Well geez, sorry. I didnt mean any harm; I was only joking. I actually enjoy reading long text instead of the usual short paragraphs... I havent started the story yet, but it from what i gathered, it hasnt ended how everyone expected. If it did end in such a bad way, then I wouldnt mind this ending that is pictured, literally. Sometimes I enjoy these cliche happy endings.
I ****ing loved the ending. I chose synthesis. The Mass Effect series is, at its most basic form, a marriage between Halo and Battlestar Galactica, and the ideas it borrows from the former are perfect. The way they handled the Protheans in ME1 is ****ing amazing and I kept thinking "this is how Halo 3 should've handled the Forerunners..." And it was capped off nicely with the same sentiment when my Shepard actually died and I thought "damn that Halo 3 Believe campaign." I was so emotionally invested in it, I thought for sure Chief wasn't going to make it by the time I actually got the game. I nearly teared up when they did the flashback snippets of Anderson et al. I don't care that your decisions really don't factor into the final confrontation, because really, it'd feel like Deus Ex Machina by that point. Sure, as someone said, I would've liked to actually see scenes from the war like the post-decision bit on earth with the soldiers on the ground, specifically seeing Rachni forces fighting alongside Turian and Krogan troops, etc. But anything more than that, like me saving them causing them to somehow save my final march to death, is just cheap. I went in thinking Shepard was going to die (not because of any promotional material or anything, it just seemed to be the logical conclusion) and I love that you could actually follow through on it. So sad. I have more to say on the subject, but the words keep escaping me since I'm holding like three different conversations at the moment lol. But I'll cap it off by saying, Garrus is the greatest character in that series. Man, I WAS teary-eyed when he mentioned going to heaven's bar, and the whole shooting segment on the Citadel before that, where you could intentionally miss the shot, made me feel like a bro.
Garrus's conversation near the end of the game was definitely emotional, as well as Mordin's and Thane's deaths. Mordin was my favorite character in ME2, and him talking about examining seashells and how someone else might have gotten it wrong... real talk. Thane was also emotional, just how he went out. I ****ing made a beeline to the hospital when I got his email, thinking I was gonna get him as a squadmate, or at least have an awesome send off missions before his Kepral's Syndrome took full effect. It was a bag of mixed feelings when I found out he was too sick to do anything. I accepted it, and thought there would be a point where I get called back to his hospital bed later in the game to fulfill his dying wish (most likely dealing with his son). Then, I see him fighting Kai Leng, which is probably the most well choreographed cut scene in the series. Talking to him in his bed later, my heart sunk when Kolyat told me he wanted to read the spiritual passage to protect me. Such an emotional game :'(
I think Garrus is generally the most liked character and is definitely a great character. I still think Wrex was better written (at least in ME1 that was the case). There were just so many unique things Wrex said and his personality that made him I think the best "character" of the series.
It seemed to me like Bioware didn't really like Wrex that much themselves. I loved him as a character and squadmate in ME1, but in ME2 the default decision is for him to have died on Virmire. Just seems like they kind of wrote him out, unfortunately. Still an awesome character.
oh god damnit. if that's true I'm going to be so mad, especially since I love "it was all a dream." I did wonder throughout the series why Shep never showed signs of indoctrination.
Shepard being indoctrinated was an idea that Mac Walters (lead writer) came up with one night when he was drunk. He thought about putting it into the game, but decided to go against it because it was too hard to implement and was unsatisfying for new players. It's not true, just people so far into denial they make up their own stories. [br][/br]Edited by merge: EDIT: Also, indoctrination doesn't make sense. Shepard doesn't spend nearly enough time near Reapers for it to take effect. The only direct contact Shepard has with Reapers throughout the series is when he is semi-near Sovereign for a bit at the end of ME1 (although he's busy trying to open up the citadel), the dead reaper in ME2 (isn't even functional anymore), and the minutes of close range proximity to Reapers in ME3; even then, most of those in ME3 Shepard gets close to are destroyers and as far as we know don't have the same indoctrination abilities as that of Soverign, Harbinger, and other "main" Reapers (the ones that are like 2km tall as opposed to a couple hundred meters). Saren is susceptible to Reaper indoctrination because he uses Sovereign for travel. The Geth and Rachni can be indoctrinated easily because they already function on a hive-mind consensus. The Illusive Man becomes indoctrinated very quickly because he outfits himself with Reaper technology and then almost sides with them so he can attempt to control them. The Collectors are obviously indoctrinated because the Reapers altered their DNA. And finally, the only reason the men and women in the Arrival DLC are indoctrinated is because they spend time trying to analyze a Reaper artifact designed to indoctrinate those around them. All evidence suggests that in order to be indoctrinated you either need to spend a prolonged time (weeks-months) in direct physical contact with a "main" Reaper, or already be susceptible to hive-mind control. Not only that, but evidence would also suggest that the more time and indoctrinated person spends away from a Reaper, the weaker the Reaper control becomes. This explains why Saren and The Illusive Man are more likely to break away from the indoctrination when they are away from the Reaper in order to talk or fight Shepard one on one. This would mean that slow, gradual indoctrination of someone like Shepard, who spends a very limited amount of time near Reapers, always followed by prolonged periods of being away from said Reapers, just doesn't make logical sense. Just seems like people who go so far to prove that indoctrination is true would realize that based on the logic of the universe, it's unlikely based on the amount of time Shepard spends near/around Reapers, not to mention how much stronger of a will Shepard has compared to most people in the universe.
LOL!1111!!!!!!1 Bioware just got told. Hahaha because its actually true. It's three endings with different colors.
Mass Effect 3: New Ending Incoming - PlayStation 3 News at IGN Muzyka doesn't specifically say that they are changing the ending to the game, just says they will be "providing more clarity for those seeking further closure to their journey." Could be an epilogue of some kind, or it may actually change the ending, who knows. Also, no word on whether or not it'll be free.
Just finished the game. I chose controlling the Reapers, because that was the only way to save everyone that I have worked so hard to protect and unify throughout the game and the series. I'm fine with Shepard dying. Ultimate sacrifice endings usually make the game more emotional and leave the character as a perfect hero. My problem isn't that none of the decisions mattered, or that the endings weren't completely different. It was that f*cking kid (the catalyst). All that time, there was someone just pulling the strings? Claiming that it was all to end chaos? Bullshit. THAT is my big problem. After all I fought for, the grand conclusion to everything I had accomplished was essentially choosing a door with a number on it and hoping everything works out for the best. Why not just have Shepard press a button to activate the Crucible and kill all the Reapers? Leave that little kid and his overly simplified view of life out of the story altogether. Shepard kills the Reapers, saves the galaxy, and everyone starts to rebuild their lives in unity. A simple ending, like QKT said. And adding conclusions to your choices should have been an obvious inclusion (i.e. DA:O or Fallout). I just don't understand why they would bring a whole new character/idea into the mix to end the saga when everything before was about Shepard and his interactions with the rest of the galaxy.
The child was not a character pulling the strings. The Reapers were completely autonomous, nobody controlled them; however, they were made for a purpose. The Catalyst was created to offer the possibility of new solutions when the current solution (Reapers returning every 50,000 years to wipe out intelligent life) proved to be impractical or impossible to maintain. All of these solutions are imperfect, which is why they weren't implemented in the first place and why there are several to choose from. And choosing a numbered door is an oversimplified analogy, but the idea of "hoping everything works out for the best" is essentially what Mass Effect has always been about. The games have always been filled with clear cut good and evil decisions, but it was never clear, at the time, which decision was right or wrong. Sometimes it was better to go with the renegade decision, and other times the paragon. Mass Effect was a game about taking the information you are given, predicting how the universe will react to each decision, and then deciding based on that analysis. And that's exactly how they ended it too. I'm not arguing that anyone should or shouldn't enjoy the ending, but I do oppose the opinion that the ending somehow went in a totally different direction than the rest of the games.
There was a perfect solution. Kill the Reapers, and let the galaxy continue under it's new unity. Anyone claiming to be trying end chaos should have been able to see that Shepard had already done that by uniting everyone against the Reapers. He had done what no other cycle had been able to do. It's all right there. It's perfectly set up, but instead we are left with an impossible choice that leaves the player with what feels like a hollow victory at best. Maybe that's what ME has always been about for you, but my experience has been one where my decisions have been rewarded for doing the right thing. There was no right thing to do at the end of ME3. There was only picking the lesser of three evils, which may be realistic, but goddamn if it isn't a depressing way to end a series.
The catalyst specifically told you that peace would not last if the Reapers were destroyed. There's no way that all these alliances would last forever after the Reapers were destroyed. Hell, most of them could fall apart as soon as the Reaper threat was eliminated. The basic concept was, no cycle had ever proven that it was capable of coexisting effectively within the galaxy. This cycle, seeing as how it was able to unite against the Reapers, proved that it was the first cycle that was responsible and prudent enough to continue to live. Therefore, they were given a choice of how they wished to live. I don't see how it's really a hollow victory. The end goal of the games was to destroy the Reapers, and that is a choice. If that's the kind of ending you wanted, choose it. But for the people who thought there was always an alternative to killing, which Bioware stresses throughout all three games, there are alternative choices. Some people think it's a lame ending because all the mass relays are destroyed, but it makes sense to me for it to be canon. The Reapers created the relays so that organic life would develop along a set path. With the relays gone, the galaxy is free to expand however it wishes, along its own path.
Peace wouldn't last no matter what decision you made. People are always going to fight. Shepard had brought peace for the moment, and while controlling the Reapers would have counted as a victory, killing the Reapers would have created a stronger bond between the races. Together they destroyed the things threatening their life. They made their own peace and could work toward keeping it. Having slept on the final events of ME3, they don't sit as poorly as they did before, but I still think it would have been better without the catalyst at all. Just Shepard and his allies taking it to the Reapers. No pseudo-deity mucking it all up with his quest to end all chaos. He's no different than the Elusive Man or the Protheans.