This isn't Mass Effect 4 -- remember that

That's silly. Destroying a bunch of inferior synthetics doesn't solve the Catalyst's problem. If it's a real problem, that is.

Define 'someone's nature'.

1. There is no such thing as a "god child". You know why ending-bashers never refer to the Catalyst as "the Catalyst"? Because it's a mean of deluding yourself into thinking all of the foreshadowing for the Catalyst's role in the conclusion of the plot doesn't exist.

2. The Catalyst explicitly tells you its disapproval of Destroy. The Catalyst seeks to prevent organic/synthetic conflict. It doesn't want you to wipe out all synthetic life and doing so wouldn't prevent new synthetics from being created.

But don't forget: The reason ending-bashers insist that the endings are only about what the Catalyst believes is because they want to complain that the endings are only about what the Catalyst believes.

I would hope by now, people realize that repeating the same shit over and over again doesn't make it true.

Failing that, let's just get back on topic and knock off the personal shit.

Just because Destroy Shepard is remembered as a hero, doesn't make him less a murderer.  But hey, Shepard isn't necesarilly a murderer.  S/He may simply sell out to the Reapers and enslave the galaxy.  Or perform horrific eugenics on the entire galaxy without their knowledge or consent.  Who's going to know?


What You Are In The Dark


And to make this on-topic:  It's this kind of lack of self-reflection on the part of the writers, this cluelessness to the idea that people might not be okay with forcing their characters into these actions that make me suspicious of MEA.  And that after five years they STILL don't acknowledge this.  This more than anything (story, gameplay, even shoehorned MP), that we are just "sad that Shepard dies", or we "don't understand".  It makes me think MEA will, at best, be a paint-by numbers action game with a "safe" ending because Bioware will think their players are simply dumb proles after ME3.  When in truth, what we want is a story that makes sense and endings that actually reflect what we fight for.

A choice between 3-4 immoral choices doesn't make the "least bad" option suddenly moral.  

And while there may be some validity to criticizing the series for not delivering on "hard choices" that doesn't mean the final ME3 choice is simply in the wrong game.  We could be pulling "greater good" stuff from day one, but galaxy-wide genocide, slavery, or eugenics is still way past the Moral Event Horizon.  It's a whole new level of institutionalized evil, all of them.  The kind of stuff we've fought wars to stop.  

When the endings were first leaked, I honestly thought they were fake, because even I, not a professional writer by any means, could see how problematic these endings were (and I've exterminated the werewolves in at least one Dragon Age game, and annulled the Kirkwall Circle in a DA2 game).

This is not the "hardness" they promised.  This is a complete lack of any kind of professional review.

I like you.

You're on my ending tip.

Doesn't it? Like I said above, I don't think nonconsequentialist systems are workable. Put another way, what use is it to describe the best choice available as "immoral"? If "immoral" doesn't mean "don't do that', what does it mean?



This is a taste dispute, isn't it? I'm not sure it's worth having.

On topic. I do agree that if they use the name Mass effect, people expect certain things in various and different features, story and lore included.
I disagree that Andromeda, so far, doesn't feel like a Mass Effect game. It's subjective. I have concerns about the game and after playing it I might feel differently, but I do feel it's a ME game from what I saw.

Can someone remind me what the point of this thread was please?

If we're going to re-fight the end of Mass Effect 3, this thread is easily moved to the Trilogy sub-forum.

It's ok to not be happy about the ME3 endings.
It's ok to dislike those who expressed that they weren't happy.

But insulting either of these groups to the extent of inciting people and repeatedly posting pointless crap, does become an issue.

CrutchCricket has already dropped an advisory in, please chill.

[x] stay classy, BSN...

Sidenote: How I got past ME1, like 8 times, the story and ending were fun. I still enjoy using that charm option on Saren to make him see the light.

As for ME:A, there are expectations and various forms of trepidation attached to the project. Sure I expect it to have all the Mass Effect themes/characters I enjoy but I don't have those insta-rosy glasses anymore.

Maybe by soft rebooting the francise via ME:A, the devs can open it up, make it entertaining. They don't have to be super cerebral ala



but they can make it "pop-corn" level sci fi if they want. Hell, if they want to do a retread of Interstellar meets Robinson Crusoe meets Star Trek, then go for it. Just make the story click.

I mainly want to be entertained with my game purchases. Maybe the biggest problem was they let Shep become bigger then the trilogy. And hyped it up way too much. Plus, like some others have stated, I don't think they really had an overall trilogy setup, even after the first game launched.

From the looks of the side media for ME:A, IE books and comics, they might be tying everything together with abit more planning. I guess we will all find out after the 21st.