Mass Effect 3 Spoiler Thread [Spoiler tag free, beware]

[Jeff Kelly]

Since both of the examples of exactly why the star child is wrong (The geth and EDI) die in that ending it's as pointless as the other two. In a well written "sort of greek" drama it might count as dramatic irony since the only way to destroy that particular kind of evil also destroys the sole examples that proved it to be wrong in the first place.

The more I know about Bioware though, the more I think that this was probably entirely by accident.

[Sjofn]

Take for example the great little scene between Garrus and Sheperd on top of the citadel presidium.

Why not make a mini game out of it? You already have the mechanics for it in place (also the spectre shooting range is in the game). Let them shoot at bottles for a while. Let the players see if they can actually win against somebody as skilled as Garrus. Create an achivement for it. Let the players decide if they'll let him win with more than just a dialogue option. Make mechanics so that both Garrus and Shepard can cheat or distract each other. End with a quip by whoever wins and let them choose to be a graceful winner/loser or to gloat at the other a little.

See, that just gets way too fucking game-y for my tastes and would've taken me entirely out of the moment they were trying to present, and I think the scene would've been poorer for it. It's also exactly the type of thing that might be neat the first time (for certain values of "neat"), but gets really stupid and/or annoying the second or third time through.

Basically you picked one of the scenes I felt worked best in the entire game, and want to slap a gimmicky mini-game onto it. I can't say I'd be down with that.


EDIT: And since it can't be said enough: fuck that little kid. So fucking hard. Utterly loathesome device.

[Riggswolfe]

Since both of the examples of exactly why the star child is wrong (The geth and EDI) die in that ending it's as pointless as the other two. In a well written "sort of greek" drama it might count as dramatic irony since the only way to destroy that particular kind of evil also destroys the sole examples that proved it to be wrong in the first place.

The more I know about Bioware though, the more I think that this was probably entirely by accident.

But do the Geth and Edi really die? Sure, we don't see Edi in the finale cutscene but so what. You're assuming the Starchild is telling the truth and the destruction ending has a scene that actually makes it appear that he is a little fucking liar. He specifically says Geth and Edi will die then says "and you are also part synthetic" at least implying you will die. Yet, if you have high enough war readiness or whatever it's called you are shown taking a breath clearly NOT dead which is what I got last night when I replayed it.

So, it's only as pointless as the other two if we assume that the little kid who claims to have created the Reapers is telling the whole truth. But we have no reason to believe that. None at all. In fact, the more I think about it, the more I think the kid was basically a last ditch effort to scare you away from doing what you were sent to do. I mean really, the choice Anderson made is the wrong one? For all 3 games he is a father figure and a voice of reason. He, and he alone, believes fully in Shepard throughout the whole series (not counting squadmates) and we're expected to believe that his choice is the "Renegade/bad end"? I don't buy it.

[Sjofn]

It's as pointless as the other two because you still destroy the mass relays and ruin everything, plus you've done blowed up the only work force that wouldn't starve to death. I have no reason to believe the Starchild was lying about it killing the geth and EDI, given EDI doesn't pop out of the Normandy like she does in the other two endings. It's as strong evidence as Shepard's one shallow breath. EDI COULD hop out of the Normandy fourth, just as Shepard COULD go on to gurgle and die (as s/he SHOULD, there's no way s/he would survive the Citadel blowing up).

Of course, all Normandy-related ending shit is stupid anyway, as Kaidan somehow went from being dead via Harbringer (he was in my squad, although I guess I only noticed Garrus' body during my magic beam slow-mo run) to hopping out of the Normandy.



Random aside: I am finishing a ME2 MANSHEP run, and I cannot believe how much I dislike Jacob now. I had grown to appreciate him during my ALL JACOB PLAYTHROUGH, and now I halfway want to send his stupid ass into the Death Tube to get killed. Cheat on MY Shepard, will you, you asshole?

[Riggswolfe]

It's as pointless as the other two because you still destroy the mass relays and ruin everything, plus you've done blowed up the only work force that wouldn't starve to death. I have no reason to believe the Starchild was lying about it killing the geth and EDI, given EDI doesn't pop out of the Normandy like she does in the other two endings. It's as strong evidence as Shepard's one shallow breath. EDI COULD hop out of the Normandy fourth, just as Shepard COULD go on to gurgle and die (as s/he SHOULD, there's no way s/he would survive the Citadel blowing up).

Of course, all Normandy-related ending shit is stupid anyway, as Kaidan somehow went from being dead via Harbringer (he was in my squad, although I guess I only noticed Garrus' body during my magic beam slow-mo run) to hopping out of the Normandy.



Random aside: I am finishing a ME2 MANSHEP run, and I cannot believe how much I dislike Jacob now. I had grown to appreciate him during my ALL JACOB PLAYTHROUGH, and now I halfway want to send his stupid ass into the Death Tube to get killed. Cheat on MY Shepard, will you, you asshole?

Well since the ending was so ambigious and so well...inconclusive we're left with nothing but theories. Yes, there is evidence that Starchild told the truth but there is also evidence he didn't. I choose to believe he didn't. Also, someone pointed out that in the Codex it says non-relay FTL is a dozen or so light years per day. Still not Mass Relay fast but it does give hope that the other races might be able to make it home, especially with the Quarians having food ships most likely. So, eh, I don't know. I think I'm sticking with the destroy ending. It's what I worked for for 3 games and even if I killed the Geth and Edi there is zero chance of the Reapers ever coming back and the more I think about it the more I like that that ending basically gives the Starchild the middle finger.

[Sjofn]

It's still not like, I don't know. Camping? You guys seem to think it'll be a simple matter of roughing it for a little bit, then everyone lives happily ever after. And that's ... well. Whatever gets you through the ending, I guess.

[Miasma]

I can't even focus at work today because all I'm thinking about is how badly done those endings were, how flawed their readiness system is and how so many important plot points were marred for me because I switched platforms and didn't have an ME2 save.  I need to stop playing video games.

[Polysorbate80]

So, I replayed the end game citadel stuff last night and this time I chose the Destroy the Reapers no matter what it does to the Geth and Edi ending. I also got the Shepard breathing clip. I'm relatively satisfied with this ending and I've read some stuff on the forums that leads me to believe more and more that this is the only real ending.

It would fit with Bioware's screwed-up habit of making all the wrong decisions the "right" ones.  I never played ME2 other than with my import from ME1, because all the defaults were renegade KILL EVERYONE GO GO GO HUMANS RAR shit--no wrex, no rachni queen, council replaced with humans, human romance option survives (not that that's a bad thing, other than BOTH HUMAN OPTIONS SUCK) blah blah blah...

I'm still ok with my synthesis ending.  AndroiDNA Joker/EDI get to be happy and have little cyborg babies, Liara lived, Tali/Garrus hooked up, and I got to ensure Lieutenant Bro-hawk and the Duck-Lip Spectre died to Reaper fire (or so I hope, I didn't see them again so I can dream, can't I?).  Plus, I can assume everyone's immortal now and they have time to travel between stars, and can all live indefinitely on a diet of stale fish-sticks and D-Cell batteries.

[Jeff Kelly]

BTW don't replay it if you liked the game and just hate the end. Serious reccomendation.

If you do you'll see just how much your "choices" matter in the big picture which is not at all.

You rescued the Rachnii queen? Tough luck the reapers enslave them again and use them to fight the organics
You Killed the Rachnii queen? Tough luck the reapers clone one and use it to fight the organics

The only difference is that the dialogue is slightly different.

This is basically the same with every choice you could have made throughout the game.

Did you sell Legion to the IM? Then you'll meet a Geth Platform that looks and talks entirely like Legion up to the N7 breastplate that you just seem to keep losing all over the terminus systems.

It's the same with basically everything, if a sqadmate died in 2 you'll get the same scene except with a generic stand-in taking over for Jacob, Jack etc.

Regardless of your choices the levels play out in exactly the same way except with a different rationalization for them and slightly modified dialogue. Which makes the whole "choices carrying over to the third installment" thing just window dressing.

This might surprise some people

[Job601]

Regardless of your choices the levels play out in exactly the same way except with a different rationalization for them and slightly modified dialogue. Which makes the whole "choices carrying over to the third installment" thing just window dressing.

This might surprise some people

You're in the same thread with people complaining that they can't get the ending they want or that they are missing plot points because they don't have access to a save with the right decisions.  Think how upset players would be if their decisions mattered more, if, for example, they couldn't access content they paid for because they didn't buy the two earlier games.  Bioware is really damned if they do and damned if they don't, and I don't think it's at all self-evident where the line for "meaningful decisions" should be drawn.

[Riggswolfe]

So, someone on the Bioware forums claims that if you use Edi alot in your squad she shows up in the Normandy crash scene even in the Destroy ending which is either A) An oops that they let slip through. or B) very hard to find proof that the Starchild lies.

[Merusk]

It's an oops.  If you think otherwise you're really just reaching for excuses to make this a non-shitty game, imo.

[Polysorbate80]

You rescued the Rachnii queen? Tough luck the reapers enslave them again and use them to fight the organics
You Killed the Rachnii queen? Tough luck the reapers clone one and use it to fight the organics

On that particular example, spoilers have it that if you didn't save the original Rachni queen but do choose to save the NEW queen, she eventually flakes out and causes trouble.  Result is a net loss of war assets rather than a gain.

Regarding the followers, you miss out on a few War asset points (meh) and the chance for futher dialogue for a lot of them.  Which may also be "meh" to many, but I like the Jack scene in the Citadel ("Shepard! Everyone knows you can't dance!")

It's all minor stuff, but it adds flavor.

[Jeff Kelly]

The morailty choices in most games have been primarily designed to encourage the players to replay the game, which is fine if a bit hackneyed. Except that all the other companies don't claim that "Your choices matter", that "choices carry over to new installments" and that you "get the story you want and created". They mostly define a canon ending they base sequels on andthat's it

This is why Bioware is "damned if you do damned if you don't" by its own decisions and PR.

The sensible choice would have been to include a save game generator where you can set the relevant choices in some sort of decision tree and then play the resulting character to see how it would have played out if I had behaved differently.

The mechanics for that are in the games (the save game importer basically has to do that anyway). Make it unlockable after the first playthrough or offer it as DLC for 600 microsoft points (that would have been a sensible zero day DLC btw.)

Everybody that complains can shut up and use the generator, the rest can bitch about their characters being the only pure ones because they actually played everything instead of just selecting it. This way everybody wins.

Hell I'd buy it just so I could see some parts of Mass Effect I'll probably never experience just because I don't want play it another time.

Even better, design it like the interactive comic they did for the PS3 version of Mass Effect 2, only with a lot more options available. This could even be the tutorial to introduce players new to the franchise via interactive storytelling.

Do what naughty dog did with Uncharted 3 and offer a Mass Effect Series bundle that includes all three games + DLC or reissue the old games + DLC included for a reduced price if you're concerned about discouraging new players to buy the old games if they can use the interactive comic instead.

Maybe only offer certain key choices to players that bought the previous games, which would be slightly evil but still OK in my book.

Or, you know, stop claiming that the choices of the players actually matter if they really don't

[Shrike]

It's an oops.  If you think otherwise you're really just reaching for excuses to make this a non-shitty game, imo.

Maybe. But maybe not.

The game pretty much rocked up until London. Then the wheels seemingly come off.

The more I think about it and talk it over with friends, the more I think we're getting played by Bioware and the reapers. I'm about 90% positive that brat is the face of indoctrination and ending(s) are just a minigame of Shepard vs. indoctrination. Of course, we have no confirmation of this presently.

If we get an ending DLC, I'd expect this to play out as confirmation. Also, it's purely in line with EAs present business model (and the forum crying would be truly epic). Time will tell!

[Riggswolfe]

Here is a fairly long video about why it is probably a dream/hallucination/indoctrination

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us4pkLy-PYk&feature=youtu.be

This one is shorter but more to the point and makes the same case

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDSwW7jflAQ&feature=share

I have to agree with what I think Shrike was saying. The vast majority of the game was really well written so it is hard to believe things fell apart this utterly at the end with this many glaring plot holes and inconsistencies. You'd expect to see it through the whole game if the writers were truly this shitty.

[deb]

words

You'd want to buy a generator and use it to make decisions that, according to you, don't matter?

I think ME3 was the probably the worst game of the series, but as a device for bringing closure for the characters I'd grown to like, it was pretty damn good. The shooting scene with Garrus (which would have been destroyed by a retarded minigame) and the final scene with Liara were both very good. Saving the geth and the quarians with Tali as my character's romance option was excellent, as was the little touch with Tali's photograph. And I loved constantly bumping into familiar faces who were there because of the choices I made years ago.

My total military strength was about 6900 and I did pretty much everything I could, and even though the N7 missions were nothing to write home about, I never got bored. I didn't like the ending either, but on the other hand, it was what I expected. Dragon Age 2 taught me that Bioware really only cares about the big picture wrt the game's universe, which while detailed, is cookie cutter fantasy/scifi. And the reason I love the Mass Effect series and DA:O are the characters and the emotional investement I have in them.

[Jeff Kelly]

Look, nobody planned an "End Game DLC" and put in this ending to mislead gamers.

If this ever came out the public relations fallout would be epic, this would have serious repercussions on sales prospects of all current and future Bioware titles and most titles by other EA-backed studios. It would probably kill EA (it will affect their stock prices) and most certainly will kill Bioware if they ever did it.

The other EA studios would be up in arms about it because EA/Bioware basically destroyed the rest of credibility and goodwill they had and because they made them guilty by association. You'd see news reports, lawsuits, the mother of all shitstorms on every gaming site and forum you'd basically destroy the trust and goodwill of most gamers out there probably for a long time for the smal price of only 6,99 per pop.

It could have legal repercussions because of the implied business practices, misleading advertising and so on.

It would be such an epically stupid move that I cannot possibly imagine even the managament of EA trying it.

[Jeff Kelly]

You'd want to buy a generator and use it to make decisions that, according to you, don't matter?

As a previous poster pointed out the reason they included decisions that don't really change the experience significantly is so that nobody feels left out just because he didn't play the "best" way in previous games (or because he/she is new to the series) which is a fair point.

So eliminate the reason people might feel left out (as in offer them something to correct bad decisions/decisions that prevent a certain ending) and then offer them choices that really change the experience.

Or simply don't claim that the choices of the players actually matter.

[jakonovski]

I'm mostly over the ending but what continues to annoy me is London. They build up this whole thing about saving Earth and then your return is based on the stupidest most contrived excuse ever. You have to land, fight Reapers on foot and take the magic elevator back to space. Why? Why wouldn't they just sneak in with the stealthy Normandy and drill a hole in the Citadel?

On top of that, their gameplay engine was woefully inadequate for any kind of depiction of mass warfare. You play up this big assault and then it's just another three man mission with lame ass radio chatter standing in for the rest.

[deb]

As a previous poster pointed out the reason they included decisions that don't really change the experience significantly is so that nobody feels left out just because he didn't play the "best" way in previous games (or because he/she is new to the series) which is a fair point.

Maybe it's a question of what one deems significant. For example, I was apparently one "point" away from having Tali commit suicide, because I reprogrammed the heretic geth in ME2. Just that would've changed my experience a lot.

I still claim Bioware handled decisions and consequences well in Mass Effect. In Dragon Age 2? Not so much. A three-game series like this is nothing anyone has tried to create before. Of course there's lot's of room for improvement, but in books the overall experience is great.

[Sir T]

Look, we have seen halucinatioon Endings before. In S.T.A.L.K.E.R. you can go into the ruins of the Cherbobyl Reactor and go to the wish granter and make a wish that depends on your choices in the game. That wish ends the game and is just a hal;ucination of your brain bieng burned out and you turning into a Zombie. For example, Good stalkers wish for the Zone to disapear, and all of a sudden you are in a beutiful glade with birds twittering and whatnot, but then you look up and your Irises have closed and you are struck blind. Bad stalkers might wish for lots of money and you see lots of money falling on him, killing him.

The thing was that if you went back to a previous save you could turn right instead of left and go find the ladder which takes you to where you can have choices that leave you alive and you either join the bad guys or kill them. If you had just the "Congratulations on your fucked up wishending comrades" ending S.T.A.L.K.E.R. would not be held in as high esteem as it is. People would have quite rightly smashed up the DVD.

And by the way the people who are trying to say that "this is just a halcination and the reapers win" are trying to justify a shit ending with an even worse ending. Thats just pathetic. Shepherd after all he has been through dreams about screwing the galaxy over as he lays dying. Bullshit. Sure, you can see his body remaining on the ground as the lift rises to where he meats the kid, but you can argue thats harbinger transmitting into him through his reaper tech, so its still valid.

Crafting a worse ending in your head to try and make a bad ending seem better is the worst form of barginning. And there is no way that Bioware would ever recover then the PR Disaster of a DLC ending "Give us 10 bucks or the Earth gets it" would result in a gigantic fuck off

[Polysorbate80]

The more I think about it and talk it over with friends, the more I think we're getting played by Bioware and the reapers. I'm about 90% positive that brat is the face of indoctrination and ending(s) are just a minigame of Shepard vs. indoctrination. Of course, we have no confirmation of this presently.

If we get an ending DLC, I'd expect this to play out as confirmation. Also, it's purely in line with EAs present business model (and the forum crying would be truly epic). Time will tell!

Plot holes that introduces:

First, everything we've heard from Miranda, the videos on the Cerberus station, and the Illusive Man himself indicate he didn't want to risk breaking whatever made Shepard, well, Shepard.

Second, the Illusive Man didn't have indoctrination technology until after Shepard was rez'd anyway.

And even if that was all untrue, he'd have used it earlier to keep Shepard from blowing up the collector base, running off with the Normandy (which he DID have remote override capability installed in), interfering on Mars, keeping him out of the Citadel the first time, etc.

I suppose one could argue the Reapers have indoctrinated Shepard--but where was their opportunity?

BTW, I watched the shorter of the two vids that Riggswolfe posted.  Some of the questions it poses are just stupid or overthought.  The rest look to be just dramatic plot devices (or in a couple of cases, sloppiness)

[Rokal]

The sensible choice would have been to include a save game generator where you can set the relevant choices in some sort of decision tree and then play the resulting character to see how it would have played out if I had behaved differently.

Someone in the community made something like this for DA2. There is also a save editor out there for ME, so you can customize your ME2 save before importing it to ME3 if you want. I think the problem with including a save editor is that Bioware assumes people without saves to import are mostly new players. A save editor isn't going to be worth anything to someone who hasn't played ME1/2 and doesn't have any idea what events the editor is talking about.

For everyone else, you're better off importing the save you had and rolling with it. If you do a repeat playthrough with a radically different save, you'll end up being disappointed just how little changes. Better not to look behind the curtain, and let the game pretend this is more *your* Shepard's story than it actually is.

[Abelian75]

I've already ranted elsewhere about the ending, and won't go into the details that so many others have raised here, but I will say that it really feel like this is the special kind of terrible that comes from management forcing a change at the last minute and the team having to scramble to change the ending.  The lack of denouement VO, brevity of the conversation with the magic sky kid with no ability to interrogate him, weird teleporting characters, and general incoherence point to this.  And I'm now specifically starting to think that the change that was mandated was that all the mass relays had to be destroyed to set the stage for their next game or something.  It would explain the lack of denouement, as nothing written before deciding that the mass relays blow up no matter what would make sense anymore.  Maybe one of the endings previously involved a crashing normandy (that had some reason to be making a jump between relays, possibly fleeing an exploding Sol system that happened in one of the less positive endings), and they figured they could just tweak some textures and make that the "fate of the characters" shot for everything.  Obviously nothing involving home planets or species as a whole would work anymore, as the destruction of the relays would change everything.

Obviously this is massive speculation that could be totally wrong.  It's a pretty horrible ending, though, and given that the writing is generally pretty good for a space opera, I really suspect the abomination was caused by more business-y related things than by simple bad writing.  Cuz I mean, damn.  Teleporting characters, yo.

[Miasma]

Just went home, did some multiplayer (which I sucked at), to get my readiness high enough for the synthesis merge ending and then restarted the final mission.  It didn't take, I couldn't do it.  I'm guessing your multiplayer percentage gets locked in when you attack the cerberus base or something.  I'm not replaying that far back, fuck this game.

Also, fuck Bioware.

[Abelian75]

Just went home, did some multiplayer (which I sucked at), to get my readiness high enough for the synthesis merge ending and then restarted the final mission.  It didn't take, I couldn't do it.  I'm guessing your multiplayer percentage gets locked in when you attack the cerberus base or something.  I'm not replaying that far back, fuck this game.

It's ok.  Just imagine Joker and some leaves with a little shimmering circuitry on them and you're pretty much good.

[jakonovski]

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99kS02nPoEM

[Jeff Kelly]

This guy claims he has sources that told him the intended ending

http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/995452-mass-effect-3/62230265

Take it for what it's worth I'm skeptical but you guys might be interested.

At least his one does make some sense compared to some of the other fan endings out there

[Simond]

I suppose one could argue the Reapers have indoctrinated Shepard--but where was their opportunity?

When you're running at Harbinger before you even get to the Citadel. You get knocked sidewides, Harbinger stops shooting and starts trying to ASSUME DIRECT CONTROL over Shepard via her suspiciously bleeding-edge implants so thoughtfully added by Cerberus. You know, that organisation run by a partially- (ME2) to fully-indoctrinated fuckhead.

[Kail]

Look, nobody planned an "End Game DLC" and put in this ending to mislead gamers.

If this ever came out the public relations fallout would be epic, this would have serious repercussions on sales prospects of all current and future Bioware titles and most titles by other EA-backed studios. It would probably kill EA (it will affect their stock prices) and most certainly will kill Bioware if they ever did it.

I wish I could believe that.  But every time I've ever heard someone say "Surely they wouldn't tarnish their reputation by doing [infuriating moneygrab X]" it's followed a week later by a press release that says they are.  I mean, this game has kindled the rage of a thousand suns on the internet over a half dozen different topics, and it doesn't seem to be hurting for sales.

[schild]

A three-game series like this is nothing anyone has tried to create before. Of course there's lot's of room for improvement, but in books the overall experience is great.

What now?

[deb]

Assuming you're objecting to the former, I think Mass Effect is unique when it comes to offering the player a vast number of decisions whose consequences are present throughout a three-game series.

But if you feel that said consequences are only superficial and don't really change the gameplaye or experience, it's a moot point, of course.

[Paelos]

Assuming you're objecting to the former, I think Mass Effect is unique when it comes to offering the player a vast number of decisions whose consequences are present throughout a three-game series.

But if you feel that said consequences are only superficial and don't really change the gameplaye or experience, it's a moot point, of course.

Here's the major problem. Having a vast number of decisions doesn't matter if they are all inconsequential. A consequence has to be the result of some previous occurance, but if all the previous occurances arrive at the same result, your vast amount of choices essentially aren't choices.

[Velorath]

Assuming you're objecting to the former, I think Mass Effect is unique when it comes to offering the player a vast number of decisions whose consequences are present throughout a three-game series.

But if you feel that said consequences are only superficial and don't really change the gameplaye or experience, it's a moot point, of course.

Here's the major problem. Having a vast number of decisions doesn't matter if they are all inconsequential. A consequence has to be the result of some previous occurance, but if all the previous occurances arrive at the same result, your vast amount of choices essentially aren't choices.

By and large it's the illusion of choice, which has been talked about on f13 numerous times so I'm not sure why it's surprising some people now.  If you want to have actual choice, you have games like Way of the Samurai which has a ton of endings but can be played through in a couple hours and doesn't lead into future games.  Even for what little variance the choices allow for in the ME games, look at all the extra work that has to be done.  Every party member from the previous two games except for Liara had to have a potential replacement in ME3 with someone else doing the dialog.  I assume this is why they have Kaiden/Ashley incapacitated for a large part of the game.  Leaving the Rachni out if you didn't save them in ME1 would result in Ravagers being completely absent from the game, requiring ever bit of combat that involves them to be reworked.  It just wouldn't be practical.