inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Member is Online
26,305
themikefest
15,636
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Mar 15, 2017 21:08:32 GMT
Depends.
Throughout the trilogy, the player can choose his/her Shepard to do this, that and the other thing. At the end, Shepard can choose 1 of 3 endings, if ems is high, or refuse, but what if there was another option?
After Shepard passes out on the platform, Hackett says, Shepard. No hint of the comms being jammed or hearing any static. To me that means the comms still work.
After talking to the thing, Shepard is given the option to call for a shuttle to his/her location. If Steve is dead, another character can fly the shuttle. edi is onboard so that when the shuttle arrives, Shepard tells edi to scan to see if there's another way instead of what the visions showed Shepard. It won't find another way.
So if the player wants to choose destroy, Shepard has the pilot fire at the tube. The shuttle heads back to the Normandy and leaves as the crucible fires. If ems is below 1750, the door to the Normandy does not open suggesting everyone onboard is dead including Shepard.
If the player wants to choose control, Shepard has the edi control them. I don't see a problem with that since it was able to takeover the eva platform. If by chance the player's ems is below 2000 and edi is taken on the bean run, it will be destroyed by Harbinger. Would it still be able to take control? I would say no since the two handles have to be pulled to activate control. At that point, Shepard would die and the shuttle would head back to the Normandy.
If the player wants to choose synthesis, what's wrong with heading back down to get Anderson's body, or better yet, go back to the chasm to grab one of the many bodies seen after Shepard went up the beam? That body is then thrown in the green beam. The shuttle heads back to the Normandy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
2543
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2017 21:26:15 GMT
Does the mere fact of Shepard surviving make any of the endings more palatable in general?... i.e. destroy still destroys the geth and EDI, control still means that the entity in control is absolutely powerful and can be corrupted absolutely, and synthesis still forcibly changes the DNA of every organic in the galaxy without their prior informed consent.
For me, Shepard's survival is neither here nor there. Heroes die all the time for their causes; and I have absolutely no problem with ending a Trilogy about a hero with that hero dying. Reorganizing the endings just to allow him/her to live does nothing to improve the endings overall, IMO.
|
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
Member is Online
26,305
themikefest
15,636
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Mar 15, 2017 21:56:43 GMT
Its giving the player another choice. The ending doesn't change. Just Shepard ends up surviving.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Deleted
inherit
guest@proboards.com
2543
0
Deleted
0
January 1970
Deleted
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2017 22:12:31 GMT
Its giving the player another choice. The ending doesn't change. Just Shepard ends up surviving. It does interfere with the notion that the control ending has a different tone to it when Shepard's personality is paragon vs. renegade (as currently demonstrated in the changes of the speech). The synthesis ending is also currently symbolic of Shepard's desires as a peacemaker making the difference... i.e. that it is his/her personality that is important to making the synthesis happen... not just random organic DNA (which has been included in the Reaper "upload" already). So, while it might add a "choice" to have Shepard life, it takes away an equal number of choices the player already has for interpreting the endings as they are currently shown. From reading the various ending threads, I also don't get the impression that Shepard merely dying is the problem that most people have with the endings. For example, the problem I've seen most frequently stated about synthesis is the lack of consent from the organic populations to the DNA changes that would be made to them. As for control, inserting EDI in that position is merely clearly just substituting one AI for another... and the player has no ability to direct whether or not EDI will be a "good" AI or an "evil" one. Conversely, the player does have control over whether or not Shepard is a paragon or a renegade. Besides, I'm sure there is (or can be) a mod for this too.
|
|
stephenw32768
N3
Quarian Ally
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy
PSN: stephenw32768
Prime Posts: 433
Prime Likes: 679
Posts: 646 Likes: 3,000
inherit
350
0
Aug 31, 2016 18:47:06 GMT
3,000
stephenw32768
Quarian Ally
646
August 2016
stephenw32768
Mass Effect Trilogy
stephenw32768
433
679
|
Post by stephenw32768 on Mar 15, 2017 23:00:59 GMT
Shepard does survive Control - by ascending to a higher level of existence. Shepard does survive Synthesis - by becoming diffused throughout all life in the galaxy (well, that's how I interpreted it). Who is to say that finite, mortal life culminating in inevitable death is a better option than either of these?
|
|
dmc1001
N7
Biotic Booty
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: ferroboy
Prime Posts: 77
Posts: 9,942 Likes: 17,687
inherit
Biotic Booty
1031
0
Nov 16, 2024 14:01:33 GMT
17,687
dmc1001
9,942
August 2016
dmc1001
Top
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
ferroboy
77
|
Post by dmc1001 on Mar 16, 2017 1:44:52 GMT
Shepard does survive Control - by ascending to a higher level of existence. Shepard does survive Synthesis - by becoming diffused throughout all life in the galaxy (well, that's how I interpreted it). Who is to say that finite, mortal life culminating in inevitable death is a better option than either of these? Me, because my Shepard and Kaidan deserve a happily ever after. I gave my whole post-war scenario in a thread that themikefest created a while back. Lots of us have heavily invested in some of these characters and want to give them a great send off. What is posited here offers ways where Shepard can survive or die based on player decisions throughout the series regardless of which choice is made. That allows a player who thinks Synthesis sounds good to go that route and still have Shepard survive - or not, if that's what is desired.
|
|
Iakus
N7
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 21,292 Likes: 50,652
inherit
402
0
Dec 21, 2018 17:35:11 GMT
50,652
Iakus
21,292
August 2016
iakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by Iakus on Mar 24, 2017 17:03:09 GMT
Does the mere fact of Shepard surviving make any of the endings more palatable in general?... i.e. destroy still destroys the geth and EDI, control still means that the entity in control is absolutely powerful and can be corrupted absolutely, and synthesis still forcibly changes the DNA of every organic in the galaxy without their prior informed consent. For me, Shepard's survival is neither here nor there. Heroes die all the time for their causes; and I have absolutely no problem with ending a Trilogy about a hero with that hero dying. Reorganizing the endings just to allow him/her to live does nothing to improve the endings overall, IMO. Themikefest's idea of EDI controlling the Reapers might have made Control more palatable, to me. But yes, Shepard's survival is not the only problem. Not even the biggest one, really. Though at the same time, it is a problem
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,628
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on May 26, 2020 15:39:16 GMT
Shepard tells edi to scan to see if there's another way instead of what the visions showed Shepard. It won't find another way. Provided EDI would have an understanding of the Crucible's function and/or able to surmise that by its surroundings. If so, it is a huge misstep not having EDI work on the Crucible itself, to begin with. You would have basic understanding of the engineering process and how to improve it, with minor, relatively, changes, so as to avoid the unnecessary sacrifice of anyone, in order to power it. If the player wants to choose synthesis, what's wrong with heading back down to get Anderson's body, or better yet, go back to the chasm to grab one of the many bodies seen after Shepard went up the beam? Exactly. You can grab Anderson or even TIM and throw him in there. It's kind of like the original ending of Fallout 3, where you need to sacrifice yourself in the radioactive something or other that was there, instead of sending anyone else, including your ghoul companion who would survive, without a problem. What a joke.
|
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
31,154
gervaise21
13,087
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on May 26, 2020 17:16:35 GMT
Shepard sacrificing themselves to save the galaxy was never a problem for me. What freaked me out was seeing Joker's weird green eyes and then all the other races. To be honest my first ever play through, which was before they brought out the additional content, I was frankly befuddled by the whole exposition by the AI kid, which back then was pretty sparse on the details. Then suddenly I was faced with a decision and the colour coding didn't help my confusion. Why was destroy red and thus considered the renegade/ruthless choice? Hadn't I fought my way through 3 games to reach the point when I could remove these dreadful beings from the galaxy altogether, even at the cost of my own life? Why would effectively joining with them, even if I was in control, be the paragon choice? It wasn't about losing my life but that I seemed to recall I had just shot TIM for suggesting doing that. It just seem the wrong choice for a hero to make, becoming supreme overlord of the galaxy. If they hadn't coloured it red, I'd have gone right but the colour made me think that there was something bad about that decision and of course I remembered how I hadn't wanted the Geth to have the Reaper Code but that was presented as the ideal choice too and the only way for them to survive.
So I remembered the mind share I'd had with Liara only a short while back and the bright white light, which is how the path straight ahead looked, so I took it thinking that had been a clue. Then Shepard disintegrated and all the green weirdness followed and my reaction was that I'd been taken in by the AI and this was the ending if you'd succumbed to indoctrination at the very end. Surely this is what the damned Reaper lord had wanted all along? So I went back, re-did the final bit and went with red, thoroughly annoyed how the writers had painted me into a corner with forcing the Reaper Code on the Geth so they would be destroyed along with the Reapers and Shepard but at least the galaxy would finally be free. I did not agree with the notion that everything would ultimately go the same way with history repeating itself but quite frankly, even if it did, that was for future generations to take responsibility for. I had achieved what I set out to do.
Now the later additions seemed to indicated that Shepard does survive if your EMS is high enough (without playing multi-player as was the case before) but that wasn't the reason I felt Destroy was the only genuinely heroic ending and a fitting finale to the series.
|
|
inherit
4454
0
May 13, 2021 19:58:39 GMT
17
katamuro
36
Mar 13, 2017 19:41:27 GMT
March 2017
katamuro
|
Post by katamuro on May 27, 2020 21:09:46 GMT
Shepard sacrificing themselves to save the galaxy was never a problem for me. So I went back, re-did the final bit and went with red, thoroughly annoyed how the writers had painted me into a corner with forcing the Reaper Code on the Geth so they would be destroyed along with the Reapers and Shepard but at least the galaxy would finally be free. I did not agree with the notion that everything would ultimately go the same way with history repeating itself but quite frankly, even if it did, that was for future generations to take responsibility for. I had achieved what I set out to do. Now the later additions seemed to indicated that Shepard does survive if your EMS is high enough (without playing multi-player as was the case before) but that wasn't the reason I felt Destroy was the only genuinely heroic ending and a fitting finale to the series. Same for me. I was ready for Shepard to do one last charge. Unfortunately anything but Red is basically a win for the Reapers. My biggest concern is that in Blue and Green there is absolutely no mention if Starbrat continues to operate. Because if it does then it is completely meaningless. Who is to say that allowing Shepard to do Blue or Green isn't another ploy by Starbrat to see what happens and then wipe the slate clean again? After all it has been doing that for hundreds of millions of years. We know that Leviathas and Reapers fought a billion years ago. So if we divide one billion by 50k we get 20 thousand cycles. Starbrat has been killing entire species for twenty thousand cycles give or take a few. Anything it says, anything that does not end up with destruction of Reapers cannot be trusted. Reapers surviving means that sooner or later the cycle will start again. Not to mention that both Blue and Green are extremely limiting in what can be done in the future of Mass Effect universe when making new games. Red offers the biggest flexibility and the only true chance of defeating the Reapers.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,628
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on May 28, 2020 13:43:30 GMT
Hot take Shepard get survived, because the cybernetic implants that were used to bring him back from the dead, kept working, post-mortem and brought him back regardless.
|
|
inherit
1853
0
Nov 26, 2024 13:28:49 GMT
495
kalreegar
416
Oct 26, 2016 11:04:07 GMT
October 2016
kalreegar
|
Post by kalreegar on Nov 18, 2020 14:19:03 GMT
If the player wants to choose control, Shepard has the edi control them. I don't see a problem with that since it was able to takeover the eva platform. If by chance the player's ems is below 2000 and edi is taken on the bean run, it will be destroyed by Harbinger. Would it still be able to take control? I would say no since the two handles have to be pulled to activate control. At that point, Shepard would die and the shuttle would head back to the Normandy. If the player wants to choose synthesis, what's wrong with heading back down to get Anderson's body, or better yet, go back to the chasm to grab one of the many bodies seen after Shepard went up the beam? That body is then thrown in the green beam. The shuttle heads back to the Normandy. the catalyst is willing to allow Shepard to take its place (and control the reapers) or to spread his essence through the galaxy, because he believe that Shepard is ready. Shepard is special (and we know that the reapers started to think so even during Me2). What he has experienced, his mental strenght etc, " the fact that you are standing here, the first organic ever" make him suitable for the task. Not dead Anderson, not dead marines, not even Garrus o Edi or Liara. Shepard. Your organic energy, the essence of who and what you are[3], will be broken down and then dispersed.You are ready. And you may choose it.But your thoughts and even your memories will continueWe will be yours to control and direct as you see fit.So, it's Shepard, or nobody else. Or at any rate, no one else close enough We know that there is little time to act, or the crucible will shut down/destroyed you would not know them and there is not enough time to explainYour time is at an end, you must decide
|
|
inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,275
AnDromedary
4,446
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Dec 2, 2020 21:57:35 GMT
If the player wants to choose control, Shepard has the edi control them. I don't see a problem with that since it was able to takeover the eva platform. If by chance the player's ems is below 2000 and edi is taken on the bean run, it will be destroyed by Harbinger. Would it still be able to take control? I would say no since the two handles have to be pulled to activate control. At that point, Shepard would die and the shuttle would head back to the Normandy. If the player wants to choose synthesis, what's wrong with heading back down to get Anderson's body, or better yet, go back to the chasm to grab one of the many bodies seen after Shepard went up the beam? That body is then thrown in the green beam. The shuttle heads back to the Normandy. the catalyst is willing to allow Shepard to take its place (and control the reapers) or to spread his essence through the galaxy, because he believe that Shepard is ready. Shepard is special (and we know that the reapers started to think so even during Me2). What he has experienced, his mental strenght etc, " the fact that you are standing here, the first organic ever" make him suitable for the task. Not dead Anderson, not dead marines, not even Garrus o Edi or Liara. Shepard. Your organic energy, the essence of who and what you are[3], will be broken down and then dispersed.You are ready. And you may choose it.But your thoughts and even your memories will continueWe will be yours to control and direct as you see fit.So, it's Shepard, or nobody else. Or at any rate, no one else close enough We know that there is little time to act, or the crucible will shut down/destroyed you would not know them and there is not enough time to explainYour time is at an end, you must decideI agree, this is made pretty clear in the story and is what the writers intended here.
Though it makes very little sense to me anyway. Shepard did not get to the dialogue wheel platform on his/her own. There were a lot of people involved and it was a team effort to get Shep to the Catalyst. I generally have a real problem with Shepard being treated like some sort of messianic holy figure all of a sudden from ME2 onward. There is no foundation for this. In ME1, Shepard was an exceptionally gifted and well trained soldier, which is what made him/her a viable candidate for the spectres but that was prety much it.
The one thing that makes Shepard special in ME1 and is the reason why s/he is the centrepiece of the plot is that s/he glimpsed the prothean vision and later got the cypher but that is not the reason people think of him/her as basically space Jesus later.
Yes, Shep (and Anderson + the rest of the Normandy crew) were absolutely essential in defeating Sovereign and they got fame for it but still, Shep was ultimately just a soldier. S/he even basically goes off on another run of the mill mission to find geth hold outs (which was in itself contrary to the ME1 ending, where they said they'd go to find a way to stop the reapers but that's another story). But then, TIM and Miranda start with this notion that s/he's "a symbol, a bloody icon" (that's even before he gets resurrected through Lazarus) and all of a sudden s/he is this mystical figure that everyone (including the catalyst) seems to revere.
I could even understand if s/he got back from the dead in some mystical way but apparently it was all just science and technology so even in the whacky Lazarus project, there is no proper reason to be found.
So that "only Shepard could do it" thing never made much sense to me to be honest.
|
|
jpcab
N2
Posts: 191 Likes: 111
inherit
3524
0
Jun 24, 2021 22:52:47 GMT
111
jpcab
191
Feb 12, 2017 15:47:39 GMT
February 2017
jpcab
|
Post by jpcab on Dec 21, 2020 2:40:24 GMT
Does the mere fact of Shepard surviving make any of the endings more palatable in general?... i.e. destroy still destroys the geth and EDI, control still means that the entity in control is absolutely powerful and can be corrupted absolutely, and synthesis still forcibly changes the DNA of every organic in the galaxy without their prior informed consent. For me, Shepard's survival is neither here nor there. Heroes die all the time for their causes; and I have absolutely no problem with ending a Trilogy about a hero with that hero dying. Reorganizing the endings just to allow him/her to live does nothing to improve the endings overall, IMO. [brDestroy by all means is a very acceptable end for Shepard story and should be canonized as the default one. It was the only acceptable choice.
|
|
inherit
∯ Oh Loredy...
455
0
31,154
gervaise21
13,087
August 2016
gervaise21
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights
|
Post by gervaise21 on Dec 21, 2020 13:36:16 GMT
Destroy by all means is a very acceptable end for Shepard story and should be canonized as the default one. It was the only acceptable choice Well looking at the recent trailer it would seem that is the case. There are dead reapers shown on the planet and a wrecked Citadel/Relay (could be either). Now it would be possible to accommodate Control with this as possibly Shepard overlord eventually chose to implode or some other form of AI suicide but not Synthesis, so it seems like they decided to dispense with the dodgy 3 choice ending and opt for a simple Destroy one. I did wonder if that might be part of the reason Casey Hudson decided to leave. After all, that whole mess was his idea but may be he still stood by it.
|
|
jpcab
N2
Posts: 191 Likes: 111
inherit
3524
0
Jun 24, 2021 22:52:47 GMT
111
jpcab
191
Feb 12, 2017 15:47:39 GMT
February 2017
jpcab
|
Post by jpcab on Dec 21, 2020 18:39:41 GMT
Casey imho would agree that if choosing a end was necessary, then destroy d be the most reasonable and well received end choice
|
|
Highwayman667
N3
"In uncertainty, find infinite possibility"
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
Posts: 522 Likes: 724
inherit
11507
0
Jun 22, 2021 18:16:33 GMT
724
Highwayman667
"In uncertainty, find infinite possibility"
522
May 10, 2020 13:11:01 GMT
May 2020
highwayman667
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire
|
Post by Highwayman667 on Dec 30, 2020 16:26:56 GMT
Casey imho would agree that if choosing a end was necessary, then destroy d be the most reasonable and well received end choice No matter what ending the developers might like (I personally liked them all)... we still need the ability to choose in all the OT games. Otherwise what's the point ? I think, seeing how Liara "looks wrinkly and matriarchish", that the next game will take place hundreds of years into the future. Time enough for a new status quo to develop, regardless of the ending anyone chose in ME3.
|
|