I liked the Mass Effect 3 ending.

[Lovely Mixture]

Here is the issue. Just because YOU think it is bad writing, does not mean that it is.

Sure, otherwise we wouldn't be arguing.

Especially when the reason you think it is bad writing is clearly identified as you misunderstanding or not even seeing what is being conveyed.

Don't you see any problem with your argument? It's literally "It's not bad writing, you didn't understand it."

Bioware attempted to end this trilogy with a level of risk and complexity that rarely if ever has been seen in gaming, and the community as a whole not only missed it, they went absolutely apeshit because they missed it. This is why I claim things like this sets us back a decade.
offering

A level of risk? They "didn't want the ending to be forgettable." It's hardly any risk if you don't care about pissing off people who actually wanted a good narrative.

It doesnt set us back a decade for being upset over the writing, It sets us back a decade when we act like screaming children getting bent out of shape simply because things did not go the way we expect them to.

Having standards and having expectations are very different things. And you are still continuing to generalize everyone who disliked the ending as whining children.

THAT is the entire problem of the controversy. Even in the face of all the well meaning, thoughtfully worded expositions on why the ending is broken, it still comes down to the same factors. You missed the point because you put your intention/interpretation as the expected end all be all resolution and when the ending did not mesh with your expectation, you screamed like a child.

That's very narrow-minded. That's all I can really say.

 

[Bigsmith]

**Obviously this is going to be spoiler-rific**

I just finished Mass Effect 3 (I'm super late, I know), and I managed to avoid getting the ending spoiled for me, except for the fact that it was apparently really bad. And having just finished it I don't see what everybody was so upset about.

Spoiler: My ending went something like this

I chose to control the Reapers, because if I destroyed them the cycle would just start all over in the next generation of people which would make all 3 games pointless, and I didn't do synthesis because it seemed kind of douchey to make that kind of choice without anybody's consent on the issue.

Sheapard dies sacrificing himself for the survival of every living thing everywhere, the rest of his squad lives on and his sacrifice is never forgotten.

Can somebody explain to me what was so bad about it?
I do realize that the choice you make has little effect on the ending but that doesn't necessarily make it a bad one.

Although I won't go into why people think it's so bad, I can however agree with you. :3

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

sorry but i dont have access to what ever the hell the writers had.

Crystal meth cut with guano, known on the street as 'batshit crazy'.

I just headdesked at that joke so hard I broke my desk.

Well, as they say, if you enjoyed that joke half as much as I did then... I've enjoyed it twice as much as you.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

The end of Mass Effect 3 did something I never thought possible...

Make me wish something had been written by Drew Karpyshyn.

 

[DioWallachia]

THAT is the entire problem of the controversy. Even in the face of all the well meaning, thoughtfully worded expositions on why the ending is broken, it still comes down to the same factors. You missed the point because you put your intention/interpretation as the expected end all be all resolution and when the ending did not mesh with your expectation, you screamed like a child.

That's very narrow-minded. That's all I can really say.

Again, if this was a planned trilogy and the ending was intended all along, it would be:

1)Properly foreshadowed through the series. the conflict of Organics Vs Synthetics is not even worth registering because no Synthetics in this cycle were a problem at all unless the Reapers upgraded them (so much for helping organics) and the god child failed to provide evidence of the contrary.

2)The "Dark Energy" leaked ending shouldnt exist

3)This video interview shouldnt exist:

Come to think of it, a decade ago we werent bitching about having an ending changed. We are, like always, a bunch of walking jeans with pockets full of money, we can only speak the elusive language of money and nothing else.

We are wrong because we missed the point? i supposed that we, the gamers, are just as worse as Anita Sarkesiam then, who missed the point of ICO and called it "the most sexist game she ever played". Do the developers even know at this point what was the point of the series?

 

[DioWallachia]

Bioware attempted to end this trilogy with a level of risk and complexity that rarely if ever has been seen in gaming, and the community as a whole not only missed it, they went absolutely apeshit because they missed it. This is why I claim things like this sets us back a decade.
offering

A level of risk? They "didn't want the ending to be forgettable." It's hardly any risk if you don't care about pissing off people who actually wanted a good narrative.

Again with the "risk". Do the risk he speak off refers to the fact that Walters ripped off the ending of Matrix Reloaded, and thus, it was a risk because people would remember that film? except that in our case, instead of being able to argue with the child like Neo did with the Architect, we end up accepting its lies without proper exposition.

Dont try to imitate Mr Hudson by pretending its our fault and not giving proper explanation of what was the idea behind an ending that was made in the last hour and the fanbase had to Headcannon to understand it. I havent found a law that prevents artist from explaning its work to the people and i am sure as hell that if we KNEW the reason of, say, The Mona Lisa smile, it will STILL be considered art.

Maybe he is sad because we cried like babies about the ending before going civilized about it. And once again, he is wrong, remember the charity drive of Child's Play? that got canceled for no apparent reason? oh wait, we do know why they dont want the gamers, the mature people who are the foil to Bioware childeshness, to complain formaly:


Dont remember the charity drive? then how about the cupcakes?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2012/03/27/mass-effect-3-protesters-sending-cupcakes-to-bioware/

To quote Wikipedia: "The group later raised $1,000 in under one hour to go toward the purchase of 402 cupcakes. The cupcakes were made with three different colors (red, green and blue) to correspond to the different endings, yet all had the same vanilla flavor"

Uhmm........all the same flavor? is this SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUBTLE foreshadowing?

So viranimus, dont want to explain? put a link for someone who holds your argument or a previous post of yours that did it before.

 

[TheScientificIssole]

Silly Koala, that's a weird way of saying how much you hated the ending.

In a game franchise that prides itself on choice and the consequences of those choices, having an ending that thematically goes against those choices makes it a poor ending.

Also, it's been established that the ending was written by two guys, with no input by any of the rest of the team.

And it shows.

I love the ending. Wall of text below.

Spoiler

I love the ending. I think it's amazing, all three of the endings ride off of the themes of all three of the games. Synthesis covers themes from two and three, because Shepard is a made partly-synthetic clone in the second game, Legion sacrifices him self to give the synthetic Geth their own lives and the relationship between Joker and EDI in the second one. And the shot at the end of EDI and Joker standing at the new planet was perfect.
Control shows themes of perseverance and courage , because Shepard is the only one has enough character to control the reapers. Paragon or Renegade, Shepard is still the person who has enough conviction and strength to do it.
The destroy ending, seems to be a little bit more dependent on your thought. It does however carry themes of the original Mass Effect, because this ending almost shows that you have refused the change of the situation.Through your choices and your beliefs, you may have made synthetics the bad guy, as they were in the first game.
And you're choices do effect your outcome! Just not in the way that you would think. Galactic Readiness defines alot of the choice thing because through the groups you decide to ally with you get a different ending, or some endings are unable to be chosen. And besides that I found that some choices would be poor decisions if made under certain circumstances. If I chose to destroy the Geth because I lacked the ability to unite them, I would probably choose the destroy ending, and I would be unable to see any good in control or synthesis. If I chose to destroy the Quarians, I wouldn't have it in my heart to be able to destroy the Geth, so I would have to choose synthesis or control.
And themes that run for the first game to the ending, Synthetics Vs. Biotics, in the first game you fight against the Geth and Sovereign, all you know is that they are destructive robots and that they must be stopped. In the second game you meet legion, who allows you to look more into the Geth and their motives. In the third you have the option to change everything and save the Geth and use the reapers for good, or destroy both.
Courage and sacrifice, Shepard, Legion, many other characters, but most importantly Saren and The Illusive Man. They both face indoctrination, and if you are strong enough, they fight it long enough to stop themselves. Both have identical situation, with almost identical resolutions, its perfect. And one character who was controlled by the Thorian shoots himself to protect his colony.
Rebirth and cycles are a big one that I don't want to explain, wall of text is too much.

That may have been poorly written, because it is too long to edit.

 

[Acton Hank]

Now go into the naughty corner and think about all the silly things you said to each other, then kiss and make up.

NEVER!! i cant french kiss anyone with a breath like that!!!

When did I mention french kissing? Is there something you'd like to share with us fine folks at the escapist forums? We're very good listeners.

Well, you say kissing and make out with each other but that is too lame, i do rather put the tongue all the way and check out if any of the teeths are real or fake (so at least i know that my......"client" has a good dental health. Otherwise, if it uses fake ones, then that means that he has a good dental plan)

Like a boss

I said "kiss and make UP"; It's an old expression that means drop grudges and try to get along.

 

[Roman Monaghan]

Could you explain why you liked it? There is a big difference between indifference and liking (which your last sentence makes you sound indifferent to the ending; I apologize in advance if I'm presuming too much here).

I liked the ending for reasons that I'm getting sick of explaining so I would like to hear what you have to say.

I liked the ending because it worked. Shepard died, I'm fine with that. In fact I think I would have liked the ending a little bit less if Shepard made his decision, hopped on the Normandy, and flew away in the sunset, because it would make the choice he made feel less significant. The fact that Shepard gave his life intentionally for the greater good just speaks more about him as a character. It exemplifies his selflessness and willingness to do absolutely anything if it means a better life for someone else.

I like the idea that (in the case of the Control ending) Shepard isn't truly dead, though. He lives on through the embodiment of the Reapers, on an eternal mission to ensure peace in the whole galaxy.

And I loved the ending scene, with the Stargazer and the kid. I can't remember who said this but there is a famous quote that goes something like this. "There are two deaths in this life, one when your body dies, and the other is the last time anybody mentions your name."
This is my favorite part about the ending, because Shepard dies physically, making his decision seem more significant, but the memory of him and what he did will live on forever.

No it didn't.

No one in the world is complaining that the endings are bad because Shepard died. We all kinda went into this one expecting it. Probably thinking there'd be a work around, but probably with a default that he'd die unless you really went out of your way, but that is not a complaint I've seen leveled at this ending unless you're a moron or making a straw man argument (which you are)

Also I think you're misquoting a One Piece quote. "Hey...when do you think a man dies? Does he die when he's been shot? No. Does he die when he's ravaged with disease? No. Does he die when he's been poisoned? NO! A man dies when, and only when, he is FORGOTTEN! Even when I pass on, my dream will come true."

People hate the ending because it made no sense in the context of the rest of the series, neither from a story stand point nor a mechanical standpoint. People hate it because it was of poor quality and felt like it was shoved in at the last minute. People hate it because it retroactively goes back and ruins the entire rest of the series; for the same reason I cannot truly enjoy the original Star Wars movies or the old Ultima games, I can no longer enjoy the Mass Effect games. People hate it because it robs us of choice, the most important thing about the series, and even then I will proudly admit that such a concept could have been used in such a way to blow our minds, but as it was it merely left a sour taste in our mouths. People hate it cuz we never find out about what happens to our team mates, or even the rest of the universe for that matter. People hate it because we were expected to accept it without argument and without input.

And for another thing: we hated it when people said we were entitled to think we should have expected better. It makes us entitled to want quality from something we love, and to feel betrayed when it is denied and we are spat upon for being so foolish as to think something that has been good for so long should continue to be so. That we should accept and enjoy without question like starved dogs slopping up filthy bilge water from a pit in the ground. It is not entitlement to complain when a wonderful 4 star dinner is suddenly replaced at the last bite with a maggot infested water bloated dog corpse.

These are real tangible reasons for why people feel about the ending. All you had given was "Shepard dying was pretty cool, so I liked it." You lose. You lose in life. Go home.

 

[DioWallachia]

No it didn't.

That was unnessesary harsh but oh well. Anyway, what do you think of this video documentary? does it cover ALL the things that make up the controversy? (warning:is fuckton long because its a compilation of several videos over the web)

Spoiler

 

[Agent 45]

I disagree with most people on here....

because I think the game was being broken beyond repair at Chronos station and went downhill from there, not just the last 10 minutes. No, I don't feel like elaborating, it's been half a year now, I have talked about it enough. (not on here though, see post count)

On top of that, this lovely scene from the endgame:

"Damnit, I'm hit!"

"Cortez!"

*Steve explodes*

"You're going to pay for that you bastards!"

"Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuueeeerrrgggghhhhh!"

 

[Eddie the head]

Snip

I remember reading a quote once buy I think Tolkien but it might have been Jules Verne. Anyway I can't remember exactly what was said but the main point of it was if you lose the willing participation of your audience then whatever your trying to say is lost. Meaning internal consistency has to be maintained. It don't matter what your themes are or if they are used in the ending even. If narrative coherence is lost whatever you where trying to say falls flat.

To put it simply the themes might be grate but the the story's not. And if the story's not the themes don't matter.

 

[DioWallachia]

I disagree with most people on here....

because I think the game was being broken beyond repair at Chronos station and went downhill from there, not just the last 10 minutes. No, I don't feel like elaborating, it's been half a year now, I have talked about it enough. (not on here though, see post count)

On top of that, this lovely scene from the endgame:

"Damnit, I'm hit!"

"Cortez!"

*Steve explodes*

"You're going to pay for that you bastards!"

"Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuueeeerrrgggghhhhh!"

Sabor it. TASTE gaming history it its full glory:


love the comments there:

Shepard: "STEEEEEEEEVE!"

Stevie: "Im alright!"

Sheaprd: (Extremely disappointed he didn't die) "...You sure?"

-----

Kimberly Brooks: "Okay, what's my motivation?"

VA Director: "You are giving birth to a pineapple."

KB: "Got it."

 

[DioWallachia]

Snip

I remember reading a quote once buy I think Tolkien but it might have been Jules Verne. Anyway I can't remember exactly what was said but the main point of it was if you lose the willing participation of your audience then whatever your trying to say is lost. Meaning internal consistency has to be maintained. It don't matter what your themes are or if they are used in the ending even. If narrative coherence is lost whatever you where trying to say falls flat.

To put it simply the themes might be grate but the the story's not. And if the story's not the themes don't matter.

Aah yes, "willing participation of your audience". We already dismissed that claim.

You know? there is this sophism argument about "There is no OBJECTIVE way to write a story. Therefore, its not a bad X", and yet here we are debating not only this game merits but ALL the crap we like/dislike in these very forums. Hell, we gave REVIEWERS telling us their opinion about certain products. So, if everything is subjective then what is the point of trying harder to make a good movie if EVERYTHING is good under that logic?

 

[Agent 45]

snip

Sabor it. TASTE gaming history it its full glory:


love the comments there:

Shepard: "STEEEEEEEEVE!"

Stevie: "Im alright!"

Sheaprd: (Extremely disappointed he didn't die) "...You sure?"

-----

Kimberly Brooks: "Okay, what's my motivation?"

VA Director: "You are giving birth to a pineapple."

KB: "Got it."

One has to wonder what the voice actors thought when they saw the final product:

"Yup, did a damn fine job with that pineapple line!" Seriously though, the endgame was full of out of sync audio and video, this buggy scene is just the most obvious and hilarious one, I literally laughed out loud when I saw it. I saw you post a link to one of smudboy's videos earlier and I have to say that I agree with a lot af what he says. Though he can overanalyze certain aspects.

 

[worldruler8]

I disagree with most people on here....

because I think the game was being broken beyond repair at Chronos station and went downhill from there, not just the last 10 minutes. No, I don't feel like elaborating, it's been half a year now, I have talked about it enough. (not on here though, see post count)

On top of that, this lovely scene from the endgame:

"Damnit, I'm hit!"

"Cortez!"

*Steve explodes*

"You're going to pay for that you bastards!"

"Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuueeeerrrgggghhhhh!"

Sabor it. TASTE gaming history it its full glory:


love the comments there:

Shepard: "STEEEEEEEEVE!"

Stevie: "Im alright!"

Sheaprd: (Extremely disappointed he didn't die) "...You sure?"

-----

Kimberly Brooks: "Okay, what's my motivation?"

VA Director: "You are giving birth to a pineapple."

KB: "Got it."

You know, I didn't see that scene since I never got the game, just watched a let's play. But I can say this, that scene may as well encompass everything that was bad about the game. Everything, the cinematography, the delivery, the reaction, and how I reacted (by laughing at the absurdity) was just wrong.

 

[Frission]

I disagree with most people on here....

because I think the game was being broken beyond repair at Chronos station and went downhill from there, not just the last 10 minutes. No, I don't feel like elaborating, it's been half a year now, I have talked about it enough. (not on here though, see post count)

On top of that, this lovely scene from the endgame:

"Damnit, I'm hit!"

"Cortez!"

*Steve explodes*

"You're going to pay for that you bastards!"

"Uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuueeeerrrgggghhhhh!"

Sabor it. TASTE gaming history it its full glory:


love the comments there:

Shepard: "STEEEEEEEEVE!"

Stevie: "Im alright!"

Sheaprd: (Extremely disappointed he didn't die) "...You sure?"

-----

Kimberly Brooks: "Okay, what's my motivation?"

VA Director: "You are giving birth to a pineapple."

KB: "Got it."

Ahaha, damn I'm actually crying from that. Even if I did find some moments of the game touching (well,ones with just legion, Mordin and the rest of the non-humans) this is still hilariously bad.

Are they making a south park reference of something.

"You killed Steve!"

"You Bastards!"

"UGHAAHHAHAAAAU"




"... Are you done?"
"Yeah, must have been something I ate"

 

[TheScientificIssole]

Snip

I remember reading a quote once buy I think Tolkien but it might have been Jules Verne. Anyway I can't remember exactly what was said but the main point of it was if you lose the willing participation of your audience then whatever your trying to say is lost. Meaning internal consistency has to be maintained. It don't matter what your themes are or if they are used in the ending even. If narrative coherence is lost whatever you where trying to say falls flat.

To put it simply the themes might be grate but the the story's not. And if the story's not the themes don't matter.

I loved the story too. Still don't understand. Sorry to point it out, but you need to clean up your writing. I know English isn't everybody's first or best language, but this post needs some edit work.

 

[viranimus]

DioWallachia, Jesus tap dancing Christ! I stated in my previous post that continuing to argue this point with me would be a waste of time because any reason I give will be insufficient to you. You have made this abundantly clear. Now I am not going to report you but hells bells, repeatedly quoting me over and over again to goad me into responding to you is harassment and I may be no judge of what the mods would do, but that seems like something that they might evaluate.

I will make one final explanation on this. This is a blanket response to being quoted.
I saw all the uncut endings. I understood all the uncut endings. I am satisfied with the uncut endings because as far as I am concerned they more than sufficiently wrapped up the end of the trilogy. It wasnt the best ending ever, but it was a fitting ending exactly as it played out. It needed absolutely NO alteration.

If you do not agree, I am sorry you dont. But I am completely done responding to arguments I was able to scratch out back in march. If you disagree with my position we will have to agree to disagree unless some new evidence comes to light that has not already been stated. Otherwise it is wasting time spinning wheels deadlocked in a never ending circular argument and I have much better things to do with my time. So thank you for your opinions, and I appreciate you taking the time to read mine.

 

[DioWallachia]

snip

*/This is the last post, assuming that people here are more interested in watching hilarious voice acting instead of actually discusing something that keeps coming back since 8 months ago. Its kinda what you get when you make claims that opens even MORE questions. We call it "Voodoo Shark"/*


------

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.................but part of my ramblings included questions that are BEYOND the issue that has been adressed a hundred millions time. This time is not if the ending sucks or not, or if the fans were childish or not (i am pretty sure that i already adresses that the fans were calm and responsible before BW went Orwellian and started to supress opinions and threads on the forums and such)

Its my same question that i do every thread and STILL dont get an answer either because the thread is already dead of people dont know what they are talking about and are just spouting the "if you change it, is no longer art" claim in order to win an argument, in the same way some people uses that war hungry dictator with a particular muschate that must not be named to wins.

So anything conserning ME3 can go fuck itself because i dont even play the bloody thing and i am here for research and to see how useful is going to be gaming after having idiots pulling the "its art, you cant touch this". Not to know if the curvaceous, cocky and clever Quarian squadmember gets Talibrated by the Epsilon 9 reject from "Alien Soldier".

Well of course the ending wraps thing up because...

NO

its a Deus Ex Machina and...

SHUT UP, I DONT WANT TO HEAR

that is

LALALALALA I CANT HEAR YOU

what its supposed to do

BULLSHIT IS THE MIND KILLER

.........

Is he gone? good.

Like any other discusion, if one makes a claim then it must be elaborated to be understood. If the crap of "games are art" pops up then the definition of art must be elaborated IF such thing had a meaning in the first place, otherwise using that term has no place in the discusion because it leads to nowhere. Its like the Chewbaka Defense, its used to make the opponent shut up at ANY cost and win by default because there is no way to make a decent come back at something so stupid. This has to stop not by being ignored but by adressing it once and for all or else it will keep coming back.

So, members of Escapist, do you want me to find more HILARIOUS glitches or "heart wrenching" moments like "STEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVE" OR we are going to discuss shit for real?

The issue is now: why DEMANDING better writing OR any change to the "vision" of the artist is going to set back X medium or make the work of art worse if:

1)The change seems to work for the better because it restores willing participation of the audience

2)Makes the events follow the three modes of persuasion in perfect balance: phatos, ethos and logos

3)The artist may notice that such execution of its art (regarless if intentional or not) actually makes his work meaningless if presented that way, thus a change may be beneficial.

4)"Changing" in any shape or form is not nesesarily a bad thing. For example, i used before "The Venus De Milo" (warning: artistic nudity in the image)

Spoiler

It lost the arms when it was discovered so you may think that whatever meaning it had was also lost, but the fact of the matter is that LOOSING the arms made it more beautiful because of the mystery of "what could have been the position of the arms?" So even if the original meaning of was lost, it could still achieve greatness.

5)the "Changing the ending" fiasco is not something unique to ME3 (Fallout 3 and The Prince Of Persia Reboot comes to mind) and has been around in the medium of movies as well.

6)If ANY of those options fail and the artist want it the way he wants it, then he/she/it has to leave the rock its living and EXPLAIN EVERYTHING IN DETAIL . Last time i check there isnt a law that prevents you from explaining your art or else it looses the status of art (unless of course the person is a money grabbing douche that DEPENDS on the people making Headcannon to explain the nothingness in front of them) This allows the artist to show off that he/she/it knows what it does and the audience can not only trust the artist for further quality works but also to dust off any of the ideas that the audience didnt get.

Do we have something to work here now? Anyone?