As I made very clear in my thorough review of Mass Effect 2, I’m a huge BioWare fan. This relationship got very, very cloudy when BioWare released Dragon Age II, a rush job with no story and atrocious gameplay. Mass Effect 3 looked like redemption – until I hit the terrible, terrible ending. The criticism of the ending has been so immense and consistent, BioWare is contemplating changing it. Of course, this story is riddled with spoilers, so be warned.
The criticism has been so pervasive and consistent, BioWare obviously could no longer ignore it. BioWare co-founder Ray Muzyka took to the company blog to address the issue, and strongly hinted that the company is considering altering the ending of the game.
“As co-founder and GM of BioWare, I’m very proud of the ME3 team; I personally believe Mass Effect 3 is the best work we’ve yet created. So, it’s incredibly painful to receive feedback from our core fans that the game’s endings were not up to their expectations. Our first instinct is to defend our work and point to the high ratings offered by critics – but out of respect to our fans, we need to accept the criticism and feedback with humility.”
BioWare’s last truly good game – up to BioWare’s standard – was Dragon Age: Origins. This game had everything I had come to expect from a company whose heritage includes some of the best games of all time, such as Baldur’s Gate and Neverwinter Nights. Dragon Age had deep and highly tactical group-based RPG gameplay, and despite some minor balancing issues (cone of cold comes to mind), it was a game that was easy to pick up and play, but very, very hard to master.
Finishing that game on nightmare difficulty as both a rogue and especially as a mage is still something I’m quite proud of – you need the right character builds for yourself and your party, and you need to program them accordingly. It required planning and constant monitoring of the entire battlefield (friendly fire is a constant threat in badly managed/programmed parties), and one tiny mistake pretty much meant instant death. The trademark BioWare depth, writing, and characters completed the package.
In my view, Dragon Age: Origins was the last truly good BioWare game. Coincidentally, it was also the last game to be developed mostly without EA’s involvement. After EA acquired the company, things started going down hill. Mass Effect 2’s story and RPG elements suffered. The epicness and ever expanding story of Mass Effect 1 was nowhere to be found, and the gameplay was barely adequate enough to feature in a Gears of War game.
Dragon Age II had to be made more enticing for the Call of Duty crowd – with all due respect – so it was forced to move away from the proper way to do fantasy RPGs (invisible dice rolling in the background determining hits) to the wrong way (hitboxes). To make matters worse, gameplay was repetitive, it only featured like three constantly reused environments, and it had virtually no story. The real story only kicked in during the last 30 minutes or so with the collapse of the Chantry, making it feel like a an incredibly long and boring prologue to Dragon Age 3. Mind you, a long and boring prologue we had to pay ^a‘not60 for.
All this made me very nervous about Mass Effect 3. While playing, a lot of the nervousness subsided – gameplay was a little bit more in-depth than ME2, the individual races’ storylines were wrapped up pretty well (especially my favourite storyline, the Quarian-Geth conflict, was tear-jerkingly fantastic). I specifically avoided all gaming media for a few weeks, to make sure I got a fresh and uninfluenced experience.
When I hit the ending of the game, I was flummoxed. It was pulled right out of someone’s intergalactic ass, and made absolutely no sense. It offered zero closure, was riddled with painfully obvious plotholes, and delivered nothing in the sense of what kind of galaxy you left behind. The problems went way, way deeper than that – Ross Lincoln summed it all up very, very well.
For once, I found myself in total agreement with an internet outrage over a game. Mass Effect 3’s ending is a trainwreck, and completely utterly discredits the entire series up until now. For a company priding itself – rightfully so – on creating deep and intricate universes, it just doesn’t make any sense. It’s like Martini adding arsenic to every 5000th bottle. As a final affront to loving fans, they throw up a “buy DLC!” notice at the end of the credits. You have got to be kidding me.
Some people will probably point out that if the rest of the game was good, why worry so much about the ending? Well, picture the best and most awesome and thrilling roller coaster ride in the world that happens to end in instant death. As awesome as the ride was, it will most likely be overshadowed and devalued somewhat by the fact that you died at the end.
Closing a trilogy is a hard thing to do, and surely, not all expectations could be met. I’m well aware of that. However, this wasn’t just a case of not living up to impossible expectations – this is a case of a really good book with the last 30 pages ripped out.
It’s a very good sign that the company is this aware of the problems, but where to go from here is difficult. Crafting a different ending is no small task, especially since EA will most likely insist we have to pay for it, opening up a whole different can of worms.
I’m very intrigued where this will go.
I was so put off by the reviews that I thought I’m not going to play it.
A game like Mass effect need a Hollywood ending. Not a Cormac McCarthy one.
This is not art nouveau. This is universe saving action RPG. It’s like watching Rambo 1,2 and then at 3 Rambo dies. Action fans don’t like that.
Edited 2012-03-22 00:10 UTC
This is why I don’t like action fans. Rambo should have died. A part of me hopes Bioware makes the new ending worse than the original, where AI is replaced with Tim Curry dressed up as a butler who explains that he killed Garfield.
That… would actually be pretty awesome.
This is why I don’t like “art” movies.
Action Movies aren’t supposed to be taken seriously. Commando is to be watched with a few mates and some beers.
Tbh if one actually actually thinks about the plot of Rambo IV the only reason why he saved the Christians was pretty much because the Rita from Dexter is very pretty …
The only reason he saves the prisoners in Rambo II is because the pretty girl dies and he goes mental. Seriously his plans were “run away and have babies with pretty girl I have just met”.
Rambo I & III was a sausage fest.
Edited 2012-03-22 08:27 UTC
If they aren’t supposed to be taken seriously, then it doesn’t matter what the end is.
I think what you meant was that action movies are supposed to have predictable endings. Even that, I’m not so sure about, Die hard had a few twists in the series. Most Schwarzenegger’s did too.
I think too many people have come to redefine an action movie as ” a movie directed by Michael bay”. They don’t all have to be that bad.
Micheal Bay movies are crap except for “The Rock”. Sorry CGI crap isn’t an action movie … the action movie was of the VHS era and died soon after.
The point is that the VHS action heroes wasn’t supposed to be taken seriously. Stallone and Arnie made jokes about each other in their movies … Demolition man and Last Action Hero.
These guys know what their audience wants to see and provides it … why The Expendables did so well … minium CGI rubbish, and more big blokes punching the crap outta one another and making cheesy one liners.
Expendables did well? That’s a surprise, guess there’s some life left in the old dogs yet.
Anyway, caught good old Die Hard on tv couple of nights ago, still works for me after all these years with Alan Rickman making something interesting out of a cardboard villain and Bruce Willis being up to form, those were the days.
Off my head I think my top 5 action flicks would be:
1. Leon (not really ‘pure’ action flick but hey, it’s awesome)
2. Die Hard
3. Aliens
4. First Blood
5. Terminator 2
I’m stuck in the 80’s and 90’s it seems…
When I saw the expendables the cinema was packed out and this was at the advanced screenings which cost more.
Did anyone actually like Last Action Hero? I pretty much remember it as a huge flop. It was when Arnold jumped over the shark. It was long, confusing, slow paced, short on action and had an animated cat.
I did. Come on, there’s a bad guy with a smiley-face contact lense, Anthony Quinn, explosions and Arnie. What’s not to like. Granted it’s a bit corny and not the best Arnie vehicle but I thought it was, and is, an entertaining flick to kill some time with.
Also, Expendables was awesome and I’m psyched about the sequel already.
I’d also like to add that the previously posted list on best action movies is missing two important 80’s ones : Lethal Weapon (1 and 2) and Beverly Hills Cop.
Actually from what I understand, the original movie (and in the story that First Blood was based upon) was supposed to end with Rambo blowing his brains out. It didn’t test well with audiences. Stupid Audiences. But then again the latest Rambo movie was pretty awesome.
This was the original ending: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtvNetgSbDk
It doesn’t really matter what they do to the ending for me, I’m not going to buy anything from Bioware now that my Shepard’s stories will be over.
An easy example of why EA has no soul:
http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/11/06
All it does is make a game that pulled me along with an incredible story into a vending machine.
I don’t feel invested into a game series that I’ve spent hundreds of hours playing and taken TWO shepard’s from ME1 to ME3. How does that even work?
You want closure, EA wants another sale.
You expected any less of Electronic Arts?
Part of me died a little inside when Bioware sold out to EA.
Well, I’ve never played Dragon Age II, but from the way you describe it, the only difference between it and Mass Effect is the no story part. I tried playing Mass Effect 1, and the gameplay was just terrible. About a year or so later, I got bored and decided to read the Mass Effect ‘prequel’ novel. I rather liked it, so decided to give Mass Effect another shot, and I just couldn’t get into it. People say that ME2 was an improvement over the original, although I can’t imagine how.
There was an article posted on Ars not too long ago where they asked readers if a good story mattered in a game. Almost all of the readers said it did matter, and after playing games like Mass Effect, it’s not hard to understand why; most modern games are complete garbage and so monotonous, a good story is pretty much required, just to have a reason to plod through them. I’ve heard reviewers say about certain games (*cough* Alan Wake *cough*) ‘I liked everything about this game except actually playing it’, and the game still gets 4 or 5 stars. WTF?
If you’re about to hit the thumbs down button and mod me down, think about this… if games like Mass Effect didn’t have a story to them, would you still bother to play them? Probably not, and we all know why… because the actual game underneath is shit. Actually, these aren’t really games when you think about it… they’re more like interactive movies with lame bits of action in between the cut scenes. And honestly, if I want to watch a f**king movie, I’ll just rent one. Or else, if you’re looking for a good story, why not just read a book instead?
It’s too bad about Mass Effect though, as they appear to have a good story. If they made novels of these games, I would read those. But I’m not about to waste my time with the games.
Edited 2012-03-22 01:33 UTC
Everyone slags off call of duty and the old FPS games like Quake for being repetitive, same with told 2D fighting games such as Street Fighter Alpha, Capcom vs SNK and Guilty Gear XX.
The stories for call of duty is pretty much total garbage, it pretty much comes down to “kill the bad man, with some brief interludes between missions”. But the games are fun mainly because you pretty much a 1 man army in the game.
In response to what you’ve written about the Mass Effect series being a terrible game, you’re sorely mistaken; the Mass Effect trilogy is an enticing game that’s crafted for the story, art, action, and many others.
All of the true fans know that the games core is truly beautiful, I can’t give you a thumbs down for that is your own opinion, but here’s my challenge to you; pick up Mass Effect 2, and then tell me whether or not you were able to put the controller down.
Spoiler Alert: Shepard’s one of the most genuine, authentic characters in quite some time! Consider this a challenge.
Now give me something.
I might try it, but let me ask you something. If you removed ALL of the story beats such that the game just consisted of gameplay without any cut scenes or dialog wheels, would you still bother to play it?
I’m not asking if the game would still be as good without the story, as of course it wouldn’t. Just like a good game is made BETTER with good graphics, that is also true of a good story, but a bad game with good graphics is still a bad game…
I’m just asking if the gameplay is good enough to stand on its own. In other words, without considering the story, is there even a reason why somebody should play this?
Yes ! Actually i rather liked playing the game, the actual gameplay.
The core gameplay is very good for me ( different amo / power / weapon , cover ).
Also the amount of different “worlds/ambient” makes it great,refreshing to play.
Let’s just remember folks that this is JUST a game! If you want to get angry about something, try directing it towards something real and meaningful like the sad state of our environment, economy, politics or medical care.
Guess they feel they can actually change something when it comes to games.
(medical should be possible to.)
Do not try to understand gamers. They are the first to call for EA boycott every time EA does something “terrible”, but a couple of weeks later “Oh, a shiny new game! Let me enter my credit card number, boycotts never work anyway.”
People want to force a multinational to change the ending of a game AND be a free DLC.
There’s two problem with this mentality. The first is money. The second is also money.
They will not develop something if there’s no ROI. Maybe Bioware would’ve done it, I don’t know them that well, but EA wouldn’t approve.
Let’s face it, making a new ending available for free implies tens of thousands of dollars in development (believe it or not, developers, animators, voice artists, and designers are not paid 5$/hr, and a single person is not enough to do a new ending in a big studio).
It’s the last episode of the trilogy. Unless they plan to pull a starwars on us, pleasing ME3 fans won’t attract then to future ME games: there will be none.
Only solution left is paid DLC.
They have said in the past numerous times that they are not done with the IP, just with Shepard as protagonist. They want people to buy Mass Effect: the MMO, and Mass Effect: The First Contact War, or whatever other garbage they churn out. The problem is with ME3 leaving such a sour taste in everyone’s mouth that most people will not bother with further ME games unless they fix the ending to this one. Making a free ending DLC would cost them money in the short term, but allow them to make it back in the long term with further projects.
That is an idiot,lame comment.
You already know what they will do next, and that it will be churned garbage.
And you complain them for making money with other protagonists, but you want them to follow the route of “Sheppard 4, killed the reapers, takes on God Next” and “Sheppard 5, Killed the Gods, takes on Developers Next”.
Just finish the damn Sheppard thing.
MGS also finished the story with its protagonist. Does that make that following MGS are churned gargabe ?
Its Sheppard, not Rambo.
Damn…. Hollywood Know-It-All gamers !!!
You completely misunderstood my comment.
I was in no way, shape or form advocating for more games staring Shepard. What I was saying is that EA/BioWare want to make more Mass Effect games, but right now the ME brand is damaged and no one will buy them because of how ME3 turned out.
My assertion that future games in the series will be bad is an extrapolation on the current downward trend of BioWare titles. The Mass Effect titles have been getting worse with every iteration, the first one is still the best in the series. Their other properties are going downhill too. Dragon Age 2 was abysmal and The Old Republic was a huge disappointment, a mediocre WoW clone with lightsabers and no content.
Without some major restructuring they will soon join the ranks of other promising studios that met their demise under EA.
Edited 2012-03-22 22:12 UTC
If i missunderstood i am sorry.
I myself dont think the ME brand is damaged. If anything, it proved that it can contain a story that doesnt have rainbows and ponies everywhere. Most other games you can do whatever you like and you still get the end where you are the supreme galaxy commander. Sheppard was a hero… died (maybe) like a hero.
What i didnt really liked is that, ALTHOUGH YOU MAY BE COMPLETLY RIGHT, we cannot judge Bioware for things that will do in the future.
To me, Never Winter Nights was a disappointment, but alot of people liked it.
DA2 really is worse than DA Origins…
I dunno about the latest StarWars,but maybe they do suck.
But making good games is hard, maybe next game will suck, maybe it will not. Bioware also is not a person, its a company. We dont know what is going back stage and in every company there is always black sheep. I guess we just have to pray for games where the black sheep is not in power.
Bottom line : things are not black and white. Lets review each game for what it is and not label them for Money lovers.
Also, ME3 is getting labeled like if it was a crappy game. ME3, to me ( to me, my opinion ) was one of the best games i played ( and unfortunatly, i played alot of them ).
By the way, if Bioware released a “Revenge of the Sheppard” ME game…. i wonder how many “sheppards” would buy it ? i guess it would either flunk or be a mass market effect
I don’t mind a tragic ending. I think most people don’t. Red Dead Redemption had one and it was very well received.
The reason most people hate the ME3 ending is not because Shepard died, but because it was poorly written and terribly executed.
It’s never just a game dude
There’s always that ^ guy!
all will be revealed in the DLC. You just need to pony up some more hard-earned cash to find out what really happened and how your choice affected the universe.
I hate the whole DLC business for becoming a pathetic excuse for publishing half-assed content in the first place.
Edited 2012-03-22 20:52 UTC
My Backstory :
Bioware is actually the few game companies i really love ( other is square soft with chrono trigger/cross ).
Baldurs Gate is one of the best games i played, played Neverwinter nights and Dragon’s age I and am on the middle of Dragon Age 2 ( for a long time now ).
I just finished, … 5 minutes ago Mass Effect 3. I saw this story on Osnews and though… gonna finish the game today !
I had the luck of playing Mass Effect 1 and 2 almost one after the other. I think it was only one month between. Maybe this was key, being able to play ME1 and ME2 just like if they were the same game.
Mass Effect 1 blew me away, really loved the game. Mass Effect 2 was amazing to me. I felt a little down that it was “do this mission to get this caracter and then go to the final” but I really fell in love with some of them. Garrus, Grunt were always on my team. Garrus missions and Grunts missions will forever be remembered.
I read about the end being bad while playing Mass Effect 3 (although i didnt knew the end, just that it was bad). While playing i kept thinking to my self : “this game can have the worst end, it still one of the games of my life”. The Universe was amazing, it really felt like i was there. Stories like the Geth-Quarians ( really the best, really great V.I./Tron moment with sad story to tell) and seeing grunt after saving the Queen was amazing. Garrus always on my team, heh
About the ending : I am mixed about the ending, it felt short and all that. It did answered the “whats controlling the reapers question” though. AND I FUCKING glad that there was no “And they lived happilly ever after” ending. Serious ending to a serious story. Could be much serious though.
About the gameplay : I actually loved the gameplay. I havent loved playing a FPS game so much since Doom or Aliens VS predators 1. In the question “if this game had no story would i play it ?” HELL yes. It actually played very well for me. I tried alot of gun combinations, the Powers were important, It actually clicked to me.
There is soooo much i hate about games today (PES and FIFA … really, how many years is it gonna take to make a good soccer game???), but honestly, kudos to BioWare for Mass Effect. Really loved it.
Well, after all the outrage, I just purchased it to see how it goes before they balls it up.
Liked the 2nd ME game play but the first one had better character development and story. Be interesting to see how this one pans out.
As long as there isn’t too much planet mining, scanning or roving to be had LOL.
I prefer the character interaction and story development.
Why can’t serious stories have happy endings?
Why should every story have a happy ending? That’s the one thing that irks me the most about most hollywood movies.
Plus ME3 isn’t actually a sad ending, you do prevent the annihilation of every civilization in the galaxy, don’t you? There’s even one possible ending where shepard somehow doesn’t die (although what actually happens is kind of confusing, but all of the endings have that particular issue)
Edited 2012-03-22 09:43 UTC
That’s one of the major plotholes: no matter the ending, everybody dies. Why? The mass relays are destroyed. The galactic fleet you assembled are now all stuck in earth’s orbit! They will never reach home using the conventional FTL drive cores (way too slow), so they will surely end up killing each other in and around the Sol system.
That’s just speculation. How many people are in that galactic fleet? It’s not a given they can’t all manage to live on earth. Plus as they do still have FTL drives they can leave sol and colonize other systems.
The problems run deeper than that. The entire economy and communication system was built around the Mass Relays. Without them – no economy. No transportation of goods. It’s like destroying all infrastructure and communication systems on earth – I can assure you, all-out war will follow.
Two of the species (Turians and Quarians) are not capable of digesting food from life evolved on Earth. At best, the food passes harmlessly (and fruitlessly) through their digestive systems. At worst, it triggers a possibly fatal allergic reaction.
yes but we all know what garrus and tali would be eating
each other !
BAZINGA !
If you destroy the mass relays at the end, and the destruction of a mass relay causes an explosion big enough to destroy solar systems (like the one in Arrival). Then doesn’t it mean that at the end Shepard essentially destroyed the entire galaxy and killed everyone in it? Shepard is essentially the single biggest mass murderer in the history of the galaxy.
Exactly – that’s what I mean by a story rife with plotholes. With such a carefully crafted and detailed universe, plotholes like this should’ve been detected by even the most cursory glance.
The fact that they didn’t speaks volumes.
Well, it kinda makes sense that the mass relays are destroyed.
Think about it :
Game -> Mass Effect
Reaper Tech -> Mass Relays
Last Mass Effect => End of Mass Relays
I just wished they had gone MGS style, with a two hours talk and video to rap up everything, but in a Serious point of view, nothing good would ever come out of this.
In a response to another post : Being Serious, i never actually believed of the premise : ” There are hundreds of bad ass Reapers out there, but we build an unknown weapon, connect it to an unknown thing and will live happilly ever after “.
Being immersed on the game, i already had the sense that the galaxy was fuck*d up. But of course, I would love for Sheppard to be happilly ever after
The ending where Sheppard lives is very weird, everything points to that we was dreaming and then waking up on London. Would love for Bioware to have the Balls to make fake endings ( bad endings ) and didnt tell us about it.
Oh…my…god. That endings hasn’t been good or original since 1890.
The destruction of a mass relay by smashing an asteroid into it does. On the other hand in the ending you don’t know that the energy contained in the mass relays is released in the same way that as if they were smashed into an asteroid.
It seems to make sense that whatever the crucible did caused mass relays to unleash a big wave of energy in a form intended to interact with and disable only certain things, such as machines. And a portion of that energy is directed into a beam towards the destination relay, causing it to do the same thing in a chain reaction.
It is rather amazing that people can’t see the difference between sending an asteroid on a mass relay and shutting down the mass relay system. If I were to make a comparison it would be like sending a big rock on a nuclear power plant as opposed to just turning it off from the main control room, the first one is going to trigger a nuclear explosion, while the second one does not (or we would know about it…). In this case that is exactly what has happened, in ME2: Arrival Shepard sends a big rock on a mass relay, and we get a big explosion, while in ME3 Shepard just turn off the system (as a consequence of controlling or destroying the reapers).
So yes, if anything what the ending lack is explanation, it is more a realisation problem than a scenario.
Except… You actually see the mass relays explode in the cutscene.
Much too late, a bug was found in the Mass Relay shutdown procedure.
Come on, both of you !
We can only know for sure if in ME3 it explodes the galaxy if we build a massive amount of Mass Relays and then destroy them like Sheppard did !
And we have to do this a thousand times to make sure the results are stable !
That is the only proper scientific way to be sure
… or we can give the benefic of doubt to the writters ! Like we do when we believe a kiss will awaken a sleeping beauty 
Sure an unhappy ending is fine, but make it a choice just like in the second game. If you want to go badass, you can. If you want to go pope-style, you can. In the 3rd game however, it’s the same ending no matter what you do. That was one of the things I liked most about ME2. Your decisions mattered and you could work towards the ending you wanted.
Mind you, that doesn’t imply that the pure paragon path is the road to a happy victory. It would be nice to see some renegade options leading toward success while paragon would be too weak and ineffective in the same situations (and vice versa).
There are plenty of good ideas with interesting plotlines but I think Bioware had to make it to the deadline and rushed the ending through giving a less than satisfactory result. It certainly ruined the replay value for me, knowing that no matter what quests you did, how much effort you put into it and what decisions you take, everyone dies the same way anyway.
Edit. Woops, replied to the parent post instead, sorry
Edited 2012-03-22 13:20 UTC
I bet most people are just upset of not seeing Shepard and Liara surrounded by lot of little blue children
The same ? Really ? Tell that to the Geth, since they either die or survive. You have basically three choices: kill the synthetics, control them or merge the synthetics with the organics. How exactly is that the same choice ? And how exactly isn’t it more choices than ME2 ? Where you only had two choices: destroy or not destroy the base.
And all of those three endings have different variations depending on your actions in ME3, depending on how much time you invest in the game (like ME2, I guess, where your crew would only survive if you do all the side quests).
Haha, likely.
“Same” in the sense that the universe is fubar’ed anyway. All the effort you had put into bringing enemies together and ending ancient wars, it’s all undone no matter which colour you pick at the end. Everyone dies or is about to die. You may have saved everyone only to get them killed when the relays explode.
It would be like a journey in the Lord of the Rings where mankind has pushed its limits through great courage and just barely won all those battles along the way, only to get all of middle earth whiped out by a supervolcano in which Frodo tossed the ring. (Although part of me would find that hilarious, but that’s because I really dislike Frodo
)
So yeah, you may have plenty of ways to win, but your victory is entirely irrelevant.
Edited 2012-03-23 13:15 UTC
Variations, really? You mean those five-second-long differences in the final CGI animations that you won’t even notice unless you compare them side by side?
*SPOILERS* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPelM2hwhJA
Fact of the matter is, your war assets don’t matter at all unless you want to headcanon your own ending after the animation. This is a lazy design.
Ohhh so an ending is only different if it has hours of different long CGI ?
The CGI’s are almost copy and paste ( like in all the game ) but the “text” ( history ) is completly different !
By the way, forgot to mention, there are more endings than those.
Me Myself got a slightly different one….unfortunatly
There are 16 different endings, but all of them are just a variation on the three ending I listed (reaper control, reaper destruction, merging), but then depending on your war preparation, you get a better version of each, ranging from destruction of earth to shepard survive.
What ?? Miranda is the true love of The Sheppard
I couldn’t care less.
I for one am not giving money to companies that ship DRM enabled games, which f**k your OS.
As usual we recommend firewalling the executables, not using Origin, and avoiding EA. (c) RELOADED
Except fanboys. And people wonder why Lucas intensely dislikes these people.
It’s immensely funny, because many seem to think that they have formed some sort of “social contract” with X (insert Lucas, Bioware or whatever for X). Ahem, no, you’ve paid to watch a movie or play a game. You found the experience unsatisfactory? Then don’t give them your money the next time around. I wonder how many people actually will.
Except that star wars must have been the most daft sci fi series in history.
Hollywood has the tendency to take the stupidest screenplay’s out there and pump millions of dollars in them when there are much better available.
Like Disney’s new Carter new movie. It’s not plausible. This is what they don’t get, although it is sci fi it must still be plausible otherwise it is fantasy.
Take chronicles of riddick. You seriously had to have flying ghosts in them?
And star wars. The main bad dude have to had that ridiculous costume he can hardly breath comfortable in.
Guys (trained by furry little ninja dogs) running around in light sabers fending off laser rounds.
Edited 2012-03-22 15:30 UTC
How dare science fiction and fantasy get confused.
yeh man, how dare they:-)
take another example. War of the worlds
You should think that aliens that cross the galaxy to reach us (an apparently lots of other planets), then be able to survived hibernated and cocooned in the soil for thousands of years to at least have biotechnology to withstand earth diseases when they eventually surface. Or at least where bio suits or something. But no, they died, spectacularly soon.
Good sci is always sort off plausible or logical.
Edited 2012-03-22 23:01 UTC
Not worse than aliens dying at the sound of a song… (what mars attack was a parody ?
)
Well then he’s probably happy since after the last three star wars movies and that appaling indiana jones debacle I doubt there are any fanboys left
How lame to complain about something like this. IMHO this is not more like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle bringing back Sherlock Holmes from dead after being harassed by fanatics, but more like Disney changing stories like the little mermaid so it has a happy ending and its suitable for CHILDREN, because sincerely this is what everybody bitching about this is!… a goddam spoiled brat that didn’t liked how the story ended.
I believe that BioWare should not do it, its an insult to their efforts, if the audience is not mature enough to take it as it was written, maybe they are more the angry bird type and are better of with such types of games.
Sorry if this feels offensive to the hardcore fans, but I’m sure the developers and story writers feel worse.
This http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/03/16 would have been much better, right?
Seriously, ME3 could have been a better game (the absolutely trivial sidequests kinda bothered me) but “T3h internets” are blowing this whole ending thing WAY out of proportion.
Definitely. I wasn’t surprised by the ending myself. I didn’t really had huge expectations for it, and I knew as I was about to reach it that it had to quickly wrap up defeating the reapers (which quite obviously was going to involve “magic” at that point) + explaining “everything”. So it was bound to do a quick, half assed job of either thing. I guess I’m used to this kind of ending.
And people complaining about plot holes make me smile, because mass effect has been a long series of plot holes from the start (example: what did saren need the conduit for in the first game?).
ME was never really about having a robust story, merely an engaging one.
Edited 2012-03-22 19:53 UTC
I did not play Mass Effect 3.
Didn’t have time before and have no desire to play now. After searching for the ‘hardest class to play ME3 on insanity’ for a couple of days I realised the game is just EASY, judging by zounds of comments on various forums. Banshees? Well, maybe, if you don’t know how to move.
What’s up with all those headlines from January praising the new AI and a whole new level of difficulty one was about to expect?
Sure, it’s all balanced now, but unfortunately:
ME1 > ME2 > ME3
in terms of skill. So who cares about the bad ending. The game is just not fun anymore.
EA sucks. They ruin every studio they get their hands on. blech.
I’m still mourning for the Old Origin (the creator of ultima, wing commander, crusader, NOT the STEAM wanna be).
I enjoyed the DA-II story. I liked that they did a different presentation with the story as flashbacks, and I liked the time jumping. I thought the plot was decent too. I know other people don’t agree with me, but there’s my opinion.
The hack job they had to do on the environments to make the game fit onto consoles was a shame though. Heck, the original Baldur’s Gate had hand-painted background for the entire game, and it used less disk space. Of course, it was designed for 2D 640×480 displays…