I?m going to do my best to explain my views as clearly, and as respectfully as I can, so, if anyone feels like reading a wall of text 21 paragraphs long (I wont over board, typed a bit much) note there will be no bile below. Sorry for the length, feel free to not read?though I did put a lot of thought in to it.
Mass Effect 3?s ending was bad, and I understand that Bob may make a note that people are allowed to complain, voice their opinion, but I think there?s a problem with too many people generalizing displeasure with ME3?s ending to fans just being fans, or fan boys. There are people who are passionate about it, and that?s a good thing. Some need to tone it down a bit, I?m in favor of people letting Bioware know how they feel, they don?t need to be so angry about it sure, but if Bioware doesn?t get the feed back they can?t use that to make the game better/different and/or use that information for their next game - not just ME but whatever game comes next.
I feel there are some things that they did, maybe not wrong, but failed to deliver in comparison to Mass Effect 2. I have no played Mass Effect 1, I played 2 and 3 on Playstation 3, so I don?t know quite what to say as 1 to 3, but myself looking at 2 and 3 there are things that are not done as well. ME3 made a lot of improvements over 2, more levels for powers, added powers, I love the weight system, running around space with Reapers chasing you is great. But looking at the ending, the whole thing for me, from the touch down on Earth even, does not compare to 2?s ending sequence in terms of player choice.
People are saying that having more options in 3?s ending (because you get options through the game, characters live and die by your choices, the Krogan and Genophage, the Rachni, you get choice there, but the ending drops it) it would be too much, impossible, how many endings would there need to be fifty? But the choices in ME2, part of what makes that ending even worth talking about is the suicide run, where characters can die because of your actions. Characters who are not loyal put in situations that they are not meant for will die, even putting someone who is loyal in a bad situation can get them killed. There are so many mixes that you can do and see in the suicide run with different characters doing different things. I?ve had a loyal character as my biotic and they failed and another loyal character died because the barrier dropped too soon, that?s interesting, that?s something to talk about, those are stories to share. It?s what people are praising in Skyrim in a way, because they do one thing in this area than someone else they get different stories, the Mass Effect series is good for that as well, and I think a bit more so when it comes to ME2?s Suicide Mission.
Mass Effect 3 does not have that same feel, or choice on Earth. No matter how many play throughs you do the same things will happen on Earth the exact same way (other than characters deaths before hand). They had an opportunity to take ME2?s last mission and expand upon it in a war, there?s so many things they could have done. In 2 you choose a leader for your second team, you don?t see what they do, you don?t see them fight, but it has impact on the story, on the game, because that character may die or get someone on their team killed. It would have been great if during the war on Earth you were able to send squads that you gained through the game to certain points and based on themselves, and how you talked to them they might die, or lower the amount of enemies charging you by succeeding.
I?m thinking now of Jack, and her squad of bio-kids. What if when leaving Grissom when asked your opinion of the bio-kids you say they?re ready for the front lines, Jack gets upset with you, later on Earth they have less kids because they died before hand on other battles, you then choose to send them to the front lines again and they, along with Jack just get over run, or you send them to the back for support, but because theirs too few of them they might die any ways. But it when leaving Grissom you said they were not ready, maybe that time they spent honing their skills as backup has lead them to be ready and now they can be a hard pressing force. And the outcomes, the play out of it, all it is, is a simple choice system like ME2?s and a short ten second clip of the out come. And that?s just Jack, and two out comes which would be easy to change up with short clips, what about Grunt and his squad, what about a second team of your people, what about the others having squads as well? It could have been so awesome.
That?s just one aspect, one point, but the thing is to me is that with the ending it?s not just one thing. Getting past that, and going to the ending part of the ending, I find a lack of closure, a lack of information, and a lack of choice, and input. By input I mean in 2 squad mates you brought to the end with you may voice an opinion, and that affected my choice of A or B. Shepard?s talking to TIM and Tali was there for me, she voiced her concern that the Collector base and Reaper baby were dangerous, and should be destroyed, and that?s one thing, but then the next, was TIM snapping at her and telling Shep not to listen to Tali that she has no idea what she?s talking about, and I felt that make my choice for me, I blew that shit up. But on another play through, with Tali there, that conversation didn?t happen, and so it felt different. On another play through I befriended Miranda had her with me, and she voiced concern that the base and reaper were too dangerous, and Miranda disagreeing with TIM in ME2? Boom, blew the base up. Now yes, at the start of ME3 Miranda has left Cerberus, even if at the end of 2 she doesn?t say anything, but that?s one of the benefits of 2 being 2 and not 3, 3 is supposed to be the end of the trilogy of Shepard and the Reapers, it doesn?t have the benefit of cleaning stuff up in the next installment or at least it shouldn?t.
In Mass Effect 3?s end, you can talk with TIM, argue with him, try to convince him, and that conversation can change, and that?s good, but that?s one thing, no matter what Anderson says (I believe) doesn?t change your thoughts through additional plays because it doesn?t change he just says the same things over and over (I believe). At the end, you are in a room with Shep, Anderson, and TIM, no matter what, and that narrows the experience, as opposed to 2 where you could choose 2 squad mates out of 12 and each one might say something that affects your view, or TIM might say something right back that affects what you?re going to do as well.
Then you are with just Shep and the VI, and people make great points about it being proven wrong about the created always rising against the creator. You can easily get into a situation where the Geth are allied with everyone else, even if the Quarians die, if the Quarians live and so do the Geth, well even more so then. But no matter what that scene plays out the same, there is no change, no difference, other than getting a third option based on Readiness.
And when it comes to the Reaper thought process of kill life so life isn?t killed, it makes some sense. Intelligent being creates robot, robot attacks intelligent beings, robot attack all beings, all beings killed, only robot left, unless robot develops emotion and gains the ability to create life then life is pretty much over. So to prevent Robot from destroying all life, simply destroy robot? Intelligent Being just recreates robot, because they did it once they can do it again. New robot still attacks Intelligent Being. New Robot still kills all life. So, prevent Robot from killing all life by killing robot and Intelligent Being so no further robots can be made, at least until 50,000 years when simple beings become intelligent beings. The problem however is that with this cycle, with Humans, Geth, Turians, and so on, is Geth didn?t attack anyone. According to ME3, the Geth were created, gained self awareness, were feared for being self aware and were then attacked, as to were any Quarian helping a Geth, or having sympathy for them. Geth defended themselves, Quarians left. Geth did not give chase. Where Shepard is told the created always attack the creator, the Geth did not, they did not seek out to attack anyone or anything for something around 300 hundred years? Until the Reaper came and lead a few indoctrinated Geth to attack life forms.
The VI says no matter what they will attack and kill all life, but the Geth didn?t until the Reaper in ME1 came and became a fews? God, and lead them to attack life. Then says that the cycle of Robot destruction is always unchanging, but Shepard has arrived to the VI and so things are have changed, in that no one ever got to that room before, how does that part even matter? The cycle is broken, things have changed because someone made it to the VI. Not because of how AI has been acting in this cycle, which is the one things that matters in this twisted logic.
As to the plot holes, they?re there, but it?s not just the end, I would like to know what the hell happened to Liara?s father? If anyone knows can you tell me? Because Liara and her Father were making nice, her Father making fun of her, then Cerberus attacked and Liara?s father was gone, and that?s it, I didn?t see Liara mention her, and see her anywhere, just she?s gone, Liara?s father is just gone. Maybe it?s a small part I missed somewhere else? But I would really like to know if Liara?s father is alive or not.
The FTC thing is pretty dumb. The ?hate? is stupid, the anger isn?t needed, and while some people have acted in the wrong, or stupidly, I?m fine with the idea of showing your displeasure by giving money to something other than Bioware, in this case charity. It can be seen as a little silly, maybe a better idea would have been letters to Bioware with a note saying they were displeased with the ending, the reasons why, stating they had money that Could have went to Bioware but instead they bought something else, enclosed is the receipt. Ex - ?The ending to Mass Effect 3 felt rushed, I will not be buying your DLC, with the money that could have went to the DLC I bought a book, here?s the receipt as proof.? It?s taking your business else where and showing Bioware such. Here though, the money went to people who need it, it?s just a few people of the bunch who where stupid, who wanted their money back, or didn?t read it, didn?t understand, or represented themselves poorly. A new ending shouldn?t be demanded, but what is everyone else saying?
?You don?t like it? Don?t buy it!? Too late, I played it, then found out I didn?t like it, now what?
?Don?t buy their stuff!? Okay, I wont, I?ll buy something else?hey Bioware I bought some new shoes instead of your DLC, they?re shiny.
I think that?s all the Retake ME was really about, it?s just a few ruined the idea. If anyone is wondering, I did not participate in Retake ME, or anything else like petitions, or hate mail, or hail bombing, or what ever.
There are better ways to show ones displeasure and I think that?s what people are trying to say, but they are just failing at it so badly.
If you liked the ending, fine, that?s good, nothing wrong with that. No snide comment, no remark of condescendence. If bioware improves the ending I will be happy, if they don?t, I?ll just move on, it?s not going to kill me. It is the same for many others, but with the internet how It is in it?s current state with the idea of twitter being the in thing, it?s get your opinion out quick, and be decisive, people, on both sides, just take a moment to think, voice your opinion sure, but slinging insults just is not nice.
TMNT?
I love the turtles, they are in my heart always, I have five actual turtles in real life, and two of them are named after the TMNT, I have TMNT underwear, a shirt, and I still have some TMNT toys in the closet. I haven?t read all the old comics, I read some, and the cartoon is different, each installment of TMNT is a little different, and that?s a good thing, when it comes to their origin though it?s mostly always the same, little turtles + ooze = mutant turtles -> Trianed by mutant rat = Mutant Ninja Turtles + age = Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. That?s their Origin, their lore, they fight Shredder, their names are Raph, Leo, Donny, and Mike (okay nicknames, but whatever), they are from New York?changing those things, it is no longer TMNT, that is why people are complaining, it?s the same reasons people complain about small little bit in super hero movies MOVIE BOB?or even the comics, MOVIE BOB.
Now if the title is changing to Ninja Turtles, okay, fine, whatever, taking it a new direction, making a clear statement that it?s different, I can be fine, just don?t bullshit me that it?s the same thing as anything else TMNT, and I wont troll you about Transformers movies, or something of equal fan-problems to anyone else who feels passionate about things that make them happy. Yes Happy, that?s what it?s all about, finding stuff that makes you happy damn it, and sad endings do that too, sad ending make me happy, complete endings make me happy, weird randomness makes me happy (sometimes), the Mass Effect 3 ending does not, and that?s okay.
PS -
Also, just to not wimp out, up there, where I typed ?but slinging insults just is not nice.? is my nice way of saying ?but slinging insults just makes you look like a jackass.?
PSS - forgive the ? marks everywhere, it's a copy paste and this thing doesn't like my ' from word documents or word processor or anything thing, and re-writing the whole thing would be a giant pain in the ass...damn you escapist post crap, maybe this is why I never post.
