Mass Effect 3 Gets An Ending

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 17 NEXT
 

The ending only bothers me because it wasn't an ending. It was like a teaser for the next movie, the next season, the next book. The player thought, "It can't end like THIS!" and BioWare replies, "Oh, it isn't over yet. You can see the rest once you insert another 800 BioWare points."

I'm a subscriber to the Indoctrination Theory that states the endings we saw were just a delusion caused be the Reapers within Shepard's mind, which I think is genius. Unfortunately the requirement that we pay more money to see the rest makes it evil genius.

I just hope any altered ending isn't made in the mindset of Hideaki Anno. Did "End of Evangelion" teach fans nothing?

Yeah well like, that's just your opinion man.

OT: Ending was meh but whatever, I had fun with the trilogy and i'll continue to buy more Bioware games. All I got to say.

The original ending as envisioned by the original lead writer of the ME series was not the ending we got. For two games the series builded the themes that were meant to be explored in the ending. That ending would have even explained the meaning of the the franchise's name. It would not have been any happier, maybe it would have been even more tragic and depressing, but it would have made sense and would have taken in to account what has happened before during the entire series. Not only that: even the leaked script of November 2011 has in many ways a different ending. That alone contradicts anything Yathzee has to "offer" on the theme. The ending wasn't planned at all. They pulled it out on the fly, just like Lost authors, mixing sources that do not fit with ME themes at all, like the original Dues Ex or Matrix Revolution.

In my opinion, ME3 endings suck on any level: writing, art, gameplay, storytelling. You name it. Is it a tragedy? No, off course. And I agree that the rest of the game is mostly good (even if it has his problems too).

But when someone judges the loud reaction of Bioware's fanbase, he should take in to account that the company in question have done anything in the last years to break the relation of trust with their player base. I'm talking of the long list of lies that the devs has fed us during the last years. Like, you know, "you can have the better ending without playing MP". I'm talking of their crappy and rushed games of late, where recycling and cutting corners have become "innovation". Like, you know, DA2, defined by the free and illuminated critics of The Escapist as "the best RPG of the year". I'm talking of the business model they are trying to impose on their fanbase. Like, you know, day one DLC that were part of the damn original CD.

ME3 endings are just the last drop. Only if you know what has happened before you can understand the dire situation of late. Btw, I do not want Bioware to rewrite the ending: I hope they stay the same so anyone can judge on his own what's happened to that incredible, creative and friendly company when EA has come in to the picture. It's important that nothing is touched so we, as simple gamers, can judge the credibility of the gaming press and their perfect scores on metacritic.

Having said all of that: anyone is entitled to his opinion. But it's strange to see a reviewer, one who lives thanks to his criticism, that questions the intelligence of fans who are simply expressing their criticism about a piece of art and asking for an alternative ending they are willing to pay for.

Especially from Yathzee, who has allways talked about the special nature of videogames as an interactive form of art, who has allways talked about the general stupidity of game storytelling. Now he questions the demand for more interactivity, more intelligence and more respect on any level. Now he plays the "it's art" card. Well, I guess that I should not come to The Escapist if I want to read/see something honest about EA/Bioware...

PS: Btw, corporate companies like Bioware use focus groups to test their games and they change their plans according to the result of those testing. If games were really art and could not be questioned, companies should not use such tools. But games are not art, at least not AAA games. So, tell me, what's the difference between focus group and the feedback of the fans?

With all due respect to Yahtzee, I can't help but feel that he had missed the main points over the furor of the endings.

A. During the lead up to its release, the developers promised us (aka: their customers) that Mass Effect 3 would have multiple endings (at least 16 I believe). Instead we got 3 variations on the same one (Red, Blue and Green).

This is akin to Mercedes promising us the next evolution in car technology and then providing us a somewhat inferior product. While still charging us the same price.

B. The endings themselves are filled with plot-holes, bizarre logical fallacies and break some concrete rules of narrative. In just ten minutes we have transformed the "Cthulesque" horror of the Reapers into the more "well-intentioned extremist" trope. When combined with their bizarre methods of achieving their goals (seriously didn't anyone consider Asimov's three laws of robotics?) made the ending sequence akin to deflating a balloon.

C. By changing the endings, Bioware will not be succumbing to political correctness. Instead it would a company acknowledging the fact that a significant proportion of their customers are displeased with the product. This would be seen on the same level as test audiences rejecting ridiculous endings or publisher's telling novel authors to fix/remove awful plot points. Most forms of art have always had some form of interaction with the creator and the viewer. Perhaps the furor over the ending is the next evolution of that interaction?

PS: Anyone else confused as to how the damn "Starchild" looked exactly as that one kid?

Well, with all due respect... Yahtzee, you've missed the point. Aka the reason for outrage.
Ending is filled with plotholes and contradicts itself.
Imagine Tolkien writing about Gollum appearing in the Shire after the destruction of the ring - with no explanation. Someone would tell "Mr. Tolkien, you actually killed him in the lava a chapter ago... Erm?".
Same with Mass Effect 3 ending scene.

DrVornoff:

I at no point said "majority." Unfortunately, there are people making unreasonable demands and the fact that their number is greater than 1 means there are too many.

But most people who take the movement seriously see those people the same way you do, whiney and entitled. They don't support or condone those who are making unreasonable demands because they're just giving them a bad name. For all intents and purposes they are not part of the movement

DrVornoff:

1. Do not use this position to file a lawsuit with the FTC as I can guarantee you will lose. That is not how the law works. I understand that is not a majority opinion, but the fact that some people are filing the lawsuit at all means that it needs to be said.

I... don't really get that guy, neither to most of the retakers. I'm guess he wasn't actually expecting to get very far, he just wanted to make a statement. The retakers don't want to do any irreverseable damage to Bioware anyway, we want them to work with us, that would be counter-productive.

DrVornoff:

2. Bioware is not actually obligated to respond. Sending ultimatums actually hurts a cause more often than not as the recipient will usually be very happy to call your bluff.

Us retakers fully respect Bioware's right not to respond to us, but they have to live with the consiquences if they don't. Consumer trust is a very important commodity that can be easily lost if a company doesn't handle their PR well.

DrVornoff:

That said, publishers don't generally take threats of boycott (and that is essentially what this shakes down to) seriously as gamers have repeatedly proven to have very little in the way of willpower. Consider the Steam groups who declared they were boycotting a title and then the majority of their members were found playing that title on launch day. It sent a message to publishers that our threats are hollow.

Oh hell yes, I hate boycott groups. But they're usually formed from a group of people who want the thing they're attempting to boycott, and are often driven to protest because of a business decision or something else they don't like. NOT because they simply don't want the product. Ask any retaker and they'll tell you the ending pretty much ruined their desire to play any further DLC and they don't really trust future Bioware games to deliver on the studio's promises.

So it's not activism, it's simple cause and effect consumer economics. Retakers want to like Bioware again, but if they just blow us off then we wont be enclined to purchase from them.

DrVornoff:

Also, if you want to be seen as reasonable, you need to vocally denounce the people who exploited Child's Play as emotional blackmail and then demanded their money back. You need to tell the people who make unreasonable statements and demands that they do not speak for you. If you do not wish to be generalized as being one of them, you need to give us a reason to see you as standing apart.

Well where did you hear about them? Because all the offical statements from both the charity and the movement organizers have insisted they do not condone or support any of those people. But many articles have been trying to put a negative spin on everything we do, god knows why, maybe they just want us to shut up.

But the majority of the retaker protest stratagies have been positive and constructive. (though quite a bit of them come at great personal cost to us, but maybe that just puts a dent in the 'entitled' argument)

For example, check out this thread I posted if you haven't already: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.357872-Angry-ME3-fans-send-cupcakes-to-Bioware?page=1

DrVornoff:

So far you personally have done little to convince me, though this is a step in the right direction. I have repeatedly said that I'm okay with people not liking the ending and taking their business elsewhere. I just don't want them coming into every thread to go, "Cool story bro. Hey, did I mention that this totally relates to how much I think Bioware sucks?"

I can't really justify the actions of people who actually are friggen annoying, and you're well within your rights go tell them to STFU. But I don't want them to shine such a negative light on the entire movement. There's always people who take a cause too far, but that doesn't take away from the cause itself.

We're really a respectful bunch, though there's still lots of crazy speculation and joke threads on BSN anyone who tries to make us look like 'whining entitled children' is promptly slapped down when confronted by the core of the movement.

Just for the hell-of-it here's a thread from BSN that pretty much everyone who's part of the movement agrees with. It's basically our mission statement.
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10662944

The way the games press handled this was in many ways a mistake. IGN's Colin Moriarty takes a platitude that the outcriers are a minority that is entitled and will compromise Bioware's artistic integrity. Destructoid's Max Scoville likens fans to a manbaby horde. The press is presenting the grass roots outrage to the creators regardless of how the message is actually presented. The rhetoric is currently, "Change the ending because we're pissed off," when in reality most of the things expressed are, "That ending was terrible and made no sense."

I don't care if they don't change it, but what else does Bioware have to offer with their DLC that they immediately proposed after the end of the game. What Yahtzee mentioned seems like an ideal solution, appease the fans with elaboration of alternation of the current ending with added content.

That being said here's what I'm fine with about the ending:
-Shepard's death: The fact that dying is inevitable is something I can accept.
-Shutting down the Mass Relays: This is something I actually saw coming.
-Confronting the Illusive Man: I wanted resolution.
-The credits song: It's a pretty chill song.

Here's what I hate about the ending:
-The space ghost: That kid's ghost showing up and basically introducing nonsense.
-The lack of agency: There's no effective player choice in the ending.
-The Normandy inexplicably appearing elsewhere: This scene sucked, and the first time I saw it I knew the ending was rushed.
-The ambiguous post credits where a child asks about 'The Shepard': This was totally unnecessary and was contrived for artistic merit.

I think the indoctrination theory explains the plotholes enough to avoid an entire overhaul of the ending. Personally, I have a bad feeling BioWare deliberately left an opening for one of those DLC resolutions. Also, Squad characters don't all necessarily die like you seem to be saying, so there is room for closure with them. And I call bullshit on the "hopeless cycle" interpretation. Mass Effect is a friggin' RPG, it's supposed to be all about making choices with significantly different outcomes. During the development stage, BioWare specifically claimed there'd be much more depth to the endings, not just "A, B or C", the latter being pretty much what happens in the game. I think you might just be making excuses.

I do admit, part of what pissed me off about the ending was the entire lack of closure. The complete derailment and how the series jumped off the rails was bad enough, but I could have taken comfort knowing that for all the efforts you put into playing the game and making choices and seeing them pay off, not just straight away but in the future too. At least knowing your sacrifice wasn't in vain.

I believe someone on this very website once said:
"Fans are clingy complaining dipshits who will never ever be grateful for any concession you make. The moment you shut out their shrill, tremulous voices the happier you will be for it. Incidentally, why not buy a Zero Punctuation t-shirt?"

And I believe that statement holds true to this instance. It's really the only thing I have left to say in any Mass Effect related thread now. I might as well smash my head against a brick wall than try debating with anyone who dislikes the endings of the game. Oh, I know all of the arguments. But you see, the thing is? I just don't care. I have better things to do than get outraged over a video game ending. Which is saying something, because pretty much all I do with my free time is play video games.

The counterpoint to the "artistic integrity" argument is very simple.

Mass Effect is commercial art. The "artistic integrity" of the product is already beholden to its financial backers (For instance, Javik and his mission were removed to cut development time to meet a release date determined by the publisher).

As the old maxim goes, "he who pays the piper calls the tune", and ultimately we as gamers are the ones paying.

More, naturally, from Forbes

H-a-v-o-k:
Seriously.. I love bioware, I'll still buy there games, I'm not on the message boards much, but I feel the need to get in on this.. It was a superb ending to an even better series, and not trying to get in on this heated fire exchange that's been going over the internet, but I believe the ending did go over most people's heads.

SPOILER ALERT_____________________________________________

Shepherd was indoctrinated through the whole series, the end of the game was not truly inside the crucible, it was the battle of indoctrination is Shepherd's mind. I have more to back up this argument if anyone is interested.

*sigh*

Yes, and I'm sure you came up with all this indoctrination stuff yourself.

I'm not trying to attack your or anything but all this "indoctrination theory" nonsense just reeks of fanfiction to me and the fact that people are clinging to it so desperately just goes to show how much Bioware dropped the ball with the ending.

Limecake:

Mylinkay Asdara:

Why has this become such a divisive hate-filled discussion when some people are actually suffering from sadness and truly upset at something they love being taken away from them? Is there no sympathy, no empathy in this community? Are we really all just a bunch of individualists who think we are right all the time and don't care how anyone feels around us? I am saddened by this whole thing. I grow more distant from the community with every passing day this drags on.

Listen, I have empathy for my fellow gamer for most things. But not this.

This whole ME3 ending thing was blown way way out of proportion. I can understand you are upset and saddened by the ending but that's where my empathy ends.

You can be dissatisfied with a game, you can be pissed all your questions weren't answered, you can be upset with bioware and even boycott future games. But you aren't entitled to tell the developers what to do.

If you don't like how they do business/make games/talk to customers/make videos/listen to music than you are fully within your right to not support them don't buy their products, don't visit their forums and don't hang onto their every word like it's a promise.

but don't buy their game and then complain you don't like it and they need to change it, it's asinine. I have a copy of alone in the dark but you don't see me petitioning Atari to take out the driving sections and replace it with something better.

not to mention the whole 'retake mass effect' movement couldn't be any more disorganized, other than 'we want a new ending' everyone involved seems to have a different idea of what should happen.

can we just move on now?

Smertnik:
I love how every time someone speaks against this whole retake ME3 nonsense people just dismiss everything with 'Meh, s/he just doesn't get it'

because obviously the hatred for Mass Effect 3's ending must be unanimous across all gamer culture.

I should go on record (as I have elsewhere) as saying the writing the situation of the ending is not something I am clamoring to get changed. That's the ending they wanted I suppose they had some reasons, fine okay, not thrilled with it but it's not my hang up.

I DO want them to slap an Epilog on it though. I am gunning for that. I am willing to shell out for it as DLC if need be, but I want some closure and yes, maybe that does make me a bit entitled, but let me lay it out from my perspective.

I have bought their games - many of them, not just ME - and I have "liked" all their FB pages when they asked me to, and all the subsequent posts they've asked me to to get X or Y. I have bought things I don't particularly need to get extras and bonuses. I have followed their blogs and their tweets and their e-mails faithfully. I have done, in short, everything they have asked of me as a consumer so far as I was possibly able to do. I am asking them for something in return: an epilog to tell me what happened to the characters and the story they made me care about so deeply and then left open and seemingly unfinished. If that makes me seem entitled it might be because I do feel entitled to what I was told would be delivered when I stuck with them all this way listening to them tell me it would be delivered and believing they would make good on that promise. Tell me what happened. Let me be done. Let me have closure so I can go play all your games again and again and again in happiness and contentment even if I don't love every single thing about each and every one of them - I love them as a whole.

Thank you for the understanding though, of my feelings. I do appreciate it. I think people are losing sight of the fact that this whole thing started with the emotions of players, not the rights of players vs. the rights of artists, not the argument about what is sacred and what is mutable, but with an emotion felt by a player at the end of a roller coaster ride of emotions brought about by a game - which is really a beautiful thing turned so ugly now that the conflict keeps going on.

How come the only people who knows what the F they're talking about when it comes to why people hate the ending is Shamus Young and This gamefront article on why the fans are right

You missed the point Yahtzee. -Everyone who doesn't agree with him

Did he? Did he REALLY miss the point? Did he "assume" your stance despite the countless thousands of threads spent by so many of you solidifying your points? Is it more likely he characterized your positions in a way that made you look unfavorable and now you're just assuming he "doesn't understand"? Maybe you guys are assuming his position.

For starters, there appears to be zero fucking solidarity in the Retake crowd on what exactly they want Bioware to do.

"We want more varied endings!"
"We want more closure!"
"We want a less depressing option!"
"We don't want them to change the end. But we do want an epilogue!"

Yahtzee might be misrepresenting YOUR particular stance, but there's about a thousand other people that seem to have the stance he's talking about. Maybe this is why so many of us see you all as whiny children, who never quite understood life's gonna let you down sometimes, because you can't even agree on what you WANT. And then you just write off any criticism as "people who just didn't get it" (sound familiar?)

Second, there seems to be an assumption of Yahtzee's stance on the ending, as is typical when people are simply blowing off valid criticism. I don't think Yahtzee likes the ending, in fact he probably hates it. But he understands that allowing the fans to set the precedent that all stories must adhere to their specifications and expectations is a terrible idea. Moviebob raised the point that taking control out of the writers' hands means they'll take absolutely zero risks. Why would they if the audience is just gonna make 'em change it to what they want?

TL;DR:Yahtzee didn't miss your point A: because there's not even one single point to begin with and B: you're just pissed he's not agreeing with you.

moosek:

-Shepard's death: The fact that dying is inevitable is something I can accept.

I would be able to accept it too, but what you say is false. The only real permutation in the endings that keep tracks of what you have done before it, is a 5 second scene that happens if you choose the red ending and have more than 4000 EMS points: Sheppard lives and start breathing in London's ruined rubble (don't aske me how he survived: probably it's another kind of SPACE MAGIC).

Honestly, I believe that no amount of context can save the ending since its premise are circular and does not make any kind of sense (I will avoid the point that thematically the ending are out of place and do not fit the series at all). So, since the synthethics will allways revolt and kill the organics in every cycle, then the Starchild have created a race of syntethics that save organics killing them all and turning them in to monsters? Hu?

Honestly, what kind of context can you give to these mess. If the Starchild is all about saving organic and avoid that tecnology advancement kill them, he could have used better means than killing organics and turn them in to ugly and rabid monsters, using procedures that would have make Mengelev smile in the process. Like, you know, destroying the syntethics every now and then. Or using indoctrination to create a universal religion where intellingent AI are tab¨. Or trying to make them coexist thanks to his superior intellingence. Like, you know, just what you have done in the game some hours before when you were able to reach some kind of peace between the Geth and the Quarians.

GloatingSwine:
The counterpoint to the "artistic integrity" argument is very simple.

Mass Effect is commercial art. The "artistic integrity" of the product is already beholden to its financial backers (For instance, Javik and his mission were removed to cut development time to meet a release date determined by the publisher).

As the old maxim goes, "he who pays the piper calls the tune", and ultimately we as gamers are the ones paying.

More, naturally, from Forbes

Ultimately doesn't trump over immediately.

FedericoV:

moosek:

-Shepard's death: The fact that dying is inevitable is something I can accept.

I would be able to accept it too, but what you say is false. The only real permutation in the endings that keep tracks of what you have done before it, is a 5 second scene that happens if you choose the red ending and have more than 4000 EMS points: Sheppard lives and start breathing in London's ruined rubble (don't aske me how he survived: probably it's another kind of SPACE MAGIC).

Honestly, I believe that no amount of context can save the ending since its premise are circular and does not make any kind of sense (I will avoid the point that thematically the ending are out of place and do not fit the series at all). So, since the synthethics will allways revolt and kill the organics in every cycle, then the Starchild have created a race of syntethics that save organics killing them all and turning them in to monsters? Hu?

Honestly, what kind of context can you give to these mess. If the Starchild is all about saving organic and avoid that tecnology kill them, he could have used better means than killing organics and turn them in to ugly and rabid monsters, using procedures that would have make Mengelev smile. Like, you know, destroying the syntethics every now and then. Or using indoctrination to create a universal religion where intellingent AI are tab¨.

I mean, where is the love :D?

The important bit you left out though is that the reapers leave. They take away the ugly monsters and let new civilizations advance. Meanwhile, the synthetics of a less-farseeing culture might have slightly more power-grabbing goals. For instance if the reapers didn't kill everyone with the capacity to make synthetics, what's to stop the Geth eventually saying "fuck this, leave us alone crap and roll on these bitches"? And then if the Geth succeed in dominating everyone, what's to stop them from eradicating all organic life? The goal was never to preserve organic life in it's current state, but rather to ensure it's continued survival entirely.

There might have been better methods, but eh, this is what the team went with.

Well yahtzee let me explain it to you by using a series you love.
You freely admit that you aren't realy into mass effect so you have already missed the mark. so let me use an analogy with your beloved silent hill 2.
LEt us say you get to the final part then ending boss fight ( I love silent hill btw) and the game all of a sudden stops. A UNicorn appears and says "to stop this evil you must choose
1: to leave with the little girl live happily ever after and marry a hot chick.
2: leave with maria live a long lovely life have many babies
3: leave with maria and the girl and live happily ever after.
Then some unicorns and rainbows glow and dance, in different colors depending on which ending you choose and then ends with a big poster going "Hey for some real Silent Hill buy our DLC!!!"

If that had happened you would throw a fit so massive it would be recordable from space.

And you are forgetting the flat out promises made to us from memebers of the development team.

If I made a game for you and i PROMISED you a gun that shoots shurikens and lightning has tits and is on fire. and then, when you played the game, it turned out to actually be a pop gun that lights on fire burning you when you use it, you would absolutely demand that get fixed.

I am just mad because the ending didn't make sense to me. I have this little kid explaining to me that Synthetics and Organics could never get along. Meanwhile I have two different types of Synthetics out there (EDI and the ENTIRE GETH FLEET) proving it wrong. I wanted to scream at it "LOOK, LOOK RIGHT OUT THERE!" However this subject was not even acnowledged by the kid. Hell a simple "it will not last" would have been better than nothing.

And on the subject of cycles. All my Mass Effect gameplay up to that point told me that cycles could be broken if people are willing to work together.

I am not asking for a new ending, but I am still disapointed.

Loop Stricken:

an epilogue appendix style thing just to square away the subplots.

Which is exactly what was missing.

I mean, let's put aside the fact that we were told there'd be multiple endings up until about a month before release; this one thing would've made the current endings slightly more bearable.

I know what you mean. I was expecting some Fallout3-esque montage about how our decisions had resonated through the galaxy, seeing a krogan shake hands with a turian or geth helping quarians build homes. Something like that would at least have the feel that our decisions bore some weight in the universe.

JDLY:
Am I the only person who finished it without "everyone dying"?

I mean, yeah a lot of people died; nameless people of all species if that's what you mean. But it seems like for everyone, all of their teammates died as well, when all of mine lived.

They mean about how all of your crew is somehow, due to "SPACE MAGIC LAPOFJAOISFJIO!" crashed on a random planet in the middle of nowhere and will no doubt starve to death and even if they tried to reproduce there would be huge amounts of inbreeding and death.

This is the funniest thread in a while! Im so ridiculously happy I never liked mass effect and I dont have to deal with the "change Mass effects ending" whiny fanboy bullshit. Who am I going to listen to on this matter eh? Some asshole on a forum calling me stupid and telling me im missing the point or well-respected people in the gaming community like Yahtzee/Moviebob/Graham Stark/Extra Credits and so on.

anthony87:

H-a-v-o-k:
Seriously.. I love bioware, I'll still buy there games, I'm not on the message boards much, but I feel the need to get in on this.. It was a superb ending to an even better series, and not trying to get in on this heated fire exchange that's been going over the internet, but I believe the ending did go over most people's heads.

SPOILER ALERT_____________________________________________

Shepherd was indoctrinated through the whole series, the end of the game was not truly inside the crucible, it was the battle of indoctrination is Shepherd's mind. I have more to back up this argument if anyone is interested.

*sigh*

Yes, and I'm sure you came up with all this indoctrination stuff yourself.

I'm not trying to attack your or anything but all this "indoctrination theory" nonsense just reeks of fanfiction to me and the fact that people are clinging to it so desperately just goes to show how much Bioware dropped the ball with the ending.

People would rather live in happy ignorance than sad truth, I suppose.

I believe in the indoctrination ending. Even if it wasn't intentional, I believe its BioWare's best chance of getting out of this clean.

Mass Effect 3 gets an ending!

The gaming-media circlejerk, however, continues.

The solution to an Endingtron-3000 isn't linearity, it's having an ending that follows logically from a variety of choices made throughout the game.

FinalHeart95:
So far, every time someone has argued against the "Retake Mass Effect" movement, the overwhelming response is that the person "doesn't get it", most without actually saying what there is to get.
Just for future reference, if you really want to tell someone that they "don't get it", tell them what it is exactly they don't get. By not providing this, it just looks like you're saying it because it's the only way you can think of to defend yourself, even if it's not. (Also, ironically, some of the "he doesn't get it" posts actually missed the point of the article...)

Also, I stand by my opinion that it's not your game, so it's not your ending. You have o right to change it. Sue for false advertising all you want, that doesn't mean Bioware is obligated to change the ending. Sorry.

Alright then, here's what people don't seem to be getting:

http://jmstevenson.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/

To be honest I hate putting down a link and calling it "proof" or whatever but the guy who wrote that said it all a million times better than I could.

irishda:

Did he? Did he REALLY miss the point? Did he "assume" your stance despite the countless thousands of threads spent by so many of you solidifying your points? Is it more likely he characterized your positions in a way that made you look unfavorable and now you're just assuming he "doesn't understand"? Maybe you guys are assuming his position.

He is completely missing the point because he is speaking of something he has no idea about and he is not even interested a lot to begin with by his own admission. He is just supporting Bioware so his editor will be happy.

Second, there seems to be an assumption of Yahtzee's stance on the ending, as is typical when people are simply blowing off valid criticism. I don't think Yahtzee likes the ending, in fact he probably hates it. But he understands that allowing the fans to set the precedent that all stories must adhere to their specifications and expectations is a terrible idea. Moviebob raised the point that taking control out of the writers' hands means they'll take absolutely zero risks. Why would they if the audience is just gonna make 'em change it to what they want?

Ask Moviebob why gaming companies use focus group and the like then. That's ridiculous: game stories change all the time. But when it's corporation processes or "professional reviewer" insight, it's all fine and legit.

When it's fan feedback it is called entitlement. That's simply ideologic and the fact that gamers are willing to support this shit is depressing.

The writers HAVE NO CONTROL in videogames. They never had. Suggesting the idea that they are free like Cormac McCarthy to write their own tale is beyond ridiculous and insulting. Videogame writers need to take in consideration all kind of pressure in to account: business, design, burocracy, etc. etc..

What's wrong with fan feedback when it has been allready proved that in many games it has helped a lot? Fallout 3, The Witcher, Infamous 2. They have all been changed because of fan feedback.

The fact that the devs have changed the original ending as envisioned and supported by the original lead writer during the two previous games of the series is proof enough of my point.

TL;DR:Yahtzee didn't miss your point A: because there's not even one single point to begin with and B: you're just pissed he's not agreeing with you.

LEAVE HIM ALONE!

I just thought it was strange that they decided to destroy the Relays, and essentially end the ME universe.

Shep dies heroically, sure, kind of expected. I don't think multiple endings where necessary, and even the final ABC was pretty pointless.

You pretty much got the full story of your crew members and know where their lives were heading, all good, no epilogue required. Right?

Then everyone in the galaxy gets stranded on half destroyed/deserted planets or presumably dies in space when their ships explode(?), um ok. It seems like the creators really don't want to make more ME games.

It would have been an easy out to just have a customized memorial service for Shep cutscene, with a bit for any of the surviving allies/armies the player had collected, and not end the universe.

Nevertheless, I'd play a Mass Effect Mercenaries prequel as long as it has more co-op.

Smertnik:
Can't agree more. All these people feeling entitled to a better ending deserve a slap in the face.

Also I love how every time someone speaks against this whole retake ME3 nonsense people just dismiss everything with 'Meh, s/he just doesn't get it'

Probably because they don't. According to a number of people, Bioware promised that their choices would matter in the end, but it didn't, at least in their eyes. They felt that Bioware pretty much lied to them in this area, thus the reason that so many people are demanding that they change their ending (might be too late for that though). For once, I would like to see someone who disagrees mention that, even if it's denying it completely.

Meh...I'm just tired of trying to explain what our problem with Bioware is to people when they just refuse to listen.

I'll try to make it really simple:
When you are promised a wide variety of vastly different endings by multiple people, multiple times...and what you get is one ending in 3 colours...that tends to piss people off. It's not about changing the ending to cater for each individuals preference, it's not about making it a super happy ending where everyone lives and goes home. It's simply about doing what was promised would happen. A lawsuit might sound extreme but what they did was effectively false advertising, and being "just a videogame" doesn't stop false advertising from being illegal and morally corrupt.
5 years of emotional investment into the multiple character creations, hundreds of dollars spent on the games and all the dlc. All of that to be met with a slap-in-the-face choice of 'A, B or C' followed up with a line of text reading "Sheperds a hero, now go buy some DLC" (paraphrased only slightly)".

By the sounds of it, they were holding back the 'real ending' from day 1 to be used as DLC, which makes it even WORSE that they would abuse their consumers in such a manner.

Sandytimeman:
Yeah, I feel like most journalists / critcs are on a completely different wave length then us gamers.

That being said I don't think bioware should have to remake the ending I just don't want to buy anything they sell ever again. Almost 300+ hours of game play to give me some depressing ass story where everyone fucking dies. Could have saved myself 80 bucks and 35 hours if I had just let shepard die in ME2...

TL;DR fuck bioware and don't buy from them anymore.

So... what? You'll only lay down The Dolla for happy endings?

Major_Tom:
image
Oh, and I guess you now like Deus Ex HR's ending too?

*slap*

Human Revolution's ending is good. Inelegant, but it serves it's purpose to a tee.

OT: I finished it about 5 minutes ago. Whilst it is not the best ending ever, it is definitely not the worst thing in the world, by any means. And even if it was, people need to seriously consider what they want this industry to be before they demand a rewrite.

I can understand the desire for every sweeping epic to end like Return of the King, but at the same time, people need to accept that not every writer wants to end their stories like that - and that's who ultimately calls the story shots. Design-by-committee is rarely (if ever) good, and making that committee out of a few thousand people doesn't change that.

And whilst the thing with the kid was a little odd, they'd hinted at whatever he was fairly strongly.

But yes, I would have preferred a RotK, let's all get down with Frodo on the bed ending too - I'm a soppy fuck, I guess. And yes, I would have preferred an ending that did take into account your previous decisions; even so, your choices to do have consequences, they just happen on the journey, and not at the destination.

This summaries my feelings mostly: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/03/19/whats-right-with-mass-effect-3s-ending/

In combination with this: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/03/14/mass-effect-3-the-end-of-an-epic/

Not a great ending, not the worst ending, could have been handled better, but the last 5 minutes should not wipe 90 hours of goodness, and we should not have collective creative control of a writer's work.

Funny how this comes from the same guy who said that if it were up to him he'd rewrite the new Star Wars trilogy after sending the ACTUAL author off to play with a colouring book.

Sure, it was a joke, but i'd really love to see him defending THAT abomination, which is ACTUALLY what the author wanted (or so he stated), while accusing us of being out of line when, it appears, most of the writing staff wasn't even aware of ME3's ending's content.

You dropped the ball, Croshaw. Big time.

I'm both shocked and disappointed that Yahtzee of all people doesn't understand what the issue is.

irishda:

The important bit you left out though is that the reapers leave. They take away the ugly monsters and let new civilizations advance.

It does not make sense still. The fact that they leave so they can do the same kind of holocaust over and over again, every bloody 50'000 years, make no sense at all if their goal is to protect organic life. Killing a child or an old man is still a form of homicide. Homicide is not the best way to preserve someone. Not to say that the whole 50'000 years cycle make no sense if it's related to technological advancement wich could go in any other way and it's hard to predict (instead it made sense in the original vision of the endings since it was linked to the way the ME universe worked in term of law of physics).

Meanwhile, the synthetics of a less-farseeing culture might have slightly more power-grabbing goals. For instance if the reapers didn't kill everyone with the capacity to make synthetics, what's to stop the Geth eventually saying "fuck this, leave us alone crap and roll on these bitches"? And then if the Geth succeed in dominating everyone, what's to stop them from eradicating all organic life?

But the Reapers themselves off course. Why kill any intelligent form of life every 50000 years if they could protect us form a race like the Geth? They could make any kind of miracle with their godlike powers. They could guide evolution anyway they want. They could intervene clinically and resolve any kind of problems with indoctrination and such.

The goal was never to preserve organic life in it's current state, but rather to ensure it's continued survival entirely.

That's not what the Starchild has to say on the issue. But most of all you must admit it is contrived at best.

There might have been better methods, but eh, this is what the team went with.

That's all that the fan who have criticized the endings have said. Point is, I've read a lot of fan fiction and constructive proposal on ME3 ending. And most of them are better than the ending we actually get.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 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