# Mass Effect 3 (SPOILERS!)



## Remus Lupin (Mar 26, 2012)

Hey folks,

Since the non-spoiler threat for Mass Effect 3 means that we can't actually talk about anything that actually happens in the game, I thought that it might be a good idea for us to have a thread where we can talk about the events of the game, particularly given some of the controversy about the ending. So consider this your spoilerific Mass Effect 3 thread.

Here there be spoilers! Continue at your own risk, and don't complain if you didn't want to know something. You've been warned!


----------



## Remus Lupin (Mar 26, 2012)

I'll jump right into the controversy about the ending: I avoided spoilers about what actually happens at the end (though I knew there was controversy), and played it through once so far. So here's my impression.

If you are only going to play the game once, I didn't think the ending was so bad. But that's because you wouldn't necessarily know that the alternate endings actually aren't substantively different. Once you know that, it sort of obviates the idea that your choices make a real difference to the outcome of the game.

But I think that there's a deeper problem related to the ending, which is the idea that there's no real difference between the "I've played a paragon all the way through and chosen a paragon choice for the ending" and "I've been a badass renegade all the way through and chosen a renegade ending." Things like whether you can transcend the Biological/AI distinction or whether you can control or destroy the Reapers ought to produce substantively different outcomes. It ought to be possible to save the Mass Effect Relays and allow for a genuine galactic civilization to come about.

Also, as some of the reviews have pointed out, a lot of the ending doesn't make sense from a story continuity perspective. For example, blowing up the relays is a big deal. Blowing up one relay is apparently like a star going supernova, and Shepherd blows them all up (irrespective of the ending you choose). And doing so, he traps the millions of troops on earth with no resources and no way of getting back to their home planets. That's got to thrill Wrex!

Finally, there's the problem of the Normandy at the end. The ending only makes sense if you don't ask why the heck Joker and the Normandy crew decided at the last minute to hightail it off earth, to the nearest mass relay and abandon Shepherd.

So, it's understandable that many people have gotten upset at the ending. If you only play the game once and don't over think it, it's probably not really that bad. But as soon as you start thinking seriously about it, or want to replay the game, it gets deeply annoying very quickly.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Mar 26, 2012)

Yes, the ending has a little too many or to big plot holes. Ofcourse, one can always argue that it just means there is more to it. A favorite theory is that the ending is actually the Reapers indoctrinating Shepard, or trying to do so. But even then it doesn't work quite out (the Normandy scene never makes sense).
I also don't get why the Citadal Security affects my war assets if the Citadel is conquered anyway and nothing whatsoever is going on he Citadel that would indicate some defenders made a difference.

---

Otherwise, I loved the game. I think from the start the only thing I disliked really was the Crubicle. I am not a fan of mystical superweapons that save the day. It also led to an uneven ending.

But again, the rest - really well done. There was a lot of interesting details going on the Citadel. Following the various NPC dialogs was sometimes interesting.

My favorite scenes may have been the Geth/Quarian reunion and the scene and Moridin and the Genophage (probably especially due to to Moridin's unfortunate ending... I loved this guy.)


----------



## Remus Lupin (Mar 26, 2012)

Somehow I screwed up the Geth/Quarian thing and I didn't get the paragon option that would have allowed them to reconcile. As a result, I sided with the Geth (without realizing that it would lead to disaster for the Quarians), and Tali ended up throwing herself off a cliff. I felt genuinely bad about that and considered going back to replay the whole damn mission so I could get the "right" outcome. But that's the thing about Mass Effect -- You have to live with the consequences of your actions.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Mar 26, 2012)

I was ok with the ending, especially when you consider it was a story that was told by some old man voiced by Buzz Aldrin, to his grandchild in distant future about the legend of "The Shepard".  

But if they want to change the ending with more DLC, I'm also fine with that, since it's more of Mass Effect 3 to play.

It's not the ending that matters, like the journey over the destination, most of the game leading up to that was still enjoyable.  I really liked the desperation there was when you actually land in London with the Hammer forces.  Hearing that woman over the radio deciding to commit suicide as a reaper approached, really showed just how desperate it was even with the presence of the Turians and Krogan assisting the Alliance forces.

Though I personally think one of the best highlights was the feces analyzer thing on Sur'kesh from the annoyed Salarian on that console.  The whole "don't touch that" bit.


----------



## Dragonwriter (Mar 27, 2012)

I found the ending of the game (and therefore the trilogy) to be a poor one. Whichever you choose, you see largely the same things, your work is largely negated, the galaxy is horribly screwed up, and you have possibly become a massive hypocrite. Some of these things could be mitigated depending on what you have done, but my issues with it remain as stated.

[sblock=Hiding this explanation anyway]
For instance, I managed to bring the Geth and Quarians together and establish what seemed to be the foundations of peace (along with punching a Quarian admiral and kicking him off my ship). The Geth also became true, free-willed AIs as a part of this. I talked with EDI on a regular basis and basically guided her to as-close-to-true-humanity-as-possible and helped her understand free will and what to do with it. Then comes decision time... Destroy or Control all Synthetics! So I fought hard to get the Geth accepted as a race and gave them complete sentience and free will just so I could wipe them from the galaxy or take over their minds? I totally accept there are consequences to my actions, but choosing either of these makes me a terrible hypocrite.
Or I could choose Synthesis and fuse all Synthetic and Organic life... which negates my work for each species' right to live and the work I have done to protect each race of the galaxy.

Then there's the destruction of the Mass Relays (which happens no matter what ending you choose)... When the Alpha Relay was destroyed in the Arrival DLC, it wiped out a solar system and every single living thing in it. That was one plain relay. Destroying all of them should devastate the galaxy and leave most inhabited systems a wasteland, thereby causing even more death and destruction than the Reapers. And even if the catastrophic effects were somehow negated by the Crucible, just obliterating the relay rather than causing it to blow up, it still leaves the entire galaxy without the one effective way to travel through the galaxy. It was established that FTL travel is not really workable for Organics and replicating the relays is beyond the scope of their skill. So now everyone is stranded in whatever section of the galaxy they happened to be on when the relays went boom, assuming they even survived.

And there's the whole weirdness with the Normandy crashing on some unknown planet, which happens no matter what and there is no explanation for why they seemed to go through the relay just before it went kablooey.
[/sblock]

So, yeah... Not happy with the ending. It felt like it invalidated much of what went into the series over the years.
The reaction I've seen elsewhere has not been surprising, though the amount of vitriol spewed at BioWare has been uncalled for. And the whole business with the FTC is just plain silly. I'm hoping they will listen to the displeased fans and release something more on-par with the rest of the game in terms of sheer awesomeness. And I hope it will be free, but I doubt it, thanks to EA's DLC strategy of charging for every single little thing...

All that said, I still loved the game. The story was riveting and powerful and filled with too many awesome moments. Going up against the Reaper on Tuchanka and calling in Kalros to take it down was one of the coolest scenes ever! Going to Rannoch and watching the Normandy dodge fire from both sides to reach the Geth Destroyer was gripping. Bringing in the combined might of damn near every sentient species, all to make that final assault with the Crucible was beyond amazing.
And saying goodbye to so many characters was really heart-wrenching for me... I played my import from ME1 and 2 and had made it out of the Omega-4 Suicide Mission with everyone still alive and kicking. I had really come to like each of them and saying goodbye was really tough. I'll admit I shed tears several times during the game.

I'm not sure when I'll play through it again... At the moment, I've been hitting the multiplayer and really enjoying that.


----------



## Kzach (Mar 27, 2012)

What are the paragon and renegade endings?

I finally finished it with my main Shepard. He was paragade in ME1, ie. a badass who'd shoot you in the face but only after every other option was exhausted. Then in ME2 he was a renagon, ie. something screwed him up inside and it wasn't until he fought through his confusion that he ended ME2 as a paragade (just) again. But in ME3, he was paragon almost entirely. He felt he had to bury his urge to shoot people in the face in order to save the galaxy. Those people might've deserved it, but they were better off allies than dead.

But when it came to the end, I felt that the only 'right' thing to do, irrespective of paragon or renegade endings, was synthesis. I also felt it was the best possible ending to the series. In fact, I never expected Shepard to make it and even before all the spoiler BS of everyone whining and bitching about the ending, felt that it was inevitable that he'd sacrifice himself for the greater good.

His only regret was never seeing all his little blue children.


----------



## Kzach (Mar 27, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> It ought to be possible to save the Mass Effect Relays and allow for a genuine galactic civilization to come about.



Why?



Remus Lupin said:


> For example, blowing up the relays is a big deal. Blowing up one relay is apparently like a star going supernova, and Shepherd blows them all up (irrespective of the ending you choose).




I'm assuming that the energy colour is blue for paragon, red for renegade. The relays weren't 'blown up', their energy was utilised to spread the 'solution'. Of course the relays themselves would break apart and the venting of combustible gasses would cause small explosions, but it wasn't a supernova explosion. Kinda thought that was obvious.



Remus Lupin said:


> Finally, there's the problem of the Normandy at the end. The ending only makes sense if you don't ask why the heck Joker and the Normandy crew decided at the last minute to hightail it off earth, to the nearest mass relay and abandon Shepherd.



Err... he was outrunning the "OMG, what the Hell is that massive burst of red/green/blue energy coming towards us?! EVASIVE MANOEUVRES!"

Again, kinda thought that was self-explanatory, especially given the movie SHOWING it.



Remus Lupin said:


> So, it's understandable that many people have gotten upset at the ending. If you only play the game once and don't over think it, it's probably not really that bad. But as soon as you start thinking seriously about it, or want to replay the game, it gets deeply annoying very quickly.



Eh, I'll admit that I haven't seen the paragon or renegade endings but from what I gather, they're basically the same bar being blue or red coloured. I get that people are butt-hurt over that, but I don't really see a need to be.

I'm possibly on the extreme end of the scale when it comes to fanboism of this series. I've played ME1 and 2 so many times through that I've literally lost count. I've played it on every difficulty, with every class, and every combination of paragon, renegade, renegon and paragade Shepards. Romanced every character, even Ashley who I personally think is a disgusting example of humanity. If there was anyone who should be butt-hurt over a poor ending, it should be me. And yet, I found it to be quite satisfying and more than expected.

Honestly, all this moaning is the reason why we don't get very much GOOD science fiction. Good science fiction doesn't answer every question or lead us by the noses to the 'right' conclusions. It's the difference between Moon and Star Wars: All Three Prequels.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Mar 27, 2012)

I think that when they do come up with a new ending it'll leave things more open for either another series or a MMORPG.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Mar 27, 2012)

And Penny Arcade has a "leak" of the new ending:

Penny Arcade - The Delicious Invasion


----------



## Dog Moon (Mar 27, 2012)

Kzach said:


> His only regret was never seeing all his little blue children.




Haha.  You and my roommate.  He said the same thing.

The Normandy thing was what confused me the most.  Especially since Liara was there... but she was in my party.  Like... how did she go from running after me to get to the Citadel to running away with the Normandy?  Doesn't make any freaking sense...


----------



## Kzach (Mar 27, 2012)

Dog Moon said:


> The Normandy thing was what confused me the most.  Especially since Liara was there... but she was in my party.  Like... how did she go from running after me to get to the Citadel to running away with the Normandy?  Doesn't make any freaking sense...




Your team-mates weren't in the final push to the transit-beam.

I actually took Javik and EDI because I felt that they were the easiest to sacrifice. EDI would survive since she was effectively only partially in EVA and Javik was going to commit suicide anyway and his entire life revolved around getting vengeance before he did. All the other team-mates had something to lose and I wasn't about to take Liara into certain death with me.

Besides that, EDI is by far the most useful team-mate on pretty much any mission. The combination of Incinerate and Overload as well as a powerful defensive ability in Defensive Matrix made her basically indispensable. I pretty much took her on every mission and only swapped the third slot depending on what the mission was and even then, I mostly just took my bro Garrus. Shooting THROUGH cover and still killing with one shot is just awesome


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Mar 27, 2012)

> OwenyOlgao
> has no status.
> 
> Registered User
> ...



Reported


----------



## Remus Lupin (Mar 27, 2012)

Kzach said:


> Why?




Because you spend three games bringing together the warring factions of the galaxy to fight a common threat, only to have that all completely undone at the last minute, since your sacrifice makes almost all interstellar travel impossible.



Kzach said:


> I'm assuming that the energy colour is blue for paragon, red for renegade. The relays weren't 'blown up', their energy was utilised to spread the 'solution'. Of course the relays themselves would break apart and the venting of combustible gasses would cause small explosions, but it wasn't a supernova explosion. Kinda thought that was obvious.




Well, that's nice, but it's not what the game explicitly says.



Kzach said:


> Err... he was outrunning the "OMG, what the Hell is that massive burst of red/green/blue energy coming towards us?! EVASIVE MANOEUVRES!"
> 
> Again, kinda thought that was self-explanatory, especially given the movie SHOWING it.




Really? Where was the movie explicitly showing the entire crew of the Normandy (who were on earth), hightailing it back to the ship, and then Joker LEAVING THE SOLAR SYSTEM in order to get to the Mass Relay, then entering the Mass Relay, only to have it explode behind him? The sequence of events as presented in the last portion of the game don't allow for this to happen in any reasonable time frame. It's not like the Mass Relays exploded a week later. They exploded instantaneously, as far as anything the game tells you would lead you to believe.



Kzach said:


> Eh, I'll admit that I haven't seen the paragon or renegade endings but from what I gather, they're basically the same bar being blue or red coloured. I get that people are butt-hurt over that, but I don't really see a need to be.
> 
> I'm possibly on the extreme end of the scale when it comes to fanboism of this series. I've played ME1 and 2 so many times through that I've literally lost count. I've played it on every difficulty, with every class, and every combination of paragon, renegade, renegon and paragade Shepards. Romanced every character, even Ashley who I personally think is a disgusting example of humanity. If there was anyone who should be butt-hurt over a poor ending, it should be me. And yet, I found it to be quite satisfying and more than expected.
> 
> Honestly, all this moaning is the reason why we don't get very much GOOD science fiction. Good science fiction doesn't answer every question or lead us by the noses to the 'right' conclusions. It's the difference between Moon and Star Wars: All Three Prequels.




It's not about answering every question. It's about not answering the questions in a self-consistent or narratively satisfying way.

I'll also note one more thing about the destruction of the Mass Relays -- Doing that leaves the Krogan stuck on a devastated earth along with the remainder of the human race, and the Turian forces. What are those guys going to eat? And as for "spreading the solution" again, the game explicitly says the relays are destroyed, and it explicitly shows their destruction. There's no way to dodge that the relays are absolutely destroyed, with no consideration of the consequences of that decision for the Galaxy. How's Buzz Aldren's grandson going to see the stars "soon" when there's no effective interstellar travel and no way to get it, since it was established very early on in the series that the capacity for creating Mass Relays is far beyond the capacity of any sentient race in the galaxy?

I think this guys review sums it up well for me:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4H_A7SeawU4]Mass Effect 3 Ending and Why We Hate It! - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Kzach (Mar 27, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> Because you spend three games bringing together the warring factions of the galaxy to fight a common threat, only to have that all completely undone at the last minute, since your sacrifice makes almost all interstellar travel impossible.



Erm... no you don't. You spend one game trying to get everyone to work together. The other two had virtually nothing at all to do with galactic diplomacy other than as a method to provide character conflict.

You spend three games trying to defeat the threat of galactic extinction of the most advanced races. All three endings provide that conclusion, do they not?



Remus Lupin said:


> Well, that's nice, but it's not what the game explicitly says.






Remus Lupin said:


> Really? Where was the movie explicitly showing the entire crew of the Normandy (who were on earth), hightailing it back to the ship, and then Joker LEAVING THE SOLAR SYSTEM in order to get to the Mass Relay, then entering the Mass Relay, only to have it explode behind him? The sequence of events as presented in the last portion of the game don't allow for this to happen in any reasonable time frame. It's not like the Mass Relays exploded a week later. They exploded instantaneously, as far as anything the game tells you would lead you to believe.






Remus Lupin said:


> It's not about answering every question.



Wow. Kinda hard to argue with someone who can't even see the trees for the forest. You want every question answered... and then you claim you don't want every question answered. Which one is it?



Remus Lupin said:


> It's about not answering the questions in a self-consistent or narratively satisfying way.



Ahh, now we're getting to the crux of the matter. What this is really about is that you didn't get the answers that you WANT, or like; hate to break this to you, but the world doesn't always hand you everything on a silver platter.



Remus Lupin said:


> I'll also note one more thing about the destruction of the Mass Relays -- Doing that leaves the Krogan stuck on a devastated earth along with the remainder of the human race, and the Turian forces. What are those guys going to eat?



Still not looking for those answers, huh?



Remus Lupin said:


> And as for "spreading the solution" again, the game explicitly says the relays are destroyed, and it explicitly shows their destruction. There's no way to dodge that the relays are absolutely destroyed, with no consideration of the consequences of that decision for the Galaxy.



Still looking...

Destroyed and going supernova are slightly different things, don't you think? I can destroy C4 without it turning me into sloppy chunks of dirt and meat. One doesn't necessarily necessitate the other.



Remus Lupin said:


> How's Buzz Aldren's grandson going to see the stars "soon" when there's no effective interstellar travel and no way to get it, since it was established very early on in the series that the capacity for creating Mass Relays is far beyond the capacity of any sentient race in the galaxy?



Again with the looking...

Someone did it. It is inferred that someone created the Reapers and that they came up with the 'solution' of the cycle. Whoever created the Reapers also probably created, or had a hand in, the mass relays. Saying that nobody could ever evolve the knowledge or understanding to do is patently absurd. It is even stated in the series that the Protheans almost unlocked the secrets of the mass relays but were destroyed before doing so and it is also stated that the Asari government kept the Prothean VI for themselves and even then, kept it a secret from their own people, thus limiting that cycle's understanding of the Reaper-tech.

But you're not looking for answers, are you?


----------



## Remus Lupin (Mar 27, 2012)

You know Kzach, I read your posts in a lot of threads, and you've always got plenty of snark and insult to go around. I've said my piece. Others can respond to you if they like. 

Since I started this thread specifically because you complained about the other one, I'm just going to go ahead and move forward with reading other peoples' replies. I'm glad you liked the game. So did I. I hope they make more in that universe. But I'm far from the only one who has noticed these problems.


----------



## Kzach (Mar 27, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> You know Kzach, I read your posts in a lot of threads, and you've always got plenty of snark and insult to go around. I've said my piece. Others can respond to you if they like.




If I've insulted you then feel free to report me. I'm on a very short leash and will probably be banned if I'm reported again.

But I don't think I did insult you. Which leads me to conclude that my arguments have merit. After all, when you can no longer argue your case, attack your opponent.

Yay! I win!


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Mar 27, 2012)

Kzach said:


> If I've insulted you then feel free to report me. I'm on a very short leash and will probably be banned if I'm reported again.
> 
> But I don't think I did insult you. Which leads me to conclude that my arguments have merit. After all, when you can no longer argue your case, attack your opponent.
> 
> Yay! I win!



Congratulations to your win.

Now, once again, why the frack did the Normandy fly away from Earth in the middle of a crucial battle and try to escape that Mass Relay shockwave? 

Also, there are some possible endings (you probably didn't have that ending, so I understand you don't know) where in fact crew members step of the ship that were with you during the final push. How did they make it back to the ship? They should either be dead or aboard the Crucible with you and Anderson. 

The game was pretty awesome, and there are aspects of the ending I like. But some of it doesn't really make sense.

I don't even mind that the Mass Relays are destroyed. Sounds interesting, having a depopulated Earth with countless of Citadel races stranded there. 

And there are still the Quantum Entanglement Communciation Devices. Could mean a new, transhuman future where people transfer copies of themselves to other worlds (fits perfect with the Synthesis ending).

OF course, it doesn'T make sense to me that the "Destroy Reaper" option also destroys EDI and the Geth and all individuals with Cybernetics. 
Or that Synthesis actualyl solves the problem of the created eventually ending up fighting their creators - can half-synthetics not create artifical lifeforms?


----------



## Piratecat (Mar 27, 2012)

Guys, enough with the snark. I know people feel passionately about ME3, but please don't channel that into aggression in here.


----------



## Kzach (Mar 27, 2012)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Now, once again, why the frack did the Normandy fly away from Earth in the middle of a crucial battle and try to escape that Mass Relay shockwave?



Two things:-

1) I already gave an answer for this but I'll do so again: if you saw a shockwave of unknown energy rushing towards you, wouldn't you try to escape it? The movie cutscene shows the Normandy trying to outrace the wave which says to me that they didn't know what it would do and were scared of the consequences, ie. they thought it would kill them. Or do you think that they should just sit there and trust all shockwaves of unknown energy types coming towards them?

2) Like I said to Lupin, why do you need to have every question answered? There are a billion possible solutions to all the questions posed by the fans but people are assuming that there can't be an answer solely because whatever answer is given will not satisfy them, not because the answers aren't possible, logical or reasonable.



Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Also, there are some possible endings (you probably didn't have that ending, so I understand you don't know) where in fact crew members step of the ship that were with you during the final push. How did they make it back to the ship? They should either be dead or aboard the Crucible with you and Anderson.



Again, I answered this. In the final run to the teleportation beam, you aren't with your squad. The other two have returned to the Normandy. I really don't see why people turn that into such a big problem when it's happened before in the series.

As for the ending I got, Joker got off the Normandy with EDI and EDI was part of the team I took to Earth. I had an EMS of 8,500 (with 100% galactic readiness) so I had the best possible ending. It didn't jar at all for me because I knew she wasn't with me in that final run to the teleportation beam. And if I was on the Normandy, damn sure I'd be trying to outrun a shockwave of unknown energy type regardless of who was left on the planet.



Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> OF course, it doesn'T make sense to me that the "Destroy Reaper" option also destroys EDI and the Geth and all individuals with Cybernetics. Or that Synthesis actualyl solves the problem of the created eventually ending up fighting their creators - can half-synthetics not create artifical lifeforms?



Again, these aren't questions that need to be answered by the game or the developers. Fill in the gaps with your imagination. There are so many possible answers that we, the audience, simply don't need to be lead by the nose to every single conclusion. At the end of the day, NONE of Mass Effect makes any sense. Eezo doesn't exist. The relays violate every known scientific law. Reapers aren't going to hail from the skies and destroy galactic civilisations every 50,000 years. And why 50,000 years? Does that even make sense?

Examine any fictional creation close enough and you'll find holes. Yet people are only doing it to Mass Effect NOW? After three iterations? I don't think people are doing that because there's anything legitimately wrong with the franchise or the endings. I think they're doing that because they didn't get the happy-happy-joy-joy endings that they wanted. Personally, I'm glad Bioware went with what I feel was the right ending instead of the 'feel good' ending. And nothing about the last levels jars for me.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Mar 27, 2012)

Yes, if you examine any fictional creation enough, you'll find holes. And the more well thought through and sophisticated the fiction, the harder the holes will be to find. the problem with the ME3 ending is that the holes are OBVIOUS and GLARING, and that's why people have so many problems with them.

As for filling in with your imagination, that's a very generous take you have on the failure of the creators to come up with a satisfying conclusion. But the fact that you can imagine some marginally plausible reason for the ending to make sense is not the same thing as the ending making sense. It just means that you're willing to give the creators a very, very large chuck of the benefit of the doubt. 

It shouldn't surprise you that a lot of others, who have invested just as much time (and money) in this game as you have, aren't as willing to give the creators that much of the benefit of the doubt, and would like it if the story had wrapped up in a narratively more satisfying and self-consistent way, rather than me having to imagine how it WOULD have wrapped up IF it had been narratively satisfying and consistent.

Again, I'm happy for you that you were satisfied by the ending. It doesn't make those of us who aren't wrong for not being so.

But hey, just as long as you feel like you "won" something ...


----------



## Kzach (Mar 27, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> It just means that you're willing to give the creators a very, very large chuck of the benefit of the doubt.




Hardly. You said yourself that you've seen how scathing I can be. I'm very critical of everything I view because that's the way I was raised. I was raised as a fully fledged member of the Skeptics Society and personally met James Randi before I was ten.

On top of that, I was aware of people's criticisms of the ending before I experienced it for myself so I was forced out of my suspension of disbelief (which is why I was pissed at it and considered it a spoiler) and so instead of enjoying the moment in blissful ignorance, was hyper critical and aware of every flaw.

I just didn't come to the same conclusions that you did. In my analysis of the ending, I don't find the flaws that you do because I feel they are easily answered and justified within the established fiction of the milieu. Nothing 'jarred'. It all made enough sense that I wasn't left thinking, "Geez, that sucked, they really screwed that up!"

To understand why people have the reactions they do, I believe one has to understand the psychology behind them and in this instance I believe that people don't like the endings not because the endings themselves are illogical or unreasonable, but because they are simply not the endings that people want or expected.

But that's ok. The developers have already announced that they're going to give everyone their fluffy-bunny endings through a DLC. So really, everybody wins.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Mar 27, 2012)

Kzach, and I'm fine with the fact that we came to different conclusions. As I said initially, at first glance, I actually enjoyed the ending. It was only on reflection that I said, "wait, that didn't make much sense."

I'm totally comfortable with the idea that you genuinely enjoyed the conclusion more than I did and didn't feel the same need to pick at the conclusion. But it sure seemed to me that you were staking out a position that those who criticized the ending were out of line ("butt-hurt" I believe was your phrase), and should just accept it without complaining. But if I'm going to take Mass Effect seriously as the piece of art that I think it is, then I have an obligation to criticize it in the same way I would criticize any other work of art, out of a sense of admiration, and a recognition of what it could have been. It's what led me to be disappointed with the epilogue of Harry Potter and the Star Wars prequel trilogy as well. If I didn't like them so much, I wouldn't have been annoyed at their last minute (or larger) fumbles. 

If I was expecting crap, then I would have been thrilled to get what I got, because it was genuinely decent on many levels. But I had been led to expect inspiration, and that's not what the ending gave us, or at least me.


----------



## Kzach (Mar 27, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> But I had been led to expect inspiration, and that's not what the ending gave us, or at least me.




I think this is the most pertinent point.

You infer, and at one point even state, that I didn't critique the game or the ending. And that your view that it is a crap ending that is OBVIOUSLY and GLARINGLY poor is the only view.

What I'm stating is that I did, in fact, critically examine the ending and I came to a different conclusion. I do not think the ending is flawed or that there are plot holes in it. I definitely don't think it's obviously or glaringly poor, either. I think it was well executed.

You didn't get what you expected or wanted out of the ending. And because of that, you find flaw in it. I think, when examined dispassionately and objectively that there isn't, in fact, flaw in it. And from that, I think that the real issue is that you were disappointed and unsatisfied with the ending, which is fine and you have every right to feel that way. What I take issue with is that you're effectively stating that it's a foregone conclusion and the only 'right' conclusion to come to that there are flaws and plot holes in the ending.

Many people might agree with you, but that doesn't make the position right, it just makes it popular.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Mar 28, 2012)

Kzach, I'll make a deal with you, if you'll stop minimizing my concerns as "you just didn't get what you want" then I'll take your endorsement of the ending more seriously, but you're clearly not hearing me if you think that's what I'm saying.

And, to make this crystal clear, I didn't think it was a crap ending. I said that if I'd expected a crap ending, I would have been thrilled, because the actual ending WASN'T crap. I didn't say that it was OBVIOUSLY and GLARNGLY poor, I said that it had OBVIOUS AND GLARING holes, which is not the same thing.

You found the ending satisfying, I get that. I think we all get that. But for many of us it wasn't, and I for one would like to explore ways that it could have been improved, and aspects that I would have liked to see better developed. Is it possible for that conversation to take place without you saying over and over again that there was nothing wrong with the ending, or shall we just take that as read?


----------



## Kzach (Mar 28, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> I didn't say that it was OBVIOUSLY and GLARNGLY poor, I said that it had OBVIOUS AND GLARING holes, which is not the same thing.




If you add, "In my opinion," to that statement, I'll be happy and leave the argument alone. But stating that it has obvious and glaring holes is exactly the same as saying it's poorly executed. It's also saying that your conclusion is the only conclusion that can be had. If you qualify it with, "In my opinion," then you allow for other opinions to be had.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Mar 28, 2012)

It's obviously my opinion. I'm the one offering it.


----------



## JohnRTroy (Mar 28, 2012)

Overall, this installment was great, hit all my levels of emotion, and the combat is satisfying, and so is the multiplayer.

Regarding the ending, I did feel the non-sequitur of the Normandy was the hardest thing to accept, which makes me wonder if things will be clarified with DLC.  

I had no problem with the "final choice", as I think leaving that one away from Paragon/Renegade choice and blurring the lines makes for a better experience.  Not everything can be set in that somewhat simplistic moral system.  

The only thing that saddens me is the fan reaction, as I think it is way out of proportion, and I hope Bioware doesn't suddenly cave into pressure to create a "happy ending".  (Some say that's not what they want, but I see others saying that elsewhere, so the movement isn't unified).  

I think a lot of it is spillover from anger towards Bioware.  Some are still bitter they never did a BG3, others dislike the direction of RPGs in general.  But some of this is coming from recent changes--EA marketing can really stink, and I feel they rushed DA2 out the door, and the DLC and exclusive content stuff (in the whole industry) is getting out of hand.  

Definately worth my money, and I would suggest for those on the fence--if you liked the first 2, get it, enjoy it.


----------



## Piratecat (Mar 28, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> It's obviously my opinion. I'm the one offering it.




Nah, with respect, that's not valid rhetoric. If you don't qualify a controversial point with "in my opinion," on the Internet it's often interpreted as you claiming that it's universal and unvarnished truth. That starts a crap-ton of misunderstandings and arguments. 

Consider an extreme example:

A: "Tomb of Horrors was a poorly designed adventure, and anyone who likes it is a dumbass."
B: "I think Tomb of Horrors was a poorly designed adventure, and in my opinion anyone who likes it is a dumbass."

I can argue the first point ad nauseum. I can't really argue the second one at all, even if I disagree with it.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Mar 28, 2012)

PC, but I think you make my point. The position that I'm taking is one that can be argued ad nauseum in a productive way, whether or not I explicitly qualify it with the phrase, "in m opinion." in fact using the phrase "in my opinion," make the argument about my opinion, rather than the game, which is what I'd like to be discussing. But if I take a position about the game, it's always implicitly my opinion, And the question is whether or not it's well grounded, which I tried to do up thread, and others have also attempted.

But look, I don't want to make a federal case out of it. My only point was that it's absolutely possible for Kzach to be satisfied with the ending for defensible reasons, and me to be dissatisfied for defensible reasons.


----------



## Felon (Mar 31, 2012)

Just finished. What a ride.

Looking over the back-and-forth on the discussion, I guess I'm in the middle.

True, the destruction of a relay in "Arrival" destroyed a solar system. However, that doesn't mean that the destruction of a relay in this situation (which was, after all, desinged by its creators to achieve a specific, non-galaxy-destroying effect) would be equally catastrophic. I just assumed it was more of a burnout than a blow-up.

As far as the Normandy goes, I kind of figured it was in the middle of battle with the reapers when they saw this wave of energy unleashed, and what we caught was the tail end of him hauling butt to escape.

OTOH, it doesn't make sense that Liara would be on the Normandy if she was on Earth. The reaper strike would have made retrieving any survivors unlikely, and more unlikely still is the Normandy leaving the battlefield to go pick her up. This is something they could easily have remedied by picking a random squadmate that was free.

It certainly is quite exquisitely lame that the various endings simply amount to a palette-swap on the energy ripple. 

I never got to have a final conversation with Ashley or Vega. I saw a floating red reticule that identified itself as "Vega", but clicking it didn't do anything. I looked all over for Ashley and couldn't find her. Darn bugs. Oh well, most of those farewells were too long and drawn out. I'm really disappointed that Wrex didn't get a full-blown cut-scene. He was a series fan-favorite, but I got better face-time with Primarch Victus and Zaed.

Questions still left in my mind:

1) What was the actual effect of amassing war assets? Doesn't seem to have any impact on the ending, so does it make the running battle to the catalyst more or less of a slog? Like, you get fewer banshees if you have a higher rating?

2) Do the various conversational options with The Illusive Man actually amount to anything? There were three or four, and I picked the paragon options until he finally commited suicide. Did you guys experience anything different?


----------



## Felon (Mar 31, 2012)

In the interest of comparing notes, here's a little questionaire:

1) What class(es) did you play as?

2) Who was your most used squadmate?

3) Who was your least used squadmate?

4) What was your favorite power that you unlocked from a squadate?


My answers:

1) Infiltrator 

2) Probably EDI. She's got high health and shields, and Overload and Incinerate destroy all defenses. All-in-all she's very hard to drop. And since she only uses SMG's and pistols, she rarely steels kills from me. Tali is great when you get her. 

3) Javik has a lot of interesting things to say, but on missions his powers often have an annoying habit of being oranged-out due to shields, barriers, whatever. Similarly, I'd have liked to use Vega more, but sheilds are just so crazily common that his skillset just doesn't match up.

4) I depended heavily on Garrus's AP ammo for a long time, but eventually Tali's Energy Drain won me over.

Would love to compare notes on anything else you guys can think of.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Mar 31, 2012)

Felon said:


> 1) What was the actual effect of amassing war assets? Doesn't seem to have any impact on the ending, so does it make the running battle to the catalyst more or less of a slog? Like, you get fewer banshees if you have a higher rating?



I don't think it changes any of the battles you fight. But if your asset rating is too low, the Crucible can apparantly backfire, destroying Earth. And if you picked the "Destroy Reaper" ending, a high asset score will lead to a small scene indicating Shepard lives.

I think the war asset points effects is a little too abstract. You get points for strengthening the Citadel Defense Forces, but the Citadel is always taken over by the Reapers, and nothing whatsoever happens on the Citadel that indicates the defense force was relevant.




> 2) Do the various conversational options with The Illusive Man actually amount to anything? There were three or four, and I picked the paragon options until he finally commited suicide. Did you guys experience anything different?



If I understood correctly, there are some variations, like the Renegade Choices maybe allowing you to shoot him instead. Not sure if there's also a difference whether Anderson dies immediately or only later so you have one last talk with him. (Alternatively, the latter may also only depend on your asset score)



Felon said:


> In the interest of comparing notes, here's a little questionaire:
> 
> 1) What class(es) did you play as?



Soldier



> 2) Who was your most used squadmate?



Garrus and Liara, ultimately meaning Liara, due to missions with mandated squadmates.



> 3) Who was your least used squadmate?



Vega. I actually liked this guy, but being a soldier myself, his skill set seemed irrelevant. Also, apparantly my Shepard had the wrong gender for him? (Playing a female Shepard)



> 4) What was your favorite power that you unlocked from a squadate?



I never found one I was really happy with. It appeared to me Barrier could be useful, but I am not sure if I used it right or effectively.



> Would love to compare notes on anything else you guys can think of.




I made peace between Geth and Quarian. 
Krogan and Turians fought together against the reapers on the Turian homeworld. 
The Rachni Queen still lived from ME1 and I managed to free her from Reaper influence.
Moridin died ensuring the Genophage Cure would work. Probably the most meaningful computer game character death I had so far. I really liked Moridin and I wouldn't have minded him studying sea shells instead. But then, _it had to be him_, right?

I picked the synthesis ending. If we believe the indoctrination interpretation of the ending, that means I failed humanity and all galactic civilizations!


----------



## Felon (Apr 1, 2012)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> I think the war asset points effects is a little too abstract. You get points for strengthening the Citadel Defense Forces, but the Citadel is always taken over by the Reapers, and nothing whatsoever happens on the Citadel that indicates the defense force was relevant.



Well, maybe it allowed the Citadel to put up stronger resistance to its takeover, kill off a few more marauders before they died. 

Was I the only one half-expecting that when Shepard got to the Citadel, that Keeper would turn around with a cigarette holder in one of its claws and say something like "bravo, my dear Commander Shepard, we were wondering if you'd ever show up"? The enemy hiding in plain sight and all that.

Would've been cooler than Ghostboy IMO.



> I made peace between Geth and Quarian.
> Krogan and Turians fought together against the reapers on the Turian homeworld.
> The Rachni Queen still lived from ME1 and I managed to free her from Reaper influence.
> Moridin died ensuring the Genophage Cure would work. Probably the most meaningful computer game character death I had so far. I really liked Moridin and I wouldn't have minded him studying sea shells instead. But then, _it had to be him_, right?
> ...




Your choices mirrored mine, except that I picked the paragon ending (which is, of course, about the same as the other two). Mordin doesn't have to die, but he will effectively be gone from the game even if he surivives the mission.

Did anyone here actually let Cerberus have the Reaper base at the end of ME2? Did it affect the storyline at all?

Did anyone kill the Rachni queen in ME1? How does that affect anything?


----------



## Dragonwriter (Apr 1, 2012)

Felon said:


> In the interest of comparing notes, here's a little questionaire:
> 
> 1) What class(es) did you play as?
> 
> ...




1. Vanguard
2. EDI
3. Probably Ashley or James. I used EDI and Garrus almost exclusively. Sometimes Liara or Tali, but not often.
4. I really didn't fiddle with the unlocked powers... Eventually chose Carnage, when it was too late to make much of a difference. 



Felon said:


> Was I the only half-expecting that when Shepard got to the Citadel, that Keeper would turn around with a cigarette holder in one of its claws and say something like "bravo, Commander Shepard, we were wondering if you'd ever show up"? The enemy hiding in plain sight and all that.
> 
> Would've been cooler than Ghostboy IMO.




No kidding, especially after that whole business in ME1 with the Keepers being Reaper servants. I know the signal got blocked, but still would've been cool.



> Did anyone kill the Rachni queen in ME1? How does that affect anything?




I killed her. You still get the Rachni-Krogan mission... I freed the Reaper-Rachni/Breeder Queen and she just eventually betrays you, killing some of the Crucible scientists, but not enough to really make a difference. 

Geth-Quarian war ended in peace between them. Cured the genophage cry: bye Mordin). I got through the Suicide mission with every crew member surviving and most of the crew (Doc, Kelly), so saw everyone pop up here and there. Didn't even hesitate to shoot Udina, stab Kai Leng and shoot the Illusive Man, despite being largely Paragon.

Chose the Destroy Ending, as I saw that as the only one to make even a modicum of sense after everything I had been through and making me the least hypocritical of the three.


----------



## Felon (Apr 1, 2012)

Looks like EDI is a very popular lady. I have nothing but regrets about choosing Ashley over Kaiden. While Ashley's just some boring gunner, his tech/biotic powers look interesting (at least going from the ME wiki). Wish I could've taken them for a spin.

Come to think of it, I only had one scene with Ashley after she rejoins the crew, and it's her drunkenly sprawled out in the lounge. Fortunately, it's an unusually vacant lounge.

So, even if you kill the sole remaining Rachni Queen in 1, there's still a Rachni queen in 2?

Maybe I'm forgetting something that happened in ME2, but I actually picked Anderson to be Earth's rep on the Council, and I rememer visiting Anderson in the embassy office in ME2, yet in ME3 it's Uldina who has the job.


----------



## Dragonwriter (Apr 1, 2012)

Felon said:


> So, even if you kill the sole remaining Rachni Queen in 1, there's still a Rachni queen in 2?




Yep. The Reapers managed to replicate her from tissue samples or some such. I don't remember exactly, but it amounted to cloning with Reaper tech.



> Maybe I'm forgetting something that happened in ME2, but I actually picked Anderson to be Earth's rep on the Council, and I rememer visiting Anderson in the embassy office in ME2, yet in ME3 it's Uldina who has the job.




Between ME2 and ME3, Anderson resigns from his Council position. It was in the Codex, as I recall. Basically, he got sick of the political BS and nobody listening to the warnings about the Reapers, so he went back into the military to do what he could to prepare Earth. Udina filled his spot on the Council.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 2, 2012)

Felon said:


> Did anyone here actually let Cerberus have the Reaper base at the end of ME2? Did it affect the storyline at all?



Yes, I let them have it, thinking it would be better to preserve any Reaper knowledge we could get to. Even if it was in the hands of Cerberus - and hey, I figured my Shepard could just wrestle it out of their hands again, after all she has the Normandy and the best crew in the galaxy.

It supposedly makes a difference, but I don't remember what it was.


----------



## John Crichton (Apr 2, 2012)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Yes, I let them have it, thinking it would be better to preserve any Reaper knowledge we could get to. Even if it was in the hands of Cerberus - and hey, I figured my Shepard could just wrestle it out of their hands again, after all she has the Normandy and the best crew in the galaxy.
> 
> It supposedly makes a difference, but I don't remember what it was.



Adds 300 points to your EMS if the interwebs are to be believed.


----------



## horacethegrey (Apr 2, 2012)

1) Soldier (Male Shep) and Vanguard (Fem Shep)

2) Garrus

3) Ashley

4) Reave - extremely useful, especially since it can be used to detonate biotic explosions.

And let me just say that I intensely dislike the endings. I never expected Bioware to drop the ball so hard on their biggest franchise.  Here's hoping that they'll fix it with some future DLC.


----------



## Felon (Apr 2, 2012)

Dragonwriter said:


> Yep. The Reapers managed to replicate her from tissue samples or some such. I don't remember exactly, but it amounted to cloning with Reaper tech.
> 
> 
> 
> Between ME2 and ME3, Anderson resigns from his Council position. It was in the Codex, as I recall. Basically, he got sick of the political BS and nobody listening to the warnings about the Reapers, so he went back into the military to do what he could to prepare Earth. Udina filled his spot on the Council.



So, we can chalk those down to moot decisions?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 2, 2012)

Felon said:


> So, we can chalk those down to moot decisions?



Yes, kinda. Though the Rachni ending at least leaves a difference - if she's cloned, she will turn against you later, if not, she stays loyal. Could have had more of an effect, but at least there are different outcomes (A loyal Queen at least means she will stick around, I don't know what happens in the other case.)

But the Anderson thing becomes basically irrelevant. 

I wonder if at some point they actually wanted to let us "keep" Anderson in Undina's role. For a while I thought "Whoa, who's this Undina guy, he's actually competent and helpful and all"...


----------



## GSHamster (Apr 2, 2012)

1. Infiltrator
2. Garrus, then Ashley

Garrus, because Garrus is awesome and he's been with me since ME1. I like Ash. As well, I played a sniper, so I preferred two soldier types to hold the enemy down. The other companions just seemed too fragile (I don't really bother controlling them in combat) and I was all "who's this Vega chap?".

3. Liara, then EDI

They just seemed to die a lot with my playstyle.

4. I didn't really use any unlocked powers, just stuck with the Infiltrator basics.

Also, I thought the ME3 ending was terrible. If anyone cares, I wrote more about it on my blog:

Blessing of Kings: Mass Effect 3: Endings (Spoilers!)
Blessing of Kings: Mass Effect 3: My Ending


----------



## Felon (Apr 3, 2012)

GSHamster said:


> 1. Infiltrator
> 2. Garrus, then Ashley
> 
> Garrus, because Garrus is awesome and he's been with me since ME1. I like Ash. As well, I played a sniper, so I preferred two soldier types to hold the enemy down. The other companions just seemed too fragile (I don't really bother controlling them in combat) and I was all "who's this Vega chap?".
> ...



Interesting. Garrus is actually pretty fragile. Ashley is sort of medium toughness at best. But if you buy up their class power quickly, they have around +150% damage with rifles. 

As an infiltrator, I'd say Garrus's Overload and Armor-Piercing ammo are super-cool assets. Definitely welcome. But I need a tank to hold aggro, and without Kaiden, that's either EDI or Vega. 

Funny. I naturally assumed for a while that Kai Leng was actually Kaiden resurrected by the Illusive Man. Essentially, I figured whoever you left to die comes back as a villain, and then you get to talk them down using Paragon/Renegade choices. I guess that was either too obvious a twist, or they couldn't work in both a male and female version.

As an infiltrator, what was your loadout? I usually packed a Raptor and then a shotgun of some type. The SMG's got so light that it was almost pointless not to carry one, but I rarely ever used it.


----------



## GSHamster (Apr 3, 2012)

Felon said:


> Interesting. Garrus is actually pretty fragile. Ashley is sort of medium toughness at best. But if you buy up their class power quickly, they have around +150% damage with rifles.
> 
> As an infiltrator, what was your loadout? I usually packed a Raptor and then a shotgun of some type. The SMG's got so light that it was almost pointless not to carry one, but I rarely ever used it.




A Mantis, then switch to the Widow when I got it. And a low-weight pistol for backup. I was basically going for 1-shot kill headshots all the time, so I didn't really need a tank.  I used the Incendiary power as a backup or when I wanted to save ammo.

I just found Garrus and Ashley were more likely to take care of themselves. I would be invisible and zoomed in Sniper mode waiting for a kill shot, so I couldn't micromanage them.

I did only play on Normal difficulty, so it might not be the best of techniques.


----------



## John Crichton (Apr 3, 2012)

One thing about ME3 that was odd was the difficulty level compared to 1 & 2.  I had to play on Hard to not blow through things with ease.  Died PLENTY on hard!


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 5, 2012)

I believe the BLASTO 6 movie excerpts taht you can follow on the Citadel weren't posted yet here: 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXf7HC7iYEY]Mass Effect 3 - Blasto 6: Partners in Crime [Easter Egg] - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Felon (Apr 5, 2012)

John Crichton said:


> One thing about ME3 that was odd was the difficulty level compared to 1 & 2.  I had to play on Hard to not blow through things with ease.  Died PLENTY on hard!




Definitely noticed this. Partially it's because 3 is much roomier. Long hallways allow you to pick enemies off before they can mount an offense. In 1 & 2, they were often zerging in right on top of you. Plus, there were more enemies like geth stalkers and Krogans that were extra-dangrous up close. 

Also, the enemies finally can miss. Indeed, I actually sniped quite a few enemies who apparently were too far away to even spot me, much less shoot back.

Oh, and enemies actually seem to shoot at other members of your squad, instead of having a huge aggro bias towards Shepard. 

Having said all that, shields still don't provide more than a few seconds of defense, at least for my infiltrator. Anything that can get around your cover is a real threat.


----------



## Kzach (Apr 6, 2012)

Felon said:


> OTOH, it doesn't make sense that Liara would be on the Normandy if she was on Earth. The reaper strike would have made retrieving any survivors unlikely, and more unlikely still is the Normandy leaving the battlefield to go pick her up. This is something they could easily have remedied by picking a random squadmate that was free.



The problem I have with people complaining about this is that there are SO many plausible scenarios in which this could easily be explained.

But fret not, it has been officially stated that these holes shall be filled and so nobody will have to use their imaginations to fill them:

Mass Effect 3 Extended Cut | BioWare Blog



Felon said:


> 1) What was the actual effect of amassing war assets? Doesn't seem to have any impact on the ending, so does it make the running battle to the catalyst more or less of a slog? Like, you get fewer banshees if you have a higher rating?



Apparently the ending changes quite significantly but I've not experienced those endings and I've avoided the conversations about them. Your best bet to find out would be to go to the Bioware ME3 forums and ask there.



Felon said:


> 2) Do the various conversational options with The Illusive Man actually amount to anything? There were three or four, and I picked the paragon options until he finally commited suicide. Did you guys experience anything different?



I've heard vaguely that it does affect something about the ending, again, I don't know what though.



John Crichton said:


> One thing about ME3 that was odd was the difficulty level compared to 1 & 2.  I had to play on Hard to not blow through things with ease.  Died PLENTY on hard!




Ironically the developers stated that they wanted to make "Normal" equal to the old versions of "Veteran" difficulty. Seems like the devs failed on delivering a lot of promises.



Felon said:


> 1) What class(es) did you play as?



ME1 I started as a soldier, primarily because I didn't know any better and I felt that it suited the character of "Shepard" the best. But due to falling in love with Liara, my Shepard developed biotic gifts with her training and... umm... their embracing of eternity together. Combined with the cybernetic implants and the change in his persona (he went 'dark' for a while), he became a Vanguard in ME2 (this was a decision made without the knowledge of the vanguard's uberness and popularity).

Since I enjoyed the vanguard so much and since I felt it had become an integral part of who the character was, ie. charge first, sort the bodies out later, I continued as one in ME3 and definitely wasn't disappointed.



Felon said:


> 2) Who was your most used squadmate?




EDI, by a long-shot. She's simply so useful. Between Incinerate and Overload, you essentially have the two most useful and powerful team-mate abilities in the game, all in one character. There were very few missions where I could justify taking anyone else in her place. Plus, I like her sense of humour.



Felon said:


> 3) Who was your least used squadmate?



Javik, again by a long-shot. He was useless and a whiny annoyance, always complaining about everything and telling me how good it used to be.



Felon said:


> 4) What was your favorite power that you unlocked from a squadate?



Energy Drain. It was the one weakness of the vanguard, ie. not having a shield drain.


----------



## hopeless (Apr 7, 2012)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> I believe the BLASTO 6 movie excerpts taht you can follow on the Citadel weren't posted yet here:
> 
> Mass Effect 3 - Blasto 6: Partners in Crime [Easter Egg] - YouTube



Thank you that was hilarious!


----------



## Felon (Apr 8, 2012)

Kzach said:


> The problem I have with people complaining about this is that there are SO many plausible scenarios in which this could easily be explained.
> 
> But fret not, it has been officially stated that these holes shall be filled and so nobody will have to use their imaginations to fill them:



It's not a failure of imagination. It's simply not very plausible given the circumstances and time frame that the characters on earth would have the opportunity to rendezvous with the Normandy, which is supposedly supporting the space battle. 

Although given the number of inconsistencies with the ending, that one's pretty minor. Go get the "perfect" ending and you'll see quite a jarring one.


----------



## Kzach (Apr 8, 2012)

Felon said:


> Go get the "perfect" ending and you'll see quite a jarring one.




I have and I still wasn't 'jarred'.


----------



## Phaezen (Apr 8, 2012)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Moridin died ensuring the Genophage Cure would work. Probably the most meaningful computer game character death I had so far. I really liked Moridin and I wouldn't have minded him studying sea shells instead. But then, _it had to be him_, right?




For me it's a toss up between Moridin sacrificing himself to save the Krogan and Legion sacrificing himself to save the Geth from the reaper influence.  But I think Legion edges it as his sacrifice is made at the moment he achieves true independent personality.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 8, 2012)

Phaezen said:


> For me it's a toss up between Moridin sacrificing himself to save the Krogan and Legion sacrificing himself to save the Geth from the reaper influence.  But I think Legion edges it as his sacrifice is made at the moment he achieves true independent personality.



Interesting perspective - but I loved Moridin more! He was probably my favorite character from ME2 (and the entire game). He was kinda... unexpected - and that made him awesome.


----------



## Kzach (Apr 8, 2012)

Phaezen said:


> For me it's a toss up between Moridin sacrificing himself to save the Krogan and Legion sacrificing himself to save the Geth from the reaper influence.  But I think Legion edges it as his sacrifice is made at the moment he achieves true independent personality.




Mordin's moment was also the most powerful for me as well but Legion's sacrifice... just didn't click. It just seemed meaningless and contrived. He had to sacrifice himself because... umm... what was it again? Something about non-conformity in a collective? But wait, wasn't that what the entire purpose of giving them the Reaper-tech upgrade in the first place? Now THERE is a plot-hole.

The second-most powerful moment, for me and in terms of other character's stories, was Grunt surviving the Rachni encounter. I was like, "Noooooooooo! Another one bites the dust! Arrrggh!" And then he comes out of the tunnel covered from head to toe in Rachni ichor 

Now that was one of my personal disappointments, ie. that the entire Rachni decision-chain came to mean absolutely nothing. They weren't in the final battle, other than as a 'war asset', and it didn't matter whether you let the Queen live in ME1 or not, as there is a 'new' Queen if you didn't. Now THAT made me feel let down. I've been waiting for three damn games to see how that played out and got... next to nothing in return. No Rachni ships, no sweet, purple notes to counter the sour yellow ones, nothing.

And no little blue daughters, either. MAJOR disappointment there


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 8, 2012)

Kzach said:


> And no little blue daughters, either. MAJOR disappointment there



You obviously didn't try hard enough.


----------



## GSHamster (Apr 8, 2012)

Kzach said:


> The second-most powerful moment, for me and in terms of other character's stories, was Grunt surviving the Rachni encounter. I was like, "Noooooooooo! Another one bites the dust! Arrrggh!" And then he comes out of the tunnel covered from head to toe in Rachni ichor




I liked this too. Apparently he does die if you haven't done everything with him in ME2, though.



> Now that was one of my personal disappointments, ie. that the entire Rachni decision-chain came to mean absolutely nothing. They weren't in the final battle, other than as a 'war asset', and it didn't matter whether you let the Queen live in ME1 or not, as there is a 'new' Queen if you didn't. Now THAT made me feel let down. I've been waiting for three damn games to see how that played out and got... next to nothing in return. No Rachni ships, no sweet, purple notes to counter the sour yellow ones, nothing.




If you killed the Rachni in ME1, the Rachni Queen is a clone in ME3, and she eventually betrays you and goes back to the Reapers.  Though I think this is mostly a matter of losing those War Assets.

So the decision chain does matter, but it's very hard to see that it matters, if that makes sense.


----------



## Felon (Apr 9, 2012)

Kzach said:


> I have and I still wasn't 'jarred'.



Well, the one I'm talking about has a few extra seconds at the end where Shepard is shown alive, and he takes a breath. Since the Citadel is quite clearly shown to be obliterated during the cutscene, I think most reasonable folks would find that to be a little jarring. But, suit yourself.



GSHamster said:


> If you killed the Rachni in ME1, the Rachni Queen is a clone in ME3, and she eventually betrays you and goes back to the Reapers.  Though I think this is mostly a matter of losing those War Assets.
> 
> So the decision chain does matter, but it's very hard to see that it matters, if that makes sense.



The problem is that the war asset points ultimately don't make much of an impact. If you didn't play MP, you had no hope of getting better than "even" odds regardless of how many assets you piled up. But if you played MP for a few hours, you got 100% readiness and could get the best odds even if you missed lots of assets. 

And the variations in endings seem to be quite slight. As I said above, the best getting gets you a sigh.


----------



## Felon (Apr 9, 2012)

GSHamster said:


> I liked this too. Apparently he does die if you haven't done everything with him in ME2, though.



As with Wrexe, Mordin, Legion, Jacob, the Rachni queen, and so forth, you get a placeholder NPC if the primary character perished at some point. I don't think the placeholder Grunt fares as well as the original (nor should he).



Phaezen said:


> For me it's a toss up between Moridin sacrificing himself to save the Krogan and Legion sacrificing himself to save the Geth from the reaper influence.  But I think Legion edges it as his sacrifice is made at the moment he achieves true independent personality.



I agree with Kzach that Legion's sacrifice seems contrived. 

OTOH, poor unlamented Thane. This guy was a real badass, but somehow he really never got much fanfare.

Probably the most disappinting aspect of the game was not getting the squad I wanted. No Wrex, no Legion, no Thane, no Mordin. Nor was there any new breakout character, like an Elcor with those shoulder-mounted weapons. Or maybe a Vorcha or Bataarian.


----------



## Kzach (Apr 9, 2012)

Felon said:


> OTOH, poor unlamented Thane. This guy was a real badass, but somehow he really never got much fanfare.




I was actually a bit pissed off at Thane. When you first meet him, he essentially says he's useless and won't join you even though he's dying. The Normandy could offer him every medical convenience that the hospital could but his knowledge of tactics and general experience and intelligence could be a great asset on-board instead of rotting away in a hospital.

But his ending was almost as good as Mordin's. By the time I'd done Udina's betrayal, I was already feeling rather 'desperate' and forlorn, so Thane's loss and his prayer had a meaningful impact.

I just liked Mordin better. And... well... seashells... man, that makes me tear up even now


----------



## Felon (Apr 9, 2012)

True, Mordin's swan song was wrenching. And I suppose you're right about Thane. I mean, if you're gonna die anyway, might as well go out fighting. Guess he wanted to be available for his son.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Apr 9, 2012)

I was actually a big Thane fan in ME2 and a bit disappointed he wouldn't join the crew in ME3. But he did go out well, as did Moradin and Legion. 

Of course, since somehow I screwed up the geth/quarian quest, for me the most emotionally jarring death was Tali's death. Particularly since she was so obviously in love with Shepherd, and in my game at least, Shepherd really wasn't interested.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 9, 2012)

What romance options did people pursue? 

In ME1, I romanced Kaidan. In ME2, I remember trying every romance, but ultimately settling for no one. In ME3, I went back to Kaidan. But I found him a little... boring this time. I am considering replaying and romancing Liara instead.

And as a male Shepard, I think I'd like to "try out" Tali. 

Vega doesn't seem a well-liked character, but I think he definitely beats Jacob from ME2, and I enjoyed the flirting going on between him and my female Shepard. Unfortunately, that never goes anywhere (as I understand, he's the gay love interest? Too bad..).


----------



## Remus Lupin (Apr 9, 2012)

I romanced Ashley in ME1 and ME3. In ME2 I romanced Miranda first time through and then Jack. Third play through I decided not to romance anyone, since I was trying to keep my options open with Ashley for ME3, though as it turns out, except for snarking at me for sleeping with Jack, it didn't matter.


----------



## Dragonwriter (Apr 9, 2012)

Felon said:


> The problem is that the war asset points ultimately don't make much of an impact. If you didn't play MP, you had no hope of getting better than "even" odds regardless of how many assets you piled up. But if you played MP for a few hours, you got 100% readiness and could get the best odds even if you missed lots of assets.




Odds never get better than "even." I had 90+ Galactic Readiness with well over 5K Asset Points and it was still "even".

I found each of the character sacrifices powerful and meaningful, even Legion's (Legion's was somewhat expected, but still impacted me). Thane's prayer for Shepherd was an incredible and moving scene, IMO. 
And the Rachni mission, seeing Grunt charge all those Reaper forces and go off the cliff... then him stumbling to the shuttle, covered in their gore. It got a cheer from me. 

Similarly satisfying for me: shooting Udina, stabbing Kai Leng and shooting the Illusive Man. Despite being a reasonable guy, I didn't hesitate to do any of those.


----------



## Kzach (Apr 10, 2012)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> What romance options did people pursue?



Through all the play-throughs I've done, I've gone every route, including hacked romances, just out of sheer curiosity and boredom.

But my primary Shep was Liara all the way and always. Hot blue bi-sexual aliens. Can it get any better than that?



Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> Vega doesn't seem a well-liked character, but I think he definitely beats Jacob from ME2, and I enjoyed the flirting going on between him and my female Shepard. Unfortunately, that never goes anywhere (as I understand, he's the gay love interest? Too bad..).



He's not a gay love interest as far as I'm aware. He is buddies with the ship's shuttle pilot and quartermaster who I'm fairly sure is a gay love interest (there was an option to seduce him during my playthrough but my main Shep chose the friends option).

And I liked Vega. I thought he was cool. If it wasn't for EDI being so utterly and completely a no-brainer choice as a companion on almost every single mission (at least for me), I would've used him far more often. He has very powerful abilities and has almost double the hit points and shields (1200/1200) of any other team member and on top of that, can get the most powerful damage reduction ability, so he's virtually indestructible and can output huge amounts of melee damage, and single target ranged, and multi-target ranged.



Dragonwriter said:


> Similarly satisfying for me: shooting Udina, stabbing Kai Leng and shooting the Illusive Man. Despite being a reasonable guy, I didn't hesitate to do any of those.



The Kai Leng renegade interrupt wasn't so much satisfying as it was a, "FRAK YEAH TAKE THAT BITCH!" moment for me. I think my housemates thought I went a little nuts for a moment, given all the cheering and "Yeah!" and "Whoo!"ing


----------



## Dog Moon (Apr 10, 2012)

I didn't romance anyone in ME1.  I didn't even realize that was an option until it was basically too late to do anything.

In ME2, it was Garrus.  I ALMOST went with Thane.  Unfortunately in ME3, my thought was mainly, whew, glad I didn't romance the sickly dying guy...

In ME3 I was INTENDING to go with Garrus again, but somehow ended up going with Specialist Traynor.  Anyway, Garrus just got to go with Tali who was only using him for his body.  Hehe.


----------



## Felon (Apr 10, 2012)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:


> What romance options did people pursue?
> 
> In ME1, I romanced Kaidan. In ME2, I remember trying every romance, but ultimately settling for no one. In ME3, I went back to Kaidan. But I found him a little... boring this time. I am considering replaying and romancing Liara instead.
> 
> ...



Always bugs me a little that we consider ME to have "romance" when for the most part all that really happens in 1 and 2 is Shepard gets laid and then goes about his/her business.

Anyways, I snogged Ashley in 1, mostly for lack of other good options (Liara is a dull quantoid, and Tali looks like an anthropomorphic greyhound). Then I gave Miranda the high hard one in 2. I wanted to dump in her in the hopes of finding a better mate, but then she turned on the waterworks and I didn't have the heart to crush her soul. Reloaded and re-diddled. 

Vega is okay, problem is ME3 just doesn't really give a good variety of enemies (compared to ME2 in particular). If there were more enemies prone to rushing in and routing Shepard from cover, I'd value a melee and shotgun character much more. While he's a great meat shield, EDI's Unshackled AI gives her similar health and shield bonuses to his Arms Master, and Defensive Matrix is more of a tank power than Fortification. Plus she has Decoy, so she's at least as good of a tank.

Then there's the whole Freddie Prinze thing. Gotta hate people who are celebrities despite nobody actually seeming to like or care about them.



Dog Moon said:


> In ME2, it was Garrus.  I ALMOST went with Thane.  Unfortunately in ME3, my thought was mainly, whew, glad I didn't romance the sickly dying guy...



Well, isn't banging Garrus kind of like doing it with a mutilated turkey?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 10, 2012)

Felon said:


> Well, isn't banging Garrus kind of like doing it with a mutilated turkey?



Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Mustrum "Or is there?" Ridcully


----------



## Felon (Apr 10, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> I was actually a big Thane fan in ME2 and a bit disappointed he wouldn't join the crew in ME3. But he did go out well, as did Moradin and Legion.
> 
> Of course, since somehow I screwed up the geth/quarian quest, for me the most emotionally jarring death was Tali's death. Particularly since she was so obviously in love with Shepherd, and in my game at least, Shepherd really wasn't interested.




One of the game's more humorous moments is Tali getting drunk in the ship's lounge, obviously pining for Shepard. Proceeding down to engineering, I found her harassing Javik over the intercom, accusing him of being a big softy inside (which, of course, he is not).


----------



## Kzach (Apr 10, 2012)

Felon said:


> ...Liara is a dull quantoid...




You take that back!

Liara was by far the most interesting of the team-mates. I will not have you speaking ill of the eternity that I have embraced!


----------



## Remus Lupin (Apr 10, 2012)

Oh this could get ugly!


----------



## Felon (Apr 11, 2012)

Kzach said:


> You take that back!
> 
> Liara was by far the most interesting of the team-mates. I will not have you speaking ill of the eternity that I have embraced!



I assure you I meant "dull quantoid" in the nicest possible way.

Here's the IGN ME3 spoliercast. Covers a lot of the yin and yang about the ending controversy, as well as the popular unofficial theory ("it's all a dream!). It's pretty long, so get settled in.

<object id="vid_07b4f3c1a250226ee0fd2b51480b4869" class="ign-videoplayer" width="640" height="391" data="http://oystatic.ignimgs.com/src/core/swf/IGNPlayer.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"><param name="movie" value="http://oystatic.ignimgs.com/src/core/swf/IGNPlayer.swf" /><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param name="bgcolor" value="#000000" /><param name="flashvars" value="url=http://www.ign.com/videos/2012/03/26/ign-live-presents-mass-effect-3-spoilercast"/></object>


----------



## Mallus (Apr 12, 2012)

So I finally finished it... after a delay caused by the death of my original model 60GB PS3 and the hairbreadth escape of my ME3 save file onto an external drive just before it completely gave up the ghost. 

Overall, I really enjoyed the game. And the ending... well, I thought it was fine, with caveats. 

As the series progressed, it became clear the ending was going to involve _deus ex machina_. After the end of the Arrival DLC, where the size of the Reaper fleet is revealed, it became a dead certainty, and I adjusted my expectations of the finale accordingly. 

I was pleasantly surprised by the way it played out. I thought the explanation of the Reapers was an interesting spin on the "ancient machine evil" convention. The final choice I made --forcing the Singularity on every major space-faring race-- was ballsy, partially horrific, and yet both moral and fitting with the way I played Shepard, as a somewhat naive intergalactic "community organizer". Someone alive during a time of enormous change for both the human race and the other civilizations of the galaxy. Someone who embraced those changes.

Since I full well expected the end would involve some sort of MacGuffin, I was glad to see it wasn't merely an ancient superweapon with a big red button marked "press to destroy Reapers". 

My complaints about the ending were more technical (and less thematic): the end missions are uninspired, we don't see enough of the various War Assets in use via cutscenes --why scrimp on cinematics _here_?-- staggering Shepard post-Beam isn't dramatic, it's just annoying, and there simply isn't enough post-final choice. I didn't need a 20 minute montage, I just needed... more. 

The Normandy's crash on Eden 2.0 didn't bother me, and neither did the epilogue. But neither did they add much. 

All in all, a good end to the series, with a lot of thrilling sequences and some truly wonderful grace notes -- I'll remember Mordin's final, interrupted song, Legion and Tali on Rannoch, and target shooting with Garrus on top of the Citadel council building for a long time.

Oh, and EDI calling Joker on his bulls*t. I'm still chuckling over that line.


----------



## Felon (Apr 13, 2012)

Mallus said:


> I was pleasantly surprised by the way it played out. I thought the explanation of the Reapers was an interesting spin on the "ancient machine evil" convention. The final choice I made --forcing the Singularity on every major space-faring race-- was ballsy, partially horrific, and yet both moral and fitting with the way I played Shepard, as a somewhat naive intergalactic "community organizer".



If you enoyed that, might want to check out Dan Simmons' "Hyperion". Pretty safe bet that it influenced ME to some degree.



Mallus said:


> Since I full well expected the end would involve some sort of MacGuffin, I was glad to see it wasn't merely an ancient superweapon with a big red button marked "press to destroy Reapers".



It wasn't???

Oh, I see what you mean. There was also a green button and blue button as well. They all pretty much do the same thing, you know.


----------



## Jhaelen (Apr 13, 2012)

Felon said:


> If you enoyed that, might want to check out Dan Simmons' "Hyperion". Pretty safe bet that it influenced ME to some degree.



Ooh, really? That's neat. Hyperion is easily one of my favorite novels.

I actually bought Mass Effect 1 and started playing it, but's it was crashing on me all the time, so I lost interest pretty early. Maybe it was caused by my venerable machine, though. I'll have to retry playing it once I got a new pc.


----------



## Kzach (Apr 13, 2012)

Jhaelen said:


> I actually bought Mass Effect 1 and started playing it, but's it was crashing on me all the time, so I lost interest pretty early. Maybe it was caused by my venerable machine, though. I'll have to retry playing it once I got a new pc.




I've heard it had a lot of bugs in it when it was first brought out but that they've all been ironed out since. When I bought it, I had very few problems with it and considered it to be one of the most stable games I'd ever played.


----------



## Mallus (Apr 13, 2012)

Felon said:


> If you enoyed that, might want to check out Dan Simmons' "Hyperion". Pretty safe bet that it influenced ME to some degree.



I've read all four. And yeah, the ME writers were definitely influenced by Simmons; the whole inevitable organic/AI conflict played out over eons, the destruction of the farcaster network, probably more.



> It wasn't???



The button also had 2nd function - piss off a chunk of the fanbase!



> They all pretty much do the same thing, you know.



I try to not think about that. 

Also -- thanks for the semi-spoiler in the spoiler-free thread. I was about to lock myself out of a bunch of early Citadel missions until I read your post.


----------



## Argyle King (Apr 16, 2012)

I am still struggling to have Mass Effect make sense to me.  I'm pretty much the only person I know in my circle of friends who is not a fan.  I've tried giving it a shot; I'm currently working my way through ME2.  There's a lot of the story that doesn't seem to fit together in a coherent way.  

Currently, I'm a little baffled as to why I'd agree to work with Cerberus.  

I'm pretty bummed that there's not really any interaction with characters from the first game too.


----------



## Kzach (Apr 16, 2012)

Johnny3D3D said:


> Currently, I'm a little baffled as to why I'd agree to work with Cerberus.



Because nobody else is doing anything about the Reaper threat. So you can sit on your hands and fret about it, or you can ally with your enemy against the greater threat. Without Cerberus, Shepard is just a really pissed off ex-soldier. He has no rank, no privilege, no resources, no crew, no team-mates no Normandy. What would you have him do? Throw rocks at the Reapers?


----------



## Argyle King (Apr 16, 2012)

Kzach said:


> Because nobody else is doing anything about the Reaper threat. So you can sit on your hands and fret about it, or you can ally with your enemy against the greater threat. Without Cerberus, Shepard is just a really pissed off ex-soldier. He has no rank, no privilege, no resources, no crew, no team-mates no Normandy. What would you have him do? Throw rocks at the Reapers?





Steal the ship and materials that Cerberus gave me; give them a galactic sized middle finger and recruit my old team.


----------



## Kzach (Apr 16, 2012)

Johnny3D3D said:


> Steal the ship and materials that Cerberus gave me; give them a galactic sized middle finger and recruit my old team.




You realise the ship is crewed by Cerberus personal, right?


----------



## Argyle King (Apr 16, 2012)

Kzach said:


> You realise the ship is crewed by Cerberus personal, right?





Nothing a few thermal clips can't handle.  That's a little bit of a joke, but not entirely one.  My first instinct about Miranda was to shoot her; my gut instinct about the Illusive Man is even worse.  The plot seems more forced than it does natural. 

Another issue I'm having right now is feeling as though the second game doesn't really connect very well to the first game.  Most of the characters I found interesting or had a connection with have little or no part in the second game; a lot of things are left unresolved.  A few plot holes bug me a little too.

In a way, I feel as though the game would make more sense to me if I knew nothing about the first game than it does going into it with knowledge of previous events.  Maybe it'll get better as I go.

Knowing what I know of the first game; knowing what I now know of the second while playing it, and knowing a little of the 3rd game via my friends, I'm struggling a little to see the big picture in a way that is satisfying.  It's most assuredly not the quality I expected based upon the reviews.  I would by no means call the game nor the story bad; I just don't see what everyone else sees.  

To get things back on topic.  I think the ending of the third game should have been something gamers saw coming.  Just from the few interactions I've had with the Illusive Man in my current play through of the second game, more than a few things seem pretty obvious.  

For what it's worth, I do not believe the ending of the 3rd game should be changed.  That's not because I feel it is a good ending, but because I fear that the 'indoctrination theory' will make it even worse.  The main complain about the game is feeling as though choices along the way did not matter as much as they should have.  If a new ending is made which uses the indoctrination theory, that's like saying you never actually made the choices to begin with.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Apr 16, 2012)

There's a bit of a plot hammer element to working with Cerberus, but no moreso than with most games. Think of it this way -- You're biding your time so you can win the crew over and THEN go rogue!


----------



## Kzach (Apr 16, 2012)

Johnny3D3D said:


> Nothing a few thermal clips can't handle.  That's a little bit of a joke, but not entirely one.  My first instinct about Miranda was to shoot her; my gut instinct about the Illusive Man is even worse.  The plot seems more forced than it does natural.



I hated it too. But I also accepted that nobody else was going to do anything about the Reapers so I (thinking in character) made the enemy of my enemy, my temporary ally. Realistically, in that situation, Shepard is pretty much at the Illusive Man's beck and call IF Shepard wants to fight the Reaper threat. Shepard might be powerful, but he'd be no match for Miranda, Jacob and the rest of the Normandy crew.

Keep playing, though, as you DO eventually get the option to stick it to Cerberus and the Illusive Man. 



Johnny3D3D said:


> Another issue I'm having right now is feeling as though the second game doesn't really connect very well to the first game.  Most of the characters I found interesting or had a connection with have little or no part in the second game; a lot of things are left unresolved.




Just how far have you played into ME2?

I ask because you do connect with most of your old team. Garrus and Tali can be squad-mates and Wrex is just busy. And, well, Kaidan/Ashley are just uptight PITA anyway so good riddance. And Liara gets a whole DLC, which is highly recommended, devoted to her.



Johnny3D3D said:


> A few plot holes bug me a little too.




Like?



Johnny3D3D said:


> The main complain about the game is feeling as though choices along the way did not matter as much as they should have.




The funny thing about this complaint is that it's only valid if you view the series as a video-game and not as a series of events in the life of a living, breathing person. As a video-game they're right, his choices mean very little and have very little impact on the story before or after the final choice. And that final choice is virtually meaningless under that light.

But if you view it as something 'real', then the fact is that no other choices could've gotten him to that conclusion. All the character's choices up until the final choice are the only choices that could've resulted in success, because nobody and nothing else has been as successful as this character in fighting the Reapers. So the character's choices were vital; if the character had gone left instead of right, the character wouldn't have made it to the Star Child and the cycle would once again repeat.

But people can't see it that way because they ARE the meta-game. They exist outside of those choices and know that regardless of what path they took, it would end up the same. They want realism for the character without accepting the reality of the character.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 16, 2012)

Kzach said:


> But people can't see it that way because they ARE the meta-game. They exist outside of those choices and know that regardless of what path they took, it would end up the same. They want realism for the character without accepting the reality of the character.



No, I have to disagree. 

If you choose to destroy the Reapers, you supposedly kill every AI - that's what the starchild tells us. That means you kill the Geth, even if you fought for them or united them against the Quarian. That means you kill EDI, who you helped understanding her place in the world more.

My choices were undone. They were irrelevant. It's like "Hey, great, you saved this little kid from a car accident! Well done. Unfortunately, your later choices now mean it's suffering from cancer and will die in agony over the next 3 weeks. Well done, Hero."

The Synthesis Choice is similar: 
"Hey, great, you found an inexhaustable and easily accessible food source for everyonee! Awesome achievement. But just so you know, if you press this button, starchild will make it so that noone ever needs to eat again."

And there is still the issue of the destruction of all Mass Relays. According to everything we knew so far, that's a big deal, as it seems a central component in interstellar travel (and could possibly destroy entire solar systems). Okay, the Devs now say "Whoa, we didn't mean that. Losing them is just an inconvienence, no habitable planets were burned when filming these sequences. And they'll just improve their regular FTL drives and everything is peachy again".


----------



## Remus Lupin (Apr 16, 2012)

Is that the current ret-con? I hadn't heard. Of course, there's nothing internal to the game that would lead you to believe that. Clearly there is FTL drive for moving between nearby solar systems, but it was never established in-game that the Mass Relays were somehow not essential to moving between those far-flung corners of the Galaxy.

I actually liked that about the travel mechanics, because while you can hand wave FTL between solar systems a little bit, the Mass Relays seem to give a better picture of what I understand any likely scenario for intra-galactic travel to be: The creation of a sort of "worm hole" allowing instantaneous travel between the relays. At least, that was my understanding of it until the last half hour of the last game, where apparently it was just a suped up version of FTL that was capable of exploding behind you as you flew through it.


----------



## Felon (Apr 16, 2012)

Johnny3D3D said:


> Nothing a few thermal clips can't handle.  That's a little bit of a joke, but not entirely one.  My first instinct about Miranda was to shoot her; my gut instinct about the Illusive Man is even worse.  The plot seems more forced than it does natural.



The ship needs a crew to operate. On top of that, it has a shackled AI running it. I'm not sure how you could expect to eliminate the crew and AI and still somehow make off with it. Plot-wise, the bases seem to be covered here.



> Another issue I'm having right now is feeling as though the second game doesn't really connect very well to the first game.  Most of the characters I found interesting or had a connection with have little or no part in the second game; a lot of things are left unresolved.  A few plot holes bug me a little too.



It's the second part of a trilogy. Typically, not a point for receiving closure. Having said that, and without knowing which characters you're referring to, I have to guess you're not too far into the game. The whereabouts and doings of the old team are thoroughly addressed. Keep at it.


----------



## Aran Thule (Apr 18, 2012)

Ive finished it twice now, and had avoided spoilers apart from knowing that a lot of people were disappointed with the ending.

1st try:
Choosing mainly renegade options, romancing Liara throughout. finished on about 75% on the war assets bar.
The two best scenes for me were shooting Mordin in the back and his final crawl, very moving.
As a follow up Wrex going nuts when he finds out that i didnt cure the genaphage.
Given that i had killed the Queen in ME1 i thought it a bit cheap when they put a clone in there, as i had not opened the Grunt pod in ME2 he wasn't there but the npc replacement died heroically.

Morinth appeared on earth as a banshee, but they Shepard didnt respond at all to her.
Moving to the end i had EDI and Liara in my team for the final push and after waking from the beam i staggered past their bodies as they lay in pools of blood (but Shepard didnt respond or say anything even though his soul mate was lying there)
At the end i only got one option(i think), to control the reapers, there then followed the cut scenes which then went blank after the door of the normandy opened.

Given that i had not filled out the war assets i though this was the 'bad' ending so tried again with my other character.

2nd try:
Paragon Shepard who had romanced Tali in ME2
Followed the path but doing all the sub missions and trying to scan planets, plus a few multiplayer games got me to 100% war assets easily.
Mordin had died in ME2 and was replaced by the Salarian that you met upon arriving at the planet.
Cured the Genaphage and united the Geth and Quarians, freed the Rachni Queen who didnt do much apart from add a few war assets.
Expected that having full war assets would change how the final fight progressed, only thing that changed was that Morinth did not appear as a banshee on earth(as i saved Samara in ME2)
On the final push (took Tali and Javak)upon awakening i did not see the bodies of my party members so hoped they had got inside...
no such luck, a few minor changed to the script and i ended up near death talking to the god child.
This time i got three options and of these two:
Destroy AI's: after uniting the Geth and Quarian and raising Edi's humanity i did not want to wipe them out.
Synthersis: suddenly got deya vu that i was playing Deux ex again, but went for this option.
Cue same cut scenes with a differant colour.
This time i got a cut scene after the normandy crashed, with Joker and Edi exiting and comforting each other, which worked well... until Tali left the ship behind them.

My conclusion was that if you play ME3 once then the endings are ok, but playing a second time for me just revealed that your actions have very little input on the final outcome and that there are some shocking holes if you look closely.

Now after looking at some other peoples views i think im drifting towards the indoctinated mindset, for the simple reason of why do you only get the Shepard survives cut scene if you choose the destroy reaper option.


----------



## Zelda Themelin (Apr 18, 2012)

Ending was kinda "meh" for me. Bible-esque Eden thing, new start in innocence or something like that. Technology evil = mass relays always destroyed. I found ending highly "religious" and it kinda sucked. Mass effect has always been shades of greys kinda game and suddenly there is this. 

I hated the kid in the end, mostly because of start in mars followed by nightmares that instead of being dreamy cutscenes force be to make boring slow-run twice. So that npc didn't have very positive image in my head what is good gamewise.

But honestly, it would have not been such a bad ending if there would have been more talking with "kiddie". More effects related to choices, at least in flashback of all relevant character or something. Well or that would been bonus. What killed it for me was destruction of mass relays. It kinda underlines religous overtunes.

And I don't have anything against religion or it's use in stories. I just don't think it served that well as epic finish. I think it tells much more about writer's personal preferances than it relates to game.

I don't think there is truth to any theories. Bioware/EA might throw something for content needy people to chew on for extra credit. If they claim that this is how they always intended story to go, I just think it's a lie. 

However it's bad marketing to claim so many different end scenarions and then put out many which are almost the same. And all the major points are the same. It's kinda boring for replay value. I don't know what happened, some writer with way too much will over others? Game was rushed? Since it's last of chronicle there is no need to create similarity than when you intend to continue it. Except for budget reasons.

I think they thought people would be more interested in multiplayer than replay-value, that seems to be so prelevant. That's where some focus and money went. That's content they had demo out in the first place.

I have stopped expecting great stories from video games. I think bioware is drifting away from that to where money is. Or where they think it is. I think if there is going to be some additional content it will cost money. They already gave free content for multiplayer. Maybe they want to do Mass Effect the Stellar War MMO or something. But considering that mine writer went off to write books I think they just come up with something new.

I probably won't buy it, I don't like evolved gameplay so much. Heat clips, sissy  bowing behind objects, movement stuck bugs, teleporting enemies, copy-paste maps. Bioware makes good stories, but their combat-control is second-rate. I compare it to games like wow and crysis.

Worst thing about ME3 for me was running around Citadel constanly to find missions. And only that. And some quests bugged for me and required leaving and re-entering for me to find quest npc to finish them. And there were 2 quests I got only after I've already done the area (which is no-return in ME3). ME3 has most annoying CItadel version of the games. And star systems opening before you can scan anything there. And then suddenly later they randomly spawn scannable things. And reaper attacks kinda got stupid after a while.  And music releted to it tiresome and whole thing not so scary at all.

And use of Origin. Mrrr. It's buggy crap and I had to install additional content 3 days later because it woudn't work for me. At least it doesn't want to keep itself always active like stupid Steam. Their new way to fight "piratism" is so terrible annoying I soon wont be getting any new games.


----------

