Originally Posted by yannickhk
Well it's debatable if you would consider it good. But there is a BETTER ending and it requires you to do a whole lot of hoop jumping and ALMOST requires multiplayer and game saves from ME2. Almost... you don't quite need them if you do EVERYTHING else perfect.
The point is its not really the end of the world. Stories will inevitably have endings people don't like. Its just the nature of people's subjective opinions. All the endings in ME3 are reasonable and are achievable.
BS, you can't get squat. I really love the mass effect trilogy, finished the first two games a least 8 times each. Played through mass effect 3 and man was it a blast until I reached the end ..... Jesus, the crappiest ending ever made.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
3 endings which are in fact all the same except for the explosion color. Your team mates being on board the Normandy by some magic trick, TIM and Anderson being on board the space station (can't remember the darn name) and no idea how, a kid being the leader of the reapers coming out of nowhere .... so many loopholes it's making me dizzy. The replayability of the game has been completely destroyed by the endings.
Oh and the good ending that you mention is someone (Sheppard ??) in a N7 armor laying in the middle of concrete rubble who starts to breathe (kinda stupid when you see the space station explode with Sheppard on board)
And yes, I care. When you spent dozens of hours with the 2 first games, making the right choices, saving all your team mates, replaying with different ones only to reach the end and realizing that it wouldn't have changed anything anyway, it's disappointing.
Originally Posted by stalker7d7
There's a good reason rules like these are set in place too. Hopefully to prevent people from selling stuff that isn't as advertised. Mass Effect 3, in this case, isn't as advertised. For all their advertised choices making a different, the ending is cut & paste no matter how you play through the game (including previous games)
I have something for both of you to consider:
Imagine you are watching a movie... lets say, the first Rambo.
At the end of the movie, after his speech/breakdown, he could have:
A) "eaten his gun" aka shot himself in the head
B) Given up / allow himself to be arrested
C) shot as many people as he could before being filled with holes
No matter the choice, Rambo loses.
And that's a GOOD thing. If Rambo was able to kill off every last police and run out victorious, what would be the point of the movie? Random slaughter with no conclusion? Sometimes, the protagonist HAS to lose for the story to hold it's intended meaning.
Does that mean that all 3 choices are the same? Of course not.
Just because none of the endings in ME3 involve what you wanted to happen doesn't mean that there aren't choices to begin with or that the endings aren't significantly varied. Of course, that would involve some understanding of subtly and the ability to get over self-entitlement... a pair of things OCN seems to lack.
So again, if you really feel the need to complain about ME3, complain about something valid. There are plenty of technical issues which are cut and dry unacceptable. "It doesnt run on my machine for no apparent reason" is indeed unacceptable, your opinion on the story is irrelevant.Edited by Zero4549 - 3/20/12 at 5:29am