falco wrote: So trolling then.

Yuffie seemed to get the joke, since the comment was directed at him that's sufficient I think. You need not concern yourself with it.

falco wrote: I guess I'll try asking again, opinons on the game and/or ending? I mean if you played the first two you must be put off by the negative reviews etc for the 3rd one? Or nah?

Truthfully I didn't enjoy the first two games as much as I thought I would (that's not to say I think they're bad, I just don't hold them in the same high regard as many seem too), because of this playing 3 just isn't a priority right now (all the negative press doesn't really help either). But lets not worry ourselves about what I think, lets all just go back to picking on Gwarden, and his subjective opinion on the objectively bad ending.

As you were men.

seanhinton wrote: But lets not worry ourselves about what I think, lets all just go back to picking on Gwarden, and his subjective opinion on the objectively bad ending.

Gonna abandon thread until the rage calms down tbh. Laters

I still haven't seen any rebuttal to the points falco and cryocore made other than, mura's 'we should go easy on the game because it's an early genre'. Seriously, would like to hear some arguments, other than just subjective opinions.

Might not buy this now, as far as I'm concerned I thwarted the reapers plan in Mass Effect 2 and they're still stuck in dead space.

Gwarden wrote: Gonna abandon thread until the rage calms down tbh. Laters

I'll be waiting. Ever watchful. A silent protector.

maha wrote: I still haven't seen any rebuttal to the points falco and cryocore made other than, mura's 'we should go easy on the game because it's an early genre'. Seriously, would like to hear some arguments, other than just subjective opinions.

entitlement

Porkupine wrote: entitlement

sorry that's not an argument either, it's been shown earlier in the thread that the devs promised some things and they failed to deliver. Why should games be able to get away with false advertising, when it's something frowned upon in every other industry.

Entitlement is the buzz word that trolls and games media continue to cling on to for dear life.

Porkupine wrote: entitlement

what a crock. I couldnt care less about the tone of the ending. Hell if everyone died while it would suck I could deal with it if it made sense to the story and was had transpited up until that point. I dont need or necessarily want a fluffy ending. I just want one that fits the decisions I have made and is consistent with the games own internal logic.

My issues as I pointed out was not how it ultimately ended but the nonsensical, inconsistent with its own logic, and utterly idiotic justifications it had. The end makes no sense based on what happened up until that point. The fact that it also offers no closure to the dozens of sub plot just adds insult to injury. If it made sense I could deal with it, but its so utterly ridiculous and idiotic I find it insulting.

The fact that Gwarden wont front up to defend his stance says it all really.

maha wrote: I still haven't seen any rebuttal to the points falco and cryocore made other than, mura's 'we should go easy on the game because it's an early genre'. Seriously, would like to hear some arguments, other than just subjective opinions.

Plotholes can't be rebutted. If there's a hole in the plot then there's a hole in the plot. But as I mentioned earlier a lot of films/novels/games have them, some small others glaring. The fact that it's a space opera should give it a bit of leeway. Not to mention that ME1 and ME2 didn't exactly have water tight plots or solid grounding. The basic answer to every how/why does it work question was "herp derp mass effect!". I think it is subjective though. If you're the kind of person who got all ****ed off at the whole water and aliens thing with Signs then some of the inconsistencies in this game will definitely piss you off.

Gwarden wrote: So the main reason people are angry is that they lied? I guess I can understand that. I didn't really read any pre-release marketing guff so perhaps that's one reason i'm not as up in arms.

This. Buy into marketing bs at your own peril. With promises from developers I hold fast to the "I'll believe it when I see it" saying.

maha wrote: I still haven't seen any rebuttal to the points falco and cryocore made other than, mura's 'we should go easy on the game because it's an early genre'. Seriously, would like to hear some arguments, other than just subjective opinions.

Why should they have to rebutt anything? Some people dont care for pointless arguements, its their opinion that the ending worked enough.Especially arguements from crycore who wont accept any view other then his own as shown but countless rants.

Murakami wrote: plotholes...

Its not a plot hole.
Its so far beyond that its actually .... i dont have the words. When a game breaks its own established logic and then says I have to act on some last minute plot device that is actually completely contrary with what I have proven to be correct then thats a ****en huge failure. When that plot point is introduced by a character that also logically cant exist who hen tell me this "truth" which is based on absolutely nothing then yeah the ending can go **** itself, and that just some of the logic issues with the ending. That doesnt include the magical teleporting squaddies.

Everyone just needs to chill out.

There are clearly some upset/disappointed/irked/confused people in here who disliked the ME3 ending (myself included).

Of course if come into the thread trolling and winding people up with 'entitled' bollocks you are going to see some rage thrown your way. It is to be expected. Remember we are in a 'Mass Effect 3' thread in a Games Discussion subforum of a Gaming forum. Shock horror if people are discussing the game.

If you aren't that invested in the whole thing maybe it is best to stay in OD instead of stiring the pot.

Entitlement may be the wrong word to use. But there are definitely some pretty absolutist views being espoused in this thread.