Human Revolution's ending and why gamers are looking inconsistent.

[ToastiestZombie]

As you all know, everyone and their dog has been complaining, whining or all out attacking EA/Bioware over the Mass Effect 3 ending. I agree, it wasn't as good as I hoped and I hope the FREE DLC fixes that by telling us what the hell happens to everyone.
What I'm a bit concerned about is the fact that everyone is complaining about ME3's ending because of it's plot holes, Deus Ex Machina ending and lack of choices affecting the ending. But, nobody at all made even close to a fuss about the ending of another big entry to a well loved franchise. I'm obviously talking about the ending to Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Spoilers below so be warned.
The ending to Human Revolution was basically: you choose between wiping out augments, keeping augments or controlling augments or letting humanity do it's stuff. You come to a room with a Deus Ex machina style 4 buttons, and you press one. You then are shown a cutscene of crappy stock footage showing NOTHING about what actually happens to anyone after the events and nothing about what happens to anyone on the oil rig, or anyone with augments, or anyone at Sarif industries or most importantly, what happens to Adam Jensen. The only ending that gives any hint at what happens is the one where you destroy and kill everyone at the oil rig you are on. But even then there is still thousands of people with augments who we have no idea anything that happens to them.
Basically what I'm saying is that the Human Revolution ending was crap, it has all the same problems as the ME3 ending, massive plot holes, a Deus Ex machina pick your ending style of ending and a few more. Yet noone whined and moaned at Eidos Montreal to make an "Extended Cut DLC" or change the ending. This fact just makes me think that gamers are people who like to pick their own battles, say they are fighting against bad art and then not bother with another ending that was terrible because well, it wasn't the ending of a trilogy. If gamers really wanted to have the integrity they deserve then you must stop picking your battles to what best suits you, there's been countless endings that have been crap, not just the HR ending. Yet none of them caused such a stir.
So Escapist what do you think of all this, is the HR ending good in your eyes, are gamers really being inconsistent and why the hell didn't anyone complain about this ending.

 

[DeManix]

The Human Revolution ending isn't good, but it's still better than ME3's. HR's ending choices, while a bit of a cop out ending-wise, are all well built up and represent the arguements of the game's 3 corperate leaders and their ideas for humanity. The story of the game allows the player to make up their own mind about who is correct by seeing many different sides to life with augmentations. In the final level those 3 characters make their cases for their ending to Jensen who can ultimately decide what happens. I spent much longer deciding the ending to HR than ME because the choice was actually based on what you had felt over the course of the game.

Meanwhile in Mass Effect, the ending choices are pretty much pulled from nothing and have nothing to do with what has happened over the course of the game and the series. Also, ME has always been about the choices the player makes and their impact on the galaxy and the characters the player meets with. None of that mattered in ME's ending and people are understandably pissed off because of that.

I can see why you compare the 2 game's endings and I don't like that sort of ending either, but HR managed to cover for the cop out ending by making the choices actually matter, while it seems ME's final choice really makes no difference and doesn't tie into the rest of the series in any way. I could be completely wrong, but that's my opinion.

 

[Moth_Monk]

But, nobody at all made even close to a fuss about the ending of another big entry to a well loved franchise. I'm obviously talking about the ending to Deus Ex: Human Revolution. Spoilers below so be warned.

Perhaps I'm just a minority here but I thought the endings to Human Revolution were amazing, philosophical and thought provoking. In my opinion the world of Deus Ex: HR was not about seeing how your choices affected the world, it was simply exploring the ethics of trans-humanism through the eyes of a badass! I always thought that in traditional Sci-fi the idea was to take a concept, usually philosophical, and explore it with the Sci-fi setting as the "background." Human Revolution does this perfectly.

This contrasts to Mass Effect which is all about the idea that your character's (usually moral) choices radically affect the world around you and so allow each player to experience their own narrative. The complaint with Mass Effect's conclusion is that the choice the player makes stop affecting the narrative once you reach the ending - or if they do, in a minimal trivial way so that each player gets the same ending.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

the endings in the deus ex games are always forshadowed you get to see all the different sides up to the end where you make your choice.. mass effects ending on the other hand there is no forshadowing, the ending comes out of left field, and for a series that prides itself on choice you cant even point out the flaws in the AI's logic.. um geth and quarians fighting side by side.

HR's ending fit the story. ME3's was full of plot holes. plus lifting the ending to deus ex and adding it to ME3.. yeah didnt work so crash hot

Actually I do agree with this. I reckon that if ME3 had some foreshadowing to what would happen in each of the choices. Say have a character that's a synthetic/human and maybe showing if their life has improved or not would of given reason to pick that one.

 

[SoMuchSpace]

DE:HR's ending were justified.that's the big difference.After talking to Sarif, Darrow and Taggart, you have to really decide which choice you're gonna make.And since it was a prequel, i already knew the choices couldn't have played out in the end.But Eidos Montreal atleast had the decency to put in a monologue in every ending, wholly justifying each ending.ME3 had an ending which was completely non justified, and felt very forced.Frankly, it was utter bullcrap.No explanation, nothing.Which is why not many gamers are upset over its ending, because ME3 toppled that.

 

[GiantRaven]

Human Revolution isn't built on making a variety of story choices throughout the game, Mass Effect (3 or the entire series) is. That is the crucial difference.

edit: Also Human Revolution can live without the closure you feel it needs because it's a prequel. If you want closure, play the first Deus Ex game.

 

[Rawne1980]

Because Human Revolution wasn't the end of a trilogy.

Being a prequel gives it a break.

You can't just end a trilogy without actually ending it.

 

[Walkchalk]

Human Revolution never really had any choices throughout the game though. Yes there were plenty of ways to approach things, and there were extra objectives you could choose to do, but your choices never had a direct effect on the overall storyline.

Mass Effect, on the other hand, embraced choices, allowed you to have a hand in shaping the universe, then took all of that away at the end. That's why it works for Human Revolution, but is revolting is Mass Effect.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well I was quite vocal on the all around cheap design in Human Revolution, but the rosy goggles everyone wore were quite thick so it never came through.

But with EA was putting people on the fence before ME3 even came out so they had a 50/50 split of hate and support from the start.
However the ending in ME3 isn't just cheap it is downright contradictory to the entire series, I'm willing to bet it wasn't done by the same team as the rest of the game.

And most importantly, another game being shit does not make the one you like any better, I'm sure you would want it to be so but it plainly isn't.

 

[Raven's Nest]

I feel my opinion has already been demonstrated fully.

Crucially, the story of Deus Ex:HR leads you up to a point where you are very likely to be given the power to choose A, B or C. One of the main characters was a mass media program whose sole purpose was to control the flow of information to the world for God's sake. It makes perfect sense to the story. Jenson stumbles through the story, linking together the clues which lead him to witness the two opposing arguments. Your experience as a human, as a player is meant to give you all the sides of the story you need to judge the situation for yourself. Through the use of your avatar, Jenson, you are empowered to choose which truth is the one the people need to hear.

I can't think of a more interesting way to end a game than to philosophically break the fourth wall and ask the player "Well what do you think?".

Mass Effect kind of attempted the same thing but fails because of the execution. The choices felt a little too (okay almost completely) similar. At least the context was there staring in Shepards face. No-one believed him in the first game, he is forced to team up with the bad guy in the second one because no-one will help him. By the third game, not only is he witnessing the destruction of the homeworlds of the galaxy's most prominent and powerful species, but he actually suffering nightmares and feeling the strain of accepting there is probably no chance of stopping it.

As much of a raw deal the endings felt, in a way, it was inevitable. Its a matter of some consulation that the star-brat even offered a chance of ending the cycle. That is what shepard set out to achieve. The price was his cycle's civilisation...

Considering the main theme of the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, shepard sacrificed the few when you think about the sheer number of cycles that came before, and the sheer number of species that will thrive in peace for countless millennia to come.

Hopefully, the DLC will reflect the magnitude of this sacrifice appropriately.

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

I only played DE:hr could someone spoil how the end affects the first DE? How are these titles tied together?

From what i heard (and seen, yup spoiled it for me)about ME3 the endings of DE:hr make more sense.

 

[mad825]

why DX:HR did get as much heat:

1.It's a prequel
2. it loosely connects to DX1 and DX2 (borderline reboot)
3.Nobody was expecting an "epic" story from Eidos
4.It was streamlined (the industry has all grown-up)
5.It wasn't as popular
6.It was many people's first DX.
7.there were 4 not 3 endings
8.there were no choices that could've impacted the ending
9. the endings were different as opposed to a change of colour.
10. there was a lower production budget.

...I think that's about just it.

Edit: OP, I'm not going to read that wall.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

I can't believe you're comparing the two.

I can say it's as simple as: Mass Effect 3 was the end of a series that had been going on for the last 5 years. Many people put hundreds of hours (and thousands of galaxies! or was it the other way around?) into the Mass Effect games. While the time we put into anything else like Fallout 3, Bioshock, DE:HR and anything recent pales in comparison to the time we put into ME. That's the difference.

 

[Cranky]

Yep, although the HR endings were rather abysmal, the game was less an RPG with many choices than a stealth gane with many options. So, no good comparing it with the ME Trilogy.

 

[Xenomortis]

Human Revolution's means of ending *was* criticised; it was just overshadowed by the mountain of hate regarding the hilariously out of place boss fights.

I'm not sure the two things are really comparable, however I've not actually played ME3.

 

[daveman247]

I only played DE:hr could someone spoil how the end affects the first DE? How are these titles tied together?

From what i heard (and seen, yup spoiled it for me)about ME3 the endings of DE:hr make more sense.

Well, what happens is already decided. The ending to deus ex HR only affects what the people think. This does not matter because its still the illuminati who are in control behind the scenes.

There is one last cutscene after the credits where bob page (who works for the illuminati) says: "There nothing we can't manage, given time"

It is this organisation that REALLY shapes the world and makes it into deus ex 1

 

[Woodsey]

And for the 500th time:

Human Revolution's ending is inelegant. It still conveys the message that is perfectly thematically in-tune with the rest of the game.

In Mass Effect, the onus is always on the consequence of your actions. In Human Revolution, the onus is on what you believe, you personal philosophy; the game is a debate, the ending is your final judgement (there's even an 'abstain' option).

What happens after is irrelevant, we know what happens: what's important is what you've taken from the debate the game has presented to you, and your justifications for it.

It is also takes the question of Jensen's humanity further. Earlier in the game there's underlying questions about his physical enhancements making him more or less human; in the ending, this extends to the power he holds to potentially decide the fate of humanity. (So again, it's thematically and narratively cohesive.)

Funnily enough, I don't particularly hate ME3's ending, although I can see why people do. But people have started to make this comparison, and all they're doing is showing they don't understand (as they did when the game came out) the narrative purpose of the ending. As I've said, the difference is that the focus in Mass Effect has always been the consequences of your choices, and people feel the ending didn't satisfy that.

Again, it is inelegant. It is not a bad ending. In fact, I'd say it's a very good ending.

Apparently a 'satisfying' ending for gamers is one that covers every minute detail and ignores the point of the whole game.

 

[Irridium]

And for the 500th time:

Human Revolution's ending is inelegant. It still conveys the message that is perfectly thematically in-tune with the rest of the game.

In Mass Effect, the onus is always on the consequence of your actions. In Human Revolution, the onus is on what you believe, you personal philosophy; the game is a debate, the ending is your final judgement (there's even an 'abstain' option).

What happens after is irrelevant, we know what happens: what's important is what you've taken from the debate the game has presented to you, and your justifications for it.

Funnily enough, I don't particularly hate ME3's ending. But people have started to make this comparison, and all they're doing is showing they don't understand (as they did when they came out) the narrative purpose of the ending.

Again, it is inelegant. It is not a bad ending. In fact, I'd say it's a very good ending.

Apparently a 'satisfying' ending for gamers is one that covers every minute detail and ignores the point of the whole game.

Plus, I'd be willing to bet that final choice will have an impact on the game's sequel, if there is one. After all, Human Revolution was one of the very few games that actually made Square Enix money, so it'd make sense for them to make a sequel.

Plus, they did a game with "JC", and a prequel with "Adam". I predict the next game will star a female named "Eve". Or, if they had balls, a man named "Steve".