Subjectively, of course. Because almost everyone's overall experience (and, thus perspective) is unique.
The end, and generally, the whole story of ME3 seems to have congealed from many different ideas and pieces scattered from the previous two games rather than flowing naturally. You might like the ending for keeping in tone with ME3, but when held up to the overall structure of the entire series, it fails miserably.
Yeah, if I'd say there was one plot hole it would be why my ground crew were magically on the Normandy and not on the ground fighting.
This. I absolutely agree. ME3 did not flow naturally from what was built from ME1 and 2. Besides the massive plot holes and burnt lore, the last ten minutes literally scrapped everything you accomplished in the series. The game felt very rushed. (But what do you except from AAA titles now). The execution of the last ten minutes was horrid. Seriously, picking what pillar you want reminded me of Deus Ex: HR, which in this context failed, because this series was built on consequences and actual RPG actions. Don't get me started on the three colours and lack of cut-scenes to provide some closure lol.
But I want an explanation for the destruction of the mass effect relays....if you're on trial for blowing one up and causing system wide damage at the start of Mass Effect 3, then how could you not cause universe wide mass destruction by doing the same at the end of the game? ...I also don't understand how every race being trapped on Earth works...
...and come to think of it, why was only Joker desperately escaping ....unless everyone else actually did get blown up by the destruction of the relay ?! Is that why nothing else was shown?
These aren't just 'gotchas' or tiny minor things that only super hardcore nerds would pick up on .....and so I just don't believe the writers just forgot while being rushed at the end.
Indoctrination theory - the only thing that makes sense!
Some of you might want to consider, if at least for a brief moment, that lead writers of MASS EFFECT are semi-intelligent human beings and might even know more about their own work better than we do.
I am patiently waiting to see how this all plays out (with the planned DLC) and hear their official explanation and intepretation of the ending.
Some of you might want to consider, if at least for a brief moment, that lead writers of MASS EFFECT are semi-intelligent human beings and might even know more about their own work better than we do.
I am patiently waiting to see how this all plays out (with the planned DLC) and hear their official explanation and intepretation of the ending.
What SAB said plus nothing I said needed some mass effect encyclopedia or insider knowledge to know. It's what we're told in the game, yet is ignored/ undone by Bioware in the end.
They also made it very known that they think it's a good ending which leads me to believe they had no intention of fixing or playing the indoctrination card.
They've also said there not changing the ending only "clarifying and proving closure." they just can't undone what they've established in previous games (mass relays).
Well it doesn't matter for me what DLC content includes about the ending or anything. I've already beaten the game and sold it so the ending I received is the ending I'm stuck with.
I agree with much of this: https://kotaku.com/5892074/why-mass-effect-3s-ending-doesnt-need-changing-spoilers
I've come around on the idea of changing the ending. I don't want a complete retconn. At this point, I just want an epilogue.
edit: Jen beat me to the article link!
Enter your email address to join: