Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Mass Effect 3: The Ending(s) [** Spoilers **]

Options
1…34689…33

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    Jester252
    Registered Users Posts: 5,533 ✭✭✭Jester252


    Maximilian wrote: »
    If they charge for it, I think the internet will burn with anti-EA rage.
    I though it had


  • Options
    #153
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    Maximilian wrote: »
    If they charge for it, I think the internet will burn with anti-EA rage.

    maybe
    but fanboys will still buy it, ea will still make a big profit on it and it will become a good option for any other publishers to try in th efuture.


  • Options
    #154
    bizmark
    Registered Users Posts: 6,892 ✭✭✭bizmark


    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »
    maybe
    but fanboys will still buy it, ea will still make a big profit on it and it will become a good option for any other publishers to try in th efuture.

    people might buy it to complete a series they played for 120-200 hours but the damage to future games specially from bioware would be noticeable id say


  • Options
    #155
    Retr0gamer
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 51,130 CMod ✭✭✭✭Retr0gamer


    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »
    you are an unbelievable twat

    Banned for three weeks for personal abuse and making me come into this thread at the risk of spoiling a game I've not even bought yet.
    Untitled Image




  • Options
    #156
    InvisibleBadger
    Registered Users Posts: 134 ✭✭InvisibleBadger


    Just finished the game. Pretty amazing game all the way through..until that ending. I didn't mind it too much at first because the game was so good, but after reading this thread and looking at the bioware forums, the indoctrination theory seems solid and explains the oddness of the ending (i got tricked).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    Outkast_IRE
    Registered Users Posts: 7,515 ✭✭✭Outkast_IRE


    InvisibleBadger wrote: »
    Just finished the game. Pretty amazing game all the way through..until that ending. I didn't mind it too much at first because the game was so good, but after reading this thread and looking at the bioware forums, the indoctrination theory seems solid and explains the oddness of the ending (i got tricked).
    So did i and i would hapilly admit it, i reloaded a save and did the renegade ending as well just to watch vid, i might do the third ending some time.
    Im fully convinced the indoctrination theory is real , its a waiting game now to see what happens, but im trying to flesh out in my head what way the choices would lead if real , what also convinces me of something fishy going on is to save anderson you have to click for a renegade reaction , since when is shooting the bad guy whos about to kill your friend a renegade reaction .

    Does anybody know what happens if you dont click the 2nd renegade click to shoot illusive man before he shoots you??


  • Options
    #158
    bizmark
    Registered Users Posts: 6,892 ✭✭✭bizmark


    Its not indoctrination its very very clear how that works we have seen it many times through out mass effect from saren to the guys on the dead reaper in mass effect 2 and so on its slow so slow you almost know whats happening but dont care its not "flick switch your indoctrination!" its a slow process people would of noticed shepard acting odd shepard would of likely noticed himself acting odd.

    I can imagen this being how the games ending came about.
    Bioware: wait this inst a series about Cerberus ! what was that reaper guys name in the last game Harvey? harmony ? er Hammond? no wait harbinger! get him to shoot shepard in the face just to remind the player the reapers are a threat then *takes some sweet sweet drugs* then man oh i can see god man **** we need this in the game and like the Normandy in ftl because i can see the light show in my mind and its so awesome *passes out*

    Its almost as plausible a explanation for the ending


  • Options
    #159
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    Outkast_IRE wrote: »
    So did i and i would hapilly admit it, i reloaded a save and did the renegade ending as well just to watch vid, i might do the third ending some time.
    Im fully convinced the indoctrination theory is real , its a waiting game now to see what happens, but im trying to flesh out in my head what way the choices would lead if real , what also convinces me of something fishy going on is to save anderson you have to click for a renegade reaction , since when is shooting the bad guy whos about to kill your friend a renegade reaction .

    Does anybody know what happens if you dont click the 2nd renegade click to shoot illusive man before he shoots you??
    [Spoilers for that bit next obviously]

    You die. I read a blog where a guy was complaining he was being forced to take a renegade action with his good-guy shepard. If you have a high enough paragon rating [very high] you can deal with the situation via conversation options before getting to that bit anyway though:
    You can convince the illusive man to shoot himself with either a very high pragon or very high renegade rating


  • Options
    #160
    AceCard Jones
    Registered Users Posts: 978 ✭✭✭AceCard Jones


    bizmark wrote: »
    Its not indoctrination its very very clear how that works we have seen it many times through out mass effect from saren to the guys on the dead reaper in mass effect 2 and so on its slow so slow you almost know whats happening but dont care its not "flick switch your indoctrination!" its a slow process people would of noticed shepard acting odd shepard would of likely noticed himself acting odd.

    I can imagen this being how the games ending came about.
    Bioware: wait this inst a series about Cerberus ! what was that reaper guys name in the last game Harvey? harmony ? er Hammond? no wait harbinger! get him to shoot shepard in the face just to remind the player the reapers are a threat then *takes some sweet sweet drugs* then man oh i can see god man **** we need this in the game and like the Normandy in ftl because i can see the light show in my mind and its so awesome *passes out*

    Its almost as plausible a explanation for the ending

    One form of indoctrination is slow over a long period of time, it can also be done at speed at great risk to the organic that is being taken over. It can kill them within hours/days instead of months/years. Also if you don't call those Dreams he was having all through the game a sign then I don't know what is, even some of the trees/bushes from the dreams appear on your way to the beam after being hit by harbinger just growing randomly out of the road.

    I also think the kid from the very beginning is something in Shepard's head, nobody else ever sees him or looks at him, and when Anderson snaps Shepard out of the conversation with the kid and he suddenly disappears, you can hear a deep growl from inside the Vent. From the Novels when a Reaper fails to take over a target it growls in frustration. And when the kid gets on the shuttle that blows up at the start, nobody else looks at him, no soldier helps him on board, nothing. I just think the kid is suspect from the start.

    Again I'm not blind to the fact that the indoctrination theory could be wrong, but there is answers to most doubts about it.


  • Options
    #161
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    Its not indoctrination its very very clear how that works we have seen it many times through out mass effect from saren to the guys on the dead reaper in mass effect 2 and so on its slow so slow you almost know whats happening but dont care its not "flick switch your indoctrination!" its a slow process people would of noticed shepard acting odd shepard would of likely noticed himself acting odd.

    Two points on the issue

    1. Much of the indoctrination theory argues that Shepherd has been under siege by it for most if not the entire game and that there are numerous nods to this that can be past off as exhaustion/guilt. Primarily the dreams he keeps having. less so the game makes a point to constantly point out how much shepherd is running himself ragged throughout the game.

    2. More important as you point out harbinger is pretty much absent from this game, which is incredible odd considering how much of the franchises lore has focused on harbinger/sherpherd connection. Harbinger has a personal interest in shepherd, from trying to steal his body prior to mass effect 2 to addressing him personnally at the end of Arrival. So for harbinger to be absent this entire game and then only show up in the final seconds for one shot at shep is incredible odd and poor storytelling. Other odd elements include how the reaper on speaks of shepherd on rannoch:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfIdDNRyxBE


    go to the 5:20 point. Harbinger speaks of you. you resist but you will fail.

    A lot of people think harbinger is the one directly trying to indoctrinate Shepherd, intending to make him his avatar like how Saren was Sovereigns and the collector leader was Harbinger's in 2. Hence the dreams, hence his absence and more importantly *like* Saren and Sovereign when you stick you and him right next to each other his influence on you triples (consider that Sovereign by the end of of mass effect could take control of Saren's body)

    While I agree with there being too much turning over little details and trying to make them work to prove the indoctrine theory and a fair chunk of it I would throw out (noises in Normandy, the Reaper IFF from ME2, Shepherds implants being of reaper origin?) I do think looking at ME3 exclusively as a story and a sequel to the franchise as a whole, then the indoctrination theory makes more sense story wise based on shepherds interactions with harbinger, harbingers personal focus on him and the dreams which do not lead anywhere.

    More so the dreams because of how the final scene is done. The dreams could have worked if the *catalyst* played up its appearance close to how the aliens did in the film Contact. Which is funny considering how much that sequence is loathed in film. But the catalyst taking the appearance of that child has no effect on shepherd or the story because it isnt used, the child delivers a dull monotone exposition, no thought on why it looks like the kid or even an attempt to comfort shepherd which would be the reason why the child's form was taken in the first place either by shepherd's sub concious or by whatever entity was the catalyst.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    Sorry, I'm a bit anal, but the number of posts getting the following wrong is irking me:

    Shepard = Name of ME protagonist
    Shepherd = Someone who looks after sheep.

    Thanks


  • Options
    #163
    bizmark
    Registered Users Posts: 6,892 ✭✭✭bizmark


    go to the 5:20 point. Harbinger speaks of you. you resist but you will fail.]

    Isnt that just more holding onto tiny little throw away lines uttered dureing the course of the game to try and prove this theory ? if the destroyer reaper had said "Harbringer speaks to you you resist but you will fail" i can see that as proof however he just utters a completely generic your going to fail line that makes far far more sense to think of in a militaristic sense after all they just had a stand up fight than any mind battle shepard might be fighting..


  • Options
    #164
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    bizmark wrote: »
    Isnt that just more holding onto tiny little throw away lines uttered dureing the course of the game to try and prove this theory ? if the destroyer reaper had said "Harbringer speaks to you you resist but you will fail" i can see that as proof however he just utters a completely generic your going to fail line that makes far far more sense to think of in a militaristic sense after all they just had a stand up fight than any mind battle shepard might be fighting..

    Yes it would be except as I said I consider all the little things people throw out in favour and against theories in the context of story telling over the mechanical need to place shepherd under reaper tech (such as the Reaper IFF arguments go, that it is on normandy somewhere and is what is projecting indoctrination to shepard). As such its what the little things tell me is missing from the games story and narrative over technical details, little things to hint at whats missing not at a string of clues to give you the secret answer and while yes its a throw away line there are some things to consider.

    1. Its the only reaper to speak in this game, so I would consider details of that dialogue more important then the 3rd of 4th visit to James when he mentions weird noises.

    2. I dont believe one can go through mass effect 3 and prove one way or another which theory is true or not, I've always felt that there would be a DLC pack involved and I do firmly believe considering how the weight of Harbinger related content prior to 3 that it will directly involve the reaper and an indoctrination attempt by Harbinger is the most direct and effective way of progressing that story and keeping it on a one to one level between shepard and Harbinger over some sterile detail.

    3. harbinger never crosses shepard (sorry about that earlier) throughout the game, numerous other reapers do, this would be the 2nd one you take down so the dialogue seems odd since the whole sentence is present tense. If both Harbinger and Shepard were actively crossing paths even in a small manner (such as Shepard escaping Harbinger when he escapes earth rather then reaper destroyer number 63344) then yes I'd pass that comment over. Except he doesnt, he's encountered other reapers and yet it is harbinger presently speaking of shepard resisting? Shouldnt quite a few reapers across the galaxy be bitching about the normandy showing up and stirring up sh*t for them? harbinger could have been talking about the ME2/arrival events but it's a bit late for him to start talking about them months into the invasion.

    To put simply I am not holding up a little detail and saying it proves a theory, I'm holding up a little detail because it draws attention to a major hole in the me3 narrative that is deliberately missing, Harbinger is only 2nd to the illusive man in showing up in Mass Effect material, he is more prominent then the illusive man as a villain in those material and directly influenced the events of Mass Effect 2. 2 of the DLC packs (Arrival which is considered the most important and lair of the shadow broker) and has appeared in the expanded universe. To directly name the character at two key points of the game (right before the ending and after you take down a reaper destroyer yourself for the first time) but to never even address the storyline with the character directly (let alone resolve it) and yet use him specifically in instigating the game's current ending (It is Harbinger that shoots you).

    it's a surgical narrative cut, its not laziness, its not that the character was not relevent or unimportant. Its a specific and measured avoidance of key material. And if you accept the recent Bioware announcement on DLC directly affecting the endgame material then you'd agree if one was a financially motivated business that wanted to make money based on a fanbase then you'd remove one of the game's two antagonists and sell their conclusion in the DLC. My surprise is that illusive man bucked harbinger for the main game. Though if you got martin sheen voicing a character you damn well get your worth up front.


  • Options
    #165
    Zillah
    Registered Users Posts: 17,371 ✭✭✭✭Zillah


    BlitzKrieg wrote: »
    And if you accept the recent Bioware announcement on DLC directly affecting the endgame material

    Wait, what's this? Have bioware specifically said there will be DLC affecting the endgame?


  • Options
    #166
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    But we also recognize that some of our most passionate fans needed more closure, more answers, and more time to say goodbye to their stories-and these comments are equally valid. Player feedback such as this has always been an essential ingredient in the development of the series.

    http://kotaku.com/5894186/mass-effects-producer-promises-well-keep-listening-and-new-content-that-brings-closure?tag=masseffect


  • Options
    #167
    RichTea
    Registered Users Posts: 1,179 ✭✭✭RichTea


    Finished the game last night and I've been in a funk since then.

    What were they thinking?

    I fully accept that Shepard dying would make sense but this God child just completely spunked all over the three games.

    I don't think there'll be any post-ending or ending-changing DLC but surely Bioware, or at least some of them, regret the direction they took the series.

    Was the ending to the trilogy written along with Mass Effect 3 or was it the intention of Bioware throughout the whole series?


  • Options
    #168
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    I bet they wish they just broke the mass effect relays before the reapers arrived in the first place. Problem solved; no invasions at all.


  • Options
    #169
    sink
    Registered Users Posts: 4,314 ✭✭✭sink


    blatantrereg wrote: »
    I bet they wish they just broke the mass effect relays before the reapers arrived in the first place. Problem solved; no invasions at all.

    It was explained in the game that destroying the Mass Effect relays would only slow the Reapers down. They've already travelled trough dark space at standard FTL speeds for an extreme length of time, they have the time and patience to cross entire galaxy even if it takes centuries. Destroying the relays will only hamper the galaxies efforts to fight back.


  • Options
    #170
    Jester252
    Registered Users Posts: 5,533 ✭✭✭Jester252


    New ending it was all a radio play by HG Wells


  • Options
    #171
    calex71
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,126 ✭✭✭✭calex71


    I don't get what the fuss is about ???? I thought the end was totally acceptable :confused:

    After hearing how rubbish it was i was expecting an ending like Rage had, but I sat through it and thought what is all the fuss about :confused:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    hightower1
    Registered Users Posts: 3,207 ✭✭✭hightower1


    calex71 wrote: »
    I don't get what the fuss is about ???? I thought the end was totally acceptable :confused:

    After hearing how rubbish it was i was expecting an ending like Rage had, but I sat through it and thought what is all the fuss about :confused:


    The ending was fine... the fact that a game built and promoted on choice vs consequence had only one real ending and your choices has nearly no effect on that is a fail.


  • Options
    #173
    Arawn
    Registered Users Posts: 3,158 ✭✭✭Arawn


    calex71 wrote: »
    I don't get what the fuss is about ???? I thought the end was totally acceptable :confused:

    After hearing how rubbish it was i was expecting an ending like Rage had, but I sat through it and thought what is all the fuss about :confused:
    hightower1 wrote: »
    The ending was fine... the fact that a game built and promoted on choice vs consequence had only one real ending and your choices has nearly no effect on that is a fail.
    that and the fact at the end of 2 the reapers **** **** up against earth, then in 3 the totally pro earth guys are suddenly bad working with the reapers who are the main bad guys in the first 2 games totally get ignored apart from a few bit mentions


  • Options
    #174
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    hightower1 wrote: »
    The ending was fine... the fact that a game built and promoted on choice vs consequence had only one real ending and your choices has nearly no effect on that is a fail.

    What colour explosion would you like?
    Congratulations, you have united the whole of galactic civilization against the reaper threat - Green explosions unlocked!


  • Options
    #175
    namelessguy
    Registered Users Posts: 179 ✭✭namelessguy


    Yeah... so Mass Effect 3 ending. With
    star-child, different colours and winter planet

    Just going to leave this here.


  • Options
    #176
    Robdoo
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭Robdoo


    namelessguy wrote: »
    Yeah... so Mass Effect 3 ending. With
    star-child, different colours and winter planet

    Just going to leave this here.

    Huh, that's interesting.


  • Options
    #177
    Burgo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,815 ✭✭✭Burgo


    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QT4IUepvrU1pfv_B95oQj0H84DlCTUmzQ_uQh1voTUs/preview?pli=1&sle=true&pli=1

    Detailed document about the fallacies of the endings.


  • Options
    #178
    bizmark
    Registered Users Posts: 6,892 ✭✭✭bizmark


    not sure if its been posted

    http://i.imgur.com/ms6Zg.jpg


  • Options
    #179
    Kirby
    Registered Users Posts: 13,084 ✭✭✭✭Kirby


    BlitzKrieg wrote: »
    The whole f*ck up with the characters coming out of the normady is a strong argument for indoctrination because the people that come out of the normandy are always the ones you took with you on your last mission, so it is downright impossible for them to be there.

    But they aren't. Javvik came out of the Normandy for me and I NEVER used him. I took Liara and Garrus with me for most of the game including the last mission and neither showed up. It was weird. I was quite surprised to see other people claim their squad showed up. Didn't happen that way for me.

    Overall the ending is terrible. On many different levels I could write pages on. But the short answer is.....if your fans hate it, you have failed. The marketing department has described it as "Your story!" which is just a slap in the face. The last 10 minutes are so unlike everything in the first 3 games. It's like the ending to a different game tacked on at the end.


  • Options
    #180
    BlitzKrieg
    Registered Users Posts: 14,685 ✭✭✭✭BlitzKrieg


    But they aren't. Javvik came out of the Normandy for me and I NEVER used him. I took Liara and Garrus with me for most of the game including the last mission and neither showed up. It was weird. I was quite surprised to see other people claim their squad showed up. Didn't happen that way for me.

    huh.

    your the first I've heard having this happen. Every time I've done it one of the two people (or both if I opted for the destroy ending) that I took with me have come out of the ship.

    Quick survey how high was your score at the end (did you get a *good/perfect* ending?)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    blatantrereg
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,743 ✭✭✭blatantrereg


    BlitzKrieg wrote: »
    huh.

    your the first I've heard having this happen. Every time I've done it one of the two people (or both if I opted for the destroy ending) that I took with me have come out of the ship.

    Quick survey how high was your score at the end (did you get a *good/perfect* ending?)
    who didn't come out for you with the non-destroy option?
    I had Liara and EDI. They both come out for the control option. EDI obviously doesn't with the destroy. Garrus does instead as far as I remember, and I never used him.


Advertisement