Mass Effect 3
- Thread starter PsychoPere
- Start date
Nah, there's no point in changing history, I've accept that the Geth died in my "canonical" playthrough. It actually made the decision to destroy the Reapers much easier since I didn't have the concern of killing off the Geth too. I just wanted to know why I wasn't given the option for peace. For two years I had assumed it was due to punching Admiral Han'Gerrel, but it seems now like it was down to a glitch.
Huh, I never thought about that aspect of it.
Kinda cheapens the predicament they were going for with their three (I know, technically there's eight) endings approach.
Well, I guess you can still feel sorry for Joker and Edi.
I gotta admit killing the tech people is the only ending I don't hate.
I gotta admit killing the tech people is the only ending I don't hate.
True, but... meh. If its not death on a genocidal scale I don't get a permanent anymore... emotionally I mean.
Doesn't EDI tell you that she'd willingly die if it meant stopping the Reapers?
Yeah, I knew that EDI was willing to sacrifice herself to destroy the Reapers, so that was a choice I was willing to make. Still a bit of a bummer, though.
In my recent pure renegade game, I let the Quarians die on Rannoch and then killed off the Geth with the Crucible. Double genocide!
In my recent pure renegade game, I let the Quarians die on Rannoch and then killed off the Geth with the Crucible. Double genocide!
They're machines anyway. In my mind I destroy the reapers and then we repair EDI quickly so that Joker can enjoy his weird fetish some more.
As I think I've said many times now, I didn't mind that I ended up sacrificing the Geth and EDI. I do mind how artificially contrived the scenario was as presented. A wave of energy destroying AI's that have Reaper code makes about as much sense as one that kills anyone that's thinking about the colour red, or speaks Italian.
They just decided that the most logical choice (destroy) be an organics vs. synthetics thing. Odd as it sounds, I would've been happier if the consequences of "destroy" were wiping out Earth and anyone in orbit too slow to get out of the way.
They just decided that the most logical choice (destroy) be an organics vs. synthetics thing. Odd as it sounds, I would've been happier if the consequences of "destroy" were wiping out Earth and anyone in orbit too slow to get out of the way.
Played my 'canon' play through last year after the Citadel DLC had come out - included all the DLC except the Pinnacle Station one.
Ending was high EMS Destroy. Couldn't be anything else really. Best of a bad bunch. I went to the Citadel to finish the Reapers, which Destroy does. Had already backed the Quarians in their war with the Geth and wiped them out on Rannoch. Consequently, EDI vs all organic life in the universe? Sorry EDI....
Still frustrated though as Shepard would never just take as read what Starjar was telling her/him. I'd have preferred a successful Refuse, somehow. At the very least I'd want to shoot the little twat in the face without eliciting the fucking end times....
Ending was high EMS Destroy. Couldn't be anything else really. Best of a bad bunch. I went to the Citadel to finish the Reapers, which Destroy does. Had already backed the Quarians in their war with the Geth and wiped them out on Rannoch. Consequently, EDI vs all organic life in the universe? Sorry EDI....
Still frustrated though as Shepard would never just take as read what Starjar was telling her/him. I'd have preferred a successful Refuse, somehow. At the very least I'd want to shoot the little twat in the face without eliciting the fucking end times....
^Not sure how you expect a "successful refuse" to play out. The Reapers cannot be defeated by conventional means. This has been made abundantly clear since ME1 and was practically hammered into our skulls in ME3. Everything was riding on the crucible being the solution, without that, all there's going to be is a slow grind into extinction just like every other cycle.
Of all the issues I have with the endings, this isn't one of them. I actually liked how they implemented the "refuse" option in the EC.
Of all the issues I have with the endings, this isn't one of them. I actually liked how they implemented the "refuse" option in the EC.
I dunno, it seems pretty contrived to me that the only weapon capable of destroying the reapers inherently has these cataclysmic deus ex machina-rrific side effects.
Oh it's *enormously* contrived, but that's besides the point in this instance. The developers did play fair by establishing up front that there's no way even a united galaxy could take on the entire reaper fleet and win. Taking down one or two by throwing whole fleets at them sure, but they have more Reapers than you'll ever have fleets. It's a war of attrition that simply cannot be won.
That's why I said "somehow"
Never said I expected it to be conventional. Let's be fair, you could have gone for an ID4-style virus ending and it wouldn't have been any more ridiculous than the ending we got anyway. The seeds for an unconventional refuse could have been sewn throughout the game. I'm still not sure why they didn't do this, considering that the way the ending was written your choice depended entirely on swallowing what the enemy CiC is telling you. Clearly no lessons learned from your experiences with TIM in ME2. Shepard doesn't even bat an eyelid when she/he's being told all this stuff. That's where the character breaking begins. It's akin to buying Saren's rhetoric in the first game, taking it at face value and deciding he's right. Would have been a short trilogy.It's lucky that I can tolerate the Destroy ending, but even then, Shepard's blind trust still grates. There are plenty of other reasons to loathe the ending though, Lord knows it's not like all those reasons haven't been debated ad infinitum over the past couple of years!
Yet the only way to beat them is with the God gun that it knows about....much is made of this cycle being different, and Humanity in particular being the glue that holds it all together, yet effectively we just pick up the ball that the previous cycle had dropped and get it over the line.
I actually kind of liked that. It didn't take just the races of the present cycle to defeat the Reapers, but the combined efforts of all those who came before (or at least those who contributed to the Crucible, that is). Those species who fell to the Reapers in the past were at least able to gain some measure of revenge.
The main problem I have with it is that it relies of the Reapers being completely naive at best, monumentally stupid at worst.
The Crucible plans have spanned countless cycles, the Reapers know this. From the pattern of progression they can see that each cycle gets incrementally closer, hence the previous cycle actually built the thing, they just ran out of time to deploy it. Despite having access to the plans in at least the previous cycle the Reapers make no attempt to sabotage them for the following cycle, they just stop at destroying the Prothean version of the Crucible, despite all evidence suggesting that the following cycle would, somehow, get the plans. They also develop no countermeasures. You could argue that this is supreme arrogance on the part of the Reapers in that they do not expect anyone to actually be in a position to use it, but the fact that the Protheans actually built it should have been warning enough that a subsequent cycle might take things one step further and not only build it, but deploy it.
Instead, they do nothing.
In certain ways Refuse is the best ending. You sacrifice the "win on the Catalyst's terms" in this cycle for a clean win in the next. The following cycle wins without having to fight the Reapers.
^None of which alters the fact that they remained true to the premise that the Reapers could not be out-fought. That the solution they came up with was bonkers is besides the point.
As I said, there's a lot I don't like about the endings--hell, just about everything after the second Kai Leng fight--but the consequences of rejecting the catalyst's options isn't one of them.
As I said, there's a lot I don't like about the endings--hell, just about everything after the second Kai Leng fight--but the consequences of rejecting the catalyst's options isn't one of them.
Besides it's not like some super weapon being their only hope came out of nowhere Shepard mentioned going to look for one at the end of Mass Effect and Lair of the Shadow Broker in Mass Effect 2 hinted at such a weapon existing with Liara hinting that the previous Broker was looking into the Prothens to see if they left anything else that could be used against the Reapers.