How Should Game Choices Matter? (ME3)

[small]

the extend cut ending basically fixed the ending issue i had with the game, i still remember finishing it initially when it was released and thinking my game had glitched and i was missing entire cut scenes.

they did start to explain what happened, but little things annoyed me like characters being killed off on twitter for instance

they were clearly rushed and bit off more than they can chew with the 3rd game, it definitely would of dramatically increased the time to make the game but it would of been nice to see effect other than a galactic readiness number going up when you did something.

maybe they needed a base/hub, like the crucible for instance. visit and see rachni workers there, see arias fleet and freighters out the window, visit a lab and see the artifacts you track down being worked on. they wouldnt of needed to be interactive but anything would of been better than a slowly increasing number

 

[Nimzabaat]

It all comes down to the Mass Effect games being wish fulfillment, and the ending to Mass Effect 3 not fulfilling anyone's wish.

Obviously Bioware couldn't cover every choice you made throughout the series and make them culminate in the ending, but they could've atleast covered the big ones and given them some relevance toward the end. Now all your choices throughout the entire series just add up to getting a big enough fleet to make a push to get to some big laser or whatever. Everytime you start a new playthrough of the trilogy, that's what's going to be in the back of your mind; I'm making all these choices just so I can die in the end regardless.

I remember Susan Arendt claiming people just can't handle a bad/sad ending... In a game series where I've consistantly been given the oppertunity to make my choices count, only to be told at the very end 'Fuck your choices, you're getting a 3 colour-coded ending'? Then no, I can't handle that.

My beef was that the ending(s) didn't fit the narrative. The Protheans were completely united and fought the Reapers for a hundred years or so before eventually losing. Our turn we were pretty divided and on the ropes in a matter of weeks. There's no way we should have had a chance if we were doing that badly that soon. It should have been the Kubayashi Maru of video game stories. It should have been a story about how you will eventually die, it's how you live and the people you interact with along the way that matter. It should have had a sad and somewhat profound ending. I would have been okay with that. Instead they wimped out and went with the happy ending(s).

That being said, everything up to the last five minutes of ME3 is gaming gold.

 

[AD-Stu]

A lot of people were upset that, despite choosing Anderson to be on the Council, Udina still ends up on the Council.

I hated a lot of the things about Bioware's handling of ME3, but the Udina retcon was one I was actually OK with. I mean if you think about it:

- It's stupid that it was a "choice" you got to make in the first place. What possible qualifications does Shepard have to be picking a political leader, and shouldn't there have been an election or something anyway? Why were Anderson and Udina the only two candidates? I know, it's implied that you're not actually the one making the choice, just that 'Shepard's endorsement will carry a lot of weight'... but that's stupid too, because it shouldn't carry any real weight, for the above reasons. That's not the biggest problem though, because...

- Anderson has absolutely zero qualifications for the job, but most importantly...

- Making a career soldier (and guddam hero) like Anderson sit behind a desk and deal with politicians all day long is just plain cruel.

I know the lead writer of ME1 left Bioware before ME2 was made, which is probably why the series took such a hard left turn (and in my opinion was worse off for it), but honestly, even a LITTLE forward planning on the writers part would have gone a long way.

That's not actually the case - Drew Karpyshyn was the lead writer on ME1, and he shared lead writing duties on ME2 with Mac Walters. Karpyshyn then left the project before ME3. Karpyshyn also wrote the first three supporting novels, while Walters wrote (IIRC) all the comics.

In retrospect, you can almost see who contributed what ideas during ME2. In particular there's all sorts of plot dead ends that foreshadow what Karpyshyn apparently had in mind for the ending (though IIRC even he admits he didn't actually have an ending written - he just had a rough idea where it might go or something). But that has to be why things like the dark energy problem on Haestrom, the Collectors being especially interested in human DNA, and the human Reaper itself are just left hanging: they didn't wash with Walters version of the ending.

I agree 100% though - if they had have mapped out a story arc for the trilogy from the start, and had a solid ending in mind, I think everything would have gone down a lot smoother. There would almost certainly still be people who didn't like the ending, but I suspect it at least would have made a bit more sense...

 

[loa]

So what exactly is the extent that choices should matter?

If it's the main selling point of the game, I expect it to at least remind me that it acknowledges that I did a thing.

 

[Alex1508]

In retrospect, you can almost see who contributed what ideas during ME2. In particular there's all sorts of plot dead ends that foreshadow what Karpyshyn apparently had in mind for the ending (though IIRC even he admits he didn't actually have an ending written - he just had a rough idea where it might go or something). But that has to be why things like the dark energy problem on Haestrom, the Collectors being especially interested in human DNA, and the human Reaper itself are just left hanging: they didn't wash with Walters version of the ending.

I agree 100% though - if they had have mapped out a story arc for the trilogy from the start, and had a solid ending in mind, I think everything would have gone down a lot smoother. There would almost certainly still be people who didn't like the ending, but I suspect it at least would have made a bit more sense...

They were actually going with Drews "dark energy" ending during production. Also Drew Karpyshyyn's ending for ME3 went on like this: the Reapers were supposed to be an union of countless alien races with the first-generation of galactic races, after they discovered in the distant past that Dark Energy (which was alluded to in ME2 during Tali's recruitment mission) was threatening the entire galaxy/universe with complete destruction, and so they preserved themselves in Reaper shells and tried to do the same to 'save' other sufficiently advanced races, while attempting to figure out a permanent solution for untold millions of years, although they were unable to find one up to the present.

All the while, sheperding races to use the mass effect based technology which apparently sped up the Dark Energy build up, bringing the upcoming Apocalypse faster.....because reasons. And the final choice was basically between creating another Reaper out of the current species thus preserving them and trying ot find out the answer some time in the future or destroy the Reapers and hope you can find a solution by yourselves.

Also this ending was leaked during ME3s info leak bonanza that happened back then and the backlash was so intense that they went on to try to rewrite the ending......and we got what we got.

 

[Madkipz]

I'm going to bring up Mass Effect 3 and the ending, sorry, I know it's been a long time since this was actually relevant, but I need to get some feedback on this, so...

Anyways, many of the complaints I have heard (and still hear) is the feeling that the choices they made didn't matter in the end. A valid complaint, but I can't help but wonder: what does it really mean when a choice "matters"?

Really, there aren't too many ways ME3 could've ended besides either a) stopping the Reapers somehow or b) not stopping them. To me, there was always a limit as to how much each choice could affect the actual outcome of the story. I just assumed that the choices would affect what happened to each character/race in an epilogue, like in Dragon Age: Origins, but I don't think whether you recruited krogans or salarians would matter too much in the fight against the Reapers, other than showing up as reinforcements and maybe preventing a character from getting killed.

So what exactly is the extent that choices should matter?

It is readily apparent during the london section of the game that nothing you ever did mattered as regardless of what choices you make nothing significant in this part changes. You are stuck playing hordemode against reapers, you go to the illusive man, and you go pick your ending. That is all there is to the earth section of the game.

We didn't ask for much when we said the ending sucked. We just wanted an end that let us see our choices unfold. Nobody gave two shits about the fact that harbinger did not fight you in the end, though it would have been nice to have a chat with him about ME2, and I don't really like that.

 

[Verrik]

In retrospect, you can almost see who contributed what ideas during ME2. In particular there's all sorts of plot dead ends that foreshadow what Karpyshyn apparently had in mind for the ending (though IIRC even he admits he didn't actually have an ending written - he just had a rough idea where it might go or something). But that has to be why things like the dark energy problem on Haestrom, the Collectors being especially interested in human DNA, and the human Reaper itself are just left hanging: they didn't wash with Walters version of the ending.

I agree 100% though - if they had have mapped out a story arc for the trilogy from the start, and had a solid ending in mind, I think everything would have gone down a lot smoother. There would almost certainly still be people who didn't like the ending, but I suspect it at least would have made a bit more sense...

They were actually going with Drews "dark energy" ending during production. Also Drew Karpyshyyn's ending for ME3 went on like this: the Reapers were supposed to be an union of countless alien races with the first-generation of galactic races, after they discovered in the distant past that Dark Energy (which was alluded to in ME2 during Tali's recruitment mission) was threatening the entire galaxy/universe with complete destruction, and so they preserved themselves in Reaper shells and tried to do the same to 'save' other sufficiently advanced races, while attempting to figure out a permanent solution for untold millions of years, although they were unable to find one up to the present.

All the while, sheperding races to use the mass effect based technology which apparently sped up the Dark Energy build up, bringing the upcoming Apocalypse faster.....because reasons. And the final choice was basically between creating another Reaper out of the current species thus preserving them and trying ot find out the answer some time in the future or destroy the Reapers and hope you can find a solution by yourselves.

Also this ending was leaked during ME3s info leak bonanza that happened back then and the backlash was so intense that they went on to try to rewrite the ending......and we got what we got.

Wait, people actually complained about this? Why? Like seriously, I don't see why that ending would be so bad that people would demand it be changed.

 

[Fox12]

I don't care so much if my choices impact the ending, I just want an ending that's good. I felt like the outcomes of your decisions were implied, and would impact the universe years after shephard died. It wouldn't make sense for everything to end with a pretty pink bow on top. That was enough for me.

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Choices should matter. But you need simple choices as the more complex things get its near impossible to account for every single little thing. I guess with ME there should have been specific actions you took in the game that decided. Like whether you were mostly on the side of organics or the robots eg if you chose the geth, or Quarian or both - adds a tick in a specific box and thats the ending you get. No choice involved. If you got the destruction ending the star child explains why - explaining all your actions that lead to its choice.

Atleast it would be a good reason to make you replay the game.

 

[sageoftruth]

Examples would be my best way of explaining. My favorite choice for this one would be The Witcher. There have already been a number of threads about the quality of the game, but it definitely nailed the choice system. Like Mass Effect, it offered choices that felt pretty heavy and were more grey and grey, rather than black and white. The choices also had consequences throughout the story, often accompanied by short cutscenes or monologues when the consequences of your choices caught up to you.
At the end of both Witcher 1 and 2, there were a variety of possible endings depending on the choices you made (most of them bittersweet at best), and also like in Mass Effect, the choices you made in the first game led to some consequences in the second.

In a game designed to make you feel the weight of all your choices, it would be a serious blow to suddenly find out that all those choices meant nothing in the grand conclusion. I've got my fingers crossed for the outcome of Witcher 3.