I apologize for the long time it took me to respond to people. I enjoyed reading the majority of these posts and I wanted to simply wait to respond to everyone at once. I did indeed read every post. My goal was to get this done before Friday when Bioware announces that the Indoctrination theory is correct at the PAX panel. A common theme that came up though was you dislike that I said I have a degree in literature. If you were somehow insulted by this take solace in the fact it cost me $100,000 and still couldn?t get me a job.
Hal10k: I would say 20% max of our interactions with the Geth have been positive, considering they were an enemy in all of ME1, and most of ME2, it isn?t until ME3 that you become super friends. I?ll ignore all that though, because I understand according to the narrative these were all reaper controlled Geth you were fighting. However, we do know form the history Bioware created that the Quarians and Geth have been at war for hundreds of years. I think this pretty much shows synthetic/organic relations are problematic. We also find out in ME3 that the Prothean empire also warred with their own synthetics that they created. So I would hardly say that Synthetic/Organic relations have been going well. If you also believe the reapers theory then this has been happening every single cycle, now if you feel the reapers are lying then yea it might be more difficult to believe. I also don?t believe that finding out a VI controls all reapers is some crazy plothole that makes no sense. Someone must control them, why not a VI. I certainly agree though Bioware should have introduced the idea much earlier and paced it better. I believe this was due to a rush in production.
UnusualStranger: I certainly agree with your first point. I wish Bioware could have told a story where the ending fits all characters imaginable and hopefully someday this will be possible in gaming. I guess my argument would be that I feel it?s clear in the third game Bioware plays a much stronger rule in deciding what the narrative is then in the other games and attempts to force your character to be a certain way which might indeed go completely against how you perceive your own character. However, I would say the ending that results from this is in line with the themes Bioware is attempting to portray in their game. I feel that ?story frustration? will be unavoidable for some people even if Bioware had did the best job possible.
I cannot agree with your second point. Yes Shepard does succeed in the other games, but I feel that is mainly because he is the main character and Bioware wanted a trilogy. So instead they cause other people in the story to be sacrificed instead. If anything I would say it?s sacrifice with hope, I certainly don?t believe Bioware is saying everything is hopeless. Kaiden/Ashley died, but their actions created hope for the future, Mordin died but he created hope for the Krogan, Shepard died you saved the galaxy.
I also agree with your third point in so far as you say that Bioware should have given better closure and this idea that they can constantly make DLC is terrifying (although I will add that at the end of LOTR you actually have to buy the Similarion to find out literally everything that happened in the end). I don?t feel this is a bad ending though, I guess mainly because I enjoy trying to analyze things. One of my favorite books of all time is John Fowles ?The Magus? which might be the most famous literary work of all time to have such a jarring ending. It just basically ends on a cliff hanger and your only option is to analyze everything that happened in the book to decide what this ending means for the characters. I consider this the greatest ending in literary history. If you read ?The Magus? you can probably understand why I love ME3, although I know a lot of people despise ?The Magus? as well.
Agayek: I would certainly agree that a theme of the series is defiance of fate and fight against inevitability. In ME 1 the reapers themselves pretty much say, we are inevitability now fight us. However, in ME 3 the narrative basically concludes by saying you can only beat us if you sacrifice yourself. Therefore I feel sacrifice is a more important theme to discuss. You are certainly defying inevitability by dying, because your sacrifice does what no other species in the millions of years of the reapers inevitability has been able to do. I guess I feel your disconnect is that Shepard needs to live in order to defy inevitability, while personally I believe he has defied inevitability with his death.
Secondly, yes I completely agree another theme in the series is diversity combining physical, sexual, and cultural diversity. However, In my view synthesis doesn?t disregard this. I don?t see how synthesis would wipe out cultural diversity, all these cultures still exist. In my opinion it would be like saying everyone is organic and therefore not diverse. As far as I can tell from the synthesis ending everyone also still looks physically and sexually different and this hasn?t changed either. I guess bioware should have explained what they meant by synthesis better, but my understanding of it is all species will be made up of synthetic and organic parts, but that doesn?t mean they all share one mind or they all now think alike.
The final point you make about the Catalyst saying the cycle is inescapable is true, if you pick the destruction ending. If you pick Synthesis the Catalyst doesn?t know if the cycle will repeat itself. I also feel the control ending gets at this as well. If you believe in free will and you avoid destruction, since that kills the Geth and proves the Catalyst point, then you can probably believe that if you control them the galaxy has a shot at not repeating the cycle.
Neonsilver: First of all, what I?m saying is that if you hated the ending solely because Shepard died then you missed the concept of sacrifice that runs throughout the narrative. I am not saying this is the only reason people hated the ending. However, you are wrong if you think people didn?t hate the ending because of this. When it comes to private blogs/articles then yes you are correct, very few of these people hated the ending because Shepard dies. But, if you read forums there are tons of posts from people saying this is exactly why they hated the ending.
Seanfall: After the mission on Rannoch you fight a reaper, it takes the entire Quarian fleet syncing their weapons with the Normandy?s targeting to destroy 1 reaper. The Reapers have constantly exterminated civilizations before, I literally cannot imagine that in the million years they have successfully been doing this no race has attempt to do what Shepard has done. However, let us say you are correct and this literally is the first time the Reapers have had to fight the combined fleets of a united galaxy. First, they slaughtered the entire Earth fleet in the opening of the game, they then crushed a large portion of the Turian fleet, even with Krogan support you speak to Garrus and learn that the Reapers will soon win and therefore they have ordered all ships to retreat. Then you have Admiral Hackett telling you pretty much in every conversation that even with a massive fleet you are going to lose. Finally, when you get to Earth at the end you learn the Reapers have massacred your entire ground force, and I believe what they say is that only 50% of your ground forces make it to the ground (I apologize I can?t remember, but it?s a low number and my friend who just won assures me it?s 50%). I guess I could be insanely wrong, but unless you are correct and Bioware has no idea what they are doing, then I can only assume they constantly tell you this so that when you get to the end you believe these are your only options because anything else will end in the death of everyone.
Chinangel: The game is about sacrifice. The fact you can?t personally choose whether you sacrifice yourself or not doesn?t matter. You are confusing the game mechanic of player choice with the actual narrative. Bioware has written that Shepard is willing to sacrifice themselves and in the end does. Simply because I am never given the choice to be like screw this bs Joker plot a course for the Andromeda Galaxy we are out of here and I?ll just live with all my friends on the Normandy does not change the fact the game is about sacrifice. Yes in Dragon Age Origins you are given a moral choice that decides this outcome, but in ME 3 you are instead told you don?t get the choice this is simply who your Shepard is. Now obviously people are upset that their character that they created wouldn?t do this, however that doesn?t change the actual narrative Bioware wrote for this game. The fact everyone else sacrificed themselves to get Shepard to this point does not somehow negate Shepards sacrifice to give the deathblow to the Reapers.
To say the hero hasn?t overcome great odds is even more ridiculous. No matter what ending you picked, you defeated the Reapers. An evil that has plagued the galaxy for millions of years. Literally, even if all your friends die and galactic civilization collapses you have accomplished what no one in the history of the universe has ever been able to do. I can only assume you are trolling me about the Bioshock ending being good, because most people despise it.
Vuljatar: Transhumanism is a huge theme in this series. In ME1 you have people being turned into husks. At the end of ME1 Saren is merged with massive amounts of Reaper tech. At the start of ME2 Shepard is fitted with synthetic tech to bring you back to life, not to mention again that you are fighting people that are being combined with Reaper tech. The final battle in ME2 is a huma/reaper hybrid. Also the biotics are people merged with technology to amplify their biotic powers. The synthesis ending is not surprising at all. You are correct that control of the Reapers is constantly said to be bad, however until the last scene you didn?t know the crucible can give you this power and just assumed control meant physically controlling them and basically having them as your own personal army. I do not feel this is what happens at the control ending at all. However, let?s say you are right, then it is indeed a gamble to try this so you should pick synthesis, which as I just explained makes perfect sense. I did indeed read that article you linked, my answers to other people?s questions deals with most of those questions as does my overall analysis. The only thing I cannot explain is the Normandy randomly flying away.
VivaciousDeimos: First I want to thank you for sharing that link (http://jmstevenson.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/) I think that may be my favorite article I have ever read on ME3 and the ME series in general. I would highly recommend everyone read this writers insight into the game. That being said I don?t agree with his analysis. If I was to defend his analysis I think the only way to do so would be to say the entirety of ME1 is the Call to Adventure, ME2 would then be the Time of Trials, ME3 would then be the Resurrection/Return with the Elixir phase. He instead broke each game into it?s own Hero?s Journey, which certainly is possible to say, but I think examining the whole series is the stronger argument.
However, while he does indeed note the structure of a hero?s journey he most like purposely ignores many of the other aspects (I say purposely, because I think it?s extremely clear he does know exactly what he is talking about). Mainly the Call to Adventure can?t be about an already established hero, that?s kind of the point of the Hero?s journey. The journey of self-discovery, over coming adversity, eventually becoming a hero. If Shepard was just starting in the Alliance Navy then you could do that, but Shepard is already too much of a hero for this to work, at least in my view (off the top of my head I can think of no story that uses this narrative structure where the hero is already an actual hero. The closest I can think of is the Odyssey, but that basically starts off by knocking the hero down to normal standards. I guess you could argue that the Reapers are such an overwhelming threat that Shepard after Eden Prime is so far knocked down in his view of the galaxy and himself that the story is basically his recreation into this even greater Hero). Despite, this fact I will agree that you could say a hero?s journey is a narrative theme in this work. But, I would certainly not suggest it as the main theme of the story as the Hero?s Journey is more about narrative structure.
I also disagree with the writers post that Shepard using the crucible and sacrificing themselves does not complete the final phase of the Hero?s Journey narrative. The Crucible is the elixir phase and Shepard uses it. Final point, even if we all agree that the main theme/narrative is the concept of the Hero?s Journey then this ending is appropriate, because nothing in this theme means the hero should or will survive, the poster even suggest that Shepard should die in the end.
Jshrike: If you actually had a degree in literature or film studies you would understand that while endings are certainly important, it is faulty logic to conclude a work is a failure because part of the ending is bad. The Cantebury Tales is considered one of the greatest literary works and it does not even have an ending. Blade Runner had a terrible original ending and no one went around saying that film is a failure, same thing with Great Expectations. I don?t even think the cutscene in itself is bad, I think it?s bad because Bioware should have put more into it, but nothing that occurs in that cutscene bothers me, except the Normandy flying away. I said let?s not focus on the cutscene, because I feel there is nothing to even focus on, it is generic as far as analysis goes. What am I going to analyze in the cutscene, the mass relays exploding? The meat of the ending is all in that part before it, which is why I focus my analysis on that.
I also honestly believe that Shepard being alive if you have enough war assets at the end is quite frankly Bioware just throwing people a bone, which is why it requires such a high war asset rating. I seriously doubt anyone at Bioware considered that the ending. Also in regards to destruction, you are proving the Reapers right, because you have other options to defeat them and not kill the Geth. How about control ending and then fly all reapers into a sun, problem solved.
Dwarfman, Reet72, The Forces of Chaos: I wish Bioware did pay me. Then I wouldn?t be sitting around with this useless degree in literature.
Vrach: This guy basically says what all my answers are to the supposed plot holes, so I?m not going to go through it again. If you disagreed with his post you?d disagree with mine.
Kasurami: First point, yea I certainly can see this. Bioware definitely should have done a better job of making it feel more impactful, it does indeed feel like Shepard is just giving up. However, they did get hit by a giant ass laser beam so I?ll cut them some slack if they weren?t at their strongest. I too would have preferred some more emotion from Shepard when told these are the only options.
Second point, I do actually know what Entropy means. However, it was very stupid of me to try and combine the myriad of things I tried to discuss under this theme as Entropy. I knew I wanted to discuss the idea of the Reapers having this Order v. Chaos thing going on. Where they believe the universe will always end in chaos and they are trying to bring order to it by creating this cycle that stops the chaos, and then combining this thought with the concept of the inescapable cycles repeating themselves. I really like the word Entropy and thought close enough, even though I knew if you really understood the definition of Entropy what I?m talking about doesn?t quite match up. Obviously, you still understood the idea I was trying to convey, so thank you for still analyzing it anyway. That being said I do agree that a theme is breaking the cycle, for the reasons you said. I would disagree that the endings ignore this idea though. Control ending might or might not continue the cycle. Synthesis I believe breaks the cycle. Destruction I believe goes back to the entropy concept that you broke the reaper cycle, but because of it this inescapable chaos the reapers were trying to stop is now going to occur.
Third point, I find Shepard?s death to be heroic. The entire weight of the galaxy is on your shoulders and these are your options and none of them are the options you want. Shepard does what must be done and ends the war no matter what option you pick. I find this to be heroic. Also, while it is true that happy endings of course can be just as mature as depressing endings I cannot imagine any happy ending for this game that would be a mature ending. I have read a variety of ?fan? endings which are happy and I find all childish. If by happy you mean full of hope instead of happy in the sense everyone lives, then yes I can actually see a mature happy ending for this game. In your conclusion part I also agree with everything you said, except for the Mass Relay part. We know life survived due to the very end of the cutscene, therefore the Mass Relay?s must have blown up in such a way that didn?t wipe out entire star clusters. Also your point about Great Expectations I assume was gotten from the Wikipedia article instead of from reading actual literary criticism or having professors discuss it. Yes, according to Wikipedia critics now like the revised ending. I have never had a professor that put forth this view, nor would I agree with it. This might be because the professor I had was a big fan of the writers who were also fans of the original ending. However, everyone I knew always read Great Expectations with the original ending, they were my classmates though, so maybe you read it with the revised ending.
Izzy1320: I agree with everything you say, I would just clarify the one point that the reason I don?t care much about the cutscene is I don?t find anything wrong with it except the Normandy randomly flying off. I wasn?t ignoring it in the sense that I don?t consider it part of the ending, it is certainly part of the ending.
Joccaren: First Point, I certainly agree and see the problem here. The narrative of ME3 definitely strong arms Shepard into certain actions, and attempts to evoking certain feelings that could very much go against the character the player creates. In this sense it is very possible for this entire story to break down, because nothing that occurs would make any sense for your particular Shepard. I?m also not sure if Bioware could have done anything to fix that though...
Second point, I would certainly agree that free will is a very important theme in the series. The only thing I would say here is that in the end the narrative Bioware has created the concept seems to be that Shepard has as much free will to the extent that the AI/Catalyst allows them. Due to this, to analyze the endings given, I don?t think examining the theme of free will is helpful (unless I was arguing that the ending is bad).
Third Point, I have responded to the Hero?s journey theme from another poster, although you also worded it well the other guy beat you to it. As for Sacrifice, I certainly feel Bioware could have made a better reason for Shepard to sacrifice themselves. However, the way I see it is, for control Shepard merges with the Reapers and hence the organic form is destroyed. For the destroy ending, they said it was because you have synthetic parts, for synthesis I wasn?t thinking so much of DNA as Shepard?s human mind being what was required for synthesis.
I answered your fourth point in another post. I also feel I answered your final point in the same way as point 1. Indeed the fact that bioware wasn?t able to adapt the game for everyone is a problem. I did read all your links and see the video as well though.
that guy with the yellow head. He's actually from a DLC from ME1 which if you have a PS3 or just didn't buy it you probably wouldn't know who he is. Can't blame ya. He takes over a huge asteroid and tries to destroy the planet Terra Nova. In the DLC: Bringing down the Sky. He Blames humans for the Batarians fall from grace. And their losses when they tried to enslave lots of humans. He has different dialogue depending on if you picked War Hero, or Ruthless backgrounds. He's an extermeist. But yeah in ME3 he has, threw the Arrival DLC, a Legitimate reason to hate Shepard. But he takes it too far.
