To OP:
The deus ex machina was a cop out to me,because I had great respect for the geth once I met Legion and ME3 re-enforced that after I experienced their consensus(wish it had more Overlord-like aesthetics to it).So it didn't make a lot sense to me,and for a billion year AI,I doubt it has such flawed logic after watching millions of civilizations and their on the Citadel.There would always be a few that offer hope for peace ad not "chaos",Shepard was this cycles hope.
Also Arrival made it clear that the Mass Relays explode in a supernova,so however you look at it,you destroy the galaxy,but it was something I overlooked the first time I saw it,so i guess I can let that go.
But the last scene with the Normandy I can't accept and I'd like some clues as to what happens to the characters developed in the franchise.
Al in all,I was dissatisfied completely,so I also made a cop out of my own and kept my Shepard alive.
Well, if we assume that the eezo core of the relays are used up when the space magic fires off, then chances are the explosion wouldn't be catastrophic. It would probably take out Pluto though...
On the other hand, if the eezo core isn't used up by the space magic, then yeah, no matter what, shit just got real.
What's this? A calm response from Zeel?! Call the police, we have an imposter!!!
Completely agree with you by the way. And when you figure in that, you could play the games so that the previous 2 games get you the least amount of points possible, and then play ME3 with only doing the main quest line, you can still get the "Shep Lives" ending by doing multiplayer. Or even worse, that you have to play "The Perfect Game" if you don't play the multiplayer in order to get the "Shep Lives" ending. Your choices really do end up meaning squat.
The Desu Ex Machina is not the problem. Almost from the very start up of the game you do hunt it: The Crucible.
The problem is how in the end it is developed and delivered.
Shepard dying heroically saving earth? Fine!
Crucible Deus Ex Machina super weapon? Fine!
Nonsensical cut (e.g. Normandy escape)? BS!
Lore breaking stuff (e.g. Mass Effect Relay explosion)? BS!
God being taking form of a little kid that died at the beginning it can't be aware of? BS!
Gods solution theory? BS!
Disregarding player choices during the three games by always delivering the choice between 3 endings unrelated to the way the player may have set up his Shepards personality? MEGA BS!
Boiling the themes of the game down to synthetics vs organics copycatting Deus Ex Human Revolution to the letter in the process, disregarding the player may have proven the God being wrong already in the process of the game? MEGA BS!
Seriously I would have even preferred an ending where Shepards dies, the Reaper win and wipe out all advanced civilization and the only thing the player could call success is another beacon warning to the next cycle.
Yeah, it pulled a deus ex machina out of its ass but... I'm just okay with that, I guess. It wasn't that bad and I thought fit into the story of a science fantasy game fairly well.
Technically not a Deus Ex Machina, but a 'Magic Bullet'. IMO just as bad and poor writing, but W/E. All semantics here. A lot of people, however, myself included, HATE Magic Bullets and Deus Ex Machina. For example, the Matrix.
WARNING: MATRIX SPOILERS. SOMEONE SOUNDED SURPRISED LAST TIME I POSTED THESE, SO I'M SPOILERING THEM FOR ALL OF YOU WHO HAVEN'T WATCHED THE MATRIX TRILOGY AND ARE OFFICIALLY DEAD TO ME:
The massive ending of the Matrix Trilogy is a 10-20 minute fist fight between Smith and Neo. Its on Youtube in a hundred places, watch it. What makes this ending cool and amazing? Neo has no chance of winning. There is no magic bullet, no Deus Ex Machina to save him. He has the odds stacked against him, and yet he fights to win. In the end, a Deus Ex Machina is pulled by, guess who, 'Deus Ex Machina' (Ironic right?), the leader of the Machines, who uses Neo's body as its connection to the Matrix to purge the system of Smith and save the day, then spares Zion's inhabitants.
I ask you this: Would the ending have been as strong and amazing if Neo had of walked in with some Machine gun or something that one hit killed a Smith, had infinite ammo, and shot a million bullets a second. Still awesome slow mo stuff and dodging his bullets, really putting effort into making the fight look cool. Would it have been as amazing? No. There was no struggle. You know Neo is going to win right from the outset because he has a plot shield and sword. In the true ending, where Neo fights Smith and dies, many people - such as myself - had no idea who would win, and it built tension. Neo is the protagonist, he has a plot shield, but he is up against impossible odds. All throughout the battle are different exchanges where Neo wins, or Smith wins, and it leaves you guessing who will ultimately win until the final few minutes of the fight. It is far more engaging than a scene where you either know you're doomed, or know you've won - like in Mass Effect 3.
Sorry for picking on semantics here again, but your title rubs me the wrong way. Mass Effect 3's endings were that bad, just not for you. They were that bad for many people as they were the exact opposite of what we were promised and what we were hoping for, but more on that later.
Cop-out? Maybe. But it resolved it well enough. Yeah there are "what-ifs", but I like when there's little things you can fill in with your imagination. Look at the movie Inception: that ending had an EXTREME "fill-in-the-gap-yourself" ending but everyone loved that movie.
Inception is a rather different case. The entire movie is about the ill defined barrier between dreams and reality, and the ending is meant to showcase this. It isn't even really a what if ending - it falls. No, you don't see it exclusively fall, but you don't see the sun rise every morning - most people wake up and see it already risen [At least in summer]. Does that mean the sun doesn't rise?
And before someone comes at me with the whole 'But that's because we've seen the sun do this before', we've seen the spiny thing spin before too. When in a dream, it is steady and doesn't wobble. When in reality, it wobbles then falls.
I will also disagree that it resolved well enough, as it didn't resolve at all. Nothing is resolved, we are left with, as you said, a lot of what ifs. There is NOTHING certain about what happens in the ending, and it is filled with inconsistencies and plot holes. It basically falls into the trope 'No ending' where almost nothing is resolved, but it ends nonetheless.
It also goes directly against a promise made to us by the devs, but again, more on that later.
As for all the choices you made prior not directly affecting the outcome... when have they ever? In Mass Effect 1 you had the choice to save or lose the council. In Mass Effect 2 you could keep or destroy the geth base (and yeah your team mates could die, but that didn't affect the ending of the game itself unless they were ALL killed).
This is an argument I find has no strength. Midway through a book do all of the Hero's plans happen and fall into place, and the rest of the book is about him having a vacation on a summer island? No. The plan falls to place at the end of the book in an epic conclusion or finally. Mass Effect 1 and 2 should be considered with 3 as part of a continuing story, rather than three individual stories. At the end is when we will see all our choices pay off, up until then things are just set up for it. Mass Effect 1's ending wasn't the ending, Mass Effect 2's ending wasn't the ending, only Mass Effect 3's ending is actually the ending to the story, hence the onus is on it to reflect our decisions.
And again, this also goes against what we were promised by Devs, but more on that later.
I also felt that each choice was a self-contained story. (MORE POSSIBLE SPOILERS) In mine I cured the Krogan of the genophage so I know they managed to reproduce and thrive; Earth was saved from destruction; the Quarians have back their home planet and live peacefully with the geth. These things didn't directly affect the ending, but I still know they happened, and I feel happier for it. I'm personally fine with this.
No, you don't know that the Krogan managed to survive and reproduce, nor that the Quarians have back their home planet living peacefully with the Geth. Here is what actually happened:
As the Crucible fired, a design flaw wiped out all life and matter in the Galaxy. Everything was destroyed. The Normandy was saved by Jokers swift decision to make a Mass Relay jump, resulting in him falling through a wormhole into another dimension that was unaffected by the Crucible.
This may seem extreme, but it is a perfectly valid explanation of events after the end. Hell, its even hinted to in the game that the Crucible may backfire as no-one knows what it does.
A simple ending montage showing the Krogan with a lot of baby Krogan, and the Quarians and Geth Rebuilding, and the people of Earth rebuilding, and an effect of Shepards final choice - that would satisfy a lot of people, as you now have closure and a proper ending - not some thing where you honestly have no idea what happened.
The fact that Earth is now stuck with entire fleets surrounding it afterward is, to me, another really exciting thing to think about. Maybe they all die. Maybe all end up finding a way to survive. Again, like Inception's ending, it was left up to us to decide and I enjoy that.
Easy logic: Assuming the universe wasn't destroyed by the Crucible backfiring, the Quarian's have liveships that they would have used to store and grow food for the fleets as they escorted them back home at normal FTL. First Salarian and Turian, then Krogan, then Asari, then the Quarian's themselves - based off longevity and necessity for others to survive. I doubt they all died unless Earth was destroyed/badly damaged as that indicates the fleets weren't strong, whilst Earth surviving and relatively okay indicates the fleets were strong and mostly survived.
And again, most people don't like being told 'We were being lazy guys, sorry. You'll have to make up your own ending'. Are books better because they don't tell you whether the hero won or not, whether the quest was completed or not? Imagine all movies and books were cut short at the midpoint of the climax, just before things were about to be decided as to who won. That is the 'its left to you to decide' ending. It works for some things - mystery themes, and stories with themes meant to instil doubt and ask that sort of question (Inception) - but not others - pretty much every other type of movie out there. Mass Effect is not a mystery game, nor is it a game that has anything it is questioning for it to leave and ending very open and vague. As such, it should properly conclude itself.
And Again, broken dev promise.
PLEASE don't flame me, I'm only stating my opinion and I would genuinely (not being condescending, I promise!) like to hear yours, because I myself really don't understand all the absolute hate. I was happy and comfortable with the ending I chose.
Although maybe I just handled it better because everyone set me up for it to be MUCH worse than it was.
No flaming here, just stating my opinion. Here is a list of other reasons people were P/Od at the ending other than what you listed:
-Plot holes and inconsistencies
-Not an option for every Shepard (None of my Shepards would sacrifice the Geth and EDI, none would try to control the Reapers, and none would force synthesis on others. A simple additional ending that would make perfect sense would be for Shepard to say 'Screw you' and let the fleets fight the Reapers. If the EMS rating is high enough, Shepard's fleet's win. If not, the fleets lose.)
-A lot of broken dev promises (NOW is the time: http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10056886)
-Lack of any real difference in the endings
-No happy ending at all, or anything close.
-Reaper's logic is BS
Internet is likely about to shut off so I'll leave it there. Night everyone...
In your ending you assumed many things but didn't notice that Mass relays are destroyed so none of them are possible. Only way ending was acceptable was if you used alt+f4 after anderson's death.
Look at the Mass Effect 2 ending, if your squad is not loyal, then they do not perform well, and they usually die.
In Mass Effect 3's real ending, if your squad is not loyal, then they are indoctrinated. You get to kill them.
Look at Mass Effect 2's ending, if there are not enough loyal squadmates, you die. In ME3's real ending, if you don't have enough loyal squad mates, you can't overcome indoctrination.
Remember what Bioware said about the ending, "We don't want to give you a lousy ending that everyone gets, we want to answer all of your questions."
I enjoyed the end of ME3 far more than Inception....
However, I will now stop and tell you about one of my very favorite moments in the game. It was just after the mission where you pick up Grunt and the Rachnai Queen. I came back to the Citadel to drop off a few quests. One of them was a letter from a Krogan to his wife. I didn't think much of it...
Until I handed it to her and the "Blue Rose of Ilium" Krogan started talking. The Krogan who I helped get his girl in ME2.
I cried. I sat there, listening to him say goodbye, and I cried, because I remembered that Krogan and that Asari. I'm crying a little now just remembering it.
Everyone who says your decisions didn't matter in ME3 - that moment proved otherwise for me.
I literally just finished the game like 10 seconds ago and I've been avoiding all of the threads about the end. Why exactly does everyone hate it? The guy telling the story to that damn kid (I really hate that kid) was annoying but otherwise I liked it. (chose synthesis)
... um... I assumed that the kid's image was plucked from Shepard's mind.
Ishigami said:
Disregarding player choices during the three games by always delivering the choice between 3 endings unrelated to the way the player may have set up his Shepards personality? MEGA BS!
I believe I addressed that in my previous post. But another said it better than me. I will now paraphrase:
"The entire game is the ending. You spend the whole game feeling the effects of the previous two. The decisions you made before determine how you get to that ending - and what your decision means. If you sided with the Quarians against the Geth, then destroying all synthetic life is a far easier choice than if you let the Geth destroy the Quarians. The end of the end - the final decision - is affected by how your previous decisions have affected YOU the player."
That is my best attempt to remember how it was said in another thread. Very good point, I thought. I liked the idea that ME3 spent 98% of the game showing me the results of my previous actions, and then gave me one final choice based on that information. And the thing with the Geth particularly got to me - if you kill the Quarians to help the Geth, and then kill all synthetic life, then you pretty much sacrificed the Quarians for nothing.
"The entire game is the ending. You spend the whole game feeling the effects of the previous two. The decisions you made before determine how you get to that ending - and what your decision means. If you sided with the Quarians against the Geth, then destroying all synthetic life is a far easier choice than if you let the Geth destroy the Quarians. The end of the end - the final decision - is affected by how your previous decisions have affected YOU the player."
That is my best attempt to remember how it was said in another thread. Very good point, I thought. I liked the idea that ME3 spent 98% of the game showing me the results of my previous actions, and then gave me one final choice based on that information. And the thing with the Geth particularly got to me - if you kill the Quarians to help the Geth, and then kill all synthetic life, then you pretty much sacrificed the Quarians for nothing.
Personally, it wasn't the ending that was bad for me. I like to guess Bioware considers the whole conversation with the Illusive Man part of the ending. The Catalyst bit and everything that led up to it was alright with me, but Bioware's decision to recycle the final cut scene using different filters doesn't stick with me. Everything else, I can I say I thoroughly enjoyed.
This has most likely been said, but I'll say it again: the problem with the ending wasn't the whole deus ex machina, to me the problem was the last of closure it provided. For a series which revolves around making choices and seeing those choices making an impact, the ending is a giant middle finger to anyone who cared about what happened regarding your choices.
The turians and krogan becoming friends again? Meh, fuck that shit.
Tali and Garrus getting together? Clearly nobody gives a shit about that.
What your romance option would do without you? Nope, even though I spent three games getting cosy with my romance option the fucks I give about their future life are clearly equal to zero.
Wait, you think "Mass Effect 3's ending wasn't that bad..." is a controversial statement?
Ha. Hahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!! Maybe if you switched out "Mass Effect 3's ending" with "The Holocaust", THEN it would be controversial. As it is, he's just saying that his opinion SLIGHTLY differs from yours. Hell, he's not even saying it's the best ending ever. He's just saying it's not the soul-sucking abomination of the creative process that people like you have been making it out to be for the past 2 weeks. That is NOT controversial. You clearly don't even know what that word means.
Wait, you think "Mass Effect 3's ending wasn't that bad..." is a controversial statement?
Ha. Hahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!! Maybe if you switched out "Mass Effect 3's ending" with "The Holocaust", THEN it would be controversial. As it is, he's just saying that his opinion SLIGHTLY differs from yours. Hell, he's not even saying it's the best ending ever. He's just saying it's not the soul-sucking abomination of the creative process that people like you have been making it out to be for the past 2 weeks. That is NOT controversial. You clearly don't even know what that word means.
Wait, you think "Mass Effect 3's ending wasn't that bad..." is a controversial statement?
Ha. Hahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!! Maybe if you switched out "Mass Effect 3's ending" with "The Holocaust", THEN it would be controversial. As it is, he's just saying that his opinion SLIGHTLY differs from yours. Hell, he's not even saying it's the best ending ever. He's just saying it's not the soul-sucking abomination of the creative process that people like you have been making it out to be for the past 2 weeks. That is NOT controversial. You clearly don't even know what that word means.
The ending MIGHT fit the definition of "controversial" but...well, you just proved my point. If the ending is controversial(i.e., creating contention or dispute), then by definition there has to be differing opinions on the matter. So the OP's statement can't possibly be controversial.
Wait, you think "Mass Effect 3's ending wasn't that bad..." is a controversial statement?
Ha. Hahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!! Maybe if you switched out "Mass Effect 3's ending" with "The Holocaust", THEN it would be controversial. As it is, he's just saying that his opinion SLIGHTLY differs from yours. Hell, he's not even saying it's the best ending ever. He's just saying it's not the soul-sucking abomination of the creative process that people like you have been making it out to be for the past 2 weeks. That is NOT controversial. You clearly don't even know what that word means.
The ending MIGHT fit the definition of "controversial" but...well, you just proved my point. If the ending is controversial(i.e., creating contention or dispute), then by definition there has to be differing opinions on the matter. So the OP's statement can't possibly be controversial.
According to the definition the reason for the opinions don't matter, just that there are differing opinions. The endings suck and the endings are okay are two different opinions that are in contention so there is a controversy in regards to the endings.
Wait, you think "Mass Effect 3's ending wasn't that bad..." is a controversial statement?
Ha. Hahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!! Maybe if you switched out "Mass Effect 3's ending" with "The Holocaust", THEN it would be controversial. As it is, he's just saying that his opinion SLIGHTLY differs from yours. Hell, he's not even saying it's the best ending ever. He's just saying it's not the soul-sucking abomination of the creative process that people like you have been making it out to be for the past 2 weeks. That is NOT controversial. You clearly don't even know what that word means.
The ending MIGHT fit the definition of "controversial" but...well, you just proved my point. If the ending is controversial(i.e., creating contention or dispute), then by definition there has to be differing opinions on the matter. So the OP's statement can't possibly be controversial.
According to the definition the reason for the opinions don't matter, just that there are differing opinions. The endings suck and the endings are okay are two different opinions that are in contention so there is a controversy in regards to the endings.
Uh. Yes. That's almost exactly what I just said. That makes the ending controversial, but not the OP's statement. I'm not sure why we're still talking about this.
I can see people point of views for why this ending didn't live up to the expectations of the fan base, but for what it is worth, here is my 2 cents on he matter.
This is a Hero's ending as to what we all knew what was going to happen throughout the entire mass effect 3 story line. We all knew it was coming and wee all knew it was going to happen; He sacraficed himself like he was going to if the option came up in ME1 and ME2. The problem with the ending that sticks with me is the fact that lots of people die and however you end picking to control or destory the reapers, the galaxy is screwed either way with the mass effect relays blowing up. On top of that, you got attached to you crew and wanted to see them live. I'm guessing, like myself, that you went back and replayed ME1 and Me2 to make sure you did things right and save your crew so that you could have them in ME3 but their lives are wasted anyways. I was pissed to see the Normandy with everyone on it crash on a remote world with no hope of survival. I would have been fine with an ending where He sacraficed himself for the greater good of humanity and the universe which he was saving if my crew was back on earth. The giant gaping plot hole at the end of the story where you are supposed infer as to what the galaxy has become is ridicilous. This is a game of choice and consequences but this is a story to, and storys have an ending where they bring it all together, atleast good ones. This does not bring it all together where you know why it ends, If your ending a trilogy, end it.
However bad the ending way, I will miss the Mass Effect Series. It provided great gaming time and a great story.
Shepard walked up to the leader of the enemy that was winning, and their leader said "screw it", and told Shepard that he won by walking into the throne room, half-dead already. I guess the villian was so distraught from having blood dripped on the floor of his throne room, that he surrendered unconditionally. Wait, not just surrendered, but handed the dying hero the keys to the big red button that would defeat them!
Oh, but if you remember your lore, that big red button is actually the self destruct for the entire galaxy. The bad guy is winning, and one dying soldier makes it into the base. Instead of killing the soldier, or waiting til he/she bled to death, the bad guy says "there is the self destruct sequence", press it.
In your ending you assumed many things but didn't notice that Mass relays are destroyed so none of them are possible. Only way ending was acceptable was if you used alt+f4 after anderson's death.
Look at the Mass Effect 2 ending, if your squad is not loyal, then they do not perform well, and they usually die.
In Mass Effect 3's real ending, if your squad is not loyal, then they are indoctrinated. You get to kill them.
Look at Mass Effect 2's ending, if there are not enough loyal squadmates, you die. In ME3's real ending, if you don't have enough loyal squad mates, you can't overcome indoctrination.
Remember what Bioware said about the ending, "We don't want to give you a lousy ending that everyone gets, we want to answer all of your questions."
Here goes the indoctrination theory which makes me feel bad for playing mass effect 3.Like I am primary school student and trying to make sense of quantum physics.(My own fault I guess!)
EDIT:
BTW I never got the option to kill my squad-mate maybe I got the virtual (not real) ending.
I always wanted to kill James Vega for calling shepherd loco.
Moreover people don't seem to be in consensus some say it started after beam hit.
Some say it started after elevator.
Some say it stared after jumping in the white light.
Some say it was from the beginning when that kid was playing with toy.
That's because the sequence seems to have been designed to allow for retconning with DLC at a later date. As if they had not decided how they wanted the series to end, and wanted to leave options.
Perhaps a better place, as it leaves the confrontation with TIM intact. As big a stretch as that sequence is, they might still be able to retcon it from this point. Most gamers would not want to rehash it in reality, and TIM's character was exactly what we had expected. He is much more arrogant that Saren, but just as misguided.
Unfortunately, it doesn't fit in with the 100% ending. Perhaps your level of completion determines which sequence was real, because maybe TIM has more confidence in Shepard, if he gained the 100% completion... ???
cynicthnkr said:
Some say it stared after jumping in the white light.
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.
