Mass Effect 3 Gets An Ending

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 17 NEXT
 

Yahtzee, you're a great guy and I love your videos. But this review, I have to disagree with you on most parts.

Mass Effect 3's ending makes me not feel like playing through all three games again. Why though since most games have the same type of endings anyhow no matter how you play them. But they don't let you make major impacting choices like with Mass Effect. Everything you do changes the game and ether by saving someone, or helping a race out can really benefit to how your story goes.

Everything I do feels meaningless now in Mass Effect because in the third game, the ending is exactly the same thing. Even one of the artists behind Bioware admitted that there should of been way more to the endings thus Casey Hudson made the ending without getting any feedback from anyone. This speech on 'the ending is art, you fans must respect that' is wrong. Because in art, you're allowed to criticize art whether it's a class project in College or your professional career in comics for say. I respect the people who made Mass Effect but because the ending is downright making no sense along with going against everything Mass Effect stands for- I should have a right to criticize it for I spent so many hours into the game overall.

Hopefully this video shall help. I think it'll explain things better then I can on here.

Eh....having thought about this, I must say the fanboy's position is untenable. (No surprises there). Sure, Mass Effect 3's ending was terrible. Poorly executed, poorly explained and terribly placed as if to inflict the maximum pain on the fanbase, but sometimes shit happens. Bioware, at the end of the day, have a right to put out this terrible, terrible ending if they want and keep it. They will certainly regret it in the long run, but they can do it. I mean, can you imagine if someone complained like this about the ending of another game? They'd be told to deal with it and move on. What gives mass effect 3 fans the right to change this status quo and declare their right to control the product that someone else made/

General theme of this thread: Nobody understands me!!

It's kind of sad how anyone who has an opinion on the ME3 ending that isn't, "Fuck Bioware!" is accused of "not getting it." Though when it comes to explaining what exactly "it" is, none of the whiners have come up with a single lucid point that would refute any of the opinions they so staunchly object to, if they even try at all.

Great, I've been driven into seeing the spoilers. I never played any of the Mass Effect games though.

I hear that great tragedies bring viewer's hopes up, only for hope to be crushed in the most devastating way during the conclusion. But as a person looking into making games, this whole fiasco is going to make me rethink about giving a multi-game series a bad ending.

Spot1990:
At this stage I think Bioware would be better off setting up a nice sandwich shop somewhere. Haven't played ME3 yet but I'm sure I'll get around to it. Biwoare fans (or ex-fans I guess) seem to be the absolute whiniest children I've ever met. It's not that they don't like it, it's that it's objectively bad with no redeeming qualities and (somehow) every Bioware game made since ME1 is the last Bioware game anyone is going to buy ever.

While there are many people who one-sidedly complain in the foulest language possible (and those people are certainly the loudest), I think there's been a very reasonable and appropriate debate going on for some time now. One point that's been made repeatedly is that up until the final ten minutes the game was thoroughly enjoyable.
Whatever comes of this: Worst case scenario, I'm still disappointed about how they offed Mass Effect, but I'll still consider buying future Bioware titles. There still a great game developer, even with EA breathing down their collective necks.

OT: I'm a bit disappointed here - I didn't expect Yahtzee to line up behind the artistic intregrity argument so easily. Didn't he himself propose once that in video game development, the beginning and the end should be completed upfront since these are the most important parts?

There's one point I can get behind though: If the ending wouldn't have been presented in that utterly loveless way, I still wouldn't have liked it, but I wouldn't have gone so far as to demand an overhaul. If they had at least make an effort to show your choices mattered. Such as:

Also, I think he's still missing one other point. The fact that some overeager people set the fanbase up for disappointment with promises they couldn't live up to. Didn't think that was ok in Yahtzee's book, especially the three-buttons-three-endings-machine he didn't like so much in Deus Ex. But then again, I haven't heard of a critic who addressed that point before.

DrVornoff:
General theme of this thread: Nobody understands me!!

It's kind of sad how anyone who has an opinion on the ME3 ending that isn't, "Fuck Bioware!" is accused of "not getting it." Though when it comes to explaining what exactly "it" is, none of the whiners have come up with a single lucid point that would refute any of the opinions they so staunchly object to, if they even try at all.

Well you certainly haven't been looking very hard for explainations, there's one at the top of this page and probably about a hundred others on this site alone.

Also, the majority of the "retake" crowd don't hate Bioware or even the game itself, just the ending. So yes, I'm pretty confidant this can be considered you "not getting it".

DrVornoff:
General theme of this thread: Nobody understands me!!

It's kind of sad how anyone who has an opinion on the ME3 ending that isn't, "Fuck Bioware!" is accused of "not getting it." Though when it comes to explaining what exactly "it" is, none of the whiners have come up with a single lucid point that would refute any of the opinions they so staunchly object to, if they even try at all.

I disagree on your idea that there is no explanation of what "it" is.
"It" is: Bad writing, bad execution, inconsistency with the rest of the series, and the guys in charge (Casey Hudson and that lead writer guy whose name I currently forget) expressly stated that what we got was what we weren't supposed to get. The quotes have been thrown around here before so I'm not adding them here again.

Also, many of the arguments about this subject usually have explanations as to why.

People you do realise why there isnt any "closure" in mass effect 3s ending.Because its isnt the end of mass effect bioware have left them a story to be told.So they will add to the story in mass effect 4 they even said it before the game came out that this isnt the end of mass effects story only shepards.Even so that might not be true now but i guess some people only want to listen to certain things that devs say.

Yeah...suffice to say I don't think the 'artistic vision' argument truly applies here. When the devs repeatedly say throughout the development cycle (even during the final stages of development) that there will be many "wildly different" endings, I think it's fairly safe to say that the "1 ending, now in 3 fun new colors!" doesn't match the vision they had for the finale - especially when they note that they had to drop a good portion of it in the eleventh hour due to gameplay issues with it - and that the presented ending itself violates their artistic vision.

As presented, the ending seems rushed and inconsistent, as if they literally ran out of time to make it. If their vision had truly planned to give the same bleak outcome regardless, then the very act of differentiating the endings (despite their overwhelming similarity) becomes counterintuitive. Ironically, I think that if they had just presented one outcome (no final choice involved) the reaction probably wouldn't have gotten as much steam as it has, as it would be very clear that what we were given was intended. However, they gave three options, which quickly became a slap in the face when their near identical nature and aftermath became apparent, and that itself points to hasty design choice: filling three possibilities with the same cinematic, which they then gave slight alterations to so as to justify the existence of the three different paths.

Were I to make an educated guess on the subject, I'd say that what we were given was originally intended to be the ending for the "Destroy" options (hence why we see more variants for that choice than any other), which were then hastily edited to make the other possibilities work when they realized they'd run out of time (the general conclusion, at least, seems to be supported by the behind the scenes commentary that has since been released) So yeah, all things considered, I don't really feel it's out of line to call them out for not holding to their own vision as it was presented to the audience.

Oh, and as to the Krogans and the Genophage: No. That was not presented as an inevitable outcome. It was feared that history would repeat itself, though much with the Rachni, the initial decision (genophage and extinction, respectively) was consistently treated as a tragic decision which many objected to (Heck, the lore itself states that the Salarians only ever intended to use the genophage as a threat and didn't expect the Turians to actually use it), and indeed one of the most significant themes underlying their respective missions was the fact that they deserved a second chance in some capacity. Despite the council berating you if you saved the Rachni in ME1 (though then again, they're angry either way), the decision proves justified in ME2, when news reports and an Asari on Ilium both make it overwhelmingly opinion that the Rachni have little interest in the hostilities the council was afraid of, and were actually quite willing to be allies.

With regards genophage, dialogue with Mordin points out that one of the main problems with the Krogan in the first place was the fact that they were introduced to the galactic community before they were ready to be a part of it, and indeed an important part of Mordin's character arc is his doubts about the genophage's ethicality and its effect in practice[1]. In fact, if Wrex survives Virmire, you see by Mass Effect 2 that he's actually taking steps that would ultimately lead to the Krogan becoming a viable and valuable part of galactic civilization. Could it go sour? Sure, but all the same, the series does not imply the inevitability Croshaw attributes to it.

Oh and on a final note: "Audience: Fill In Your Preferred Ending Here"? Quippy strawman, but a strawman nonetheless. That would only really hold up if the upset fans were submitting preferred endings rather than the generally expressed sentiment of "Bioware, take a mulligan on that ending"

Edit: Broke up the paragraphs a bit so it's less 'wall of text'-y.

[1] While the genophage itself was designed to drop krogan population growth to pre-industrial levels, the sociological impact led the krogan to become fatalistic and self-destructive and thereby was leading them down a slow path to extinction

tautologico:
I don't think any of these people writing about the controversy is saying you don't have a right to not like the ending, to complain about it, to never buy Bioware games again, etc. No one is telling you what to think about the game or the ending.

The problem is that some fans feel that Bioware "owes" them a better ending or some such, and try to demand a new ending from them. This is what most journalists are talking against, not the fact of not liking the ending.

I'm going to interject with a different perspective which has been constantly getting on my nerves since those final 10 minutes.

I know Bioware doesn't owe anything to it's gamers and it's ultimately their choice and right if they want to change the ending or not, just like it's our choice and right to point out every damn thing they did wrong.

Honestly it does seem like changing the ending is a bit pointless now it's out there, sure it'd make people happier, I know I'd be happier, but the lingering disappointment is still there, I honestly think Bioware owed it to themselves to create a better ending.

How long has Mass Effect been help up as a series that shows amazing story, difficult choices and actual repercussions for those choices?

Then they piss it all away in the last 10 minutes, I think I'm just as annoyed that they did this to the franchise as I am that they did it to the fans.

Mass Effect could've been something really special, but now at it's best, it's a great series will a pretty disappointing ending, at it's worst it's a series killer.

But maybe I'm rambling...

Oh thank God, someone finally mentioned it.

I though I was the only person who saw the ending and thought (besides What?): "Wait, if the relays are destroyed, aren't all the species trapped in Earth's solar system? That's kind of a glaring plot hole"

I am so happy someone else noticed that.

JDLY:

Mausenheimmer:
"Curing the Krogan Genophage implies that the Krogan Rebellions would start again"

No, they wouldn't because Wrex and Eve survived on my playthrough and they were determined to guide the krogan along a different path. Similarly, the geth and quarians started to get along and help each other, undermining the point that synthetics will inevitably fight organics.

But I guess paying attention to differences between playthroughs would require you to spend more than half a week thinking about it. And that requires way more effort than I've come to expect from you.

Perhaps in his playthrough Wrex, or Eve, or both of them had died, so the Rebellions would start again. And perhaps he didn't manage to get peace between the Quarians and Geth.

Just a thought.

So that excuses him to be ignorant of their existence?

He probably didn't because he admitted he pretty much sped through the game. I know apathy is kind of his schtick, but his ignorance combined with his apathy makes him in no way qualified to discuss this topic.

Mcoffey:
Oooh, where'd you hear that? Not calling you out, it just sounds fascinating. I was wondering what happened to all that Dark Energy stuff they kept mentioning in Mass Effect 2.

There was a script leak at some point. I'm not entirely sure when, but the script and information from it has been floating around for quite a while.

It's still not certain if the ending was changed due to the leak, or simply because someone didn't think the majority of the gamers would be smart enough to understand all the dark energy stuff.

Mcoffey:
As for the topic at hand, it doesn't matter how shitty the ending is, or how many times Bioware lied to you. Nothing they did warrant's the stupidity of all this "Change the ending" nonsense. You're (presumably) adults. Stop acting like whiney children and get the fuck over it.

It's false advertising. People are, generally, exercising their rights as consumers.

The complaints, in great part delivered through constructive criticism, are a testament to how dearly BioWare's fanbase holds the Mass Effect franchise and its characters. ME3 ending on such a terrible note can be compared to a bad breakup, and it will take time for people to get over it and move on.

Personally, I still want BioWare to change the ending into something that makes more sense. Something without a last minute Deus Ex Machina that seems to exist for the sole purpose of making the ending bad. But I'm a realist, and know enough about how the industry, EA and Mass Effect development work to have given up hope on that by now.

Once BioWare rolls out the "update" to Mass Effect 3's ending, we'll probably have some extra dialogue between Shepard and Anderson, and Shepard and the Catalyst, but the ending still won't make any sense, and it will still be bad. That's just the reality of the situation.

Mcoffey:
I hope we can put this behind us and remember that no matter how bad the ending was, Dragon Age 2 was still shittier.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. While Dragon Age II's final act was definitely shoddy and inconsistent with the rest of the game, the plot still made sense and the game had a proper climax.

When I finished Dragon Age II I thought "I'd like to play this game again, but I'll save it for later so that I won't get burnt out on it."

When I finished Mass Effect 3, after a short period of nihilism, I thought "I can never play through a Mass Effect game again."

(And, in contrast to both of them, finishing Mass Effect 2 lead to me immediately starting up a second playthrough. Same with Dragon Age: Origins, although I never finished the second playthrough there...)

Not gonna lie, guys, saying "Blah, you don't understand" and then ending your comment isn't making me think that they didn't just put a Geneforge ending in their Lord of the Rings (which I would see as a ballsy and admirable move, but misguided).

"Waaah! None of my choices mattered!" - Mass Effect 4
"Waaah! I don't know teh clooosure!" - Mass Effect 4
"Waaah! What happened to those guys?" - Mass Effect 4
"Waaah! I don't like 3 choices!" - You mean, like the 3 choices you made repeatedly over the course of three 30 hour games?

Rangerboy87:
Oh thank God, someone finally mentioned it.

I though I was the only person who saw the ending and thought (besides What?): "Wait, if the relays are destroyed, aren't all the species trapped in Earth's solar system? That's kind of a glaring plot hole"

I am so happy someone else noticed that.

That's not a plot hole, that's just plain old unfortunate.

Gigatoast:
Well you certainly haven't been looking very hard for explainations, there's one at the top of this page and probably about a hundred others on this site alone.

Or maybe I don't find the explanations to be all that good. It is possible to read an argument and still not buy into it.

Also, the majority of the "retake" crowd don't hate Bioware or even the game itself, just the ending. So yes, I'm pretty confidant this can be considered you "not getting it".

Maybe I'm just sick of hearing it. I have no problem with people who just plain didn't like the ending. What I have a problem with is the people who won't shut the fuck up about it and move on with their lives. The people who insist that the ending must be completely redone to appease them (though thankfully those are becoming fewer in number). The people who react to anyone with an opinion other than their own with, "You don't get it. Also you're an asshole."

Ticonderoga117:
I disagree on your idea that there is no explanation of what "it" is.
"It" is: Bad writing, bad execution, inconsistency with the rest of the series, and the guys in charge (Casey Hudson and that lead writer guy whose name I currently forget) expressly stated that what we got was what we weren't supposed to get. The quotes have been thrown around here before so I'm not adding them here again.

And at what point did, say for example, Yahtzee say that the ending was well-written? I don't remember him saying any such thing. So then what is the "it" to which he is not privy?

Also, many of the arguments about this subject usually have explanations as to why.

And most of them suck. Or come across as whining. Or are poorly supported. Or are just infuriatingly arrogant. The thing is, people who don't like the ending have been so damn vocal about it for so many damn days that it's impossible to not hear their reasons for being upset. That doesn't mean I have to agree with them 100%.

Besides, look at the number of people who just post, "Point? Missing it," or something similarly snarky and then fucking off to do whatever it is they do. Am I supposed to take them seriously? Am I supposed to believe that they really have some kind of lucid, intelligent argument if I just opened my mind up to their brattiness and saw the tormented soul within?

Its not like fans-myself included- want a series of perspectives of closure of wth happened to the rest of the crew. But a real logical ending. Yahtzee...you mention a complete wipe out in the case the cycle is unscapeable and i would be fine with it, hell i was thinking that was going to be the ending: everyone is dead no one can escape the reapers, thak you very much for participating, best of luck for the next advanced idiot who try it. But i think your missing the point of the whole: reapers killing advanced races cuz...well they would kill themselves, cuz of their creations!! :D. Its solving a problem with a bigger one and running it in parallel. Like shamus young said in his blog: because you burn dinner, ill torch the entire city to avoid kitchen fire. Which makes no damn sense. On the side the theme of a real gallaxy being united no matter species or machines all together for a goal its killed by the affirmation that -its impossible- even if the point of the story is that it really isnt. Again its like saying, white ppl will always slave black ppl, so today even if its been proved wrong for a many years, some neohitler comes and just kills all white women and men sparing the kids, so they dont enslave black ppl or other races.......does that make sense to you?

tautologico:

TsunamiWombat:
Point. Missing it. Thanks for not understanding, Yahtzee.

Holding the Line.

soren7550:
I'm surprised that Yahtzee is both missing the point and isn't up in arms over the ending. For someone that has emphasized in the past how games should have good writing and that BioWare was one of the few developers that understood this, he really seems to not get it.

You guys are sure it's Yahtzee (and MovieBob, and Devin Faraci, and Ben Kuchera from PA Report and every other journalist that has said similar things recently) that's missing the point, and not yourselves?

Saying that games should have good writing doesn't mean we should pressure a company to change a game's ending that is perceived as bad. Even excellent writers do write bad books sometimes. But there's a certain level of respect for what the author has done, even if it's bad, that no one starts demanding they change something. Demanding changes is not respecting the writing, good or bad.

I think other people have already responded but yes the point has been missed. This isn't the first time this has happened either. Sherlock Holmes was resurrected due to fan pressure as well, so not the first time nor the last time that an author changed a story based on fan reactions. If anything this is actually a good thing for video games.

Video games have long been regarded as an inferior medium. ME3 has brought the medium up to a level where we actually do care about the story and plot (not just shooting bad guys), so much so that we call it out when it's well... stupid. I would further say that for most if BW doesn't fix the ending, we just won't be buying any more BW products... Just like if you saw a bad end on a trilogy, say Matrix Revolutions... How do you think Matrix 4 would be received today given it's ending (and it was still far better than the ME ending).

Artistic integrity has become a scapegoat to hide behind because the ending was inferior. It was poorly written and executed in an otherwise great title. It's disappointing but don't try to hide behind the artistic integrity to excuse the ending... It sucks and if you want to continue cranking out ME titles (or BW titles for that mater), it needs to be fixed. I think they've already gone on record and said that it will likely not change the current ending, but give closure to it. While it's still a little disappointing it's better than what we have right now... at least bring some closure to the game.

The big thing here I thing for yatzee & movie bob, and gaming journalists in general is this isn't about being entitled, or wanting a happy ending. It's about a poorly crafted ending on top of an excellent game. It's horrible and it sucks and yeah people want it changed. I would say some fans are going overboard (FTC... really), but let's not use artistic integrity to hide over the fact it was a poor ending. Should they fix it... yes if they want to continue writing adventures in the ME universe sure. I know between this and DA2 I no longer have BW games on my auto-preorder list.

All that said is it really a surprise that Yahtzee doesn't think they should change anything. He's whole stick is merciously slaughtering game reviews in general.. re-watch his video and come back here... crap game, crap ending... no surprise and in fact if I felt that way, he would be correct. If ME3 wasn't so good up til the ending, no one would be near this upset. The fact that it's great until the last 5 minutes... yeah thats a huge deal because we expect more...

I see no mention of the ridiculous reason for the reapers existence. Or how about how many games/movies have changed their ending (see Fallout 3, Dodgeball etc). Honestly I don't care anymore. Bioware is dead to me, I will never buy another one of their games.

JediMB:

Mcoffey:
As for the topic at hand, it doesn't matter how shitty the ending is, or how many times Bioware lied to you. Nothing they did warrant's the stupidity of all this "Change the ending" nonsense. You're (presumably) adults. Stop acting like whiney children and get the fuck over it.

It's false advertising. People are, generally, exercising their rights as consumers.

It's not false advertising. Misleading almost certainly, but Marketers have been misleading their customers for years. This is nothing new.

The complaints, in great part delivered through constructive criticism, are a testament to how dearly BioWare's fanbase holds the Mass Effect franchise and its characters. ME3 ending on such a terrible note can be compared to a bad breakup, and it will take time for people to get over it and move on.

Personally, I still want BioWare to change the ending into something that makes more sense. Something without a last minute Deus Ex Machina that seems to exist for the sole purpose of making the ending bad. But I'm a realist, and know enough about how the industry, EA and Mass Effect development work to have given up hope on that by now.

Once BioWare rolls out the "update" to Mass Effect 3's ending, we'll probably have some extra dialogue between Shepard and Anderson, and Shepard and the Catalyst, but the ending still won't make any sense, and it will still be bad. That's just the reality of the situation.

Complaining is one thing, no problem with that. Acting like EA "owes" them a better ending just because they were expecting more (From misleading advertising but, again, not entirely false advertising) is the problem.

Mcoffey:
I hope we can put this behind us and remember that no matter how bad the ending was, Dragon Age 2 was still shittier.

I'm going to have to disagree with you here. While Dragon Age II's final act was definitely shoddy and inconsistent with the rest of the game, the plot still made sense and the game had a proper climax.

When I finished Dragon Age II I thought "I'd like to play this game again, but I'll save it for later so that I won't get burnt out on it."

When I finished Mass Effect 3, after a short period of nihilism, I thought "I can never play through a Mass Effect game again."

(And, in contrast to both of them, finishing Mass Effect 2 lead to me immediately starting up a second playthrough. Same with Dragon Age: Origins, although I never finished the second playthrough there...)

That was more to lighten the mood then an actual statement, but I know I'll never play DA2 again. About a week after I finished ME3, I picked up one of my half-finished ME2 runs so I can see how the main game changes with different choices. So yeah, the last 1-5% of Mass Effect 3 was bad for me, but at least it wasn't the 100% badness of Dragon Age 2.

tautologico:
I think I'm much more into Mass Effect than Yahtzee, but I still don't think the ending is a heinous crime against humanity.

The general idea of the ending makes sense in the setting

Horseshit. Glowy fuckwit's logic is inherently paradoxical. The ONLY way GF could have arose given HIS OWN LOGIC is if he was a product of the first iteration of intelligent life in the Milky way. However, the fact that he had to be a product of that first society means that he has NO basis for the line that synthetic life will exterminate organic life.

Moreover, unless you are going to take the line that life only arises in the Milky way, an utterly stupid position to take given that multiple intelligences achieve interstellar travel every 50,000 years in the Milky Way alone, the logic espoused by GF means that sooner or later a galaxy without Reapers(which is every other galaxy but the Milky Way) will launch extragalactic seed ships built by synthetics to acquire more resources and spread themselves throughout the universe(Since once the seed ships make it to another galaxy they can make a giant Mass Relay to the previous galaxy) and would wipe out all rival intelligences from the Milky Way for resources. All of which means that no matter what you picked, the Milky way is fucked since the Reapers have been doing their thing for millions of years.

Little Duck:
Mass Effect 3's ending is architecture.

Indeed.

image

Welcome to the internet where the vocal minority get heard.
I have been safe from the IMMENSE RAGE because I've been discussing this topic maturely on some forums about a certain Canadian Comedy Troupe. Reading some comments in this thread makes me ashamed of being grouped with them under 'gamer'.

I will still buy from Bioware. I enjoyed Mass Effect 3 (except for that last bit).
I don't want a completely reworked ending, I want closure. I want things to make sense. I want Paragon Shepard to be that very annoying and horrible blindly optimistic twat that drives the plot. I don't want Shepard to go /fuck it and listen to surprise god-kid.

There are some good blog posts out there that explains from a technical point of view why the ending was bad. No fanboy crying. Hard, academic philosophy.

I wish both sides would just shut the fuck up. Yes the ending was shit. Yes the fanboys are making a lot of fuss and think it's the right thing to do to emotionally blackmail Bioware by donating money to charity to change it. Is a mature discussion hard?
Yes, because it's the internet.

TsunamiWombat:

Respect is a two way street. If you want respect for your work, respect my intelligence. I don't think I have a -right- to change the gamings end, I would -like- to. Bioware has every right to ignore the shit out of me and complainers like me and more power to them as a business and an artist. I have every right not to purchase their products in the future out of disatisfaction, seek a refund (as many did in the initial 2 weeks, and recieved them I might add, even from Origin), and to pressure my friends and peers not to buy their games. Yet when I exercise my rights, I'm "immature" and "spiteful" whereas Bioware is "artistic" when they exercise theirs.

image

And we have a winner. I'm fowarding this to The Escapist as post of the month.

So, according to Yahtzee, EA and Bioware, despite the Day one DLC, rather pathetic marketing, managing to piss people off every step of the way, and may have created an ending without the approval of the Bioware writing team which is full of potholes, WE'RE the ones with cocks for heads and THEY all know better than us...yeah, not buying it. Apparently Yahtzee thinks that EA knows better than the general public. So tell me Yahtzee does that mean that the ending for Human Revolution was actually good because no matter what you do the first Dues Ex happens? Also has he ever heard of Broken Steel?

Ah well, I get the vibe that Yahtzee only played reach game once and never bothered with much of the side quests, I think I can live without his seal of approval.

Thank you, Yahtzee, for actually taking the time to think about the game's ending and what it could mean.

For an ending that is so clearly BEGGING to be analyzed, I'm shocked people like Shamus and co. are so quick to just call it dumb without even taking five minutes to ponder the philosophical ramifications.

Numerous Ending spoilers, FYI:

In conclusion, I maintain the ongoing theory that the endings are BRILLIANT, and this is a case of nobody wanting to actually give them the proper amount of consideration/contemplation/observation.

But the evidence is all there, people. Ya just gotta look for it! XD

DrVornoff:
And most of them suck. Or come across as whining. Or are poorly supported. Or are just infuriatingly arrogant. The thing is, people who don't like the ending have been so damn vocal about it for so many damn days that it's impossible to not hear their reasons for being upset. That doesn't mean I have to agree with them 100%.

So you call people out for not having reasons, then say most reasons are dumb, then say that through the massive number of posts, you've seen everyone's reasons and just plain disagree with them ._.

Could'a finished that a lot quicker without backtracking on your reasoning.

Besides, look at the number of people who just post, "Point? Missing it," or something similarly snarky and then fucking off to do whatever it is they do. Am I supposed to take them seriously? Am I supposed to believe that they really have some kind of lucid, intelligent argument if I just opened my mind up to their brattiness and saw the tormented soul within?

Maybe if they were taken seriously when they first posted their three paragraph long reasons and the writers of these kind of articles had realised that we'd rather they address our counter arguments rather than collectively agreeing with each other, reiterating the same points that don't directly address people's problems with the ending and then pretty much telling everyone to 'Suck it up', then they wouldn't have become bored of it and resorted to simply pointing out when yet another writer falls into the category of 'Games are art, your arguments are invalid'.

I'd like to say that I don't object to the ending itself so much as the incredibly stupid way in which it was presented; the sudden appearance of a ghost child who argues in a very badly explained manner for the existence of the Reapers (lots of people are saying his reasoning is cyclical and dumb but i would disagree. It makes sense it just is really badly explained).

And I would argue that the theme of the mass effect series is not hopelessness but hope. If you do everything right you'll have Wrex in charge of the Krogan and he'll stop them from getting out of hand again. The Krogan Wars are not inevitable and the reptition of the cycle of the Reapers is not inevitable.

The kids logic while not inherantly stupid is shown to be faulty by the cooperation you can forge with the geth, and so it just doesn't make sense to force you into making a dumb decision based on this illogic.

There is a certain element of people moaning just because they wanted to see their Shepard and Liara living happily ever after or whatever, but I think there are some legitimate concerns with the ending.

But not so much that the game should be changed for them.

If Bioware adopts the 'Indoctrination Theory' then I will lose all respect for them, no matter how plausible the theory itself might be.

lacktheknack:

Rangerboy87:
Oh thank God, someone finally mentioned it.

I though I was the only person who saw the ending and thought (besides What?): "Wait, if the relays are destroyed, aren't all the species trapped in Earth's solar system? That's kind of a glaring plot hole"

I am so happy someone else noticed that.

That's not a plot hole, that's just plain old unfortunate.

I'd say it's both. A possible consequence that's not addressed is a plot hole, which is quite unfortunate.

GamesB2:

How long has Mass Effect been help up as a series that shows amazing story, difficult choices and actual repercussions for those choices?

Then they piss it all away in the last 10 minutes, I think I'm just as annoyed that they did this to the franchise as I am that they did it to the fans.

Mass Effect could've been something really special, but now at it's best, it's a great series will a pretty disappointing ending, at it's worst it's a series killer.

But maybe I'm rambling...

I get the disappointment and how the ending not being so good affects the overall quality of the experience, but I still think Mass Effect is something special as a series, and ME3 in particular. So what I'm saying is that I don't think the ending ruins the whole series. Actually, ME3 has the most difficult choices to make, with more far-reaching consequences than anything on the series before.

It's also the first time a game trilogy tells a single story sticking to a continuity based on the player's character, instead of a general canon continuity that is fixed. I still think that's pretty good.

He's right you know. This is the ending they wanted, it's the ending we got. Deal with it.

I expected Shepherd to die and lo and behold, he did. The relays were destroyed. Alright. What's the problem? I don't see one. It's the inevitable ending that was going to happen. It concluded. I'm actually pretty okay with it. It isn't perfect but it's at least finished. Done. Concluded. Is that the big problem?

Riff Moonraker:

TsunamiWombat:
Point. Missing it. Thanks for not understanding, Yahtzee.

Holding the Line.

I am in complete agreement. He missed the point, as did Moviebob, Ken Levine, etc. etc. etc.

Hold the line.

Eh, Levine's just afraid cause he can't write a good ending to save his life

tehweave:
He's right you know. This is the ending they wanted, it's the ending we got. Deal with it.

I expected Shepherd to die and lo and behold, he did. The relays were destroyed. Alright. What's the problem? I don't see one. It's the inevitable ending that was going to happen. It concluded. I'm actually pretty okay with it. It isn't perfect but it's at least finished. Done. Concluded. Is that the big problem?

Funny, I don't recall ever asking for Shepard to die at the end.

Mausenheimmer:
"Curing the Krogan Genophage implies that the Krogan Rebellions would start again"

No, they wouldn't because Wrex and Eve survived on my playthrough and they were determined to guide the krogan along a different path. Similarly, the geth and quarians started to get along and help each other, undermining the point that synthetics will inevitably fight organics.

But I guess paying attention to differences between playthroughs would require you to spend more than half a week thinking about it. And that requires way more effort than I've come to expect from you.

Oooo snap! I like you :D

And yeah, I agree. The themes of cycles are present in the game but they are in no way implied that everything will be repeated over and over again. The fact that the story is telling you on multiple occasions "Things can change if they're given a chance" tells that brilliantly. The species that everyone fears is given a second chance because they won't learn from their mistakes otherwise. A race of Synthetic beings finally gets to express its reasons for rebelling against its creators and possibly work towards a better future for the two of them. The species that have for so long been separated from one another, in a time that could possibly tear them apart like it has in the other cycles, has grouped together to protect one another.

None of those bits ever said to me "The fate of the Galaxy is inevitable" but more "We're all responsible for our actions and all choices have consequences, good or bad". That's what Mass Effect has always been about, how our actions shape the worlds around us. Being forced to sit through those last five minutes or so where I was completely taken out of my Shepard and put into somebody else who didn't act them same... it felt wrong. Without any explanation or even the option to say "No", that ending did not feel like the game I had just been playing before.

http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/5695/article/mass-effect-3-writer-allegedly-slams-controversial-ending/

Here, have a look at this. If it's true, it explains a lot and even breaks the argument of "artistic integrity".

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 . . . 17 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here