Thoughts on Mass Effect 3 after completing it

I've completed it twice now and I've seen no evidence of this "easter egg" ending that people are referring to. Does it have to be a replay with the same character? Maybe I can dig it up on youtube or something.

Anyway, replaying it was actually more fun than I expected, mainly because I knew roughly where I was about to get disappointed. Doesn't change the fact that there's a lot of holes and a lot of stuff that's never explained. Examples:

- How did Cerberus go from having finite resources to infinite resources? In less than a year they've somehow managed to construct a fleet that's so badass it requires the entire Fifth Fleet of the Alliance to deal with it.
- The last 10 minutes are about as "huh?" as the last 10 minutes of ME2. Speaking of which, we still have no idea what the plan of the Collectors were - they would have to target Earth to complete the human Reaper, something they were clearly not capable of doing. Their original mission seems to be a complete failure even before Shepard comes along.
- Why did the Reapers not stick to plan A once they reached the galaxy? For millions of years, they've taken out galactic civilizations by targeting the Citadel first, where they gain lots of information about who's who and what's what, in addition to killing most political leaders in the galaxy. Once they reached the first mass relay, it would've been easy to go straight to the Citadel and start the war the same way they always do.
- If the Catalyst is the master of the Reapers, doesn't that make him the master of the Citadel? Why do they need the Keepers (and then Saren) to open the mass relay linking to dark space?
- Everything about the Catalyst is still a complete mystery. Who made it? Is it an AI? How can an AI reach such an illogical conclusion with such a rubbish solution? If synthetics really were a threat to all life, the obvious solution would be to simply have the Reapers around as guardians - they are more than advanced enough to wipe out the Geth or similar AIs should they ever threaten organic life in the galaxy.
- The list goes on and on..
Anyway, it's still a fun game, though the multiplayer thing is a bit annoying. It is possible to solo multiplayer missions though, so you can take care of the readiness rating on your own, but it's very hard.

By the way, my 2nd character was a Renegade character. The choices do make a difference here and there, but they don't seem to affect the outcome.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,583
Location
Bergen
I've completed it twice now and I've seen no evidence of this "easter egg" ending that people are referring to. Does it have to be a replay with the same character? Maybe I can dig it up on youtube or something.

Anyway, replaying it was actually more fun than I expected, mainly because I knew roughly where I was about to get disappointed. Doesn't change the fact that there's a lot of holes and a lot of stuff that's never explained. Examples:

- How did Cerberus go from having finite resources to infinite resources? In less than a year they've somehow managed to construct a fleet that's so badass it requires the entire Fifth Fleet of the Alliance to deal with it.
- The last 10 minutes are about as "huh?" as the last 10 minutes of ME2. Speaking of which, we still have no idea what the plan of the Collectors were - they would have to target Earth to complete the human Reaper, something they were clearly not capable of doing. Their original mission seems to be a complete failure even before Shepard comes along.
- Why did the Reapers not stick to plan A once they reached the galaxy? For millions of years, they've taken out galactic civilizations by targeting the Citadel first, where they gain lots of information about who's who and what's what, in addition to killing most political leaders in the galaxy. Once they reached the first mass relay, it would've been easy to go straight to the Citadel and start the war the same way they always do.
- If the Catalyst is the master of the Reapers, doesn't that make him the master of the Citadel? Why do they need the Keepers (and then Saren) to open the mass relay linking to dark space?
- Everything about the Catalyst is still a complete mystery. Who made it? Is it an AI? How can an AI reach such an illogical conclusion with such a rubbish solution? If synthetics really were a threat to all life, the obvious solution would be to simply have the Reapers around as guardians - they are more than advanced enough to wipe out the Geth or similar AIs should they ever threaten organic life in the galaxy.
- The list goes on and on..
Anyway, it's still a fun game, though the multiplayer thing is a bit annoying. It is possible to solo multiplayer missions though, so you can take care of the readiness rating on your own, but it's very hard.

By the way, my 2nd character was a Renegade character. The choices do make a difference here and there, but they don't seem to affect the outcome.

Have you followed any of the indoctrination theories running rampant? There seem to be some pretty strong arguments for it and it goes a long way to explain many issues people seem to have. On the other hand, if true, was very risky of Bioware and maybe giving them more credit then they deserve.

Since you have played it twice now was curious.
 
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
3,959
Location
NH
I've heard of it, but it seems a little far fetched, and not very BioWare-like. I honestly think the ending is exactly what is shown.

I also think they'll release a DLC that either explains things or somehow builds on it.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,583
Location
Bergen
After all its main story arch that we are talking about.
No, we aren´t :). I was talking about examples of what I consider to be competent storytelling in Mass Effect series.

I disagree, unless by capitalize you mean "show that the entire writing team (with the exception of the lad/lass who wrote Mordin) deserves immediate sacking". The story just doesn't make sense, is full of cliches, which are executed in the most mundane fashion.
You just seemed to agree with me that those two story arcs are good, what is this. It seems like you shifted the attention to the whole game here, whereas I was talking about those two arcs only. If that´s not the case, I disagree, more below.

The choices in the previous games matter very little. Yeah, so you get a flavour dialogue, and a bonus/penalty to War Assets. So?
Again, this is in regards to genophage and geth/quarian arcs only.
First, no, the dialogue you get is not "flavour".
It´s a story/character driven game and as such it assumes you´re invested into its story and characters. If you´re not, it´s a failure on a different front, but if you are, you get legitimate narrative consequences. There´s nothing flavour about having to kill Wrex, for example. There´s nothing flavour about wiping out geth, wiping out quarians or brokering peace between them.
As for the choices that factor into these arcs, I think there´s enough of them for this kind of production.
How the genophage line plays out is influenced by Wrex alive/dead in ME1, Mordin alive/dead in ME2, Maelon´s sure saved/destroyed in ME2 and whether you choose to sabotage the cure in ME3 or not.
If the main quest worked similarly (aka council saved/alive or collector base kept/destroyed would have a lot more significant influence), personally I wouldn´t have much if any complaints in regards to ME3´s treatment of player´s actions in the previous games. Well, besides the endings, if they´d stayed the same.

Arcanum happened, Fallouts happened, Witcher happened - all of them have better executed C&C.
Neither was a trilogy with an import save functionality though.
Import a save where Geralt was into Shani into TW2 and see what happens.

Mass Effect series mostly suck at usual C&C (and it´s real pity ME3´s ending is so lazy, it was a great opportunity to rectify some of the C&C deficiency), but they do offer something akin to, I dunno, customized narrative bits across the games and that´s a pretty unique feat in itself.
Wizardry 6-8 have a certain easter egg that involves certain set of actions in 6 resulting in acknowledgment in 8. All I got out of it was some experience I didn´t need and a "flavour" dialogue, but it was still a great moment.
ME series are the only games I´ve played that offer something similar, even though often the acknowledgment is just an e-mail or in-game news.
In ME3, I got 5 war assets out of Conrad Verner encounter (among other things thanks to asari writings I´ve collected in ME1) and that moment ruled with an iron fist, even though the asset boost was useless.
Even something as trivial as Jack remembering that I´ve used her as a biotic bubble gal during the suicide mission was pretty cool.

Yes, but there are many MACRO stuff that are wrong -
Since ME2, the writing/plotting has been of inconsistent quality and unfortunately most of the worst stuff happens to constitute the highest level elements, yeah.
However, I find most of the lower level stuff acceptable to good and that´s what the majority of both games consists of. I also tend to consider those genophage and geth/quarians arcs to be very close to macro, because all the stuff related to these together contains probably more writing than the whole main plot.

I´ve already posted what I think about ME3´s ending. No disagreement here, the fact it doesn´t put war assets to concrete use brings down the whole ME3, the last 5-10 minutes bring down the whole franchise.
I can´t deny that I enjoyed most of ME3 up till that point though. Some plot holes, terrible beginning, lazy deus ex machina insertion, The Kid and some minor stuff aside, overall it was still a good piece of popcorn entertainment with fun combat in my book.

Can it be satisfying as a B-grade flick about killing rubber-headed alliens with lazor pistols? Sure! But nothing more.
Sometimes B-grade flicks shit all over Dostojevskij.
Oh, and my vanguard on insanity rarely needed any stinkin´ "lazor pistols" :).


Maybe YOU should go read that paragraph again. The very first sentence talks about the main story getting worse in later titles.
Obviously a side note.
Although, I would be interested in what plot holes you're referring to in the first game.
That´s kinda irrelevant, since my point was just that I haven´t found any bothersome plot holes in ME1.
Right now I may even not remember any plot holes made in ME1 at all!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
2,437
Location
Prague
ME1 didn't have a lot of plot holes (mostly minor ones), but ME2 turned the whole thing into a Swiss cheese. I was hoping ME3 would finally give us the answers ME2 lacked, but that was not the case.

Here's an excellent analysis of why the main story of ME2 makes very little sense:
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=7004

A few of the things pointed out here has been dealt with (such as how the Illusive Man managed to recruit Dr. Chakwas etc), but a lot of the holes remain.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,583
Location
Bergen
No, we aren´t :). I was talking about examples of what I consider to be competent storytelling in Mass Effect series.


You just seemed to agree with me that those two story arcs are good, what is this. It seems like you shifted the attention to the whole game here, whereas I was talking about those two arcs only. If that´s not the case, I disagree, more below.

Yes, I did.

Again, this is in regards to genophage and geth/quarian arcs only.
First, no, the dialogue you get is not "flavour".
It´s a story/character driven game and as such it assumes you´re invested into its story and characters. If you´re not, it´s a failure on a different front, but if you are, you get legitimate narrative consequences.

Ok, narrative consequences. Good. What about gameplay consequences? You know, for example, different questlines?

There´s nothing flavour about having to kill Wrex, for example. There´s nothing flavour about wiping out geth, wiping out quarians or brokering peace between them.

There is. In case of Wrex you get Wreav who has exactly the same lines read by a different voiceactor. In case of the Geth and Quarians you still end up doing the same thing and end up with the same thing. The flavour text may be different, but gameplay consequences hold little water - you just get more/less war assets.

As for the choices that factor into these arcs, I think there´s enough of them for this kind of production.
How the genophage line plays out is influenced by Wrex alive/dead in ME1, Mordin alive/dead in ME2, Maelon´s sure saved/destroyed in ME2 and whether you choose to sabotage the cure in ME3 or not.
If the main quest worked similarly (aka council saved/alive or collector base kept/destroyed would have a lot more significant influence), personally I wouldn´t have much if any complaints in regards to ME3´s treatment of player´s actions in the previous games. Well, besides the endings, if they´d stayed the same.

Neither was a trilogy with an import save functionality though.
Import a save where Geralt was into Shani into TW2 and see what happens.

True about TW2, but I don't care about flavour consequences, nor about importing saves from diffferent games. To me it's a gimmick that is doomed to fail, which offers cheap excuses as to why the game cannot branch out and have many different real endings and questlines. ME3 did nothing to change that.

Mass Effect series mostly suck at usual C&C (and it´s real pity ME3´s ending is so lazy, it was a great opportunity to rectify some of the C&C deficiency), but they do offer something akin to, I dunno, customized narrative bits across the games and that´s a pretty unique feat in itself.

Fair enough, but I can't help but feel disappointed by this narrative - for two reasons. 1). The story is very weak. The moment you stop looking at small things, like single characters, divorced from context, and start perceiving the larger picture you realise how much of a patchwork it is. Thus, no matter how I look at it, I can't say the story was good or even decent. The best comliment I have - it had its moments. 2). The story is badly implemented into the framework of the gameplay which restricts player's freedom and reduces his input to meaningless wishfull thinking.

Wizardry 6-8 have a certain easter egg that involves certain set of actions in 6 resulting in acknowledgment in 8. All I got out of it was some experience I didn´t need and a "flavour" dialogue, but it was still a great moment.

Good. But then again, Wizardry series aren't exactly praised for the amazing story, which is the case if ME series.

ME series are the only games I´ve played that offer something similar, even though often the acknowledgment is just an e-mail or in-game news.
In ME3, I got 5 war assets out of Conrad Verner encounter (among other things thanks to asari writings I´ve collected in ME1) and that moment ruled with an iron fist, even though the asset boost was useless.

Great, but as you said - it was an easter egg, and you can't make a plot out of those.

Even something as trivial as Jack remembering that I´ve used her as a biotic bubble gal during the suicide mission was pretty cool.

I agree, that's quite cool.

Since ME2, the writing/plotting has been of inconsistent quality and unfortunately most of the worst stuff happens to constitute the highest level elements, yeah.

Unfortunately, that's the case.

However, I find most of the lower level stuff acceptable to good and that´s what the majority of both games consists of. I also tend to consider those genophage and geth/quarians arcs to be very close to macro, because all the stuff related to these together contains probably more writing than the whole main plot.

Fair enough. To be honest with you I liked the micro stuff as well. However, I do thing they do nothing to excuse poor implementation of the rest. In fact, I find it mindboggling how this micro quality stuff could appear together with MACRO nonsense. I could excuse it if it were the other way round. As it is…

I can´t deny that I enjoyed most of ME3 up till that point though. Some plot holes, terrible beginning, lazy deus ex machina insertion, The Kid and some minor stuff aside, overall it was still a good piece of popcorn entertainment with fun combat in my book.

Yes, I enjoyed the game for that pulpy, dirty quality as well, with vastly improved gameplay. I have this soft spot for space marines going pew-pew with guns - and I can't help it. However, it is popular belief that the story in this piece is actualy good - which, due to various misgivings you yourself pointed out, is not the case. Furthermore, I ultimately consider ME influence as harmful to RPG genre as it really shallowed it down, giving up interactivity in favour of "cinematic experience". That's why I kind of go ballistic when Biodrones are drooling over it. The sheer presence of the audience that would award developers for botched job by buying "alternative ending DLC" prevents quality products from coming about. I would be fine if most people recognized the series for what it were.

Sometimes B-grade flicks shit all over Dostojevskij.

Maybe in the sense that it's more entertaining. I can't help and point out, however, that while watching B-flicks you don't really emotionally attached to any character… which in my case was true about the entire ME 1 cast and most of chars from ME2 and 3 (Legion… shall be forevar remembered :salute:).

Oh, and my vanguard on insanity rarely needed any stinkin´ "lazor pistols" :).

Do not underestimate the power of a handy Carnifex or Paladin Mk. V, or even Phalanx. Those are monsters, not guns. My Adept on Insanity can vouch for that. ;)

Obviously a side note.

That´s kinda irrelevant, since my point was just that I haven´t found any bothersome plot holes in ME1.
Right now I may even not remember any plot holes made in ME1 at all!

That was too early for any plotholes to become apparent, though the sheer existence of ME1 creates those in later installments. Nevertheless, many of the ideas were pulpy at best. Off the top of my head: the whole idea of Spectres being above the law for no apparent reason, or that the entire council believed some random recording retireved by a Quarian (so, a member of hardly respected species) from some random Geth, which could have been easily doctored, and not the words of their most trusted agent (Saren).
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2010
Messages
88
ME1 didn't have a lot of plot holes (mostly minor ones), but ME2 turned the whole thing into a Swiss cheese. I was hoping ME3 would finally give us the answers ME2 lacked, but that was not the case.

Here's an excellent analysis of why the main story of ME2 makes very little sense:
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=7004

A few of the things pointed out here has been dealt with (such as how the Illusive Man managed to recruit Dr. Chakwas etc), but a lot of the holes remain.

A very good article. I generally agree with everything that was there. However, it's a great shame the author overlooked one important thing about ME2 plotholes - the "Loyalty" missions. First the game creates in you a sense of urgency (We must save the colonies!) and then has you solving personal issues of your crew that have nothing to do with any part of the main quest. Furthermore, the game actually penalizes you for acting smart and hasting to rescue the colonists (sorry Jacob, your father is but one man, and we really don't have the time to search for people that might be dead for years. At this moment the Collectors may be abducting whole colony!). The worst part is how it actually penalizes you - for some reason your characters die - but not due to them being disloyal to you, but them magically becoming incompetent.

That's why I like Legion so much - his loyalty quest was not banal, and important in the light of events of ME1. Stopping Reaper-Geth alliance sure can take priority over some random colony.
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2010
Messages
88
Ok, narrative consequences. Good. What about gameplay consequences? You know, for example, different questlines?
Different questlines would be great, sure. I´m ok just with the narrative consequences in these cases though.
Remember, I mentioned these two arcs as examples of good storytelling, gameplay consequences aren´t all that relevant in this context imo.

There is. In case of Wrex you get Wreav who has exactly the same lines read by a different voiceactor.
Wrex was alive in my game, so I can´t attest to it, but judging by few youtube videos, his lines are mostly different, just the scenes are mostly the same.
If you cured the genophage and had Wrex in your game, check out this version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL2FIUi57Jw
(Shepard´s "careful diplomacy" face at around 6:40 is precisely the kind of cheese I enjoy in the series, also, note that in this version it´s Shepard who says "someone else might´ve gotten it wrong")
That´s a pretty different conclusion (narratively), I´d say.
Doing this with Wreav has no further repercussions, but if you sabotage the cure with Wrex, later you get this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrAncE0WUIg
Only narrative (and likely some minuses in assets), but still pretty cool imo.
Aaand if Mordin died in your ME2, you get to witness this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dr9k2ywHWL4§

In case of the Geth and Quarians you still end up doing the same thing and end up with the same thing. The flavour text may be different, but gameplay consequences hold little water - you just get more/less war assets.
Well, if you wipe out quarians, you loose a squad member :).
As a climax of an arc started back in ME1, personally I´ve found brokering peace between the two really satisfying (and Legion referring to "himself" as "I" instead of "we" at the end was the cherry on the top) and it wasn´t something achievable in entirely straighforward fashion. Afaik, without an imported save it´s impossible and even on import you may be SOL (even if you completed quests related to this, but not in certain fashion), and you still need pretty high reputation.

As for the gameplay consequences, for me that´s a separate matter and has mostly to do with the shitty ending and war assets not working/being put to use in granular manner.
But personally I´m fine with the narrative conclusions of the above arcs, so that at least counts for something.

True about TW2, but I don't care about flavour consequences, nor about importing saves from diffferent games. To me it's a gimmick that is doomed to fail, which offers cheap excuses as to why the game cannot branch out and have many different real endings and questlines. ME3 did nothing to change that.
Yeah, I just happen to like the gimmick :).
It´s something unique and there´s quite a lot of other games if I want to scratch the C&C-heavy itch anyway.

Fair enough. To be honest with you I liked the micro stuff as well. However, I do thing they do nothing to excuse poor implementation of the rest. In fact, I find it mindboggling how this micro quality stuff could appear together with MACRO nonsense. I could excuse it if it were the other way round. As it is…
The micro may do nothing to excuse poor implementation of the rest, but, well, it does a lot to excuse my enjoyment :). I just don´t think about the MACRO much, or just laugh at it. It´s quite easy to leave it at periphery, considering the amount of other content. For example in the case of ME2´s core thread, I may not like the collector plot line, but I do enjoy the collector-y locations for their atmosphere and some combat scenarios, plus I find the suicide mission itself to be a cool event, human reaper aside.

Maybe in the sense that it's more entertaining.
I meant it more in the "itch" sense.
When I´m in the mood for some "popcorn" entertainment, "popcorn" entertainment beats THE ART, hands down :).
I consider Mass Effect series a good "popcorn" entertainment.
Some of the worst bits in ME3 are obviously attempts at transcending the category.

Do not underestimate the power of a handy Carnifex or Paladin Mk. V, or even Phalanx. Those are monsters, not guns. My Adept on Insanity can vouch for that. ;)
I suspect they generally did a good job at diversifying weapons.
Suspect, because my pinballing vanguard didn´t really have enough time to appreciate
it :).

That was too early for any plotholes to become apparent, though the sheer existence of ME1 creates those in later installments.
I´ve always thought ME1´s story felt very self-contained, complete and likely hard to follow consistently in sequels, so kinda agreed.
On its own though, I think it´s tight.

Sorry I didn´t respond to everything, but that would´ve likely turned the post into clusterfuck and I agree, at least to some extent, with the other stuff anyway.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
2,437
Location
Prague
I'll agree with anyone who says that the ending is poor because:
1. Why "the god" is a human child and not asari, prothean, whatever else child
2. Why the illusive man represents blue choice and anderson red choice if it's logical to be vice versa
3. Why all your choices in the game have so little impact in the end and whatever you do, mass relays are doomed
4. Why Catalyst's solution assumes organics always want to destroy non-organics - when you (ok, me) saved geth from extinction (so Tali jumped from a cliff) and one of my crewmembers is AI - not only that, but you can't tell this to Catalyst to prove him wrong
5. What the hell was Normandy trying to do in the "subspace stream" while mass relays were being destroyed - shouldn't that ship be on earth fighting?
6. Why London in yet another game has to be a place where "Hellgate" appears? Why not Johanesbuurg or some other not-so-popular capital?
7. Why Krogan Battlemaster wants to buy Australia when recently you may get Greece for cheap on ebay (check the politically non-correct humor thread on this forum)?
8. Why the whole ending feels like a result of a false perception, indoctrination in fact, but if was an indoctrination how come it's not explained and also what's the point of adding some anonymous "storytelling" Stargazer after credits?
9. etc, etc, about the endings design I could number even more bad made stuff

Rhetorical questions.

3- Because Bioware got their Dragon Age lesson (as should any Dragon Age player), that the developpment of divergent universes is simply not sustainable?
If you started to play ME3 thinking you would matter in the end making, I suggest you take once again the pain of playing DA 1 and 2

4- Because it had witnessed countless cycles?

Etc...
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
First the game creates in you a sense of urgency (We must save the colonies!) and then has you solving personal issues of your crew that have nothing to do with any part of the main quest. Furthermore, the game actually penalizes you for acting smart and hasting to rescue the colonists (sorry Jacob, your father is but one man, and we really don't have the time to search for people that might be dead for years.

No. The game creates nothing. The narrative creates.
ME2 has the narrative of a suicide mission while the game mechanics support a walk in the park mission.

Acting smart is taking things at face value, acknowledging that the game mechanics do not convey a suicide mission urge and act accordingly.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
Here's an excellent analysis of why the main story of ME2 makes very little sense:
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=7004

A few of the things pointed out here has been dealt with (such as how the Illusive Man managed to recruit Dr. Chakwas etc), but a lot of the holes remain.

Sentimentalism.

It was established firmly in ME1 that...

Is it serious?

By now, it should be acquired that being fed with inaccurate information at start is part of the narrative technique. Video games appeal to kid dimension, kids usually think they are the center of the universe, that everything that happens is by them.

Video games using that trick were selected by the video games players communauty who received well the call for exceptionalism.

And discovering bits of information that no one else knows as you progress through the game boots exceptionalism by 9.

Reading the article shows very few plot holes and all in all, a poorly thought article.

I would favour the emergence of mature gaming where the player is just but one bit of the gaming universe with major things evolving without the player's inputs but I also acknowledge that the players communauty made the choice of exceptionalism and I cant blame game developpers for adopting solutions that give what the gaming communauty wants.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
Cant tell I was disappointing by ME3 because it is what I expected it to be.

Played it because I played one and two.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
@Chien
You're just grasping at straws here. The plot holes are blatantly obvious to anyone who's played through ME1-3 more than a few times. I have. Missing information or wrong perception would be a narrative technique if it was confronted later on. It's not. No explanations are given.

- Cerberus: In the other thread you claimed Cerberus in ME1 was the same as Cerberus in ME3. That's just plain false. After unshackling EDI in ME2, she provides accurate information on how big Cerberus is and roughly how much resources they have. Combine that with what Miranda says and we have a fairly good idea of how big Cerberus was in ME2. Going from being a small organization to a massive fleet in less than a year is never explained. Noone even makes a guess. Again, it would be a narrative technique if the missing information was ever explained, but it's not, so it's a plot hole.
- The plan of the Collectors was doomed to fail. EDI clearly explains they need millions of humans to complete the Reaper, which would be impossible without targeting Earth. They clearly do not have the resources to target Earth.
- The Reapers are only two years away from the Sol System when they're resting in dark space, as proven by the fact that they show up in a Batarian system roughly two years after the defeat of Sovereign. Why did the Reapers bother with Saren, the Geth, the Collectors and so on when the most efficient solution is to simply fly the distance and arrive unnoticed? After playing ME1, I honestly thought the position of the Reapers in dark space was a good century away unless someone opened a relay to their position. That would make sense. Two years does not make sense.
- The list goes on and on. It's just far fetched to believe that BioWare somehow planned all this in a cunning way. They created an interesting franchise, but made a series of story related bloopers. It's as simply as that. Even Star Wars has plot holes.
Anyway, regarding DA1 and 2:
If you started to play ME3 thinking you would matter in the end making, I suggest you take once again the pain of playing DA 1 and 2

Huh? DA1 and 2 are vastly different when it comes to endings. DA2 is exactly like ME3, yes. You can't affect a thing. DA1 is very different, however, where you can affect the outcome of pretty much every faction you ever get involved with. Your choices matter, and that is reflected when watching the ending. Sure, beating the darkspawn happens every time, but that's where the similarities end.

People are not whining because it wasn't a happy fluffy bunny with flowers ending. They're whining because they didn't get an ending similar to DA1 where the ends were tied up - we got to know exactly what happened to the dwarves, the elves, the mages and so on. In ME3 we get no information at all. The ending makes no sense.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,583
Location
Bergen
It does not correspond with what I wrote.

So I rephrase: the information fed in ME1 is misleading on purpose. This is the narrative technique. You, the player, who wishes to feel exceptional, are going to be the one who discovers the real substance of Cerberus (and the rest).

The article considers that the information given in ME1 is one hundred reliable. It is firmly established etc

On the contrary, the information fed here is approximate on purpose.

Only you the player is going to find out what is going on really.

Massive fleet? When?
It is made clear that Cerberus had big means as they can undertake rebuilding a better Normandy, revive Sheppard. One of the first sentences in ME2, sheppard log, is that other scientist telling how expensive the operation was and how resources do not seem to be an issue for Cerberus.

Taking down bases: alliance forces are stretched and Cerberus has sleeper cells.

Why bother with the collectors and the rest? Well, because they have to absorb organics to maintain them. The collectors are there to provide them with the material. Or they have their absorption technology working for any kind of organics without any distinction, no matter the cycle they operate. ME2 hints at something there.

And what about the geth? ME1 hints at what they are? Apparently, the communauty did not bother about that.

The Dragon Age lesson was that one indeed. When an episode ends with divergent outcomes, the cost of producing the follow up explode as you have to developp several games instead of one.

If an episode brings two divergent conclusions, the next episode has to provide with two fundamentally different versions. If it follows, the next episode had to provide four different versions etc

Not manageable. Not possible to sustain.

Dragon age lesson. Apparently, certain players did not get it.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
It does not correspond with what I wrote.

So I rephrase: the information fed in ME1 is misleading on purpose. This is the narrative technique. You, the player, who wishes to feel exceptional, are going to be the one who discovers the real substance of Cerberus (and the rest).

The article considers that the information given in ME1 is one hundred reliable. It is firmly established etc

On the contrary, the information fed here is approximate on purpose.

Only you the player is going to find out what is going on really.
Like I said: This would be a narrative technique if we were ever confronted with the plot holes and explained why it's not a plot hole. That's simply not the case in Mass Effect. I'll explain more in the spoiler tag.

Massive fleet? When?
- The ending of ME3: When the Alliance attacks the main Cerberus base, they attack with the whole Fifth Fleet in a battle that is so massive it's bound to get the Reaper's notice according to Admiral Hackett, which is why the attack on Cerberus also leads to the attack on the Earth/Reapers. In previous games, Cerberus was only surviving because they stayed hidden - in ME3, their forces are so massive it takes an entire fleet just to take them on.

It is made clear that Cerberus had big means as they can undertake rebuilding a better Normandy, revive Sheppard. One of the first sentences in ME2, sheppard log, is that other scientist telling how expensive the operation was and how resources do not seem to be an issue for Cerberus.
- Yes, but Miranda and EDI both confirm that Cerberus invested almost all their resources in Shepard/Normandy, which is why it's so critical that he succeeds.

Taking down bases: alliance forces are stretched and Cerberus has sleeper cells.
- Yes, but the Citadel is bigger than New York, with far more police and military power than New York. For a terrorist organization to take over such a massive city, they would need a crazy amount of resources and soldiers. Anything less than a full sized army is completely out of the question.

Why bother with the collectors and the rest? Well, because they have to absorb organics to maintain them. The collectors are there to provide them with the material. Or they have their absorption technology working for any kind of organics without any distinction, no matter the cycle they operate. ME2 hints at something there.
- Yes, but it's still a risk that makes no sense. Why risk discovery, which could complicate things, when the Reapers can just fly in and destroy everything? The Reapers are clearly capable of reaching the Alpha Relay in two years once notified that the harvesting should begin, so for Sovereign and the Collectors to reveal the existence of the Reapers - thus giving the galaxy time to prepare - is pretty stupid. It's a rubbish plan.

And what about the geth? ME1 hints at what they are? Apparently, the communauty did not bother about that.
- The Geth and their actions were explained by Legion in ME2. Unlike the other plot holes, we're actually confronted with the differences between the Geth in ME1 and the Geth in ME2. In this particular case, it's a narrative technique just like you described - you only get a little info at first, and then more later on. But the info you get later on actually makes sense, unlike in the case of Cerberus and the Reapers.
The Dragon Age lesson was that one indeed. When an episode ends with divergent outcomes, the cost of producing the follow up explode as you have to developp several games instead of one.

If an episode brings two divergent conclusions, the next episode has to provide with two fundamentally different versions. If it follows, the next episode had to provide four different versions etc

Not manageable. Not possible to sustain.

Dragon age lesson. Apparently, certain players did not get it.
Mass Effect 3 is supposed to be the definite ending though.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,583
Location
Bergen
I doubt they are not going to milk the Mass Effect universe through DLCs and the rest.

A number of players talk about a new arc for a new hero.

For the rest, it is the same. Information in ME1 and ME2 is not reliable. It is you, the player who wants to play an exceptional character, who is going to discover everything to its right dimensions.

Raid on the Cerberus base, must be quickly achieved, brute force. Does not recall they(cerberus) have cruiser size vessels. Only fighters. Entrenched base.

Citadel is taken over by Reapers, not Cerberus.

Neither Miranda or EDI knows the full dimension of Cerberus. Miranda in ME2 is introduced in the same room as TIM, same sun etc but does she know the location of the base? Does not look that way. Miranda does not know the full scope of Cerberus. Only you the player who wants to embody an exceptional character will.

"- Yes, but it's still a risk that makes no sense." How? Reapers mission is not to destroy everything but crop the most advanced civilizations so organics do not go extinct at the hand of the synthetics the most advanced civilizations never fail to developp.

Reapers must also sort of ensure the eternity of the organics they crop by absorbing them.
How making sure they can perform this important part of their mission is a risk that makes no sense?

Through cycles, it is also known that hiding behind the omega 4 relay was effective. Some might have known about them but none was able to croos through, pointing at the ship cemetary.

Only you the player who want to embody an exceptional character manages to go through and shed light on what is going on.

The geth needed an explanation.
Cerberus does not. Cerberus is a secret organization that actually goes far beyond the intelligence services think. Only you the player who want to play an exceptional character will discover that.

No plot hole. Anytime you go to enquire on a secret organization to find out that actually it is a squid infiltrated at each level, world scale, you do not need explanations. The discovery is self explanatory. Geth would not be.

Narrative technique.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
For the rest, it is the same. Information in ME1 and ME2 is not reliable. It is you, the player who wants to play an exceptional character, who is going to discover everything to its right dimensions.

Again, it's not a narrative technique unless we're given clues or explanations. The plot twist in KotOR is an excellent example of BioWare doing it right - they give clues throughout the game, and then BAM - drop the twist like a bomb, with references to the previous clues. It was fantastic. There is no such thing in ME, so it's safe to assume the stuff in ME is simply a plot hole.

I'll reply to the spoiler stuff in the spoiler box.

Raid on the Cerberus base, must be quickly achieved, brute force. Does not recall they(cerberus) have cruiser size vessels. Only fighters. Entrenched base.
I assume you haven't read the comics then. I won't spoil it for you, but suffice to say Cerberus is massive.

Citadel is taken over by Reapers, not Cerberus.
That's at the end. Cerberus beats C-SEC and takes over the Citadel when trying to kill the council. Shepard stops them. A terrorist organization would not stand a chance at taking over New York.

Neither Miranda or EDI knows the full dimension of Cerberus. Miranda in ME2 is introduced in the same room as TIM, same sun etc but does she know the location of the base? Does not look that way. Miranda does not know the full scope of Cerberus. Only you the player who wants to embody an exceptional character will.
EDI has access to Cerberus databases until Shepard betrays the Illusive Man. Digging up number of employees and similar shouldn't be hard at all. It should, at least, be enough to let us know what scope we're talking about (small and secret vs MASSIVE).

"- Yes, but it's still a risk that makes no sense." How? Reapers mission is not to destroy everything but crop the most advanced civilizations so organics do not go extinct at the hand of the synthetics the most advanced civilizations never fail to developp.

Reapers must also sort of ensure the eternity of the organics they crop by absorbing them.
How making sure they can perform this important part of their mission is a risk that makes no sense?

Through cycles, it is also known that hiding behind the omega 4 relay was effective. Some might have known about them but none was able to croos through, pointing at the ship cemetary.

Only you the player who want to embody an exceptional character manages to go through and shed light on what is going on.
Because the Collectors have a grand total of one base + one big ship. The Reapers have an army so vast nothing in the galaxy could ever beat it. The only way they could ever lose is if someone is capable of preparing for their arrival. What the Collectors can do in two years, the Reapers can do in less than a day. Why risk alerting someone to their presence, when all they gain is a few hours of work? A single day after they hit earth, they had harvested ten times more than the Collectors did in a whooping two years.
The geth needed an explanation.
Cerberus does not. Cerberus is a secret organization that actually goes far beyond the intelligence services think. Only you the player who want to play an exceptional character will discover that.

No plot hole. Anytime you go to enquire on a secret organization to find out that actually it is a squid infiltrated at each level, world scale, you do not need explanations. The discovery is self explanatory. Geth would not be.
What needs explaining regarding the Geth? You keep saying they need to be explained, but I have yet to see any plot holes regarding them.

Cerberus go from being a "rogue black ops cell of the Alliance" to an organization capable of taking over both Omega and the Citadel - the two biggest, most massive space stations in the galaxy. A black ops cell is hardly that resourceful, and their insane growth over a few years makes no sense. At least not without a proper explanation.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,583
Location
Bergen
By the way, I've completed it a third time now, this time starting with a new character. It's a bit interesting, as you basically start a game where all the "wrong" choices have been made, meaning you get to see how it all turns out without playing ME2 like an idiot.

The differences are generally much bigger between a fresh game and an imported game, than it is between Renegade/Paragon.

Small warning though: On higher difficulties, it's actually quite hard to start as a level 1 character. I died quite a lot because of the complete lack of abilities.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,583
Location
Bergen
Small warning though: On higher difficulties, it's actually quite hard to start as a level 1 character. I died quite a lot because of the complete lack of abilities.

That's another reason why I am not in a hurry to play ME3. When my backup drive crashed it took with it my saves ME2 included.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,721
Again, it's not a narrative technique unless we're given clues or explanations. The plot twist in KotOR is an excellent example of BioWare doing it right - they give clues throughout the game, and then BAM - drop the twist like a bomb, with references to the previous clues. It was fantastic. There is no such thing in ME, so it's safe to assume the stuff in ME is simply a plot hole.

No plot twist. There is no twist. It is just investigation job. You investigate on a secret organization and you discover its real dimension.

Clues? You are given more than clues. You see the real dimension by yourself.

I'll reply to the spoiler stuff in the spoiler box.

I assume you haven't read the comics then. I won't spoil it for you, but suffice to say Cerberus is massive.


That's at the end. Cerberus beats C-SEC and takes over the Citadel when trying to kill the council. Shepard stops them. A terrorist organization would not stand a chance at taking over New York.


EDI has access to Cerberus databases until Shepard betrays the Illusive Man. Digging up number of employees and similar shouldn't be hard at all. It should, at least, be enough to let us know what scope we're talking about (small and secret vs MASSIVE).


Because the Collectors have a grand total of one base + one big ship. The Reapers have an army so vast nothing in the galaxy could ever beat it. The only way they could ever lose is if someone is capable of preparing for their arrival. What the Collectors can do in two years, the Reapers can do in less than a day. Why risk alerting someone to their presence, when all they gain is a few hours of work? A single day after they hit earth, they had harvested ten times more than the Collectors did in a whooping two years.

What needs explaining regarding the Geth? You keep saying they need to be explained, but I have yet to see any plot holes regarding them.

Cerberus go from being a "rogue black ops cell of the Alliance" to an organization capable of taking over both Omega and the Citadel - the two biggest, most massive space stations in the galaxy. A black ops cell is hardly that resourceful, and their insane growth over a few years makes no sense. At least not without a proper explanation.

For some reason, you did not like the narrative trick. It is quite useless though to distort what happened.

You keep asking basing your plot holes demand on information fed in ME1 and ME2 when this information was misleading on purposing.
Cerberus did not take the Citadel. They failed. That is what the game shows. It is not possible to claim that Cerberus took the citadel because they failed.

Cerberus is not small. Cerberus is thought to be small and sold as small in ME1. Cerberus does not go from a rogue black alliance cells to an organization capable of taking over Omega.
In ME1, Cerberus is capable of taking over Omega (under the same circumstances) but it is not know. The real threat caused by Cerberus is miscalculated. Only you the player who wants to play exceptional characters will discover. The other part of the universe has their intelligence wrong.
But as you keep denying the narrative trick, considering the information you are fed in ME1 and ME2 as being reliable, as reliable as ME3, and wish to oppose them, it is going into circles.
The story you know of Cerberus in 1 is wrong.
The story you know of Cerberus in 2 is incomplete.
The story you know of Cerberus in 3 is right.

It is a secret organization. You investigate it and discover the real dimension. There is no plothole. There is no justification to provide for an evolution that does not exist.
The conspiracy dimension of Cerberus is simply much bigger than when introduced in ME1. It is as simple as that.

EDI is no more reliable than Miranda. EDI does not know the location of the base.

Geth needed explanation because a split faction demands explanation to figure out that actually there is a schism.

The real dimension of a secret organization you investigate provides answers as you discover more. I stated nothing about plotholes. I stated that given the substance of the geth narrative, an explanation was required.

Investigating a secret organization and discovering its real scope, dimension, reach, project or whatever, is self explanatory. It is classics. You start with a petty theft to discover much bigger behind it. No plothole when you discover much more than you expected.

This trick is simply here to reinforce the exceptionalism of your character. Cerberus is as it is from the start. You saved the galaxy from an unknown threat. Only you and the bad guy know of the real thing. You protect people etc
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
Back
Top Bottom