Mass Effect 3 Gets An Ending
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Ironic that you should direct this at the fans. Take note: I'm not attacking you. You have a right to your opinion however greatly it differs from mine, and it is no less valid because I disagree.SonOfVoorhees said:
But I state calling the fans children for wanting something far better for something they've poured hours of their valuable time into is ironic because of Bioware's own reactions. They claim to be artists, yet see how they react to "criticism." They hide behind their PR and throw backhanded remarks towards the fans, and get incredibly insulted simply because people don't like what they have done.
You know who else can't take criticism? Stephenie Meyer. Bioware has become Stephenie Meyer.
I think a major reason why so many fans are upset over the whole thing is that Bioware said time and time again that we had as much investment in the Mass Effect universe as they did, and that we helped create it as much as they did. Then, when we try to voice our creative voice that, from their own statements, we should have in the matter, we are shut out, shut down, banned, silenced, and all together ignored by the company.
I don't have the time to speak on the writing, but I think we can all agree the writing came from nowhere. Catalyst doesn't fit into the universe, everything is rushed, Shepard is so far out of character he may as well not even be there, the reason for everything supposedly beyond the comprehension of humans doesn't even make sense... themes are abandoned, foreshadowing towards a completely different ending is utterly ignored, and everything the player has accomplished throughout three games is not only not addressed, but all for naught. Every single action you take amounts to nothing in the end.
I probably won't be reading this topic any further, I just felt the need to clarify on a few points I felt were being missed.
Hold the line.
An interesting thought just occurred to me... (probably not very original though)
They made a poorly executed ending to enrage people and gain more publicity(even bad publicity is publicity), then fix the ending(as in and charge for it... actually they don't even need to charge for it, if they fix it they'll be seen as heroes, while the complaining fans will be seen as the antagonists(though to be fair, many of them are) of sorts and that'll make even more people buy the game, and it probably will be remembered for a longer time as well, which means future games set in the ME universe will probably do better as well(as I said, even bad publicity is publicity).
I might be overthinking this here(and lending too much intellectual credit to those in charge of these decisions), though... still, an interesting thought.
Captcha thingy: alive and kicking
Amused me somewhat, though I don't know why.
They made a poorly executed ending to enrage people and gain more publicity(even bad publicity is publicity), then fix the ending(as in and charge for it... actually they don't even need to charge for it, if they fix it they'll be seen as heroes, while the complaining fans will be seen as the antagonists(though to be fair, many of them are) of sorts and that'll make even more people buy the game, and it probably will be remembered for a longer time as well, which means future games set in the ME universe will probably do better as well(as I said, even bad publicity is publicity).
I might be overthinking this here(and lending too much intellectual credit to those in charge of these decisions), though... still, an interesting thought.
Captcha thingy: alive and kicking
Amused me somewhat, though I don't know why.
Couldn't agree more with Yahtzee's point. The issue of investment is a good one- I loved the ending, but I've always been a casual Mass Effect fan at best. Nothing more to add from me, but someone else brought up an interesting point:
Why is that, I wonder? Maybe journalists are exposed to much more games and therefore don't get as invested in a particular franchise?
This is something I've also noticed. The vast majority of game journalists and critics seem to either like the ending or be neutral toward it, whereas the majority of ME3 players hated it.
Why is that, I wonder? Maybe journalists are exposed to much more games and therefore don't get as invested in a particular franchise?
Yeah, they do. And of course you have every right not to like Jar Jar Binks and wish fervently that the prequels had been better, but that doesn't change the fact that it's Lucas' story.
I don't respect this whole "you must respect the author's story the way he/she intended it to be." BS.
If a guy at E.A. had said "this ending won't do, write a new one." then that would have happened.
Where is your "respect the artist" then ?
If a guy at E.A. had said "this ending won't do, write a new one." then that would have happened.
Where is your "respect the artist" then ?
Some good points there.
None of which will matter one iota since at this point everybody's so buried in their trenches nothing can get them out of it. It's just angry fanboys yelling at each other.
I hope it'll pass soon. Maybe then we can get back to discussing how many amazing things are in this game.
None of which will matter one iota since at this point everybody's so buried in their trenches nothing can get them out of it. It's just angry fanboys yelling at each other.
I hope it'll pass soon. Maybe then we can get back to discussing how many amazing things are in this game.
Reasonable debate on the internet what sorcery is this. I'm still angry someone give me a straw man to yell at - YOU THERE, IMAGINARY MAN WHO HATES KITTENS *marches off*tautologico said:
In all seriousness though, thank you. We can agree to disagree. But if you follow the narrative -alot- of 'journalists' are being incredibly insulting towards us.
Completely agreed. Folks aren't going to be happy with a "different" ending. All it will do is show people that they can get creators to change endings. That would be like judges letting criminals know they can get a reduced sentence if they start enough fights in prison. Very counter-productive.tautologico said:
But it's not outlandish for people to ask for the same ending, done better. In my personal opinion, here's what I felt was missing:
1. Peril. Where are the Reapers? The battle itself? They all but vanish once Shepard is on the Citadel. Splice in a few bits of the armies fighting the Reapers -- that gives weight and meaning to all of the allies you've spent so much time gaining. If you gained a lot, you can show them slowly gaining ground... if you went "bare minimum," show them barely holding out long enough for Shepard to make the choice. Either way, this "meanwhile" cinematic stuff wouldn't change the ending at all. Just the feel of it.
2. Epilogue. Who made it? Who didn't? Where does everyone go next? What are the consequences of the mass relays being destroyed, especially with so many fleets hanging out in Earth's orbit at the time? What are the greater consequences of the specific choice you made (like what do you do with the Reapers, or what happens now that all Synthetic life is gone, or now that all organic and synthetic life are joined, or whatever else)? Make the ending matter by showing how it matters
All of this can be accomplished through cinematics or text crawls, really. Some narration would be nice, of course. Alternately, it could be DLC packs that allow you to play as one or more of your old squadmates as they "hold the line" while you fight your way to the beam. Preferably at least some of the ending content would be free, though.
I just figured out the perfect analogy for ME3's ending. It's like if at the end of Romeo and Juliet before Juliet takes her own life, she uses a pandora's box to pull the trigger instead at the behest of a stranger who she recommends it to her and who she has no reason to trust.
I'm gonna forego what most everyone has been on about and just ask the simple question:
Is BioWare satisfied with what they've created?
If the answer is yes, then by all means, don't change the ending no matter how hard we complain. Leave us to our devices of creating our own little realities, and move on to your next project. Heck, you'll probably be better for it with a lack of rabid fanboys gnawing at your heels all the way.
All that said, there's a very real possibility that they're not satisfied with the ending they created. If statements are to be believed, then the content of the ending was still in contention around November of this past year, and they had built up one particular type of ending before scrapping it in favor of this new one.
Honestly, it does seem to me that BW's eyes were bigger than their stomachs for this project, and that, despite their lofty goals for a myriad branching story, they were forced to face the very real problems of time, money, and manpower, and had to consolidate things. I mean, it's obvious in ME3. For just one example, the destruction or preservation of the Collector Base, while played up to be a big decision in ME2, pretty much boils down to little more than which War Asset you get near the end of ME3. That obviously speaks of a thread that had to be cut short for one reason or another.
So, to my original point. If BW isn't happy with the ending they've given us and just kinda hoped we'd be happy and would just leave them alone, then obviously that has backfired. They should consider this an opportunity, not an obligation, to reassess what they wanted to say with this series. If it leads to a new ending, it should still be on their terms. Don't let any of the fans do any writing for you.
Sadly, given how they're still in a business (and at the mercy of a rather notorious parent company), I don't see this happening despite the desires of the dev team or the fanbase. I'll be interested to see how they plan to handle all this at PAX next week.
Is BioWare satisfied with what they've created?
If the answer is yes, then by all means, don't change the ending no matter how hard we complain. Leave us to our devices of creating our own little realities, and move on to your next project. Heck, you'll probably be better for it with a lack of rabid fanboys gnawing at your heels all the way.
All that said, there's a very real possibility that they're not satisfied with the ending they created. If statements are to be believed, then the content of the ending was still in contention around November of this past year, and they had built up one particular type of ending before scrapping it in favor of this new one.
Honestly, it does seem to me that BW's eyes were bigger than their stomachs for this project, and that, despite their lofty goals for a myriad branching story, they were forced to face the very real problems of time, money, and manpower, and had to consolidate things. I mean, it's obvious in ME3. For just one example, the destruction or preservation of the Collector Base, while played up to be a big decision in ME2, pretty much boils down to little more than which War Asset you get near the end of ME3. That obviously speaks of a thread that had to be cut short for one reason or another.
So, to my original point. If BW isn't happy with the ending they've given us and just kinda hoped we'd be happy and would just leave them alone, then obviously that has backfired. They should consider this an opportunity, not an obligation, to reassess what they wanted to say with this series. If it leads to a new ending, it should still be on their terms. Don't let any of the fans do any writing for you.
Sadly, given how they're still in a business (and at the mercy of a rather notorious parent company), I don't see this happening despite the desires of the dev team or the fanbase. I'll be interested to see how they plan to handle all this at PAX next week.
Disclaimer: I've never played any Mass Effect game. I have played nearly every other Bioware game, so I feel like if I squint and picture my PC and his/her companions in shiny spacesuits with different skin colors or headbumps, I sort of have played it, but I realize that probably really doesn't count.
Anyway: as a semi-detached bystander, my view of the situation is this:
Bioware has a reputation for making games with in-depth stories where the choices you make matter and affect the ending. Most Bioware games have endings that change depending on how you play it. They have firmly planted in the minds of their fans that their choices matter. So if you suddenly, after years and years and years of establishing this reputation, in an already established series that has also reinforced this idea, decide not to do it like this anymore, it is at the very least very jarring. At most, it's a very poor design decision to throw at a loyal fanbase without warning--and may sever the fanbase in the long run for little reason.
That said, as much as I like the mutable ending idea to a degree, I agree with Yahtzee that it can be frustrating to not have a canon ending to some games. In part, because it takes away a sense of closure, and you never feel like your end "counted." In part, because if the game with the mutable endings ends up having a sequel, the developers then have to pick the "right" ending to carry on from. Suddenly one kind of ending became canon, and if your game ended differently--again, it doesn't count.
I can kind of see the idea of if you want to end a franchise, such as Mass Effect, you might want a non-mutable ending so no one bickers about what "canon" was. But a) gamers will bicker no matter what you do, and b) a solid ending in a mutable, your-choices-matter story is in itself inconsistent. Maybe if Bioware wants to take a route where stories have more solid endings in future, that's a really good idea--they just shouldn't have started with Mass Effect 3.
And THAT said, I agree with the article that changing the ending officially could set a bad precedent -- especially since we as gamers will whine about everything we don't like to the point we will make up something not to like if something is perfect; we suffer from massive cases of "unpleasable fanbase" on a regular basis.
On the other hand to THAT, though, there are actually existing precedents to changing endings. Fallout 3 comes to mind. The original ending to Fallout 3 handwaved past some major plot/logic holes to force your character to make a noble sacrifice (maybe this sounds familiar). Or to force a specific NPC to make a noble sacrifice. But the game itself had established possibilities for reasonable alternatives. When enough players vociferously pointed this out, Bethesda changed the ending to the original game when it published one of its DLC add-ons.
So this HAS already happened. And Bethesda specifically established a precedent of "we'll fix this when the DLC comes out" (though I think they patched the original game at the same time). Still this leads to...
A sinister thought--could this even have been planned? Would the possible new ending be a patch, OR do you only get the new ending if you buy DLC? EA LOVES to nickel and dime its customers with downloadable content (one of the reasons I in fact stopped buying Bioware games). Is it possible they're testing and seeing customer response--don't like the ending? How much are you willing to pay for a new one? Are you willing to pay for other added choices as well?
I hope that last thought is a bit extreme. But it will be interesting to see, if Bioware does rewrite the ending, what form of the delivery of that ending will take.
Anyway: as a semi-detached bystander, my view of the situation is this:
Bioware has a reputation for making games with in-depth stories where the choices you make matter and affect the ending. Most Bioware games have endings that change depending on how you play it. They have firmly planted in the minds of their fans that their choices matter. So if you suddenly, after years and years and years of establishing this reputation, in an already established series that has also reinforced this idea, decide not to do it like this anymore, it is at the very least very jarring. At most, it's a very poor design decision to throw at a loyal fanbase without warning--and may sever the fanbase in the long run for little reason.
That said, as much as I like the mutable ending idea to a degree, I agree with Yahtzee that it can be frustrating to not have a canon ending to some games. In part, because it takes away a sense of closure, and you never feel like your end "counted." In part, because if the game with the mutable endings ends up having a sequel, the developers then have to pick the "right" ending to carry on from. Suddenly one kind of ending became canon, and if your game ended differently--again, it doesn't count.
I can kind of see the idea of if you want to end a franchise, such as Mass Effect, you might want a non-mutable ending so no one bickers about what "canon" was. But a) gamers will bicker no matter what you do, and b) a solid ending in a mutable, your-choices-matter story is in itself inconsistent. Maybe if Bioware wants to take a route where stories have more solid endings in future, that's a really good idea--they just shouldn't have started with Mass Effect 3.
And THAT said, I agree with the article that changing the ending officially could set a bad precedent -- especially since we as gamers will whine about everything we don't like to the point we will make up something not to like if something is perfect; we suffer from massive cases of "unpleasable fanbase" on a regular basis.
On the other hand to THAT, though, there are actually existing precedents to changing endings. Fallout 3 comes to mind. The original ending to Fallout 3 handwaved past some major plot/logic holes to force your character to make a noble sacrifice (maybe this sounds familiar). Or to force a specific NPC to make a noble sacrifice. But the game itself had established possibilities for reasonable alternatives. When enough players vociferously pointed this out, Bethesda changed the ending to the original game when it published one of its DLC add-ons.
So this HAS already happened. And Bethesda specifically established a precedent of "we'll fix this when the DLC comes out" (though I think they patched the original game at the same time). Still this leads to...
A sinister thought--could this even have been planned? Would the possible new ending be a patch, OR do you only get the new ending if you buy DLC? EA LOVES to nickel and dime its customers with downloadable content (one of the reasons I in fact stopped buying Bioware games). Is it possible they're testing and seeing customer response--don't like the ending? How much are you willing to pay for a new one? Are you willing to pay for other added choices as well?
I hope that last thought is a bit extreme. But it will be interesting to see, if Bioware does rewrite the ending, what form of the delivery of that ending will take.
I am in complete agreement. He missed the point, as did Moviebob, Ken Levine, etc. etc. etc.TsunamiWombat said:
Hold the line.
First of all, allegedly the ending was essentially taken out of the writers' hands, so it'd be hard to argue that it's breaking 'artistic vision' to change it when the 'artists' didn't do it to begin with. (http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/5695/article/mass-effect-3-writer-allegedly-slams-controversial-ending/)
As for my views on the subject...I LIKED the ending, personally (or my variation of it, at least). And I actually liked the whole final 15 minutes that people complain about...plot inconsistencies aside. Although I did kinda have it in my mind that indoctrination was a possibility, which somewhat guided my final choice, even before the whole 'Indoctrination Theory' thing popped up and went very detailed on the matter.
I just hated how linear and dismissive the whole thing was that lead up to/followed it. Characters that were proclaimed dead showed up again, because the game made assumptions about my squad choices. But more importantly, all the alliances and relationships I forged never came into play. A unified galaxy, and all I get to see is humans fighting on Earth? I command unheard-of alliances, and I get no choice or even word of what happens to them? Mass Effect 2 did it right with the way it handled the final mission, and that had to deal with having a follow-up. I was horribly disappointed that I got nothing in the way of choice or resolution from the point where it would have been easiest and most logical to include it.
I mean, come on...I spend 3 games keeping the Rachni around to bring them into the final fight, and they don't even get referenced there? I wanted to bring them in, or see them in action...or even just hear them in action. I would have loved for Jack and her Biotics to lay down fire if I had them, or again, just hear it. The Geth and Quarians, same deal. There was no ultimate payoff for collecting allies or for any of the choices beyond a bar that barely affected a single choice at the end.
Anyway, my point: I agree with Yahtzee's overall conclusion, and that of most critics. The ending shouldn't be changed, in my eyes. The ending arc though absolutely should be amended. Be it through DLC or patch, there's way too much left untouched and unexplained after all the buildup. It just screams of being trimmed down to the bones to keep things neat, but it needs to have the muscle built back on, not have the bones broken and put back together.
As for my views on the subject...I LIKED the ending, personally (or my variation of it, at least). And I actually liked the whole final 15 minutes that people complain about...plot inconsistencies aside. Although I did kinda have it in my mind that indoctrination was a possibility, which somewhat guided my final choice, even before the whole 'Indoctrination Theory' thing popped up and went very detailed on the matter.
I just hated how linear and dismissive the whole thing was that lead up to/followed it. Characters that were proclaimed dead showed up again, because the game made assumptions about my squad choices. But more importantly, all the alliances and relationships I forged never came into play. A unified galaxy, and all I get to see is humans fighting on Earth? I command unheard-of alliances, and I get no choice or even word of what happens to them? Mass Effect 2 did it right with the way it handled the final mission, and that had to deal with having a follow-up. I was horribly disappointed that I got nothing in the way of choice or resolution from the point where it would have been easiest and most logical to include it.
I mean, come on...I spend 3 games keeping the Rachni around to bring them into the final fight, and they don't even get referenced there? I wanted to bring them in, or see them in action...or even just hear them in action. I would have loved for Jack and her Biotics to lay down fire if I had them, or again, just hear it. The Geth and Quarians, same deal. There was no ultimate payoff for collecting allies or for any of the choices beyond a bar that barely affected a single choice at the end.
Anyway, my point: I agree with Yahtzee's overall conclusion, and that of most critics. The ending shouldn't be changed, in my eyes. The ending arc though absolutely should be amended. Be it through DLC or patch, there's way too much left untouched and unexplained after all the buildup. It just screams of being trimmed down to the bones to keep things neat, but it needs to have the muscle built back on, not have the bones broken and put back together.
Inconsistant opinions!
>Rips Deus Ex: HR (a generally linear, self contained game) a new one for halving a 'pick ur fate' style ending.
>Praises Mass Effect 3 (a game from a series renound for featureing choices with real outcomes) for doing the same thing only worse. Is the idea that you're proud Bioware was brave enough to completly screw up their game?
It's almost as if Yahtzee likes to alternate his viewpoints specifically to contrast with popular opinion and draw attention to himself.
>Rips Deus Ex: HR (a generally linear, self contained game) a new one for halving a 'pick ur fate' style ending.
>Praises Mass Effect 3 (a game from a series renound for featureing choices with real outcomes) for doing the same thing only worse. Is the idea that you're proud Bioware was brave enough to completly screw up their game?
It's almost as if Yahtzee likes to alternate his viewpoints specifically to contrast with popular opinion and draw attention to himself.
For me the entire story of Mass Effect 3 was based on the "Together we stand, divided we fall" mindset in uniting the Galaxy against a common foe. When I reached the end I was expecting all the time I had spent gathering allies, forming alliances, and ending the infighting to pay off but instead, no matter what you do most people die, the survivors are stranded and the Galaxy is propelled into an intergalactic dark age (That's what I expect would logically happen anyway).
It's not just an ending that fails to consider your actions throughout the series, it's an ending which destroys the value of those actions entirely. "Did you help the Quarians get home?" It doesn't matter because most of the migrant fleet will never see that place again. "Did you make peace between the Turians and Krogan?" To bad they'll never see each other again.
I can understand if someone wants bring a story to a bleak and nihilistic end in some cases but if a story's main aim is to tell you "nothing matters, life's harsh" then spreading it over three 40+ hour games across five years is just sadistic
It's not just an ending that fails to consider your actions throughout the series, it's an ending which destroys the value of those actions entirely. "Did you help the Quarians get home?" It doesn't matter because most of the migrant fleet will never see that place again. "Did you make peace between the Turians and Krogan?" To bad they'll never see each other again.
I can understand if someone wants bring a story to a bleak and nihilistic end in some cases but if a story's main aim is to tell you "nothing matters, life's harsh" then spreading it over three 40+ hour games across five years is just sadistic
Wow.
Just, wow. I don't get what all the controversy is about. A game isn't a static piece of "art" that shouldn't be changed, it's dynamic (imagine if all games were to remain unchanged after release; no patches, no mods, hell, you could even go to extremes and argue that changing the graphics or audio settings would count as changing the game).
My problem (and apparently many other peoples') is the combination of everything; the promises BioWare/EA made (and then broke), the choices we made throughout the game (which eventually amount to nothing), the ending that lacked any explanation and felt like it was pulled from an entirely different game, the time and money we've invested into the game(s),..., all of this (and more) gives us every reason to be pissed off and demand something be done.
Now I don't know if that something will be explainers, a new ending or if it's just a PR stunt to shut us up, but I actually hope that they change it. It's not because I want a new ending (I'd be happy with explainers but for every single subplot I followed), but because it might make the gaming industry think twice before screwing us over in the future. And make no mistake, whether you support the current ending or not, we got screwed over. Hard.
Just, wow. I don't get what all the controversy is about. A game isn't a static piece of "art" that shouldn't be changed, it's dynamic (imagine if all games were to remain unchanged after release; no patches, no mods, hell, you could even go to extremes and argue that changing the graphics or audio settings would count as changing the game).
My problem (and apparently many other peoples') is the combination of everything; the promises BioWare/EA made (and then broke), the choices we made throughout the game (which eventually amount to nothing), the ending that lacked any explanation and felt like it was pulled from an entirely different game, the time and money we've invested into the game(s),..., all of this (and more) gives us every reason to be pissed off and demand something be done.
Now I don't know if that something will be explainers, a new ending or if it's just a PR stunt to shut us up, but I actually hope that they change it. It's not because I want a new ending (I'd be happy with explainers but for every single subplot I followed), but because it might make the gaming industry think twice before screwing us over in the future. And make no mistake, whether you support the current ending or not, we got screwed over. Hard.