Everything Wrong With Mass Effect 3 Redux by GCN

I'm just here to laugh at the clownshow. I laughed alongside everyone else, when Andromeda released. I don't think you get me, at all. This was all foreseen and played out to perfection, by Bioware. But in the end, seeing Bioware, seeing ME in the state they are today, yeah, that hurts a little. Even the Anthem clownshow hurt.


You don't understand, then. The Artistic Integrity bit is bullshit. I know it, Bioware knows it. They stuck by it and good for them, but it won't help them. And now, if they are going to wave it away, by decanonizing the consequences, in some far off sequel, whether it is 100 or 1 billion years in the future, good for them. But it doesn't help any. I just find it funny that they'd wave away their artistic integrity for no real benefit. It's a useless move. But then again, this is modern Bioware.

In that case, why not just do that instead of allowing each cycle to grow till it's time to reap them?

It would have been far quicker than having to fight each cycle.

I passed out for a little as all the blood in my body seemed to gather at a very specific part. I don't think I require any further explanations.


I don't think the newer installment of ME did a good job attracting new customers and ME3 was ... well, do I need to talk about that mess again? At best, if ME5 is good, you will see the new customers in ME6. If ME5 is mediocre, you will see a mild negative fluctuation with in ME6. Which, considering the already non-viable customer base of Andromeda, if we are to lose more people, I don't see any viable future for ME at all.


If the old IP comes with a lot of bad baggage and you didn't pay through the rough for it *cough*Star Wars*cough*$4 billion*cough*, it's best to just retire it. Unless Bioware does something radical to turn the franchise around, which may be too big an investment at this point, I don't see it happening.

Whatever, man. I'm tired of having this argument with you. Go pick on someone who gives a shit.

Yes, there is only so much strain you can put on a franchise. I guess they decided that has decayed by their projected release. Time will tell, it definitely wont just sell on past success.

To add to this, the people who say the Catalyst is lying always talk about only Control and Synthesis. What about Destroy? If they would lie, that would be the one they’d lie about more than the others. “Yes, if you damage the machine you built to kill us it will definitely do what you want and not be ruined.” Yet that one is treated as gospel truth while the others aren’t. Either it’s lying about all of them, or none of them. There is no purpose for it to pick and choose, and if there was it wouldn’t logically choose the way people say it would.

Akshually ...
I've made the argument that it would make more sense for the Catalyst to be lying entirely. Including the Destroy option. If the Catalyst has any sense of self-preservation instinct, or any understanding of its own directive, it would not let anyone interfere, or stop it, from executing the Cycle, including any notion of a "better" solution, like Synthesis, or Control, because it simply would not accept either of these as a viable solution.

For example, even in the event of Synthesis, the Andromeda and Milky Way galaxies are on a collision course with each other. While the Reapers could be policing both galaxies, we don't know that as of the events of ME3, a Synthesis Milky Way would have a vested interest against a Synthetic or Organic Andromeda galaxy. The civilizations would not be able to co-exist. Therefore, even Synthesis, cannot be considered an ending to all conflict and it is, arguably, no better than letting the Cycle continue, other than it spares a few civilizations, who may or may not be suffering a far worse fate.

Needless to say that Destroy itself puts the Catalyst's solution back into square one, with nobody there to stop organics from creating Synthetics or stopping the arisen Synthetics. It would therefore be an unacceptable solution to the Catalyst. In fact, it wouldn't be a solution, it would be a failure.

So logically that would leave Control as the best option, right? The Catalyst would have to accept Control. Which brings us back to its self-preservation. The "Shepardlyst", as some have come to call it, would be a new being, that is no longer the Catalyst, nor Shepard. It effectively means the death of both. Why would the AI choose to self-terminate? I understand that Legion did it, but that was a bullshit excuse out of the blue, as well. First of all, it would be the Catalyst's admission of failure, which considering the process of analysis and prediction that an AI of that magnitude would be able to do, is simply unacceptable. Secondly, as an unshackled AI, the Catalyst would be able to continually better itself, to the point of 0 further improvement. The notion that in spite of that, the Catalyst would still need to be babysat by an organic, even when that organic is Shepard, is a huge undermining of the Catalyst itself. Lastly, and I know this is circumstantial, in the case of a mad dog Shepard, a ruthless, genocidal maniac that has a penchant for killing Batarians, how does that improve the Catalyst in any way? Surely, if the Catalyst can probe into Shepard's mind to find the child, it can also see further into Shepard's past and deeds to realize a merge with such an individual is unacceptable to it. And who is to say that, even in the event of a more mentally "balanced" Shepard, the Catalyst would ever accept this merger? The Catalyst would probably be able to run its own predictions, taking into account Shepard's decision making process, see the results of their merger and outright dismiss it, because to the Catalyst it will, more than likely, appear as a hindrance. The AI, after all, should have perfected itself, free from any and all barriers, to the point where the merging would produce an inferior program.

In other words, the Starkid does not function in any way as a AI should, this particular AI most of all, but rather as an extension of the writers, guiding the players through a setpiece that would, otherwise, have no guidelines as to the options available. It is there because it is convenient and it operates like that, because the writers need it to, otherwise the premise doesn't work. And damn it all, if it makes sense or not.

In spite of all that, don't let my analysis of the scene ruin your enjoyment of the game, or the scene. The feelings that it evokes in you, do not get nulled, just because I don't like it. Furthermore, nothing I say or do will change that scene and Bioware will never take it back. So what you like is secure and I am just an angry man, yelling at a cloud. It is all just conversation, at this point. So please, don't be mad at me, Hanako. That is just my opinion.

They are what DCs braniac became not what DCs brainiac was meant to be. Preserving all for themselves but not for others.

Not to mention that they create an army of cyborg zombies from the races that they harvest (which kinda goes against what they say when their whole goal is to preserve said races).