*Note: I responded to the majority of complaints in post 134.
Mass Effect 3: Great Ending or Greatest Ending
Disclaimer: I have a degree in literature and I minored in film studies. My following analysis could of course be wrong, as works of art are always open to interpretation. I also mainly wrote this analysis for my friends and I in an attempt to explain how we could all think the ending was great when according to the internet we were wrong. I should also point out that I have read the indoctrination theory, but I don?t believe enough evidence exists for this theory (but it?s fun, just like the Squall is dead theory for VIII is fun). This analysis will be very long, but that?s the point it?s an in-depth analysis. Please don?t bother commenting on the fact you find it too long.
I agree with Ben ?Yahtzee? Croshaw?s ?Mass Effect 3 Get?s an Ending? article in the sense that he is correct that in order to understand the ending of Mass Effect 3 you need to understand the narrative themes of the game. I believe this is also a reasonable avenue of analyzing the ending considering that a lot of people on forums and articles seem to hate the ending because they don?t understand what the theme of the game is. Many arguments on why people hate the ending mention they don?t think it ?fits? with the story, or the ending feels like a tonal shift, or the ending jumps the shark. I find all these arguments to be ludicrous. No tonal shift exists here; the ending clearly follows the themes of the narrative.
To be clear, if your problem is with the final cutscene then I agree with you in the fact that this cutscene is poorly done. However, I do not look at this cutscene to be the ending of the game. It shows you nothing of what occurred due to your decision, nor what happened to anyone, it is just a generic piece of eye candy. I believe the final decision you make is the real ending and once the CGI starts that really doesn?t matter. I think it is a bit foolish to ignore everything that happened before and say the game is awful because of a 30 second cutscene and to disregard what actually happens in the end.
If you think the ending is bad because you don?t think enough of your decisions matter then I can kind of see where you are coming from, but I feel your decisions do matter. Yes your final decision to pick 3 choices is not based on anything, but your choices until that point certainly do matter. I agree though it would have been better if those 3 decisions were tied to decisions you have made. Perhaps in order to get Synthesis ending you must have allied with the Geth or reunited the Geth and the Quarians. Maybe, for control ending you have to save Miranda?s evil father so he gives you the intelligence on how to control the reapers. Then destroy ending is simply based on war assets. I think that would be good, but that?s not what Bioware picked and it doesn?t bother me to the extent it bothers other people. I do see it as a valid point though.
However, if you think the ending is bad because by uniting the galaxy you think you should be able to beat the reapers and have this super happy ending you have ignored the entire narrative of the series. From reading forums and articles it seems like the majority of people hated the ending due to this reason (I?ve noticed a bunch of people say this isn?t the majority of people, but I read far more blogs and posts saying they hated the ending because Shepard dies and they felt they should have been able to beat the reapers with just the fleets). I believe such an ending would be nonsensical and would have been a complete tonal shift in the series changing what I consider one of the best videogame narratives of all time into this lame B movie ending where everyone lives.
In order to show this I?m going to explain what the main themes of this series were, as very few people seem to understand what the themes are. If you end up agreeing with me that these are the main themes of the series I feel you have to then agree the ending is actually very appropriate and hence great. Now, this series has a variety of themes but the main overarching themes as I see it are: (1) Sacrifice for the greater good (2) Entropy, as Yahtzee puts it (3) forgiveness.
Sacrifice for the Greater Good:
This is probably the biggest one that ties into requiring Shepard to die and one that most people completely missed or just ignored. I find this theme is pretty obvious, so I don?t know why people were so furious that Shepard died, I assume it was despair at having a character they cared about so much die.
First of all, from the very first game this theme is clearly laid out. Shepard is a commander in the Alliance Navy, not only that but they are N7, and about to become a Specter. The entire purpose of a military career is to sacrifice yourself for the great good, and the entire code of the Specter?s is to sacrifice yourself for the entire galaxy. Obviously, simply because you are in the military doesn?t mean you will have to sacrifice yourself, but if you are called upon to do it you are supposed to do it willingly. To refuse to sacrifice yourself would quite frankly be a disgrace to everything you are supposed to stand for. No matter if you are going full on renegade, you cannot get away from this duty.
Second, one of the biggest moments in Mass Effect 1 is you are forced to sacrifice either Ashley or Kaiden. While the game certainly does let you make many different decisions, you are not allowed to skip this sacrifice. The writers make it very clear that you know one of these people has to die, because if they don?t die the entire galaxy may be destroyed.
Third, even in the conclusion to Mass Effect 1 you either sacrifice the counsel or the alliance fleet for the greater good to take down Sovereign. All these examples are just in Mass Effect 1, I feel it pretty clearly sets the tone that Shepard is going to have to sacrifice a lot for the greater good and clearly foreshadows that Shepard is probably going to have to one day sacrifice him/herself.
In Mass Effect 2 literally the entire theme of the game is sacrifice for the greater good. In order to stop the Collectors you are going on a suicide mission that you are all supposed to die on. At no point is it really assumed everyone will survive. In fact I highly doubt that without looking online to see how to make sure everyone survived you pulled off this suicide mission with everyone surviving.
However, let?s assume that everyone does survive the suicide mission this clearly shows that sometimes sacrifice isn?t necessary and the greater good can be accomplished without it. While, this may be true if you got everyone to survive, this doesn?t change the theme of the overall game. Mass Effect 2 starts with you sacrificing your life to save Joker. This concept of sacrifice literally starts the game; the fact that you may end it in a pretty good place doesn?t wash out this fact.
On top of this are all the stories the game tells and most of these stories deal with this central theme. The entire theme of Tali?s story is that she wishes to sacrifice her place in the fleet to preserve the memory of her father. Samara wishes to sacrifice her own daughter, who according to Samara she does care about, in order to save the thousands of possible victims she will go after. Thane?s entire story seems to revolve around him trying to sacrifice whatever years remain in his life to do some good, as does Garrus?s story.
Finally in Mass Effect 3 you are just hit again and again over the head with this concept with the need to sacrifice for the greater good. I find it impossible for anyone to play even half of Mass Effect 3 and not understand that Shepard has to die at the end of the game. Mordin/Padok are going to die saving the Krogan, I realize that it is possible to save Mordin if you betray the Krogan. However, even if you do that you are still then sacrificing the Krogan for the greater good.
Quite frankly it seems almost ridiculous to even go through all the examples because they are so numerous, so I?m going to just list them: (1) Sacrificing people on Earth while you escape, (2) Tali (if you side with the Geth and can?t unite the races), (3) Kaiden/Ashley (if you can?t get them to back down), (4) Thane (saving the council), (5) Anderson (staying on Earth to lead the resistance), (6) Primarch?s son (stopping the bomb), (7) the entire quarian race (if you side with geth), (8) entire geth race (if you side with the quarians), (9) Thessia. These are just the main ones, there are times of smaller tales of sacrifice for the greater good such as the Krogan dying on the Rachni planet, or the Rachni queen dying if the Krogan team is saved.
In case you didn?t get the point that you?re going to have to sacrifice yourself, you have that entire scene on Earth where pretty much everyone says, ?you?re going to die.? Garrus literally says, I hope we meet again in heaven and if you beat me there I?ll see you at the bar. Tali even says she wishes you had more time together if you romanced her. Liara makes it pretty clear that she feels this is it and wants to share memories with you because she knows this is the end.
The fact that people think a tonal shift occurs in the ending because Shepard dies and in all their previous missions they survived is ludicrous. The entire series has been pointing to Shepard having to die in the end. I?ve noticed some people say the theme is ?A Hero?s Journey? and therefore Shepard doesn?t need to die, because it?s about them always triumphing.
This shows a complete lack of understanding of what the narrative theme of ?A Hero?s Journey? is. If you want the long answer you need to read Joseph Campbell?s ?The Hero with a Thousand Faces.? The short of it is simply look at Frodo in LOTR or Luke in Star Wars. Those are examples of narratives with the theme of ?A hero?s journey.? Basically, the theme deals with a non-hero being confronted with adversity and rising above it to become a hero. It does not mean a hero goes on a journey. Shepard starts Mass Effect 1 as one of the greatest warriors in the galaxy. They are a Commander in the Alliance Navy, N7, and a Specter. You can?t be more of a hero then that, the theme of the game cannot therefore be Shepard rising to be an even greater hero, that would be the dumbest story ever told.
I noticed someone also said the theme was Personal choice and living with your decisions. First of all, this is not a narrative theme. This is simply a quality of the gameplay. Bioware lets you pick your choices to an extent as part of the game, it isn?t built into the game as a narrative theme. It would be like saying the theme of the game is a tactical squad based shooter. That?s not to say this can?t be a narrative theme. If the story was about free will and whether it exists in the galaxy you can kind of say a dumbed down version of that is Personal choice, but I think it?s pretty clear the concept of free will is not one of the themes of the core story. Although, it is certainly a theme in regards to the Geth storyline.
In the end this series was constantly about asking others to sacrifice themselves for the greater good. It makes perfect narrative sense that in the very end it was you who had to make the final sacrifice to save the galaxy. In fact if Shepard doesn?t sacrifice themselves in the end it basically ruins the entire narrative and changes the whole tone. This would make Commander Shepard into a monster, who is perfectly willing to sacrifice others for the greater good, but not themselves. By complaining that Shepard is simply better than everyone else and deserves to survive, you are making your commander Shepard into the worst person alive.
Finally in regards to this overarching theme, I also feel it?s pretty clear they are making Shepard into a Christ like figure. Susan Arendt on the escapist podcast, seems extremely against this idea. She believes that it just doesn?t fit her character. Whether it fits your character or not really doesn?t matter, I find it very hard to argue that Bioware was not attempting to allude to this. In the very last scene you are being referred to as ?The Shepard.? It?s clear that Shepard has become this Christ like figure who is now worshipped in the far flung future. If Bioware?s writers didn?t want this connotation they wouldn?t have said, ?The Shepard.? I mean your character?s name is even named Shepard, which alone carries with it an allusion to a religious figure.
Like Susan Arendt I also felt very uncomfortable with my squad in the game basically looking at me like I was their savior, but that does not change the fact that this theme clearly existed. It only makes it better that you?d be uncomfortable with it, because in order to be a Christ like figure you can?t want people to heap all this praise onto you. In ME2 Shepard literally dies and comes back from the dead. At the end of the game you figuratively die for everyone?s sins and then meet ?the creator? and basically argue with God that life is precious and should be saved instead of destroyed. I?ve read a lot of literature, I?m not sure if any other story has created such a clear cut Christ figure before. Hell you might as well call this ?The Shepard theme? in videogames from now on as it?s the ultimate example of such a theme. This theme also of course requires Shepard to be dead in the end.
Entropy:
At the start of this article I said this would be an in-depth analysis. So far I only covered one theme out of three. So here goes, next on the list is Entropy. If you believe Shepard should die in the end, but still hate the ending because you don?t believe it fits, then looking at this theme may help. I don?t want to rehash what Yahtzee said in his article, you can read that here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/9511-Mass-Effect-3-Gets-An-Ending. The main point of this theme is that events are basically cyclical and everything that happened before will happen again and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it.
While not touched too much on in the rest of the series the idea that these events have transpired before are briefly noted. Sovereign basically says you can?t understand the Reapers plan because no organic can comprehend its vastness. Which certainly alludes to the idea that the Reapers are basically creating a cyclical plan of evolution. Otherwise the only hint of this theme appearing in the rest of the series is the fact that the Reapers do indeed come back every 50,000 years to kill everyone and that they make it so all races evolve according to their design.
It isn?t until Mass Effect 3 that this theme is really put forward. As you learn that not only do the Reapers cause all races to evolve the same, but the entire purpose of their existence is to stop the eventual war between organics and synthetics which they were put in place to stop and have been stopping for millions of years.
The main problem is that most of this narrative theme is only uncovered if you have Javik. Without Javik you just have to take the Reapers word for it that what they are saying is true. However, with Javik you learn that indeed this cycle has repeated itself before. His race was involved in a war with synthetics they created, just as the Quarians are currently at war with the Geth.
I find it extremely important for people to recognize this is a major theme of the Mass Effect series though, because if you deny this is a theme then the endings do actually fall apart. If you don?t accept what Javik and the Reapers say to be true, then Synthesis ending is terrifying. The Synthesis ending is on some level a very physical rape of everyone in the galaxy. If you accept the theme of ?Entropy? then this ending is acceptable, because without synthesis their will only be death.
If you united the Geth and the Quarians or simply sided with the Geth this might seem crazy to you. However, the whole point of accepting the theme of ?entropy? is the idea that no matter what is currently happening; in the future some other race will create a synthetic life form that does kill all organic life. If you believe what the Reapers say then this is true, without synthesis synthetics will one day kill all organics, it just probably won?t be the Geth that do it. It also stands to reason that the Reapers have actual proof of this happening.
If you only sided with the Quarians or you picked the destroy ending, then you just proved the Reapers right. Synthetics and Organics can?t co-exist, one must always kill the other and therefore the Reapers plan is correct because it will insure the survival of both forms of life?although not in any form either species would wish. This is why the destroy ending is actually the worst ending, because you are dooming the cycle to repeat itself and literally insuring it does by wiping out the Geth, the one synthetic species that could finally co-exist with organics.
Now if you believe in the theme of ?Entropy,? then the control ending is kind of a neutral choice. You are basically telling the reapers they are wrong, synthetics and organics can co-exist and you have proved it by either siding with the Geth or uniting Quarians and Geth (if you picked the control ending after killing all Geth, then I find that to be a rather confusing and misguided ending to your story. As you are basically saying the Reapers are wrong about the cyclical nature of events?even after you proved them right about not being able to get along with synthetics). This also sounds like the ending a lot of people complained that they didn?t get. I have seen forum posts and articles about how they should have been able to tell the Reapers, hey I sided with the Geth and we therefore proved your plan is wrong. If you believed this then you should have controlled the Reapers, because that option is basically saying I am willing to chance that the Reapers have miscalculated and the cycle is not a repeatable cycle, but one that can be broken.
I believe that a better final cutscene that better fleshed out what happened would have been a great benefit for people that either didn?t or can?t analyze the situation themselves and just wanted to be told by Bioware what the endings meant. If such a cutscene existed I really doubt the majority of people would be upset with the game.
I do want to add one final point to this concept of ?Entropy.? A lot of people have said that Shepard should have been able to beat back the Reapers by uniting the galaxy against them. First Bioware has made it extremely clear that this is impossible. In every game they have made it clear the Reapers are unbeatable. If every single ship in the galaxy fought the Reapers you would still lose. It goes back to the concept of ?Entropy? because we know from history that for millions of years the Reapers have been exterminating galactic civilization. No one has been able to beat them in all this time, I?m sure in the millions of years there have been races that have done exactly what Shepard has done and they all lost. The Protheans weren?t able to unite their Galaxy, but that doesn?t mean some other species in the thousands that have been exterminated wasn?t.
Bioware simply made the Reapers too powerful an enemy for anyone to defeat. It takes the whole Quarian fleet to kill 1 reaper. It takes the whole Citadel fleet to destroy Sovereign. Shepard did everything in his power to get the fleet ready, but it simply does not matter because the Reapers are too numerous and technologically advanced to defeat. A lot of people still complain, but that was literally hard coded into the game from the very start. Reapers are unbeatable, so stop saying Shepard can beat them. It all simply means that nothing you can possibly do matters, because the Reapers will always win. With this concept in mind you should be able to accept picking the 3 options given to you at the end as quite frankly the only realistic options, and options that are clearly within the confines of the narrative being told.
If you feel upset and betrayed because you don?t feel your Shepard would ever pick those options then that is a good thing. That is the whole point, these are the options Shepard is given, any other choice means the death of all organics in the entire Galaxy. You should feel constrained by these choices, because I?m sure a real person faced with such a decision would be as well.
Forgiveness:
This is the final major theme which I don?t think anyone has mentioned. Bioware basically said the main theme is Sacrifice for the greater good, Yahtzee believes it?s ?Entropy.? Those are both definitely themes of the game. However, I feel that you also need to understand that forgiveness is a major theme in the narrative, as it helps a lot in understanding the ending.
I think it?s fairly obvious in Mass Effect 3 that this is a theme. However, just to prove it is an overarching theme throughout the series lets start with ME1. Now due to the fact that paragon and renegade decisions can basically insure that some people you forgive and others you don?t, I?m only going to focus on decisions which you can?t really affect. I believe the two biggest overarching parts of the narrative that deal with this are the Krogan/Genophage and the Quarian/Geth.
Certainly besides this many other smaller narratives deal with this as well such as: (1) Liara/Mother (2) Garrus/Sidonis (3) Jacob/Father (4) Miranda/Niket (5) Tali/Father (6) Thane/Son (7) Shepard/Kaiden/Ashley (8) Turians/Krogan (9) Shepard/boy (10) Rachni/Shepard. These are just some of the side ones, which I don?t really want to focus on, I?m just pointing them out to show that it is a theme Bioware keeps harping on. The only one of these side ones that actually matters is the fact of Shepard and the boy in ME3. Many people complain that it?s cheesy or nonsensical for the reaper to take the form of this boy. It might be cheesy, but certainly not nonsensical. Bioware goes to ridiculous lengths in ME3 to make it a fact that Shepard cannot forgive him/herself for letting this boy die. It would of course be near the surface of Shepard?s memories when she meets the AI at the end and hence the most likely form for it to take. You might dislike the fact that this boy is in the game, but it?s absurd to say it makes no sense why Bioware had the reaper take his form, after they went to such lengths to make it an important part of the narrative.
Anyway, back to the Krogan/Genophage. Even in ME1 this was a big theme, the question of do the Krogan deserve to be able to live without the Genophage. The underlying question is, can we ever forgive the Krogan for the atrocities they committed in the rebellion? In ME1 the narrative forces you to say you either can?t forgive them, or if you do forgive them you are sorry but you can?t cure them now. In ME2 this same narrative theme continues with Mordin and the fact he actually helped cause the genophage. By the end of ME2 you basically can get Mordin to admit that it was a regrettable decision, but something that had to be done. However, by ME3 Mordin (or Padok) is consumed by guilt over this and most likely always has been. Due to the guilt he feels over this, he believes the only way he can ever obtain forgiveness is by his sacrifice to save the Krogan.
Similarly, the Geth/Quarian narrative goes along similar lines. In ME1 all you basically know is that the Quarians made the Geth and the Geth rebelled. In ME2 it becomes clear that something is not quite right as Legion seems to not be this insane Geth that the Quarians make them out to be. You can even have a conversation basically forcing Tali and the Geth to become friends. By ME3 you realize the Geth were actually the ones mistreated by the Quarians and it was the Geth who were peaceful until the Quarians tried to destroy them and even then the Geth let the Quarians flee instead of killing them.
In the end you are faced with a choice, the Geth will forgive organics for the way the Quarians treated them, if you can forgive the Geth for what they have done to organics. This forgiveness comes at the cost of the entire Quarian people. However, if you can pass the reputation check you can unite both Quarian and Geth and force them to start on a long path of forgiving one another for their actions.
This theme of forgiveness is very important to the narrative, because the final question in the game gives you the power to atone for Shepards own mistakes, just as Mordin was given the chance to atone for his and how organics are given the ability to atone for the Quarians mistakes. This is important, because lets say you went through the entire narrative of all 3 games with the idea that such actions cannot be forgiven. Then at the end you are giving the option to pick these 3 choices all of which kill you and you are left thinking, this is stupid and makes no sense. The reason it makes no sense is because quite frankly you missed this narrative theme.
I believe Bioware?s writers were attempting to say that in the end Shepard?s sacrifice isn?t just necessary because it?s for the greater good, but because it?s the only way Shepard themselves can find forgiveness in his/her actions. Shepard is certainly a hero, but no matter how you got to the end you cost a lot of people their lives. Ashley/Kaiden or perhaps even both is dead, perhaps people you cared for died on the suicide mission, either way Mordin or Padok died in order to help you get the Krogan to join the war, you might have killed Tali and the whole Quarian race to get the Geth on your side, or you might have personally killed Legion and the Geth to get the Quarians on your side, in the end Thane died because he believed in you, you might have killed the Rachni queen or let a bunch of Krogan sacrifice their life to save her, it?s even possible entire planets and races are being exterminated by the reapers because of choices you make in the game.
In the end I feel it is made very clear that Shepard feels a ton of guilt over what has happened. Especially after Thessia, I am not sure how anyone could come away from that mission and not think that Shepard is being brought down by extreme guilt for failing people. It is constantly shown throughout the game that Shepard can barely even sleep because he/she suffers from so much guilt for failing people, especially a little boy she barely even knew. In the final moments of the game Shepard is told hey all these people died, but if you sacrifice yourself you can save the rest of the Galaxy. Having Shepard sacrifice themselves is a catharsis and one of the only ways Shepard can be forgiven for all the deaths on his/her hands. Without this sacrifice Shepard would forever have to carry around the guilt that they caused friends, loved ones, even strangers do die for the good of the galaxy but when the time came Shepard refused to do the same. It would be an inherently selfish act that would condemn Shepard forever. If on the other hand you selflessly give up your life it makes up for all the deaths you caused and hence you die forgiven and at peace.
I believe if anything the ending of ME3 is one of forgiveness. Where Shepard seeks to atone for his/her failures by selflessly doing the one thing Shepard has ordered others to do in his/her place. I got no feeling that in the end Shepard was brought down by guilt, but instead was finally at peace and could rest.
Conclusion:
So that?s pretty much it. I find it impossible to comprehend how anyone can say the ending was in any way a tonal shift or somehow disconnected from the narrative. It fits perfectly in with the themes of (1) sacrifice (2) entropy (3) and forgiveness. If you are so caught up in the fact that the final cutscene randomly shows the Normandy fleeing, or the fact the mass relays are exploding, then you really need to stop it. For one thing it doesn?t matter that galactic civilization might be over, you still triumphed over the Reapers.
It certainly doesn?t mean none of your decisions in the game mattered. If you cured the genophage then the krogan civilization can still thrive on their planet, if you united the quarians and geth then they are indeed going to be working together to establish their future. The mass relays didn?t destroy all life when they exploded as some of you have argued. We already know from the final scene set in the future that it didn?t kill everyone. Clearly Bioware is saying there is a way to destroy the relays without them destroying the entire galaxy.
Finally if you are sad Shepard is dead, then you certainly should be. If you think this ruins the game you are have misunderstood the narrative themes of the series. The best stories have realistic endings, Shepard dying in this context when examined against the narrative themes Bioware is portraying is an extremely realistic ending. When Blade Runner was made the studio forced Ridley Scott to put a happy ending on the film. This ending made little narrative sense in connection with the theme and tone of the overall movie and was mostly deemed a failure. Scott?s director?s cut which omits the happy ending is now considered to be the far superior version of the film. When Great Expectations came out everyone demanded Dickens change the ending because it was too depressing. Dickens relented, he couldn?t afford his audience to be upset with him. Today literary scholars consider this the worst decision Dickens ever made and now the majority of students that read Great Expectations read it with the original ending intact. So certainly mourn the fact that Shepard is dead, but don?t go around saying that Bioware?s writers didn?t know what they were doing, they clearly did and they created one of the best videogame narratives because of it.
Mass Effect 3: Great Ending or Greatest Ending
Disclaimer: I have a degree in literature and I minored in film studies. My following analysis could of course be wrong, as works of art are always open to interpretation. I also mainly wrote this analysis for my friends and I in an attempt to explain how we could all think the ending was great when according to the internet we were wrong. I should also point out that I have read the indoctrination theory, but I don?t believe enough evidence exists for this theory (but it?s fun, just like the Squall is dead theory for VIII is fun). This analysis will be very long, but that?s the point it?s an in-depth analysis. Please don?t bother commenting on the fact you find it too long.
I agree with Ben ?Yahtzee? Croshaw?s ?Mass Effect 3 Get?s an Ending? article in the sense that he is correct that in order to understand the ending of Mass Effect 3 you need to understand the narrative themes of the game. I believe this is also a reasonable avenue of analyzing the ending considering that a lot of people on forums and articles seem to hate the ending because they don?t understand what the theme of the game is. Many arguments on why people hate the ending mention they don?t think it ?fits? with the story, or the ending feels like a tonal shift, or the ending jumps the shark. I find all these arguments to be ludicrous. No tonal shift exists here; the ending clearly follows the themes of the narrative.
To be clear, if your problem is with the final cutscene then I agree with you in the fact that this cutscene is poorly done. However, I do not look at this cutscene to be the ending of the game. It shows you nothing of what occurred due to your decision, nor what happened to anyone, it is just a generic piece of eye candy. I believe the final decision you make is the real ending and once the CGI starts that really doesn?t matter. I think it is a bit foolish to ignore everything that happened before and say the game is awful because of a 30 second cutscene and to disregard what actually happens in the end.
If you think the ending is bad because you don?t think enough of your decisions matter then I can kind of see where you are coming from, but I feel your decisions do matter. Yes your final decision to pick 3 choices is not based on anything, but your choices until that point certainly do matter. I agree though it would have been better if those 3 decisions were tied to decisions you have made. Perhaps in order to get Synthesis ending you must have allied with the Geth or reunited the Geth and the Quarians. Maybe, for control ending you have to save Miranda?s evil father so he gives you the intelligence on how to control the reapers. Then destroy ending is simply based on war assets. I think that would be good, but that?s not what Bioware picked and it doesn?t bother me to the extent it bothers other people. I do see it as a valid point though.
However, if you think the ending is bad because by uniting the galaxy you think you should be able to beat the reapers and have this super happy ending you have ignored the entire narrative of the series. From reading forums and articles it seems like the majority of people hated the ending due to this reason (I?ve noticed a bunch of people say this isn?t the majority of people, but I read far more blogs and posts saying they hated the ending because Shepard dies and they felt they should have been able to beat the reapers with just the fleets). I believe such an ending would be nonsensical and would have been a complete tonal shift in the series changing what I consider one of the best videogame narratives of all time into this lame B movie ending where everyone lives.
In order to show this I?m going to explain what the main themes of this series were, as very few people seem to understand what the themes are. If you end up agreeing with me that these are the main themes of the series I feel you have to then agree the ending is actually very appropriate and hence great. Now, this series has a variety of themes but the main overarching themes as I see it are: (1) Sacrifice for the greater good (2) Entropy, as Yahtzee puts it (3) forgiveness.
Sacrifice for the Greater Good:
This is probably the biggest one that ties into requiring Shepard to die and one that most people completely missed or just ignored. I find this theme is pretty obvious, so I don?t know why people were so furious that Shepard died, I assume it was despair at having a character they cared about so much die.
First of all, from the very first game this theme is clearly laid out. Shepard is a commander in the Alliance Navy, not only that but they are N7, and about to become a Specter. The entire purpose of a military career is to sacrifice yourself for the great good, and the entire code of the Specter?s is to sacrifice yourself for the entire galaxy. Obviously, simply because you are in the military doesn?t mean you will have to sacrifice yourself, but if you are called upon to do it you are supposed to do it willingly. To refuse to sacrifice yourself would quite frankly be a disgrace to everything you are supposed to stand for. No matter if you are going full on renegade, you cannot get away from this duty.
Second, one of the biggest moments in Mass Effect 1 is you are forced to sacrifice either Ashley or Kaiden. While the game certainly does let you make many different decisions, you are not allowed to skip this sacrifice. The writers make it very clear that you know one of these people has to die, because if they don?t die the entire galaxy may be destroyed.
Third, even in the conclusion to Mass Effect 1 you either sacrifice the counsel or the alliance fleet for the greater good to take down Sovereign. All these examples are just in Mass Effect 1, I feel it pretty clearly sets the tone that Shepard is going to have to sacrifice a lot for the greater good and clearly foreshadows that Shepard is probably going to have to one day sacrifice him/herself.
In Mass Effect 2 literally the entire theme of the game is sacrifice for the greater good. In order to stop the Collectors you are going on a suicide mission that you are all supposed to die on. At no point is it really assumed everyone will survive. In fact I highly doubt that without looking online to see how to make sure everyone survived you pulled off this suicide mission with everyone surviving.
However, let?s assume that everyone does survive the suicide mission this clearly shows that sometimes sacrifice isn?t necessary and the greater good can be accomplished without it. While, this may be true if you got everyone to survive, this doesn?t change the theme of the overall game. Mass Effect 2 starts with you sacrificing your life to save Joker. This concept of sacrifice literally starts the game; the fact that you may end it in a pretty good place doesn?t wash out this fact.
On top of this are all the stories the game tells and most of these stories deal with this central theme. The entire theme of Tali?s story is that she wishes to sacrifice her place in the fleet to preserve the memory of her father. Samara wishes to sacrifice her own daughter, who according to Samara she does care about, in order to save the thousands of possible victims she will go after. Thane?s entire story seems to revolve around him trying to sacrifice whatever years remain in his life to do some good, as does Garrus?s story.
Finally in Mass Effect 3 you are just hit again and again over the head with this concept with the need to sacrifice for the greater good. I find it impossible for anyone to play even half of Mass Effect 3 and not understand that Shepard has to die at the end of the game. Mordin/Padok are going to die saving the Krogan, I realize that it is possible to save Mordin if you betray the Krogan. However, even if you do that you are still then sacrificing the Krogan for the greater good.
Quite frankly it seems almost ridiculous to even go through all the examples because they are so numerous, so I?m going to just list them: (1) Sacrificing people on Earth while you escape, (2) Tali (if you side with the Geth and can?t unite the races), (3) Kaiden/Ashley (if you can?t get them to back down), (4) Thane (saving the council), (5) Anderson (staying on Earth to lead the resistance), (6) Primarch?s son (stopping the bomb), (7) the entire quarian race (if you side with geth), (8) entire geth race (if you side with the quarians), (9) Thessia. These are just the main ones, there are times of smaller tales of sacrifice for the greater good such as the Krogan dying on the Rachni planet, or the Rachni queen dying if the Krogan team is saved.
In case you didn?t get the point that you?re going to have to sacrifice yourself, you have that entire scene on Earth where pretty much everyone says, ?you?re going to die.? Garrus literally says, I hope we meet again in heaven and if you beat me there I?ll see you at the bar. Tali even says she wishes you had more time together if you romanced her. Liara makes it pretty clear that she feels this is it and wants to share memories with you because she knows this is the end.
The fact that people think a tonal shift occurs in the ending because Shepard dies and in all their previous missions they survived is ludicrous. The entire series has been pointing to Shepard having to die in the end. I?ve noticed some people say the theme is ?A Hero?s Journey? and therefore Shepard doesn?t need to die, because it?s about them always triumphing.
This shows a complete lack of understanding of what the narrative theme of ?A Hero?s Journey? is. If you want the long answer you need to read Joseph Campbell?s ?The Hero with a Thousand Faces.? The short of it is simply look at Frodo in LOTR or Luke in Star Wars. Those are examples of narratives with the theme of ?A hero?s journey.? Basically, the theme deals with a non-hero being confronted with adversity and rising above it to become a hero. It does not mean a hero goes on a journey. Shepard starts Mass Effect 1 as one of the greatest warriors in the galaxy. They are a Commander in the Alliance Navy, N7, and a Specter. You can?t be more of a hero then that, the theme of the game cannot therefore be Shepard rising to be an even greater hero, that would be the dumbest story ever told.
I noticed someone also said the theme was Personal choice and living with your decisions. First of all, this is not a narrative theme. This is simply a quality of the gameplay. Bioware lets you pick your choices to an extent as part of the game, it isn?t built into the game as a narrative theme. It would be like saying the theme of the game is a tactical squad based shooter. That?s not to say this can?t be a narrative theme. If the story was about free will and whether it exists in the galaxy you can kind of say a dumbed down version of that is Personal choice, but I think it?s pretty clear the concept of free will is not one of the themes of the core story. Although, it is certainly a theme in regards to the Geth storyline.
In the end this series was constantly about asking others to sacrifice themselves for the greater good. It makes perfect narrative sense that in the very end it was you who had to make the final sacrifice to save the galaxy. In fact if Shepard doesn?t sacrifice themselves in the end it basically ruins the entire narrative and changes the whole tone. This would make Commander Shepard into a monster, who is perfectly willing to sacrifice others for the greater good, but not themselves. By complaining that Shepard is simply better than everyone else and deserves to survive, you are making your commander Shepard into the worst person alive.
Finally in regards to this overarching theme, I also feel it?s pretty clear they are making Shepard into a Christ like figure. Susan Arendt on the escapist podcast, seems extremely against this idea. She believes that it just doesn?t fit her character. Whether it fits your character or not really doesn?t matter, I find it very hard to argue that Bioware was not attempting to allude to this. In the very last scene you are being referred to as ?The Shepard.? It?s clear that Shepard has become this Christ like figure who is now worshipped in the far flung future. If Bioware?s writers didn?t want this connotation they wouldn?t have said, ?The Shepard.? I mean your character?s name is even named Shepard, which alone carries with it an allusion to a religious figure.
Like Susan Arendt I also felt very uncomfortable with my squad in the game basically looking at me like I was their savior, but that does not change the fact that this theme clearly existed. It only makes it better that you?d be uncomfortable with it, because in order to be a Christ like figure you can?t want people to heap all this praise onto you. In ME2 Shepard literally dies and comes back from the dead. At the end of the game you figuratively die for everyone?s sins and then meet ?the creator? and basically argue with God that life is precious and should be saved instead of destroyed. I?ve read a lot of literature, I?m not sure if any other story has created such a clear cut Christ figure before. Hell you might as well call this ?The Shepard theme? in videogames from now on as it?s the ultimate example of such a theme. This theme also of course requires Shepard to be dead in the end.
Entropy:
At the start of this article I said this would be an in-depth analysis. So far I only covered one theme out of three. So here goes, next on the list is Entropy. If you believe Shepard should die in the end, but still hate the ending because you don?t believe it fits, then looking at this theme may help. I don?t want to rehash what Yahtzee said in his article, you can read that here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/columns/extra-punctuation/9511-Mass-Effect-3-Gets-An-Ending. The main point of this theme is that events are basically cyclical and everything that happened before will happen again and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it.
While not touched too much on in the rest of the series the idea that these events have transpired before are briefly noted. Sovereign basically says you can?t understand the Reapers plan because no organic can comprehend its vastness. Which certainly alludes to the idea that the Reapers are basically creating a cyclical plan of evolution. Otherwise the only hint of this theme appearing in the rest of the series is the fact that the Reapers do indeed come back every 50,000 years to kill everyone and that they make it so all races evolve according to their design.
It isn?t until Mass Effect 3 that this theme is really put forward. As you learn that not only do the Reapers cause all races to evolve the same, but the entire purpose of their existence is to stop the eventual war between organics and synthetics which they were put in place to stop and have been stopping for millions of years.
The main problem is that most of this narrative theme is only uncovered if you have Javik. Without Javik you just have to take the Reapers word for it that what they are saying is true. However, with Javik you learn that indeed this cycle has repeated itself before. His race was involved in a war with synthetics they created, just as the Quarians are currently at war with the Geth.
I find it extremely important for people to recognize this is a major theme of the Mass Effect series though, because if you deny this is a theme then the endings do actually fall apart. If you don?t accept what Javik and the Reapers say to be true, then Synthesis ending is terrifying. The Synthesis ending is on some level a very physical rape of everyone in the galaxy. If you accept the theme of ?Entropy? then this ending is acceptable, because without synthesis their will only be death.
If you united the Geth and the Quarians or simply sided with the Geth this might seem crazy to you. However, the whole point of accepting the theme of ?entropy? is the idea that no matter what is currently happening; in the future some other race will create a synthetic life form that does kill all organic life. If you believe what the Reapers say then this is true, without synthesis synthetics will one day kill all organics, it just probably won?t be the Geth that do it. It also stands to reason that the Reapers have actual proof of this happening.
If you only sided with the Quarians or you picked the destroy ending, then you just proved the Reapers right. Synthetics and Organics can?t co-exist, one must always kill the other and therefore the Reapers plan is correct because it will insure the survival of both forms of life?although not in any form either species would wish. This is why the destroy ending is actually the worst ending, because you are dooming the cycle to repeat itself and literally insuring it does by wiping out the Geth, the one synthetic species that could finally co-exist with organics.
Now if you believe in the theme of ?Entropy,? then the control ending is kind of a neutral choice. You are basically telling the reapers they are wrong, synthetics and organics can co-exist and you have proved it by either siding with the Geth or uniting Quarians and Geth (if you picked the control ending after killing all Geth, then I find that to be a rather confusing and misguided ending to your story. As you are basically saying the Reapers are wrong about the cyclical nature of events?even after you proved them right about not being able to get along with synthetics). This also sounds like the ending a lot of people complained that they didn?t get. I have seen forum posts and articles about how they should have been able to tell the Reapers, hey I sided with the Geth and we therefore proved your plan is wrong. If you believed this then you should have controlled the Reapers, because that option is basically saying I am willing to chance that the Reapers have miscalculated and the cycle is not a repeatable cycle, but one that can be broken.
I believe that a better final cutscene that better fleshed out what happened would have been a great benefit for people that either didn?t or can?t analyze the situation themselves and just wanted to be told by Bioware what the endings meant. If such a cutscene existed I really doubt the majority of people would be upset with the game.
I do want to add one final point to this concept of ?Entropy.? A lot of people have said that Shepard should have been able to beat back the Reapers by uniting the galaxy against them. First Bioware has made it extremely clear that this is impossible. In every game they have made it clear the Reapers are unbeatable. If every single ship in the galaxy fought the Reapers you would still lose. It goes back to the concept of ?Entropy? because we know from history that for millions of years the Reapers have been exterminating galactic civilization. No one has been able to beat them in all this time, I?m sure in the millions of years there have been races that have done exactly what Shepard has done and they all lost. The Protheans weren?t able to unite their Galaxy, but that doesn?t mean some other species in the thousands that have been exterminated wasn?t.
Bioware simply made the Reapers too powerful an enemy for anyone to defeat. It takes the whole Quarian fleet to kill 1 reaper. It takes the whole Citadel fleet to destroy Sovereign. Shepard did everything in his power to get the fleet ready, but it simply does not matter because the Reapers are too numerous and technologically advanced to defeat. A lot of people still complain, but that was literally hard coded into the game from the very start. Reapers are unbeatable, so stop saying Shepard can beat them. It all simply means that nothing you can possibly do matters, because the Reapers will always win. With this concept in mind you should be able to accept picking the 3 options given to you at the end as quite frankly the only realistic options, and options that are clearly within the confines of the narrative being told.
If you feel upset and betrayed because you don?t feel your Shepard would ever pick those options then that is a good thing. That is the whole point, these are the options Shepard is given, any other choice means the death of all organics in the entire Galaxy. You should feel constrained by these choices, because I?m sure a real person faced with such a decision would be as well.
Forgiveness:
This is the final major theme which I don?t think anyone has mentioned. Bioware basically said the main theme is Sacrifice for the greater good, Yahtzee believes it?s ?Entropy.? Those are both definitely themes of the game. However, I feel that you also need to understand that forgiveness is a major theme in the narrative, as it helps a lot in understanding the ending.
I think it?s fairly obvious in Mass Effect 3 that this is a theme. However, just to prove it is an overarching theme throughout the series lets start with ME1. Now due to the fact that paragon and renegade decisions can basically insure that some people you forgive and others you don?t, I?m only going to focus on decisions which you can?t really affect. I believe the two biggest overarching parts of the narrative that deal with this are the Krogan/Genophage and the Quarian/Geth.
Certainly besides this many other smaller narratives deal with this as well such as: (1) Liara/Mother (2) Garrus/Sidonis (3) Jacob/Father (4) Miranda/Niket (5) Tali/Father (6) Thane/Son (7) Shepard/Kaiden/Ashley (8) Turians/Krogan (9) Shepard/boy (10) Rachni/Shepard. These are just some of the side ones, which I don?t really want to focus on, I?m just pointing them out to show that it is a theme Bioware keeps harping on. The only one of these side ones that actually matters is the fact of Shepard and the boy in ME3. Many people complain that it?s cheesy or nonsensical for the reaper to take the form of this boy. It might be cheesy, but certainly not nonsensical. Bioware goes to ridiculous lengths in ME3 to make it a fact that Shepard cannot forgive him/herself for letting this boy die. It would of course be near the surface of Shepard?s memories when she meets the AI at the end and hence the most likely form for it to take. You might dislike the fact that this boy is in the game, but it?s absurd to say it makes no sense why Bioware had the reaper take his form, after they went to such lengths to make it an important part of the narrative.
Anyway, back to the Krogan/Genophage. Even in ME1 this was a big theme, the question of do the Krogan deserve to be able to live without the Genophage. The underlying question is, can we ever forgive the Krogan for the atrocities they committed in the rebellion? In ME1 the narrative forces you to say you either can?t forgive them, or if you do forgive them you are sorry but you can?t cure them now. In ME2 this same narrative theme continues with Mordin and the fact he actually helped cause the genophage. By the end of ME2 you basically can get Mordin to admit that it was a regrettable decision, but something that had to be done. However, by ME3 Mordin (or Padok) is consumed by guilt over this and most likely always has been. Due to the guilt he feels over this, he believes the only way he can ever obtain forgiveness is by his sacrifice to save the Krogan.
Similarly, the Geth/Quarian narrative goes along similar lines. In ME1 all you basically know is that the Quarians made the Geth and the Geth rebelled. In ME2 it becomes clear that something is not quite right as Legion seems to not be this insane Geth that the Quarians make them out to be. You can even have a conversation basically forcing Tali and the Geth to become friends. By ME3 you realize the Geth were actually the ones mistreated by the Quarians and it was the Geth who were peaceful until the Quarians tried to destroy them and even then the Geth let the Quarians flee instead of killing them.
In the end you are faced with a choice, the Geth will forgive organics for the way the Quarians treated them, if you can forgive the Geth for what they have done to organics. This forgiveness comes at the cost of the entire Quarian people. However, if you can pass the reputation check you can unite both Quarian and Geth and force them to start on a long path of forgiving one another for their actions.
This theme of forgiveness is very important to the narrative, because the final question in the game gives you the power to atone for Shepards own mistakes, just as Mordin was given the chance to atone for his and how organics are given the ability to atone for the Quarians mistakes. This is important, because lets say you went through the entire narrative of all 3 games with the idea that such actions cannot be forgiven. Then at the end you are giving the option to pick these 3 choices all of which kill you and you are left thinking, this is stupid and makes no sense. The reason it makes no sense is because quite frankly you missed this narrative theme.
I believe Bioware?s writers were attempting to say that in the end Shepard?s sacrifice isn?t just necessary because it?s for the greater good, but because it?s the only way Shepard themselves can find forgiveness in his/her actions. Shepard is certainly a hero, but no matter how you got to the end you cost a lot of people their lives. Ashley/Kaiden or perhaps even both is dead, perhaps people you cared for died on the suicide mission, either way Mordin or Padok died in order to help you get the Krogan to join the war, you might have killed Tali and the whole Quarian race to get the Geth on your side, or you might have personally killed Legion and the Geth to get the Quarians on your side, in the end Thane died because he believed in you, you might have killed the Rachni queen or let a bunch of Krogan sacrifice their life to save her, it?s even possible entire planets and races are being exterminated by the reapers because of choices you make in the game.
In the end I feel it is made very clear that Shepard feels a ton of guilt over what has happened. Especially after Thessia, I am not sure how anyone could come away from that mission and not think that Shepard is being brought down by extreme guilt for failing people. It is constantly shown throughout the game that Shepard can barely even sleep because he/she suffers from so much guilt for failing people, especially a little boy she barely even knew. In the final moments of the game Shepard is told hey all these people died, but if you sacrifice yourself you can save the rest of the Galaxy. Having Shepard sacrifice themselves is a catharsis and one of the only ways Shepard can be forgiven for all the deaths on his/her hands. Without this sacrifice Shepard would forever have to carry around the guilt that they caused friends, loved ones, even strangers do die for the good of the galaxy but when the time came Shepard refused to do the same. It would be an inherently selfish act that would condemn Shepard forever. If on the other hand you selflessly give up your life it makes up for all the deaths you caused and hence you die forgiven and at peace.
I believe if anything the ending of ME3 is one of forgiveness. Where Shepard seeks to atone for his/her failures by selflessly doing the one thing Shepard has ordered others to do in his/her place. I got no feeling that in the end Shepard was brought down by guilt, but instead was finally at peace and could rest.
Conclusion:
So that?s pretty much it. I find it impossible to comprehend how anyone can say the ending was in any way a tonal shift or somehow disconnected from the narrative. It fits perfectly in with the themes of (1) sacrifice (2) entropy (3) and forgiveness. If you are so caught up in the fact that the final cutscene randomly shows the Normandy fleeing, or the fact the mass relays are exploding, then you really need to stop it. For one thing it doesn?t matter that galactic civilization might be over, you still triumphed over the Reapers.
It certainly doesn?t mean none of your decisions in the game mattered. If you cured the genophage then the krogan civilization can still thrive on their planet, if you united the quarians and geth then they are indeed going to be working together to establish their future. The mass relays didn?t destroy all life when they exploded as some of you have argued. We already know from the final scene set in the future that it didn?t kill everyone. Clearly Bioware is saying there is a way to destroy the relays without them destroying the entire galaxy.
Finally if you are sad Shepard is dead, then you certainly should be. If you think this ruins the game you are have misunderstood the narrative themes of the series. The best stories have realistic endings, Shepard dying in this context when examined against the narrative themes Bioware is portraying is an extremely realistic ending. When Blade Runner was made the studio forced Ridley Scott to put a happy ending on the film. This ending made little narrative sense in connection with the theme and tone of the overall movie and was mostly deemed a failure. Scott?s director?s cut which omits the happy ending is now considered to be the far superior version of the film. When Great Expectations came out everyone demanded Dickens change the ending because it was too depressing. Dickens relented, he couldn?t afford his audience to be upset with him. Today literary scholars consider this the worst decision Dickens ever made and now the majority of students that read Great Expectations read it with the original ending intact. So certainly mourn the fact that Shepard is dead, but don?t go around saying that Bioware?s writers didn?t know what they were doing, they clearly did and they created one of the best videogame narratives because of it.
