Update: Fan "Fixes" Mass Effect 3 Ending With A 539-Page Rewrite

[sumanoskae]

You obviously think the game would not benefit from an ending change, but you must concede that there is an argument to be made against it. And making such an argument does not make you ignorant.

Making this argument does not make you ignorant, no. The way you do it though might.

Your comment suggested otherwise;

"if someone believes central story elements like the Crucible, the Catalyst, or the final choice are so awful that the only way to "save Mass" Effect's story is to get rid of them entirely, he's likely either ignorant or so full of himself that he confused personal preferences with "objective" quality."

Again, suggesting that these elements should be removed from the story doesn't make you ignorant; it's entirely a matter of opinion.

There's a difference between saying the story would be better without these elements, and claiming that these elements are so bad that any story that includes them (such as the actual story of the game) is beyond redemption.

The former could well be true. I don't think so, and it would be a story that I'd find less interesting at first sight, but who knows. The latter is a rather absolutist claim, and begets the question: If the story was so incredibly awful, how come that so many people liked it? And not just 12-year-olds, critics and others who consider themselves reasonably educated and thought about all of this a lot as well.

How many people approve of something has no actual effect on it's objective quality because no such thing exists. Saying something is "Good" or "Bad" is a value judgement; it's entirely subjective because the concept of "Good" and "Bad" are entirely subjective.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the general consensus that these elements are rushed, contrived and needlessly bleak; just generally poorly written? These are all things most of us agree are bad, correct? Where we differ is weather or not the ending could be described in such a way.

 

[Loonyyy]

"Objective". How does it go again? "You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means."

But it's a nice show of umbrage and pretense you've got going there. Be a shame to spoil it. Carry on!

I use objective observations in pretty much all my analyses, thanks.

If you think that any review of an artistic work is objective, you've got some catching up to do. Yes, you can point out objective facts, but what you make of them, whether good or bad, isn't. That's not a fatal flaw, it's just how things work. It's a viewpoint most of us have at some point, and I'm certain that at some point, you'll be past it.

That said, your videos are pretty good. Shame it was presented amidst the ridiculous rant and feigned indignity.