Why the ending did not work (repost)

If Shepard was directly hit by the beam that would be true.



And their is fair argument because he had so many cybernetic implants on him to bring him back from death that he is able to take more damage then a normal person and keep living.

Guns and various weapons work how the game creator works when they want it to work. This isn't isolated to simply games in movies the same thing happens. A bullet grazes the hero and he keeps going. A bullet so much as gets in the general vicinity of a bad guy and he is killed or something explodes into a massive fire ball.  One minute they are reloading every 12 shots from their hand gun the next they are running after the bad guy firing 30 shots before finally showing them even attempting to reload.

I've always seen since ME 2 when they introduced thermal clips that they operate much differently then game play mechanics demand they do.  If the stronger higher damage pistols could fire at the same amount per clip as weaker ones it would ruin any tactical choice for game play reasons. Do you pick the low round but high damage or high round but lower damage?  This even more evident because unlike guns in say CoD series that use chemical propellants in the form of gun powder which for larger rounds would need more thus generating more heat. ME guns fire rounds using ME fields which reduce the mass of the round before being accelerated. Meaning it needs less energy to throw the round as fast.


Dark Energy was really only talked about by the Quarians in Tali's missions. It was suppose to lay the ground work for the dark energy plot and why the Reapers exist in the first place. Since ME 1 left them fairly blank as to why they do anything only telling how they do it.



That was from ME 1 Codex so dark energy besides the sun dying quickly was really the only mention of it in game.



Well the thing messed up on me so going to simply sum up what I put down.

Role playing alters and colors the game far to much for me to see as any valid complaint against anything they have done. You have to look at the entirety of the game as it is presented rather then though colored glasses to actually be able to criticize anything.

We set ourselves up constantly for fire to happen with 2,000 deaths and 12,000 injuries in residential fires in 2013. We provide 2/3's of the triangle for it to happen.

Transhumanism wasn't really a theme. There were questions with Shepard asking if they were still themselves or some sort of creation with artificial memories implanted. But that has nothing to do with trans issue which revolves around people willingly implanting synthetic technology in themselves to improve themselves beyond evolutionary means.  Making them more then human but less then an AI.

Catalyst repeats the same events over and over again because each cycle represents a new equation that keeps reaching the same conclusion. Because of that it keeps going with the Reapers which are the only solution that works with maintaining organic life as thriving in the galaxy.

Who dies a moment later
And why isn't it melted/blown on/off the others that are seen in the area?
Massive modifications? When talking with Joker, in the Citadel dlc, he says Shepard has about 30% cybernetics. That's far from massive modifications. So what are these massive modifications?
And this has what to do with what? Wait a minute. I'm setting myself up for an analogy? I guess I'll find out.

If we can belive Lazarus project then I'm fine with Shepard surviving getting hit by the beam.

Shepard's death at the start of ME 2 was asphyxiation followed by retry and impact on a planet. Least I hope it was asphyxiation. Kind of seems like that would be the lesser of the two evils.



Nope this is a very common set up in games. The back ground characters don't get nearly the same attention as main characters do. That is why Master Chief always looks suitably battle damaged yet the nameless NPC that assist you always look fresh out the armory.



Even with the 30% claim there is a lot that can be done with that 30%. Heart, spine, brain, etc.


Barrier, armor taking the blunt of the indirect strike. Cybernetic enhancement sand general sturdy body structure thanks to being rebuild from ground up by Cerberus. Leaving Shepard in the near death state isn't a stretch.



I don't have a problem with people disagreeing with me as long as there is logic behind the reasons. And the logic you are presenting is that you don't want it to make senses and for it to be stupid. So no matter what is said you stubbornly close your ears and eyes and declare the other person wrong. It is amusing in a way.

As well no one else has actually proven me wrong. The funny thing is I'm willing to continue a debate with someone as long as they continue to use at least a hint of logic and reason behind their statements. So many other people on BioWare forums how ever as soon as they saw someone wouldn't agree with them they declared themselves correct and the other person an idiot.

So the irony is there are people that for fill everything you complain about how ever I am not one of them. QMR would have been a much more appropriate example because that one had their head so far up their own bottom they could roll all the way down Mt Everest.

You were not paying attention to what I said then. Not the first time. Shepard was rebuild from the ground up. The cause of death wasn't a bullet wound or an illness. His/Her body impacted the ground at terminal velocity. (roughly 122 MPH) Then sat for an unspecified time before being recovered by Liara, fought over and eventually handed to Cerberus who spent a good amount of time repairing it to get it back in a condition that could even attempt to support life.



You know what this is exactly as I expected. None gamer complaining about a common set up in games.



Yes when shot to much you get mission failure screen. But that is a game play mechanic. You should be able to tell the difference between game play mechanics and story and all things related to the story. That is why the Reaper on Rannoch advances towards you and you have to fire at it multiple times. Pure game play mechanic. Story wise it wasn't needed. And it certainly wouldn't be focusing on the long human when it is the Fleet of ships in space that are nailing it with their main guns.



Yes me disagreeing with them and explaining why I disagree with them must be a new concept for the internet. Who function on the basis of no one can every question you ever.



I've used more then enough game examples and lore of the game to explain why it happened. Yet with stubborn insistence you compare it to a direct hit to a Frigate. Which would hold more water if that was the Reaper main gun being fired. But what was used was more Reaper version of the GARDIAN system on organic ships for anti projectile and anti fighter ship.

Powerful yes, capable of taking out frigates with enough sustained fire yes. But here is the thing Shepard didn't get hit by any sustained fire. The beam tracked by him taking out a few Makos but never directly hit him. And continually attempting to claim a ship being directly and continually hit by it till destroyed and the beam sweeping by aiming at the Makos around Shepard is some how the same. Is frankly insane.



Again no not really. There are parts that I haven't remembered 100% that people have corrected me as. But that is pretty far from proving me wrong. No one has really proven anyone wrong.



Yes and it amuses me because the logic displayed time and time again is "OMG this person doesn't agree with me and won't back down to me. Clearly they must be an idiot troll." I've seen this set up dozens of times across dozens of forums with hundreds of people. People can not stand other people disagreeing with them and refusing to back down to their superior logic. So they automatically make the jump to call the other person a troll or block/ignore the other person.

And that isn't even counting if it is an actual game like an MMO were they spin on a dime and try to find and use any reason like you being 5 levels below them to some how discount or discredit everything you stated even though the topic at hand is some thing that doesn't even involve that level.



Yea after QMR set up the concept in their own head that Quarians are some how super powered and though skill alone they could have taken out the Geth and the Reaper without any outside interference. Which includes killing Legion instantly even though Legion or the VI version played a large role in allowing a number of actions to take place. Like distracting the security system of the Geth Base which is were the Reaper was hiding.

I called BS on that stating that the Quarians are a skilled race but that is putting them far to much on a pedestal considering all the short comings they have. Even making Shepard seem realistic compared to it.

QMR said there was an error and so they were not going to retype everything called me an idiot and that was that.

So yea head so far up their own rear they could roll down Mt. Everest if they tripped forward.

Well, honestly I think the most dissatisfying part of the ending was possibly that the only option to take out the Reapers also involved destroying the relays and everything, basically there was no "clear path to the destruction"

I've tried to understand other people's concerns, but that was my issue.

You've never seen Big Lebowski?

I've had my fair share of ending discussions over the years, but I think I've said what I've wanted to say. I might just read this thread and observe from the sidelines.

That way, I can avoid any heated arguments that might derail or get this thread locked. 

Oh it's not pretentious. It's just a movie quote. The "Dude" was the main character. He was just really chilled out. That's all Natashina was saying to be..

Yeah to me the brat encounter is the cancer. The endings in themselves as notions could be interesting or challenging if integrated and presented in a timely/good manner, however their implementation by last minute ambush and via the mouth of a cheap DEM, tainted by being the antagonist means that means you can't believe a word or vision that you see. i think problematic is an understatement.