MrPopo wrote:I'm amused that you still confuse "bad ending" with "ending I didn't like".
Considering the rather large number of other people who don't like it, I think it definitely falls into the "bad" category
The problems people have with the endings tend to have a lot more to do with inconsistencies and plot holes than just not being satisfied with the conclusion. All three introduce major problems for the ME universe that aren't even touched on.
MrPopo wrote:I'm amused that you still confuse "bad ending" with "ending I didn't like".
Considering the rather large number of other people who don't like it, I think it definitely falls into the "bad" category
The problems people have with the endings tend to have a lot more to do with inconsistencies and plot holes than just not being satisfied with the conclusion. All three introduce major problems for the ME universe that aren't even touched on.
The only plot hole I'm really aware of is the Normandy crash at the end. The rest is realization that the galaxy has fundamentally changed and a lot of bad shit has potentially gone down and we want to know what it is. I see those as story hooks for more works in the universe. The ME trilogy was Shepard's Story, and that's very much wrapped up. But the ME Galaxy has many more stories to tell.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
MrPopo wrote:The only plot hole I'm really aware of is the Normandy crash at the end. The rest is realization that the galaxy has fundamentally changed and a lot of bad shit has potentially gone down and we want to know what it is. I see those as story hooks for more works in the universe. The ME trilogy was Shepard's Story, and that's very much wrapped up. But the ME Galaxy has many more stories to tell.
Some of it would be, some of it would qualify as a plot hole. Mostly because the post-credits scene still seems to indicate that people see Shepard as a savior, but the loss of the Mass Relays would effectively kill off more civilizations than even the Reapers would. That, to me, requires a little explanation, or (at least) recognition. As-is, it's basically a "well, we're killing almost everyone, would you like them original recipe or extra crispy?".
Beyond that, prior decisions meant jack shit. The only thing that does is readiness rating, which could be gained from multiplayer. You do see different characters appear in 3, or different conversations before you rush off on your final mission, but the actual end of the game is unaffected. Shepard going along with any of the choices seems out of character, doubly so with the recognition that pretty much everyone is going to die no matter what she picks - though again, the game never actually acknowledges that.
Some of it would be, some of it would qualify as a plot hole. Mostly because the post-credits scene still seems to indicate that people see Shepard as a savior, but the loss of the Mass Relays would effectively kill off more civilizations than even the Reapers would. That, to me, requires a little explanation, or (at least) recognition. As-is, it's basically a "well, we're killing almost everyone, would you like them original recipe or extra crispy?".
Aside from the Quarians (which is debatable), would it really kill off any civilizations, or just specific planets? I got the sense that Shepard saved the galaxy from annihilation in the post-credits scene, which she did. It cost countless individual lives but near-annihilation is better than annihilation.
Beyond that, prior decisions meant jack shit. The only thing that does is readiness rating, which could be gained from multiplayer. You do see different characters appear in 3, or different conversations before you rush off on your final mission, but the actual end of the game is unaffected.
As opposed to ME1 & 2 where your decisions mean almost jack shit. I guess Bioware's real failure was not giving you a good illusion of choice like they did before.
Shepard going along with any of the choices seems out of character, doubly so with the recognition that pretty much everyone is going to die no matter what she picks - though again, the game never actually acknowledges that.
If your choices are:
1. Everyone gets wiped out 2. Some form of in the worst case almost everyone dies out
I'm pretty sure everyone is going to pick 2. And like I said, I disagree about your theory that everyone would get wiped out.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
Aside from the Quarians (which is debatable), would it really kill off any civilizations, or just specific planets? I got the sense that Shepard saved the galaxy from annihilation in the post-credits scene, which she did. It cost countless individual lives but near-annihilation is better than annihilation.
Without the Mass Relays, the entire combined fleets are stuck in orbit around Earth, with decades of travel to the next nearest system. Quarians and Turians can't eat food produced there. Krogan repopulate like fiends too, so likely scenario, within a few years our solar system is populated by thousands of derelict ships and a few Krogan that haven't yet starved to death. Plus colonized worlds depending on food and supplies that can't be delivered anymore because, hey, no Mass Relays.
Additionally, it had already been established that blowing up a Mass Relay is a pretty big deal. I think Bioware has already said something like, well, we could do it differently...but in-game canon thus far was that doing so blows up the system it's in.
As opposed to ME1 & 2 where your decisions mean almost jack shit. I guess Bioware's real failure was not giving you a good illusion of choice like they did before.
Thing with the first two games is that they were setting up this one. I don't disagree, most Bioware games just end up in the same place anyway, but we were told that our decisions would matter in the end. They didn't. It was Bioware's opportunity to step up their game in that regard, and instead they took a step back.
If your choices are:
1. Everyone gets wiped out 2. Some form of in the worst case almost everyone dies out
I'm pretty sure everyone is going to pick 2. And like I said, I disagree about your theory that everyone would get wiped out.
Except that they never were going to get entirely wiped out. They were going to get made into Reapers. The space-faring ones anyway. All their knowledge and such retained, albeit in a giant space-bug hive mind. The "young" races get left alone to continue to grow until they get out into space, find the Citadel, and start the process over.
Every choice results in the destruction of the Mass Relays, crippling their way of life if they aren't directly killed. Sure, eventually, if any of them actually make new faster-than-light travel they don't need to worry about the anti-Spirals Reapers coming to get them, but for the time being, you probably have more death than the Reapers would have brought. Space faring races are cut off and slowly die, primitive cultures get wiped out when the Mass Relays blow up.
Could it be the basis of some post-ME-apocalypse series set thousands of years later? Sure. The problem is that the current endings don't address any of that at all.
Yes, they destroy the star. Remind me again how many systems you visited in game that didn't have a mass relay.
Again, it seems like your complaint is that you have unanswered questions. I think they're fantastic questions. Let's see if they get answered in the future.
Blizzard Entertainment Software Developer - All comments and views are my own and not representative of the company.
