Mac Walters is such an awful writer he somehow left so many plot holes that form a better ending
If you didn't know any better you would think it was on purpose but no, he's just that damn bad.
/napkin
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
If Mass Effect 3 DID have a canon ending...(old spoilers)
- Thread starter The Artisan
- Start date
If you didn't know any better you would think it was on purpose but no, he's just that damn bad.
/napkin
Destroy doesn't work for me. Destroy ignores our prior knowledge of what the destruction of a Mass Effect relay actually means and veers to close to a Hyperion knockoff.
Synthesis is right out. No.
Control is the real destroy and by destroy I mean disable.
My canon ending is control as a form of disabling. The Shepard Reaper effectively shatters much of the high level Reaper AI. Individual Reapers become brutally fragmented by the will of their constituent species. Some Reapers immediately begin to fight one another. Other Reapers carry on with the original reaping effort. Some flee to parts unknown. Many simply hang dead in space unable to handle the sudden awakening. As soon as this happens dozens of incredibly advanced species that had been hiding emerge from the depths of gas giants, the darkness between stars and behind sectors with unexplored or missing relays. These ancients species similarly begin working their own agenda.
Mass Effect 4 opens on the Citadel orbiting Earth.
The system has finally been secured at tremendous cost and reconstruction efforts are underway. Communication via QED is limited yet paints a bleak picture of the devastation felt across the galaxy. Arguments about what to do next threaten to rip apart what little remains. Some argue that it is too early to divide the fleet in the face of what unknown threats may remain. Others argue for the importance in saving as many lives... and resources as possible. The decision is made to send heavily armed scouts to reestablish regular contact between former Council worlds and determine the extent of new and emerging threats. You are one of those scouts. You are a Pathfinder.
Synthesis is right out. No.
Control is the real destroy and by destroy I mean disable.
My canon ending is control as a form of disabling. The Shepard Reaper effectively shatters much of the high level Reaper AI. Individual Reapers become brutally fragmented by the will of their constituent species. Some Reapers immediately begin to fight one another. Other Reapers carry on with the original reaping effort. Some flee to parts unknown. Many simply hang dead in space unable to handle the sudden awakening. As soon as this happens dozens of incredibly advanced species that had been hiding emerge from the depths of gas giants, the darkness between stars and behind sectors with unexplored or missing relays. These ancients species similarly begin working their own agenda.
Mass Effect 4 opens on the Citadel orbiting Earth.
The system has finally been secured at tremendous cost and reconstruction efforts are underway. Communication via QED is limited yet paints a bleak picture of the devastation felt across the galaxy. Arguments about what to do next threaten to rip apart what little remains. Some argue that it is too early to divide the fleet in the face of what unknown threats may remain. Others argue for the importance in saving as many lives... and resources as possible. The decision is made to send heavily armed scouts to reestablish regular contact between former Council worlds and determine the extent of new and emerging threats. You are one of those scouts. You are a Pathfinder.
It's funny how the tricolor ending mirrored the Deus Ex choices, at least on the surface but seems to have botched it really hard. From a player's perspective, any ending that gets rid of the Reapers is fine with me simply because I'm sick of them as the enemies and ME4 needs to have a new breed of antagonists.
The Indoctrination Theory while fun to day dream about is actually worse than the original three choices for me personally.
The Indoctrination Theory while fun to day dream about is actually worse than the original three choices for me personally.
Destroy makes the most sense.
Howver control ending could get us a more interesting sequel.
Just picture ME4 where under Control MW wish to spread out and bring other galaxies under the Milky Way control. You play as an entire new race/alien in a different galaxy trying to repel this new unknown enemies.
Howver control ending could get us a more interesting sequel.
Just picture ME4 where under Control MW wish to spread out and bring other galaxies under the Milky Way control. You play as an entire new race/alien in a different galaxy trying to repel this new unknown enemies.
Yeah, Rejection would be my canon ending if Andromeda were to continue simply because that adds the most to the Andromeda plotline specifically, but just viewing the original trilogy on it's own merits, I found Control to be the best. A lot of people use the arguement that "Oh, you were fighting to destroy the reapers all along though" as if being faced with an alternative and deciding to go a different way is unheard of. I played a Paragon Shepard and I thought Control was the most Paragon-aligned, not even because of the blue color assignment, but because Destroy involves sacrificing a few to defeat the enemy, while Control involves sacrificing yourself to save them all.
The thing that really solidifies Control as the best canon ending of the three major ones is that the ending monologue is actually delivered by Shepard, rather than EDI or Hackett. Yes, you take the advice of the villain, but the whole premise of the Control ending is that Illusive Man would have been too corrupt to meld with the Reapers, where as Shepard could turn the Reapers into a force for good. Having Shepard controlled Reapers also creates the fastest path to reconstruction of any of the endings. Destroy kind of leaves everything a mess, and Synthesis isn't much better, but the Geth are still around to help clean up. Control has literally all of the Reaper forces repurposed into units that could theoretically repair almost all the war damages within a short timespan. Shepard's journey always felt a little messianic to me, and Shepard being digitized into a godlike hivemind seemed like a thematically appropriate end.
Sure. I mean thats just Kingdom Hearts right?
Does anyone understand Kingsom Hearts?
That comment was just 3 off the cuff ideas that were given almost 0 thought. I'm sure with a bit more thought a propper writing team could come up with a fully realized idea that is significantly better.
Edit. Also Shepard would 100% kill Edi and Legion if it meant safeguarding the universe. In ME1 s/he wipes can potentially exterminate the rachni and shepard is comfortable executing Wrex on Virmire. 1 species and one crew member for the whole galaxy is a choice some shepards were comfortable making.
Last edited:
Destroy is the best ending suited for future games in the universe as well as the most interesting. Imagine the interesting ways you could develop the universe with all species cut off from one another for hundreds of years due to lack of Mass Relays. And then some force suddenly making them work again. It writes itself. It's the worst ending for those who actually want a satisfying ending for the characters the player experiences with the journey though.
Control is the best ending for everyone invested in the story I think. Shepard, a force everyone trusts actually does legitimately seem to control the reapers for good--something no one really thought was possible. There's some story potential down the road by having Shepards will actually be a feint by the reapers, with the clear indoctrination manifesting itself after the reapers are given an opportunity to reassess/rebuild.
Synthesis is happy...but I find it just far too bizarre to ever be able to really build off of in a sequel.
I'm still surprised to this day how fans hate the options though. I find them all to be interesting, impactful enough, and satisfying in their own ways. What were people looking for?
Control is the best ending for everyone invested in the story I think. Shepard, a force everyone trusts actually does legitimately seem to control the reapers for good--something no one really thought was possible. There's some story potential down the road by having Shepards will actually be a feint by the reapers, with the clear indoctrination manifesting itself after the reapers are given an opportunity to reassess/rebuild.
Synthesis is happy...but I find it just far too bizarre to ever be able to really build off of in a sequel.
I'm still surprised to this day how fans hate the options though. I find them all to be interesting, impactful enough, and satisfying in their own ways. What were people looking for?
OP
OP
Shepard sacrificed a lot and didn't get to live? Screw it. Would pick Destroy again and again.
Didn't really care for AI or the Geth. The destruction of the Relay was a set back though.
Didn't really care for AI or the Geth. The destruction of the Relay was a set back though.
The one where Shepard miraculously survives is the only canon ending. Otherwise why would they even include that?
Only 1 ending (control or destroy I don't care) that leaves the door open for future sequels.
I was a Mass Effect super fan, and I honestly don't even remember what the endings were. All I remember is that I actually chose the wrong one at the time; I got confused about which one was which, and you don't get to ask the Star Kid to repeat anything, so I chose the wrong one. And the worst thing is that I didn't even realise it at the time, because the original, unpatched ending was so laughably brief and nonsensical; I only became aware when I went on Youtube to see what the other endings were and found out I'd picked a different coloured explosion.
Yeah, I don't care which ending is canon, they're all bad. I don't even want to dignify Bioware's writing there by pretending there's merit to any of'em. I guess there's some meta-textual value in the one they patched in where you can just shoot Star Kid and the game ends pathetically, because that feels the most like what Bioware and EA have done to Mass Effect :P
Yeah, I don't care which ending is canon, they're all bad. I don't even want to dignify Bioware's writing there by pretending there's merit to any of'em. I guess there's some meta-textual value in the one they patched in where you can just shoot Star Kid and the game ends pathetically, because that feels the most like what Bioware and EA have done to Mass Effect :P
It's insulting because it was literally the same cutscene with different coloured energy waves and some kind of pointless text at the end. But I think it's because they set up this expectation that the trilogy would be about the player's choices and the impact those choices had on creating unique narratives. The reality, of course, is that this is just impossible. It's why a lot of people have given up on the Telltate formula as well.
OP
OP
i don't think it would be impossible, it would just mean that Me3 should've taken much longer to develop. I guess ea pressured them to release it in q1 2012 but perhaps if they had more time...I dunno.
That was only part of it though. If they gave a single well written ending people would have settled on it fine, but the shit show of awful writing that ignored the very themes of the rest of the series just left a lot of bitterness.
I don't think they are in a position of basically creating two or three games worth of content for a single game though. lol
I wonder if people would have been satisfied with a super strong ending. Like if it ended right before star kid showed up and Shepard blew up the Reapers, I guess it would have been a good ending, but there'd also be the complaints about not having any impact on the game.
I don't accept any ending. Destroy makes Shepard go "I spent ages helping the geth and renuite them with the quarians... ohwell, they have to go! Oops!"
Synth is just awful and gross and bad in every single way. Shep goes around telling everyone that we are all different and are allowed to be different, but we have to respect each other and help each other anyway. But oh let's make everyone the same!
Control is just... eh.
Only way I can play ME3 is with the Mass Effect Happy Ending Mod.
MEHEM removes both the starchild and the choice. The red wave goes out, killing the reapers (leaving EDI and the geth alive) while the Normandy picks Shepard up. Everyone stands at the memorial wall and pay their respects to the fallen and then Shepard hugs their LI. The end.
Sure it's typical fanfic "happily ever after" ending but I'll take that over the stupid official stuff any day.
Synth is just awful and gross and bad in every single way. Shep goes around telling everyone that we are all different and are allowed to be different, but we have to respect each other and help each other anyway. But oh let's make everyone the same!
Control is just... eh.
Only way I can play ME3 is with the Mass Effect Happy Ending Mod.
MEHEM removes both the starchild and the choice. The red wave goes out, killing the reapers (leaving EDI and the geth alive) while the Normandy picks Shepard up. Everyone stands at the memorial wall and pay their respects to the fallen and then Shepard hugs their LI. The end.
Sure it's typical fanfic "happily ever after" ending but I'll take that over the stupid official stuff any day.
Destroy is the ending I always believe to be the real ending. The reapers main goal is the cycle. Synthesis keeps them alive and maybe somehow in control of everyone, who knows the side effects of being synthesized. Control creates essentially a human reaper and keeps all the reapers to live another day with unknown consequences. The reapers tell you that even destroy will leave the cycle in tact and a whole bunch of other bad things but it's the only one getting rid of them. Even if the cycle continues it won't include the reapers. They seem for the first time afraid of how far things have gone.
Sure you lose Edi, the geth, and the relay. But the other options you lose all species. Plus with all the reaper corpses the relay might be able to be rebuilt.
Sure you lose Edi, the geth, and the relay. But the other options you lose all species. Plus with all the reaper corpses the relay might be able to be rebuilt.
Synthesis fixes the conflict between organic and synthetic permanently. The reapers were an extreme solution to an even bigger problem: destruction of the Milky Way. The reapers designers at least thought that destroying all intelligent life was the way to go.
The Leviathans liked to enslave intelligent life, the Reapers killing everything was not their plan.
More or less? I'm wagering most people wanted an ending that wasn't a multiple-choice ending on an extraordinarily contrived, almost literal deus ex machina. It makes no narrative sense that:
1. Shepard is carried onto the Crucible exterior by a mystery elevator after the initial activation fails.
2. The Catalyst makes an appearance to spout last-minute exposition.
3. Three choices are presented, each requiring an absurd method of activation. (Either blowing up part of the structure with Shepard's gun, grabbing a conduit and disintegrating, or taking a swan dive into a big green light.) Why on Earth or anywhere else in the Milky Way does the device function in this manner at all? The entire mechanism exists to give Shepard a heroic sacrifice without functioning as a sane piece of technology.
I went with Synthesis when I played it. Seemed like the best of both worlds. Everyone lives and organics get a sweet upgrade. Looking back, I see the argument that it's weird to force that kind of change on everyone. In retrospect, Control was probably the best scenario. The Reapers were all "evil" so I don't have any issue taking control of them, everyone lives except Shephard who still lives in a different way, and society gets rebuilt by the monsters that destroyed it. There's also a certain irony to controlling the species that was essentially controlling everyone else. Won't deny the ominous tone of it and the weird feeling that Shephard would eventually go bad though.
Destroy never crossed my mind as an option. I wasn't comfortable with committing genocide on the Geth along with any other bystander sentient machines when there were other options to defeat the enemy.
Destroy never crossed my mind as an option. I wasn't comfortable with committing genocide on the Geth along with any other bystander sentient machines when there were other options to defeat the enemy.
Last edited:
Mass effect ended in a boardroom. EA putting a gun to Biowares head telling them to ship now. I belive IT was intended there is to much evidence and the current endings are just to stupid. Add IT to the poll and ill vote.
I fully bought into the Indoctrination Theory when the game came out. After all of this time, I don't believe it was anything than fans trying to piece together a worthy ending to a great series. I will say that the IT is the greatest internet video game theory I have ever encountered and I hope that Bioware just adopts it as canon. They won't but a guy can still hope!
Except we solved it with the Geth, so it was not needed.
Those are VIs. AIs were outlawed after the Geth uprising.
Destroy is the only choice that makes sense. It's the completion of what you originally set out to do from the beginning.
Anything else is indoctrination.
Synthesis is basura. It was hinted at in ME 1 and Shepard calls Saren insane for agreeing to go along with it. Why would he then agree in ME 3 when the reaper kid suggests it when that was everything he was against in ME 1 is mind boggling.
"The relationship is symbiotic. Organic & machine intertwined, a union of flesh & steel. The strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither".
Control again is another thing which everyone was against with in ME3. Shepard, his crew, alliance leaders all were against it &TIM for thinking he could control them. To think him agreeing with it out of the blue with just one dialog ("So TIM was right") is again just absurd storytelling.
Refuse was just Bioware shitting on the fanbase. Destroy is the only option.
"The relationship is symbiotic. Organic & machine intertwined, a union of flesh & steel. The strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither".
Control again is another thing which everyone was against with in ME3. Shepard, his crew, alliance leaders all were against it &TIM for thinking he could control them. To think him agreeing with it out of the blue with just one dialog ("So TIM was right") is again just absurd storytelling.
Refuse was just Bioware shitting on the fanbase. Destroy is the only option.
It is ALL absurd storytelling.
After going through all the effort to broker peace with the Geth and the game's multiple efforts to push EDI onto the player, unceremoniously killing them both during the last minutes of the game also makes little sense.
After going through all the effort to broker peace with the Geth and the game's multiple efforts to push EDI onto the player, unceremoniously killing them both during the last minutes of the game also makes little sense.
Why would a character who was reanimated with synthetics in the prologue of ME2 change his mind about synethics?
You can play Shepherd to have almost a complete personality and opinion shift in ME2 versus ME1. Shepherd is basically the most successful player avatar ever, in the sense that he/she seems like a character but nothing about the characters ideas are hard wired into the games narrative. Destroy is a nonsensical ending if you played a paragon route and successfully non-violently ended the Geth conflict.
Probably destroy, everyone gets to square one, and develops away from each other. also rip syntetics
I chose Refuse and I was quite happy with it. I was like "Fuck you, I don't have to make a choice". So my own selfishness caused extinction.....yeah I'm cool with that.
Plus the way the kid said "So be it" scared the shit out of me when I heard it.
Plus the way the kid said "So be it" scared the shit out of me when I heard it.
I would be happy with any of them to be honest.
my first pick was refuse, it made sense for how I saw Shepard.
perhaps it's the one the feels the less rewarding and more shocking for the player, with destroy (with high enough rank or whatever) being the more satisfying and easier to deal with probably.
my first pick was refuse, it made sense for how I saw Shepard.
perhaps it's the one the feels the less rewarding and more shocking for the player, with destroy (with high enough rank or whatever) being the more satisfying and easier to deal with probably.
I'd never considered before that destroying Reapers would give the Leviathan's a new opening for enslavement. Interesting.
I think the most fascinating thing about this thread for me has been the majority of IT-deniers refusing to provide any counter-argument for why the theory doesn't work. And the only counter-argument that has been cited is esentially "I don't think the studio that brought us KOTOR can manage good story twists."
Codex entry for indoctrination:
Rachni Queen description of indoctrination:
If any IT-denier wants to explain what the shadowy ghosts are about in Shepard's dreams, why he gets oily shadows clouding his vision during the ending, why he loses control of his body and mind during the ending, why he gets headaches and hears discordant tones, why he sees a kid that no-one else can see at the start of ME3 that then haunts his dreams and eventually shows up as the starchild, and why Shepard would be able to resist indoctrination after years spent around Reaper tech and Reapers themselves... then I'm all ears. Please, explain all these effects and animations and events specifically placed into the game. What are they there for? What purpose do they serve if not to hint at the struggle for Shepard's mind after years of Reaper exposure, where so many others have succumbed to indoctrination? Because anyone who thinks the IT doesn't make sense clearly doesn't understand what it's about. The IT does make sense - that much is undeniable. The main game and especially its ending absolutely doesn't make sense without it, and the only argument I've seen so far is literally "I think the version of the story that doesn't make sense is more believable, because I have no faith in the team's abilities." Which... okay, I guess? The version of the story without plot holes seems more likely to me.
Codex entry for indoctrination:
Rachni Queen description of indoctrination:
If any IT-denier wants to explain what the shadowy ghosts are about in Shepard's dreams, why he gets oily shadows clouding his vision during the ending, why he loses control of his body and mind during the ending, why he gets headaches and hears discordant tones, why he sees a kid that no-one else can see at the start of ME3 that then haunts his dreams and eventually shows up as the starchild, and why Shepard would be able to resist indoctrination after years spent around Reaper tech and Reapers themselves... then I'm all ears. Please, explain all these effects and animations and events specifically placed into the game. What are they there for? What purpose do they serve if not to hint at the struggle for Shepard's mind after years of Reaper exposure, where so many others have succumbed to indoctrination? Because anyone who thinks the IT doesn't make sense clearly doesn't understand what it's about. The IT does make sense - that much is undeniable. The main game and especially its ending absolutely doesn't make sense without it, and the only argument I've seen so far is literally "I think the version of the story that doesn't make sense is more believable, because I have no faith in the team's abilities." Which... okay, I guess? The version of the story without plot holes seems more likely to me.
Last edited:
The only real ending there is. Without indoctrination theory, I would not be able to cope with how ME ended.
It would have been nice of them to put that in the game that I played at launch. When I ejected the disc after that first play through I knew was never going to touch the game again. Some things just can't be undone, you only get one chance to make a first impression and ME3 made a horrendous one from start to finish.
Mass Effect 3's ending is such a mess that debating which ending is preferable depends on which version of the ending (and DLC) we are talking about.
In the original ending, Control is way too risky. After just stopping Elusive Man, and with star child offering no info of assurance, why would I want to choose that? Extended cut and Leviathan DLC helps a bit with star child's credibility.
Synthesis is also stupid in many ways, but especially because Javik has a conversation about "this cycle the life forms aren't as homogeneous, so you might have a chance", combined with solving all these conflicts for different species to peacefully exist. How am I turning around to force synthetics and organics into the same existence? But to people who didn't pony up for the DLC (still insane that Prothean was day one dlc), it'a better choice because it requires the highest score.
The extended ending added the breathing scene in high score Destroy, and the Reject option, so I am partial to those as the semi-canon endings. But I don't think anyone at Bioware right now has the guts to truly go down either road: remake the trilogy and add on a new Finding Shepard epilogue, or a new game still fighting the reapers but with completely new life forms in the next cycle.
In the original ending, Control is way too risky. After just stopping Elusive Man, and with star child offering no info of assurance, why would I want to choose that? Extended cut and Leviathan DLC helps a bit with star child's credibility.
Synthesis is also stupid in many ways, but especially because Javik has a conversation about "this cycle the life forms aren't as homogeneous, so you might have a chance", combined with solving all these conflicts for different species to peacefully exist. How am I turning around to force synthetics and organics into the same existence? But to people who didn't pony up for the DLC (still insane that Prothean was day one dlc), it'a better choice because it requires the highest score.
The extended ending added the breathing scene in high score Destroy, and the Reject option, so I am partial to those as the semi-canon endings. But I don't think anyone at Bioware right now has the guts to truly go down either road: remake the trilogy and add on a new Finding Shepard epilogue, or a new game still fighting the reapers but with completely new life forms in the next cycle.
I definitely know that feeling.
One of the reasons I am hoping for a remake/remaster or at least 4k xbox one x enhancement on the trilogy is that I can convince myself to try out ME3's DLCs. After the ending (I did go back after the extended cut to shoot the star child in the face though), I didn't bother seeing any of the DLC, not even the pure fan service Citadel.
The proposition that Saren makes is a very different one than the one offered by the Catalyst. Saren offers servitude to a conquering army until your races reach the end of their usefulness. Saren's path wouldn't just modify the Milky Way races, but have Sovereign and the reapers subjugate and brain wash them. Sarens implants were horrific and gruesome.
Synthesis, while relying upon a change made to all the races of the Milky Way galaxy without their consent, is not depicted as having any of the grim consequences. No conquest, no subjugation, no gruesome body modifications. The Catalyst tells us that it will be a new framework, a new DNA, and we see on those alive afterwards a bizarre green glimmer, but there is absolutely no negative effect evidenced by Synthesis, and indeed, besides the glimmer, everyone seems to go about their lives in the EC Synthesis ending exactly as they would've if Synthesis did nothing at all but end the reaper threat. The objection to Synthesis seems like one rooted in ideological absolutism, and suggests that the genocide of the few is preferable to a (seemingly) small sacrifice on behalf of the many.
Shepards rejection of Saren's offer absolutely does not set a precedent for Synthesis. The two are night and day difference.
I was a little late to the party because I was replaying ME and ME2 in preparation for ME3. So I started the game a couple of weeks after the release date. When it was time to choose ending, I turned around and shooted the damn ghost kid, it felt like the only natural reaction to such a load of bullshit.
I personally go with the Destroy/Indoctrination theory. I also want to say, it's ultimately not that important what Bioware intended, what matters is how plausible the Indoctrination Theory is within the core narrative of the series, and in that regard it is extremely plausible. The reason why I say it is not that important what Bioware intended is because this is art and our interpretation of it is our own. There's a reason why many artists refuse to provide an explanation to what their songs mean, what an ending in a movie means, because they want to leave that up to your interpretation. Now is that what Bioware is doing here? I don't really know, they've never explicitly denied Indoctrination Theory as far as I can tell and again, the theory itself makes a lot of sense within the core narrative there is actually a lot of evidence for it.