Mass Effect 3 Gets An Ending

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 . . . 17 NEXT
 

It's a first person story. When Shepard dies, you die, and there would be no way of knowing the exact consequences of your actions. That's what makes the final decision actually something you think about rather than just choosing the paragon option like you've been doing so far.

Really Yahtzee? I expected better of you when NOT retarded, plot hole riddled, awful story telling is on the line. I am just dumbfounded that you apparently didn't spend all of 5 minutes looking into this ME3 Ending business. There's a thing called Google Yahtzee. It contains the knowledge that would bring you and pretty much anyone else who's played the Mass Effect games together. I implore you to please use it.

But sadly, I'm sure this is the last we'll ever hear of it again as I'm sure you'll never give it another thought. That's fine. I wish you well in your blissful ignorance, the rest of us will continue to rightly feel betrayed, lied to, and very annoyed.

Danny Ocean:
It's a first person story. When Shepard dies, you die, and there would be no way of knowing the exact consequences of your actions. That's what makes the final decision actually something you think about rather than just choosing the paragon option like you've been doing so far.

I call BS. Let's be honest, this is no excuse for terrible, terrible writing.

Nice to see how there's slightly less hyperbole involved in this thread, although the same arguments/elements still seem to be here.

Also, I think if Bioware completely replaced the ending, that would be a precedent. At least for videogames. People keep bringing up Broken Steel - no. Similar, but not the same. Bethesda extended the ending past the original and plugged up a few plot holes.

I believe the difference is that people in the Retake movement seem to be demanding a completely different ending, with a completely different plot point. I think a lot of people are overtly incensed about the issue that they don't realise how problematic it could be.
And similarly, might be overtly incensed about the issue that they don't even attempt to find the positives about the ending.

At least some people share my opinion about ME3 endings. I couldn't understand what was all the fuss about when i finished the game. Those were pretty standard sci-fi book endings: bad but with a "hint" of hope, bad but provocative and just bad. Not everything is suppose to have a closure and not always do you get hollywoodesque "happy ending".

I was surprised they did not include "inevitable entropy" ending as well. Reapers win, credits roll, post credits movie shows how 50 000 years later some evolved cow finds Shepards hologram in a dig site on Earth. Everybody's happy.

Thumper17:

For serious, I heard the ending was shit so I just didnt buy the game.

It's not shit. We're not unreasonable folk. We know that one size does not fit all. But if the product doesn't meet expectations of MOST clients, then... ;]

While I was disappointed in the ending of Mass Effect 3, mostly for the whole palette-swap, ABC ending/s thing, I really don't see the point of the sheer amount of complaining and outright demand for a changed ending. First off, it's a game. A bad ending isn't the end of the world itself. Secondly, that was a lot to live up to over three games and it was inevitable that it would disappoint some people. Do I think they could've done better? Yes, I do. Do I feel they could've written a better ending and not had what happened come out of nowhere like it did? Sure. But I'm not going to get my torch and pitchfork over it. Just like I wouldn't do that over a movie whose ending I disliked. Or how I wouldn't make such demands of an author who wrote the ending of their book in a way that I found disappointing.

I know that some people will point out all the claims that were made that the ending/s would deal with all the decisions made throughout the previous two games, but those decisions made in the games were still all written by Bioware's creative team. Everything done in all three games were along the lines set by them. In the end, it's their product and their story. People chose to buy it just as easily as others chose not to.

Now, if they release some alternate stuff or explanations for what happened and a little more closure in DLC, I'm, personally, fine with that, free or (more likely) not. If people want to keep complaining, then there are some pretty simple solutions, I'd think: don't buy the DLC, swear off Bioware's games if you must, and take your copy of Mass Effect 3 to a store and maybe get some money or some credit towards another game you may want to play instead. Why keep dwelling on it? It's not the first disappointing ending in the history of games and it certainly won't be the last, so why expend so much energy in a manner that's hardly constructive?

I shudder to think that if Bioware completely rolls over and retcons the ending because of some outraged, entitled people whining for what they say they want, what does this mean for any narrative-heavy games in the future? If one dares to disappoint, is there going to be another pointless fit thrown by so-called fans of that game for the creators to cater to their own ideas and opinions of what should've happened? If so, then what's the point of putting out any games with quality stories or even endings at all if all people will do is complain about it and behave as though they're owed their own particular outcomes by the game companies? If people want to be disappointed and express it, that's one thing; but to outright demand something be changed because they're disappointed seems ridiculous to me.

Another thing I've seen a lot of lately is how people are saying how Bioware owes them what they want, not because they're 'fans', but because they're 'consumers'. If I buy an item of a specific brand and dislike a detail of it, does that give me the right to try to file complaints and throw a fit about it and demand that the manufacturers bend to my will because I and possibly a small percentage of other people who agree bought the item in the first place? It's a weak argument, this 'consumers-not-fans' argument, at least to me. Either you're a fan of the series because of what you enjoyed about it and deal with the disappointment of a weak ending and move on; or you're merely a consumer who chose to buy a product and you live with being disappointed with your choice because you dislike a feature of it. Neither means that you get to dictate how the creators chose to make it.

I know it's only my opinion and there are certainly enough people who disagree; that's their opinion. Sorry this became such a long post and a bit of a rant, but I felt I needed to throw my two cents in on the matter.

tautologico:

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?

Why do you think all the paid journalists that have to worry about ad revenue voice more valid opinions than thousands of customers? :o

Also, I think if Bioware completely replaced the ending, that would be a precedent. At least for videogames. People keep bringing up Broken Steel - no. Similar, but not the same. Bethesda extended the ending past the original and plugged up a few plot holes.

Wrong. Several games already changed endings, including Fallout. As did other media, including such classics like Sherlock Holmes.

Not to mention that oddly, "Bethesda extended the ending past the original and plugged up a few plot holes." is what many people were originally asking for.

Guess you defeated your own argument there. Good job.

That was actually a good point, Yahtzee. Except that.. you don't actually see any of that in the story-telling in the game.

.. that's kind of the point, isn't it.

zefiris:

Also, I think if Bioware completely replaced the ending, that would be a precedent. At least for videogames. People keep bringing up Broken Steel - no. Similar, but not the same. Bethesda extended the ending past the original and plugged up a few plot holes.

Wrong. Several games already changed endings, including Fallout. As did other media, including such classics like Sherlock Holmes.

Not to mention that oddly, "Bethesda extended the ending past the original and plugged up a few plot holes." is what many people were originally asking for.

Guess you defeated your own argument there. Good job.

Could you list me some examples for changed endings, please? Specific to videogames? I don't profess to have an encyclopedic knowledge of literature, but I don't know of any significant examples remotely comparable to what's going on here, besides Fallout 3.

And if you paraphrased my entire argument properly, you would realise that I theorised that there was a majority of people involved in Retake Mass Effect who want to change the core plot of the ending, which have some subtle differences from that of what Bethesda did.

The main plot of Fallout 3 still ends with the finalization of Project Purity, Broken Steel deals with the ramifications of that. In contrast, there are people who seem to want to remove the concept of the Star Child entirely.

In any case, if people just want to see what the ramifications of the Crucible/Catalyst were, and what happened to characters after the player made that 1/3 choice, fine - I can sympathise with the lack of closure. But there's a difference between extending an ending, and changing the fundamentals of it entirely.

satsugaikaze:

zefiris:

Also, I think if Bioware completely replaced the ending, that would be a precedent. At least for videogames. People keep bringing up Broken Steel - no. Similar, but not the same. Bethesda extended the ending past the original and plugged up a few plot holes.

Wrong. Several games already changed endings, including Fallout. As did other media, including such classics like Sherlock Holmes.

Not to mention that oddly, "Bethesda extended the ending past the original and plugged up a few plot holes." is what many people were originally asking for.

Guess you defeated your own argument there. Good job.

Could you list me some examples for changed endings, please? Specific to videogames? I don't profess to have an encyclopedic knowledge of literature, but I don't know of any significant examples remotely comparable to what's going on here, besides Fallout 3.

IIRC, Hitchhikers Guide' author wrote a really bad, depressing ending because at the time he was depressed. He later got the ending changed (or encouraged fans to do it for him I think, because he died not long after) because he realised he made a mess of things.

I think, I'm not a HGTHG fan I've only heard this second-hand.

Sandytimeman:

Realitycrash:

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

Sorry, are you implying that Moviebob and Yahtzee are not gamers, and you are?
Because if so, I feel a full-blown facepalm coming.

I'm saying there is a difference between someone who plays games and watches movies for a living, than someone who works a standard 9-5 job and plays games for enjoyment and escapism. Yes.

In fact Movie bob has stated there is a difference in several of his articles about how he sees movies different from your average joe because he sees almost every movie that comes out and your regular person sees only one or two a month, at best.

Plus they are involved in the industry I feel they have a bit of stake in things to side mostly with the authors and not with the consumers. Thus the "its the consumers fault for caring about/ being angry about getting a shitty ending" that seems to be cropping up amongst all paid reviewers.

I think it's more of a long view/short view kind of thing.

People who want it changed think the ending sucked and feel cheated, and that BioWare needs to give them the ending they feel they were promised. (short view - thinking only about this one game and how they feel about it)

The people who don't want it to change are thinking about what precedent it will set for the entire industry, one that is still in the developmental stages and finding its feet (long view - thinking about what it means for the burgeoning industry itself. Think the growth of DLC - if fans had refused to buy DLC when games first started, there'd be no DLC happening with nigh every game now. This is also why even people who haven't played the game, like Movie Bob, are chiming in on this side - it's not about this one game for them.)

That's where the big difference lies, I think, and why there won't be agreement between the two sides.

JediMB:
The thing is, here, that the indoctrination theory is just speculation. And if it's true, it instead leaves us with a non-ending where the battle for the Earth and the Citadel isn't over yet. Which leaves us with an incomplete game.

I'd kinda disagree with that - if you see the game as being Shepard's story, then ending when it does makes sense because

Sherlock Holmes. Died at Reichenbach Falls or didn't? Was the sanctity of Sherlock Holmes rendered meaningless by every story after that one?

Also, as others have said, your framing of the problems with the ending ignores most of the very major issues people have with the ending completely independent of the choice/divergence.

satsugaikaze:

Also, I think if Bioware completely replaced the ending, that would be a precedent. At least for videogames. People keep bringing up Broken Steel - no. Similar, but not the same. Bethesda extended the ending past the original and plugged up a few plot holes.

I don't buy that.

"A company changed the ending to their game because the fans pissed and moaned about it."
That's exactly the same precedent, the same response even.

Bethesda was pressured into compromising their (shitty) story for the sake of the fans, and future DLC sales. No matter how you spin this, they caved to the fans' demands and sold out.

So yes, objectively, Bethesda is every bit as guilty here.
The difference lies in the severity of their actions, mostly because the story for Fallout 3 was written by total hacks, whereas in ME3, well, the writing and characters were the best parts of that series.

With a greater loss of investment comes a greater bias, which seems to be the sole discriminator here. Yet logic has no place for bias. Nobody cared about FO3's terrible story, so nothing was really lost by changing it. But precedent remains the same.

Sirevien:

I was surprised they did not include "inevitable entropy" ending as well. Reapers win, credits roll, post credits movie shows how 50 000 years later some evolved cow finds Shepards hologram in a dig site on Earth. Everybody's happy.

Exactly! Why wasn't this included? It would have been great.

MiracleOfSound:

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

Indeed.

-image-

This my good sir. Is amazing.

Because it would set a horrible precedent if they're serious about actually changing the ending in line with some kind of democratically agreed upon alternative, rather than merely expanding or adding to it. I'm not as incensed about this concept as Moviebob has been on Twitter lately, but I can definitely say it's a bad idea. Because if it's established that the creators of a story can be pressured by constant browbeating by the audience, then the sanctity of the creator's original intention is made meaningless.

2 things, Yahtzee.

1. I can't believe you're going with the "horrible precedent" bullshit when Bethesda changed the ending of Fallout 3 due to popular outcry and backlash and proceeded to deliver one of the most awesome DLCs ever(Broken Steel).

2. The creator's original intention doesn't mean shit when said intention completely puts off their customers and leaves them(at least the vast, vast majority of them) completely dissatisfied with the product created AND leaves those same customers disenchanted with their product.

Because, I won't lie, I was a HUGE Bioware fanboy until I beat ME3. ME1 restored my faith in their original IPs, and I enjoyed DAO and liked DA2. Now, well, unless Bioware does something to mend their broken bridges, I'm done with them. I mean, I might shell out the cash for DA3, but that's a BIG maybe and it's only because the DA series still has some cred with me. Mass Effect's credibility was completely and utterly destroyed by the ending, which sucks because I thought it was the best original IP of this generation, just ahead of Assassin's Creed.

PiCroft:

IIRC, Hitchhikers Guide' author wrote a really bad, depressing ending because at the time he was depressed. He later got the ending changed (or encouraged fans to do it for him I think, because he died not long after) because he realised he made a mess of things.

I think, I'm not a HGTHG fan I've only heard this second-hand.

..Douglas Adams wrote a lot of the scripts for the radio play three minutes before deadline, and so on. So they were rewritten and done over again, compiled differently, and so on when it turned into a book.

But the "depressive ending" was never a bad ending, and it made perfect sense in the way it was written. If you watch the movie, they're going with that ending, except they're skipping over the entire road to get there. And then making it happy, for a moment, because they're not telling the story. So, not particularly impressive either, even if it was an ending that slightly crossed the source material, I guess..

I doubt very much that Douglas Adams rewrote the ending right before he died to placate "fans". If he did, he must have had a terrible attack of something.

But.. that's completely beside the point, isn't it. The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy had enough content in the ending to actually get a picture of what happened. You could like it or dislike it for various reasons.

But it wasn't a "if he had written something like this... then it would have been a good ending" discussion. It was about what was written there in the first place.

Bioware missed that with ME3, since there wasn't any ending or plot there at all. Not from what they described to the viewer/player, anyway.

PiCroft:
IIRC, Hitchhikers Guide' author wrote a really bad, depressing ending because at the time he was depressed. He later got the ending changed (or encouraged fans to do it for him I think, because he died not long after) because he realised he made a mess of things.

I think, I'm not a HGTHG fan I've only heard this second-hand.

I was under the impression that the whole deal was a posthumous work which was penned by someone else under his approval, but I suppose that's still valid.

Again, though, I'm kind of looking for examples specific to videogames.

Atmos Duality:
I don't buy that.

"A company changed the ending to their game because the fans pissed and moaned about it."
That's exactly the same precedent, the same response even.

Bethesda was pressured into compromising their (shitty) story for the sake of the fans, and future DLC sales. No matter how you spin this, they caved to the fans' demands and sold out.

It's still technically a precedent, because while the contexts are similar they're by no means identical. The main difference, however, would lie in the end outcome - the extent and severity of the response (in this case, a comparatively more drastic fundamental change in the writing) would set a precedent, and as Yahtzee hinted at, could create future, more extreme situations. Also, "guilt" is a word which I'm not sure we would be using objectively. =P

I personally think retconning the Lone Wanderer's sacrifice detracted from the significance of the event, but that might be a matter for a different topic.

I haven't got a problem with the ending. Thought is was pretty good. The only thing I don't like is the mass relays being destroyed. You can't continue the mass effect universe now unless you set it generations into the future. Why couldn't they realign instead? Civilisation would have to explore the galaxy all over again, that's jolly.
Picked synthesis.

You know what I just thought of? National Lampoon's Vacation. As random as it sounds, it had a similar situation. The test screen audiences were laughing all the way through the movie, then came the ending. The Griswolds didn't go into Walley World and instead went to Roy Walley's house and held the people there hostage and made them do a song and dance. All the build up to Walley World, all the tension that the family went through, amounted to nothing. It didn't make sense and the audience wasn't laughing anymore. Rather than release what they had, the film makers went back to work to film a new ending at Walley World and inserted John Candy into it. It made the movie a million times better. See what happened there?

nipsen:
[snip]

satsugaikaze:
[snip]

Yeah pretty sure I mashed the shit out of that HGTHG ending stuff, as I said it was second hand-info.

Probably should have looked into it more before opening my trap vimagev

Fox242:
You know what I just thought of? National Lampoon's Vacation. As random as it sounds, it had a similar situation. The test screen audiences were laughing all the way through the movie, then came the ending. The Griswolds didn't go into Walley World and instead went to Roy Walley's house and held the people there hostage and made them do a song and dance. All the build up to Walley World, all the tension that the family went through, amounted to nothing. It didn't make sense and the audience wasn't laughing anymore. Rather than release what they had, the film makers went back to work to film a new ending at Walley World and inserted John Candy into it. It made the movie a million times better. See what happened there?

Yes exactly!
Test screenings have changed films all the time due to "pressure" from their audiences.
But what do us the meek consumers know that the mighty producers/critics dont?

I disagree with the idea that a work of art can't be modified after it's release (by either the creators or the fans) and I disagree with the idea that a story HAS to have a single "official" ending.

And by the by, movie test-screenings are more akin to gamers involved in closed-beta testing.

Post-release changes are far more awkward. Studios sure as heck don't tend to change an ending and release it theatrically a few months after it hits the big screens. The only thing I can think of off the top of my head was that DVD release of I Am Legend (the meh Will Smith version) that had a "CONTROVERSIAL NEW ENDING" (read: lulz)

PiCroft:
Yeah pretty sure I mashed the shit out of that HGTHG ending stuff, as I said it was second hand-info.

Probably should have looked into it more before opening my trap vimagev

No harm, no foul, mate. =)

GartarkMusik:

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.

But would Wrex be able to stop them? What if a majority of the krogan want revenge for the Genophage? Wrex may be a respected leader, but he's just one krogan. If they all want blood, he may not be able to stop it happening. And let's not even get started if Wrex didn't survive and Wreav took over.........

Well, I'm pretty sure you haven't played Mass Effect 3 yet. But the game goes out of its way to make it clear that Wrex and Eve (the krogan female whose tissue was used to cure the genophage) cause a cultural paradigm shift in the krogan. Furthermore, they pretty much explain that the unintended consequence of the genophage was 1400 years of nihilism and hopelessness for the Krogan. An end to the genophage means that krogan have a tomorrow to fight for and will actually focus on rebuilding their culture again rather than fighting as hired muscle.

I could never bring myself to pull the trigger on Wrex, but from what I've read, Wreav's violent tendencies are kept in check by Eve's influence. But if Eve and Wrex are dead, then you're right. There would be no culture shift and then history would repeat itself.

But that's the problem with the ending and why everyone hates it. All of that diversity of choice is completely meaningless. The game couldn't be bothered to tell you what happens on Tunchanka after the Reaper invasion. Or anywhere else. So long as you get your 2800 Effective Military Strength in whatever way you deem fit, you have your three endings carved in stone.

PiCroft:

Yeah pretty sure I mashed the shit out of that HGTHG ending stuff, as I said it was second hand-info.

Adams had intended a new HHGTTG book before he died. He died before its completion, and he had initially started writing a Dirk Gently book, "The Salmon of Doubt." He said he might even keep the title. There's a release of the partially written book.

The third-party book referenced, "and another thing," was written with the blessing of Adams' wife and evidently using Adams' own notes. Who released it, however, seems less important than the fact that Adams had intended a new book after the ending.

Just to clear the air, and you may not give a damn at all, but there it is.

satsugaikaze:
The main difference, however, would lie in the end outcome - the extent and severity of the response (in this case, a comparatively more drastic fundamental change in the writing) would set a precedent...

The magnitude of a precedent has no bearing on the establishment of the conditions that lead to it. Murder would still be murder whether you killed one person or a thousand.

The impact of a thousand deaths would have more impact for sure, but the precedent for murder could have been established with EITHER event.

Since Bethesda's Broken Steel came first, chronologically, it established the precedent, even if nobody bothered to pay much attention to it.

I really hope that Bioware does not change the ending. Maybe just an epilogue about the squadmates and races, I'd be fine with that. This whole mess about how gamers reacted to the ending is shameful.

It is not without precedent. The earliest form of storytelling, telling a story orally, were varied with each retelling and popular changes would stick and less popular plot elements fell by the wayside. Even operas would commonly be modified by composers throughout their life, and surely some of those changes had to be in response to feedback from others. Purists should back off and let the process unfold as it does.

I'm. Just saying, a good story is not an artist unleashing his or her creative freedom in a vacuum, but a reverie between audience and storyteller

You know what? I no longer care whether the ending should be changed or not. Normally I'd try and clarify to people why the endings should be at least altered, but SO MANY GODAMNED PEOPLE are just shouting the 'artistic integrity' 'it's their story' 'get over it' retorts that I've just given up. I'm just going to sit back in happiness of knowing that with this much negative PR, Bioware won't be seeing the sunlight anytime soon. Serves them right for dishing out that pile of tripe they call an ending...

MiracleOfSound:

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

Indeed.

image

>demeaned me an age ago for having the audacity to think BioWare are going to fuck ME3 up in some way

I have been vindicated.

VINDICATED.

BOW TO ME ESCAPIST.

VINDICATED.

image

Since Yathzee doesnt get that the endings contradict what the developers said about what WE the gamers would get i will just let Gunther Hermann from Deus Ex sums it up:

"THEY TALD ME I WOLL GET ORANGE ENDING BUT IT GAIFF ME LEMON LIME ENDING!!"

CosmicCommander:

>demeaned me an age ago for having the audacity to think BioWare are going to fuck ME3 up in some way

I have been vindicated.

VINDICATED.

BOW TO ME ESCAPIST.

VINDICATED.

Lol I don't recall this but if true then yeah, you win :D

Little Duck:

MiracleOfSound:

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

Your words brought the image into my head, all I had to do was post it :D

Indeed.

-image-

This my good sir. Is amazing.

Your words put the image in my head, all I had to do was post it :D

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 . . . 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