come up with just enough vague reasons to explain away most other things, but why the hell is Joker, with the rest of my crew no less, fleeing earth?
Joker was in the battle with the reapers and I see no clear reason why he'd turn tail and run, especially as we can assume that he's already fleeing once you make your choice as he's running from one of your colourful space lasers, and why is my crew with him? Moments ago they were on Earth preparing for the final assault with Shepard.
Then they crash land, coincidentally, on a habitable planet and step out. Well, they're now stranded with no means of being found or returning to civilization (no relays remember?) and if you chose to wipe out synthetics, EDI is now dead and Joker doesn't even bat an eyelid at this.
It makes no sense.
And that is why we make sure to keep the same writers for the entire series on board and relevant to every plot point in the series.
The reason we hate the endings is because of the plotholes, inconsistencies, terrible writing, and unfulfilled promises by the developers. Idiot like moviebob who have no interest in Mass Effect just don't get it.
I'm fairly sure it's been said. However, in case it hasn't...
Game journalists aren't stupid. Do you really think they haven't caught on to what the real disappointment with ME3 was for most fans? Of course they have. Do you also think that they'd write a scathing article about the shortcomings of a game that they're widely advertising as one of the greatest examples of what a video game should be? Of course not.
Gaming "journalists" are protecting their asses from scrutiny from publishers and producers by avoiding writing about the larger issues most gamers are having with ME3, and video games in general these days. Don't think for a second that they're supportive of your hobby and its critical errors before they're supportive of what puts money in their pocket.
Stop saying that game journalists are missing the point. They're probably missing it on purpose. Wise up.
Yeah, I feel like most journalists / critcs are on a completely different wave length then us gamers.
That being said I don't think bioware should have to remake the ending I just don't want to buy anything they sell ever again. Almost 300+ hours of game play to give me some depressing ass story where everyone fucking dies. Could have saved myself 80 bucks and 35 hours if I had just let shepard die in ME2...
TL;DR fuck bioware and don't buy from them anymore.
Not exactly why most of us are pissed off... You're not going to buy from them because it's not all sunshine and bunnies? Or is it because, like me and most comments I've seen over the past month, the ending invalidates everything you did up until that point and creates a massive amount of plot holes?
Shepard was indoctrinated the whole time and everything that happened at the end actually was in his mind (the whole citadel ending).
How else do you explain in the end him gasping for air on the ground in London after having been in space with no equipment to survive in one of the endings?
Pay attention to the clues the game gives you as your on the citadel at the end.
Also it is not the first time bioware allowed you to have shepard die as part of the story. At the end of Mass Effect 2, depending on certain choices you made you could have shepard and the whole crew besides Joker die. Just because he dies in one ending does not mean he or his crew are actually dead.
Yeah, I feel like most journalists / critcs are on a completely different wave length then us gamers.
That being said I don't think bioware should have to remake the ending I just don't want to buy anything they sell ever again. Almost 300+ hours of game play to give me some depressing ass story where everyone fucking dies. Could have saved myself 80 bucks and 35 hours if I had just let shepard die in ME2...
TL;DR fuck bioware and don't buy from them anymore.
Not exactly why most of us are pissed off... You're not going to buy from them because it's not all sunshine and bunnies? Or is it because, like me and most comments I've seen over the past month, the ending invalidates everything you did up until that point and creates a massive amount of plot holes?
The indoctrination theory isn't correct. If you asked yourself whether you earnestly believe it's the intended conclusion to come to, I'm sure the answer would be "no". Mass Effect has never been subtle or smart, it's a series about a solider-guy heroically saving the galaxy by kicking one ass at a time.
The indoctrination theory isn't correct. If you asked yourself whether you earnestly believe it's the intended conclusion to come to, I'm sure the answer would be "no". Mass Effect has never been subtle or smart, it's a series about a solider-guy heroically saving the galaxy by kicking one ass at a time.
The indoctrination Theory has a lot of evidence to back it up, what do you have to disprove it beside your vague opinion? Mass Effect not being "smart" or "subtle" is open for debate. I remember it has surely offered way much more moral debate than your average space marine testosterone fueled rampage.
The indoctrination theory isn't correct. If you asked yourself whether you earnestly believe it's the intended conclusion to come to, I'm sure the answer would be "no". Mass Effect has never been subtle or smart, it's a series about a solider-guy heroically saving the galaxy by kicking one ass at a time.
The indoctrination Theory has a lot of evidence to back it up, what do you have to disprove it beside your vague opinion? Mass Effect not being "smart" or "subtle" is open for debate. I remember it has surely offered way much more moral debate than your average space marine testosterone fueled rampage.
Well, it's kind of weird. Just taking in-game sources it seems to fit flawlessly, but the way the devs have been reacting to the fan outcry seems to indicate otherwise. The devs really seem like they're surprised and hurt that the fans didn't love their horribly written half assed ending. At first I was convinced that the IT was real and they really had just hacked the ending off the game in order to sell it separately, but now I'm not so sure.
I'm also not sure why I'm so damn interested in this when I haven't even played any of the games.
It is time we call out these developers and publishers when they intentionally deceive us. They must have expected some backlash from the ending. Just not this much and it shows in their actions. These people are not artist. The are employees earning a paycheck. If they have any artistic value, it is marginalized by time/budget constraints.
They told us several things and didn't deliver on them and in some cases did the exact opposite. They got called on it and now they want to play victim and call it art? No, sorry that is not how that works. It is okay to defend your employees from the bile and hatred from the community. It is NOT okay to insult the rational people with valid concerns and reasons for not liking the ending.
I am honestly done with preorders and paying new game prices. I can wait until the prices go down. With the blatant lies and exaggerations from developer/PR firms and their paid reviewers, I am pretty much done with being excited about any game I hear about until it has proper time to be reviewed by the community. Plus it gives with developer time to patch up some bugs that are with the games release. I am not paying for a game and beta testing it for them.
The indoctrination theory isn't correct. If you asked yourself whether you earnestly believe it's the intended conclusion to come to, I'm sure the answer would be "no". Mass Effect has never been subtle or smart, it's a series about a solider-guy heroically saving the galaxy by kicking one ass at a time.
The indoctrination Theory has a lot of evidence to back it up, what do you have to disprove it beside your vague opinion? Mass Effect not being "smart" or "subtle" is open for debate. I remember it has surely offered way much more moral debate than your average space marine testosterone fueled rampage.
I actually never bothered to look at the evidence for the indoctrination theory because it seemed so unlikely that they would completely change their method of storytelling so that only hardcore and dedicated Mass Effect fans who've spent a lot of time contemplating the ending would fully understand it. I just watched a video about it though, and it's pretty damn compelling. Stupid ending either way because it's completely alienating to the kind of fan base Mass Effect has, but at least it makes sense and it's told in a neat way, even if it's executed horribly.
Because if it's established that the creators of a story can be pressured by constant browbeating by the audience, then the sanctity of the creator's original intention is made meaningless.
Except there is no such thing as the sanctity of the creator's original intention.
The ending we got is what we got because of publisher meddling, and a new lead writer who was wholly uninterested in actually crafting an ending that was consistent with the rest of the series.
When the original ending got cut the development team was left with a lot of already completed content (and the whole "Take Earth Back!" marketing thing), such as the London scenario and the sequences with the Citadel in orbit around Earth. Since they couldn't justify abandoning these things, a new ending was crafted around them... and it just happened to not make any sense whatsoever.
The original ending, the one about dark energy rapidly aging the Milky Way's suns, had an explanation for how the Citadel ended up in the Sol system. The ending we got just pretended that it wasn't anything out of the ordinary.
The original ending explained that harvesting humanity might be the key to finding a solution to the dark energy problem, as foreshadowed in Mass Effect 2, and would let the player choose to either sacrifice humanity or destroy the Reapers while hoping that the galaxy could be salvaged without them. Not a lot of choice, but a hell of a lot less nonsensical than the Star Child contradicting everything Sovereign and Harbinger ever said, and space magic "fixing" the galaxy in three utterly unsatisfactory ways.
You know what I think their problem was. It was that they felt they had to explain the reapers. Like Sovereign said "My kind transcends your very understanding."
The point is that it's Bioware's (not EA's) story, and not the fans' story. You're allowed to have your opinion of the story, you're even allowed to write fanfiction that changes the ending if you're displeased with it, but he's addressing anyone who feels entitled to a different ending. It's figuratively like reading a book, and then after finishing it crumpling it up and throwing it back at the author, yelling "No! You got it all wrong! Do it again!"
It's the author's story. They are entitled to end it with whatever message they want. Now if you don't feel entitled to a different ending, but you feel like the current one was poorly mishandled, that's an entirely different story.
I loved the entire mass effect series. Read the books, comics, done it all. I'm completely fine with the ending. I'm not sure what everybody expected but it was the ending I predicted. I could see the writing on the wall fairly early on. A bit like Red Dead Redemption. Doom was in the air.
The fact that the "multiple endings" was a bit of a con is absolutely in keeping with Mass Effect 1 & 2. Maybe other people don't see it but each Mass Effect has been a series of bottle necks with some expansion of plot between each node.
No matter WHAT you decide the outcome for every single mission is basically the same. Everyone destroys Sovereign and Saren in the first game. Everybody fights the giant baby terminator in ME2. Everybody does the exact same story missions and the only variation is a bit of dialogue and the "concept" that you picked A instead of B. Killed Wrex? Fine, you get a different Krogan and a bit of different dialogue in ME2. Effect on missions and gameplay and the outcome of other missions? = 0! Nothing, nada.
The Blue Paragon/Red Renegade is the biggest con of all. You need to get person X to do Y. You can sweet talk them with Blue option, result = you get Y. You can intimidate them with Red option, result = you get Y. Where exactly is the massive change in decisions.
I know "the means" is the interesting part and no "the ends" but at no point as Mass Effect even shown anything but a cursory nod towards "multiple-choices". The impact of even the most important choices from previous games result in a bit of dialogue difference, and maybe a footnote in the codex or war assets. As far as concluding subplots I can't see a single thing they didn't answer. Not sure what closure people are missing but no story, film, book, or game is going to list what happens to every single character at the end of a series. Unless it's LOTR and that's the worst part of the books.
I love Mass Effect but I never played it for the "multiple-choices". That's fluff, a thin icing on very lovely cake. Anyone saying Mass Effect set an expectation of multiple endings or massive changes in plot due to choices made is a complete liar or a fool. They've always said this stuff and it's never been true before. It's like CoD going on about "loads of new weapons and perks" when it's the same stuff rebranded and tweaked a bit. They've said this stuff from day one and at no point has a decision made in ME ever made much difference to the major story line. At least not a single change to the chain of events.
I can only presume these people only played ME2, and not ME1 and believed the hype about carrying your decisions over to the next game. Coupled with the fact that the series is ending (sad face) and that it's pretty damn obvious only sad endings are going to occur (how many missions in ME end with "Yeah! Everybody is happy"??) that left them feeling sad. Unable to comprehend or reflect on this new emotion produced by art they had a temper tantrum. You know, like a child does if his hero in a film dies.
You expected Shepard's entire motivation to change within 14 lines of dialogue. See it's not that the ending is overly grim, it's that it's not a culmination of everything Shepard's done up to this point as well as being poorly written. I suppose, unlike you, I thought that up until the end I thought Bioware were fairly good writers.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
