Very Long Analysis of ME3 Ending, aka why the ending is great (spoilers)

[Badassassin]

I appreciate what you're trying to do here OP but lets face the facts: nothing you say or do is going to calm the ridiculous fucking buttanguish that is going on about the ending.



It's funny really. The gaming community wants to be taken seriously as a medium and we talk about how mature we are but then you guys do this. You do realize you've kept up this temper tantrum for a MONTH now, right? You know what you're making the gaming community look like? CHILDREN. Sure, sure, you talk about how gaming can be and is a medium for adults, and should be respected as any other medium, but you never see this shit anywhere else. You know what else sucked? Matrix: Revolutions. But you didn't see fans whining to the producers to give them something else. You didn't see people claiming they "deserved" better. You know, the only movies I can think of that has had such a ridiculously enraged response is the Star Wars prequels, and I can bet that a lot of you who are angry now are the same people who want to burn George Lucas at the fucking stake. And now Bioware is playing the role of a mother buying her whiny kid a candy in the checkout line so that they'll just stop screaming. Come on, just move on, please, this is just getting hard to watch.


/rant

I'd love to know why complaining about the ending and not giving up on it after a month = all the vitriol you apply to them.

Frankly my worst experiences from all this is from people like you who are getting far more worked up then anyone has over the ending.

Because I DO want games to be taken seriously as an art form. I DO want people to know that gamers can be mature adults. But its just... When something like this happens it does no good. You're mad, I'm mad, and everyone else standing on the outside watching is just thinking "what a bunch of kids."

This needs to stop.

 

[Darkcerb]

I appreciate what you're trying to do here OP but lets face the facts: nothing you say or do is going to calm the ridiculous fucking buttanguish that is going on about the ending.



It's funny really. The gaming community wants to be taken seriously as a medium and we talk about how mature we are but then you guys do this. You do realize you've kept up this temper tantrum for a MONTH now, right? You know what you're making the gaming community look like? CHILDREN. Sure, sure, you talk about how gaming can be and is a medium for adults, and should be respected as any other medium, but you never see this shit anywhere else. You know what else sucked? Matrix: Revolutions. But you didn't see fans whining to the producers to give them something else. You didn't see people claiming they "deserved" better. You know, the only movies I can think of that has had such a ridiculously enraged response is the Star Wars prequels, and I can bet that a lot of you who are angry now are the same people who want to burn George Lucas at the fucking stake. And now Bioware is playing the role of a mother buying her whiny kid a candy in the checkout line so that they'll just stop screaming. Come on, just move on, please, this is just getting hard to watch.


/rant

I'd love to know why complaining about the ending and not giving up on it after a month = all the vitriol you apply to them.

Frankly my worst experiences from all this is from people like you who are getting far more worked up then anyone has over the ending.

Because I DO want games to be taken seriously as an art form. I DO want people to know that gamers can be mature adults. But its just... When something like this happens it does no good. You're mad, I'm mad, and everyone else standing on the outside watching is just thinking "what a bunch of kids."

This needs to stop.

This thread is a perfect representation of the situation I feel, people discussing why they like or hate the ending in detail and people on the outside walking in and shouting "ENTITLED BRATS WHINING" and walking back out with a vaguely superior feeling that they're the adults in all this.

You're right, that does need to stop.

edit: And why care what non-gamers think of gaming? I don't need validation from the likes of the news network (any the world over really, they're views have been made plain) which will never change it's stance on gaming, not until the next big thing...virtual reality maybe.

More to the point why care what the average person cares about your/our hobby?

And lastly the most hilarious part of all this is how the argument over whether games are art or not was apparently decided somewhere between a day before ME3's release and a day or two after when the complaints started.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

My main complaint about the ending wasn't necessarily a thematic or tonal shift; it was the fact that it seemed like it was trying to do way too much with the time it had left. Five minutes from the end, we're told that the Reapers are actually under the control of a godlike figure that lives in the Citadel's attic. We're told that he doesn't think organics and synthetics can coexist, when 90% of our interactions with the Geth serve to suggest otherwise. We're given his almost comically stupid plan for correcting this issue, namely kill them before they can kill themselves. And we're told that because some people we know managed to build something, we're in charge of deciding what happens to the galaxy next.

All of these elements are introduced way too quickly, at a point in the narrative where people naturally expect answers instead of additional questions. And these new questions are themselves brushed aside as well, leading to the infamous RGB scale of ME3 endings. It could have been done well, if certain aspects of it had been 1. explained more substantially, 2. paced more carefully, and (the others are maybes, but this is most important) 3. introduced earlier in the narrative.

Use 2001: A Space Odyssey as a comparative. In 2001, the very first sequence shows us a monolith interacting with early humans, indirectly showing its responsibility for the evolution of humanity into its present form. The very last sequence shows a monolith interacting with an astronaut and transforming him into a fetal figure. It still leaves the audience with questions, but it gives them a familiar reference point for them in the form of the monoliths. We may not know what exactly the monolith did to the astronaut, or how, or why. But we recognize the monolith, and what it's capable of, and its role in the narrative so far.

Mass Effect 3 is 2001 without the first two sequences. You have a familiar conflict with a recognizable antagonist, then suddenly there's a weird lightshow and you have no idea why or what this has to do with the rest of the story.

I applaud Bioware for their effort to create an ambiguous conclusion to their narrative, but I consider it to be one of the greatest failures in artistic execution in recent memory.

That is the calmest and most rational explanation of the ME3 ending problem I've seen so far. Good job. I applaud you for not giving into G.I.F.T. instincts.

 

[Badassassin]

I appreciate what you're trying to do here OP but lets face the facts: nothing you say or do is going to calm the ridiculous fucking buttanguish that is going on about the ending.



It's funny really. The gaming community wants to be taken seriously as a medium and we talk about how mature we are but then you guys do this. You do realize you've kept up this temper tantrum for a MONTH now, right? You know what you're making the gaming community look like? CHILDREN. Sure, sure, you talk about how gaming can be and is a medium for adults, and should be respected as any other medium, but you never see this shit anywhere else. You know what else sucked? Matrix: Revolutions. But you didn't see fans whining to the producers to give them something else. You didn't see people claiming they "deserved" better. You know, the only movies I can think of that has had such a ridiculously enraged response is the Star Wars prequels, and I can bet that a lot of you who are angry now are the same people who want to burn George Lucas at the fucking stake. And now Bioware is playing the role of a mother buying her whiny kid a candy in the checkout line so that they'll just stop screaming. Come on, just move on, please, this is just getting hard to watch.


/rant

I'd love to know why complaining about the ending and not giving up on it after a month = all the vitriol you apply to them.

Frankly my worst experiences from all this is from people like you who are getting far more worked up then anyone has over the ending.

Because I DO want games to be taken seriously as an art form. I DO want people to know that gamers can be mature adults. But its just... When something like this happens it does no good. You're mad, I'm mad, and everyone else standing on the outside watching is just thinking "what a bunch of kids."

This needs to stop.

This thread is a perfect representation of the situation I feel, people discussing why they like or hate the ending in detail and people on the outside walking in and shouting "ENTITLED BRATS WHINING" and walking back out with a vaguely superior feeling that they're the adults in all this.

You're right, that does need to stop.

Alright, that's fair. To be honest, I dont really care if people take gaming seriously either. Really. I just think its hard to watch people who do care about those things sabotage themselves. You're probably are getting a lot of this, I know it doesnt make me special for saying that this is getting old. But you dont think there's ANY validity in that? Cant we agree that this is getting a little out of hand? I mean, every other thread is the same people saying the same things about how they disliked the ending. Its fine, you cab dislike the ending. Your reasoning is completely valid. EVERYONE on this site agrees with you. So can we be done now? Can we all agree the endings bad and move on? I dont who you guys are arguing against, other than the OP I dont think anyones denying that its a bad ending. I just dont see the point of flooding the forums with this.

 

[Seanfall]

Well said.

In particular:

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.

I wish more people understood this. All the "alternative" endings proposed by the fans have a "win" option (the Indoctrination ending is fine if it's just Shepard last dying hallucination, but the whole "Destroy option works" part of it is silly), which misses the whole point of the game.

I must have missed the part where the WHOLE quarion fleet attacked a reaper. I saw a few ships and fighters and the Normandy but the WHOLE fleet must have been of camera. Not to mention: the Codex entries and the dialogue that talks about a bunch of Dreadnoughts relaying into the middle of the reapers and managing to blow up several and then bug out before the reapers even LINE UP A SHOT. Don't give me that 'we can't defeat them conventially' stuff we've taken down a few on foot. We've sicced a giant freaking worm on these guys. We've over come the odds before. Why not now? Why not spit in the face of a phyrric victory? Why not tell the catalyst to piss off and put it all on the line like we've done every time before hand. Mass Effect is not about entropy, or inevitability. It's about Unity, Strength threw diversity, and overcoming the odds. While I don't think everyone had a problem with no happy ending. And hey my problem goes waaay beyond that. This is in the end a game and if the player works his butt off, gets every asset, then he should be rewarded for his efforts.

Also the Reapers have never faced a threat like this, they've taken the Galaxy before by blindsiding the races, destroying communications and then wiping them out one by one. But we stopped them taking the Citadel. (also Big plot hole, if the Catalyst lives in the Citadel...why didn't he just open the Mass Relay in ME1. That right there is a Black hole sized plot hole.) This time Shepard rallied the entire Galaxy and every fleet he could. Thousands of ships, probably millions of fighters. Of all different races, worlds, technologies. Plus we've reversed engineered their tech. (Thanix weaponry) They didn't see that coming.

Their is a long 39. Minute video that explains in very great detail why the Narrative Cohesion falls apart at the end. It's not about an emotional reaction but still shows rather well I might add why the ending makes no sense in a Narrative viewpoint. I will try to find it and post it at the end of this post so I don't look like I'm making it up.

Also do you love how the OP starts with 'I have a degree in literature and I minored in film studies.' Okay this is a GAME. A Video game. Yes you can take certain things from both of those and apply it to another. But this is a RPG as well, a Book you read and I've read some good ones, in a book your ultimately reading a series of events you have no control over. Which makes horror and mystery writing so good cause you feel powerless. IE: the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and it's two sequels. (Shame Larsson died, I think he had more planned but we'll never know.) And movies are about the same. But Games and RPG's are interactive. It's a lot different BEING the guy under fire then just watching or reading about it. It gives the player an amount of investment in the character. Especially over three games and a ton of DLC split between ME1 and ME2. The OP's post was well thought out, well put. But that doesn't, and probably won't ever, make the players (like me) the customers of this franchise feel any less: Lied too, betrayed, and upset.

It's not that I don't get the ending. I do. I've looked at them all and I see what they were going for. And I don't care, they endings are unsatisfying, come out of nowhere and make no sense in the context of the rest of the game.

Edit: fuck I forgot the link for the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MlatxLP-xs

 

[Elamdri]

Snip

This was probably one of the most insightful and well thought out posts about the ME3 ending that I have read. Good Job!

 

[Darkcerb]

I appreciate what you're trying to do here OP but lets face the facts: nothing you say or do is going to calm the ridiculous fucking buttanguish that is going on about the ending.



It's funny really. The gaming community wants to be taken seriously as a medium and we talk about how mature we are but then you guys do this. You do realize you've kept up this temper tantrum for a MONTH now, right? You know what you're making the gaming community look like? CHILDREN. Sure, sure, you talk about how gaming can be and is a medium for adults, and should be respected as any other medium, but you never see this shit anywhere else. You know what else sucked? Matrix: Revolutions. But you didn't see fans whining to the producers to give them something else. You didn't see people claiming they "deserved" better. You know, the only movies I can think of that has had such a ridiculously enraged response is the Star Wars prequels, and I can bet that a lot of you who are angry now are the same people who want to burn George Lucas at the fucking stake. And now Bioware is playing the role of a mother buying her whiny kid a candy in the checkout line so that they'll just stop screaming. Come on, just move on, please, this is just getting hard to watch.


/rant

I'd love to know why complaining about the ending and not giving up on it after a month = all the vitriol you apply to them.

Frankly my worst experiences from all this is from people like you who are getting far more worked up then anyone has over the ending.

Because I DO want games to be taken seriously as an art form. I DO want people to know that gamers can be mature adults. But its just... When something like this happens it does no good. You're mad, I'm mad, and everyone else standing on the outside watching is just thinking "what a bunch of kids."

This needs to stop.

This thread is a perfect representation of the situation I feel, people discussing why they like or hate the ending in detail and people on the outside walking in and shouting "ENTITLED BRATS WHINING" and walking back out with a vaguely superior feeling that they're the adults in all this.

You're right, that does need to stop.

Alright, that's fair. To be honest, I dont really care if people take gaming seriously either. Really. I just think its hard to watch people who do care about those things sabotage themselves. You're probably are getting a lot of this, I know it doesnt make me special for saying that this is getting old. But you dont think there's ANY validity in that? Cant we agree that this is getting a little out of hand? I mean, every other thread is the same people saying the same things about how they disliked the ending. Its fine, you cab dislike the ending. Your reasoning is completely valid. EVERYONE on this site agrees with you. So can we be done now? Can we all agree the endings bad and move on? I dont who you guys are arguing against, other than the OP I dont think anyones denying that its a bad ending. I just dont see the point of flooding the forums with this.

I've rarely seen the same people arguing but the same themes are always touched on, the reason I feel is that all that's implied by it. And of course new people finishing the game or finalizing there thoughts on it and coming to post about it.

Fan/consumer ownership (not saying they own in strictly speaking, but how much say do we have and how much should game writers consider us when writing) of the story for example is a big topic with a lot to talk about.

Should the ending be changed?

Interpretation of the ending's (indoc theory mainly)

Is game art? if so is the ending artistic? and if so can art miss it's medium and audience?

There's alot to talk about and it all stems from the ending, I personally see it as a good thing and step forward, I haven't seen all the "childish" complaints every games journalist harps on about but even if it is occurring can you really judge one side of an argument based on a few chimps on there side flinging poo? whenever two groups disagree there will always be chimps.

What's better silence acceptance of something you feel could be dramtically better when changed (or kept the same) or active criticism?

 

[Seanfall]

Maybe I've been playing a different series, because the theme was always "hope" there's always hope no matter how grim things look, defiance and victory through co-operation and diversity. I seriously can't comprehend where people are seeing all this hopeless grim fatality in the series, especially after ME2 where you could walk away with no losses. It smacks of grasping at straws to justify the ending to me.

Unusualstranger nailed it basically, and you claim if we ask any sort of questions about the ending we're what? over-thinking it? under-thinking it? just thinking about it wrong? your claims that we might all be put off by sheps death is a big issue I have with all the pro arguments, I assumed shep wouldn't walk away from ME3 simply because it was to easy a way to leave an impact on the player and end sheperd story arc, but I assumed I would have more say in my end and my actions leading up to my end would be meaningfully shown.

It's a big vague plot hole ridden mess made far worse in that it removes the player from the equation almost entirely which is probably there biggest mistake.

It really feels like one or two people sat down after dismissing the rest of the team and came up with a deliberately vague plot hole mess in a vain attempt at a deep ending with last-ability in the interpretations of the fans. But all anyone can see is how ham-fisted the attempt was.

According to a post that was taken down on the Penny Arcade forums that's exactly what did happen. The poster was supposedly a Writer for ME3.

Also yeah I don't know why people are suddenly are 'it was hopeless from the start'...I mean did they just think this was Gears of War3 with a different skin? This isn't Warhammer 40K (I'm a fan of warhammer but apples and oranges here) I'm seriously thinking that a lot of the pro people are people who picked up the series at ME3.

 

[tlgAlaska]

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.

I couldn't read further, because most of the people who dislike the ending didn't really care about Sheppard dying.

I was actually a little pissed that my Shepard apparently survived... after the whole citadel blew up in his face... in space!... and if the godchild didn't lie his life-saving implants should have failed, not that it should matter by that point.

 

[Badassassin]

I appreciate what you're trying to do here OP but lets face the facts: nothing you say or do is going to calm the ridiculous fucking buttanguish that is going on about the ending.



It's funny really. The gaming community wants to be taken seriously as a medium and we talk about how mature we are but then you guys do this. You do realize you've kept up this temper tantrum for a MONTH now, right? You know what you're making the gaming community look like? CHILDREN. Sure, sure, you talk about how gaming can be and is a medium for adults, and should be respected as any other medium, but you never see this shit anywhere else. You know what else sucked? Matrix: Revolutions. But you didn't see fans whining to the producers to give them something else. You didn't see people claiming they "deserved" better. You know, the only movies I can think of that has had such a ridiculously enraged response is the Star Wars prequels, and I can bet that a lot of you who are angry now are the same people who want to burn George Lucas at the fucking stake. And now Bioware is playing the role of a mother buying her whiny kid a candy in the checkout line so that they'll just stop screaming. Come on, just move on, please, this is just getting hard to watch.


/rant

I'd love to know why complaining about the ending and not giving up on it after a month = all the vitriol you apply to them.

Frankly my worst experiences from all this is from people like you who are getting far more worked up then anyone has over the ending.

Because I DO want games to be taken seriously as an art form. I DO want people to know that gamers can be mature adults. But its just... When something like this happens it does no good. You're mad, I'm mad, and everyone else standing on the outside watching is just thinking "what a bunch of kids."

This needs to stop.

This thread is a perfect representation of the situation I feel, people discussing why they like or hate the ending in detail and people on the outside walking in and shouting "ENTITLED BRATS WHINING" and walking back out with a vaguely superior feeling that they're the adults in all this.

You're right, that does need to stop.

Alright, that's fair. To be honest, I dont really care if people take gaming seriously either. Really. I just think its hard to watch people who do care about those things sabotage themselves. You're probably are getting a lot of this, I know it doesnt make me special for saying that this is getting old. But you dont think there's ANY validity in that? Cant we agree that this is getting a little out of hand? I mean, every other thread is the same people saying the same things about how they disliked the ending. Its fine, you cab dislike the ending. Your reasoning is completely valid. EVERYONE on this site agrees with you. So can we be done now? Can we all agree the endings bad and move on? I dont who you guys are arguing against, other than the OP I dont think anyones denying that its a bad ending. I just dont see the point of flooding the forums with this.

I've rarely seen the same people arguing but the same themes are always touched on, the reason I feel is that all that's implied by it. And of course new people finishing the game or finalizing there thoughts on it and coming to post about it.

Fan/consumer ownership (not saying they own in strictly speaking, but how much say do we have and how much should game writers consider us when writing) of the story for example is a big topic with a lot to talk about.

Should the ending be changed?

Interpretation of the ending's (indoc theory mainly)

Is game art? if so is the ending artistic? and if so can art miss it's medium and audience?

There's alot to talk about and it all stems from the ending, I personally see it as a good thing and step forward, I haven't seen all the "childish" complaints every games journalist harps on about but even if it is occurring can you really judge one side of an argument based on a few chimps on there side flinging poo? whenever two groups disagree there will always be chimps.

What's better silence acceptance of something you feel could be dramtically better when changed (or kept the same) or active criticism?

But, you must know, Bioware isn't changing the ending because people didnt like it, strictly speaking. They're changing the ending because of all the pressure they're getting. The only example I can think of that relates to this is, although its very exaggerated, i know, is of a torture victim. That's a better example than a placating mother. All the hate their getting, if fans wanted Shepard to ride off on a flying turtle made of friendship, they'd probably do it at this point.

 

[chinangel]

I hate it when people use this word of 'sacrifice' for the ending of mass effect 3. Because it's NOT sacrifice. like. at all.

A sacrifice is a choice. You see two options and you choose to give your own life up for a certainty (you believe) of some kind of victory.

A perfect example of this is Dragon Age: Origins. The Warden has to make a tough call. Sacrifice them self to kill the arch-demon for good, or put their trust in a shifty, morally-questionable sorceress.

THAT is a perfect example of sacrifice.

Mass Effect 3 however is just shock tactics, or a weak attempt at it. When I was buying the game I KNEW they were going to kill Shepard and I KNEW it was going to be simply because 'this is how you make a memorable ending'. This. IS. Bullshit. It is also very lazy writing.

Endings are NOT memorable because the hero dies at the end. Endings are memorable because the hero overcame great odds. This is not what happens in Mass Effect 3, and writers kind of need to realize that.

Look at Bioshock the good ending shows the main hero living, and with all his daughters, and dying of old age. This is a good ending, and it's memorable. He overcame great odds and was rewarded for doing so.

In Mass Effect 3, Shepard dies (no matter what) and...what? Nobody wins. Earth is destroyed, the races are scattered and this has solved nothing, in fact analysis reveals it has made many many many more problems for the Mass Effect Universe.

"Dur Hurr the main character dying is controversial and dramatic" no it's not. The death of your main character MUST feel organic. It must feel that this is what the game was building to, that there was no way this could be accomplished without this momentous sacrifice, and it MUST be a sacrifice! A CHOICE! NOT me being railroaded into choosing my preferred death.

Lastly, there is respecting the main character. Look how much Shepard has already sacrificed. Friends, Family (in some cases), loved ones, humans, turians, spectres, a chance at a normal life. LIFE ITSELF in one case! Shepard has ALREADY given up so much, and then you're just going to take the rest in the end? (For gender pronoun purposes i'm going to use my shepard for refference, a girl.)

My shep WANTS to stop fighting, but on her own terms. She'd probably find a comm system and tell everyone to glass the Reapers, and then...I don't know..use the Citedal as a battering ram, escaping just in time in a shuttle as it plowed through several dozen reapers, and cause chaining explosions that take out more and fight to some bare victory, but a victory none-the-less and go on to have little blue babies.

This is the thing, Shepard deserves a happy ending above all else. shepard has ALREADY given up so much that killing her at the end feels like a slap in the face to the player who watched Shepard struggle up to now, and to the character who isn't given a fighting chance.

TL;DR.

1) Sacrifice must be a choice, a real choice. Not a railroad (See also: Mordin Solus' death)

2) Endings Must feel organic, and the ending must make sense. Not thrown in because you want to be 'shocking'.

3) Respect the sacrifices of your main character, who has already given up so much to this cause, don't demand their lives as well unless the ending would truly feel empty without it.

 

[Darkcerb]

I appreciate what you're trying to do here OP but lets face the facts: nothing you say or do is going to calm the ridiculous fucking buttanguish that is going on about the ending.



It's funny really. The gaming community wants to be taken seriously as a medium and we talk about how mature we are but then you guys do this. You do realize you've kept up this temper tantrum for a MONTH now, right? You know what you're making the gaming community look like? CHILDREN. Sure, sure, you talk about how gaming can be and is a medium for adults, and should be respected as any other medium, but you never see this shit anywhere else. You know what else sucked? Matrix: Revolutions. But you didn't see fans whining to the producers to give them something else. You didn't see people claiming they "deserved" better. You know, the only movies I can think of that has had such a ridiculously enraged response is the Star Wars prequels, and I can bet that a lot of you who are angry now are the same people who want to burn George Lucas at the fucking stake. And now Bioware is playing the role of a mother buying her whiny kid a candy in the checkout line so that they'll just stop screaming. Come on, just move on, please, this is just getting hard to watch.


/rant

I'd love to know why complaining about the ending and not giving up on it after a month = all the vitriol you apply to them.

Frankly my worst experiences from all this is from people like you who are getting far more worked up then anyone has over the ending.

Because I DO want games to be taken seriously as an art form. I DO want people to know that gamers can be mature adults. But its just... When something like this happens it does no good. You're mad, I'm mad, and everyone else standing on the outside watching is just thinking "what a bunch of kids."

This needs to stop.

This thread is a perfect representation of the situation I feel, people discussing why they like or hate the ending in detail and people on the outside walking in and shouting "ENTITLED BRATS WHINING" and walking back out with a vaguely superior feeling that they're the adults in all this.

You're right, that does need to stop.

Alright, that's fair. To be honest, I dont really care if people take gaming seriously either. Really. I just think its hard to watch people who do care about those things sabotage themselves. You're probably are getting a lot of this, I know it doesnt make me special for saying that this is getting old. But you dont think there's ANY validity in that? Cant we agree that this is getting a little out of hand? I mean, every other thread is the same people saying the same things about how they disliked the ending. Its fine, you cab dislike the ending. Your reasoning is completely valid. EVERYONE on this site agrees with you. So can we be done now? Can we all agree the endings bad and move on? I dont who you guys are arguing against, other than the OP I dont think anyones denying that its a bad ending. I just dont see the point of flooding the forums with this.

I've rarely seen the same people arguing but the same themes are always touched on, the reason I feel is that all that's implied by it. And of course new people finishing the game or finalizing there thoughts on it and coming to post about it.

Fan/consumer ownership (not saying they own in strictly speaking, but how much say do we have and how much should game writers consider us when writing) of the story for example is a big topic with a lot to talk about.

Should the ending be changed?

Interpretation of the ending's (indoc theory mainly)

Is game art? if so is the ending artistic? and if so can art miss it's medium and audience?

There's alot to talk about and it all stems from the ending, I personally see it as a good thing and step forward, I haven't seen all the "childish" complaints every games journalist harps on about but even if it is occurring can you really judge one side of an argument based on a few chimps on there side flinging poo? whenever two groups disagree there will always be chimps.

What's better silence acceptance of something you feel could be dramtically better when changed (or kept the same) or active criticism?

But, you must know, Bioware isn't changing the ending because people didnt like it, strictly speaking. They're changing the ending because of all the pressure they're getting. The only example I can think of that relates to this is, although its very exaggerated, i know, is of a torture victim. That's a better example than a placating mother. All the hate their getting, if fans wanted Shepard to ride off on a flying turtle made of friendship, they'd probably do it at this point.

Strictly speaking that pressure is the sheer volume of people who didn't like it, the same thing.

And if they did they'd be missing the point of what most of the complaints I've read are.

Although that argument rings hollow to me when in ME1 and two you could walk away from a fight with a reaper and a suicide mission intact if the player put in the effort.

I don't know why the current trend for story telling is bleak, bleak death and ruin. Not that I advocate a happy star wars meddle ceremony because we're well past that possibility 10 mins in when earth gets mass invaded by reapers. I didn't feel much when my shep died because this was the final story for him/her I knew that going in and shep was a pretty well written blank slate (Our avatar if you will) for us to view the world, It's the rest of the ending that's so disappointing.

Having shep live certainly doesn't make this story suddenly rainbow colored, if they had him/her live and expanded on what they have they could certainly placate alot of people, remove joker fleeing like a coward (and if it wouldn't kill you to remove the relay splosions all the better, though I feel that was a giant full stop on the series...something I don't understand with such a popular franchise but there you go) and you've got a pretty good continuing on point as either shep or a squad mate in the vein of the dragon age dlc as oriana I think her name was. Even if the continuing on was just a series of text screens again in the vein of dragon age it'd probably placate a lot of the ire felt atm.

 

[DrWilhelm]

*snip*

*snip*

Couldn't agree more guys.

Again, it isn't just that the game lacks a happy ending. That is a problem in my opinion, and in case anyone tells me I can't handle a bleak ending I'll point out that I'm a huge Song of Ice and Fire fan. Bleak is fine when it fits. But the overly bleak ending is only a minor problem in comparison to what's really pissing everyone off. From the moment you hear that the Citadel has been taken and moved to Earth, the plot holes and unanswered questions start piling up exponentially.

What happened to the millions of people on the Citadel?

If the Reapers control the Citadel now why aren't they shutting down the Mass Relays?

If they could take the Citadel so quickly and easily, why didn't they do so earlier?

If the Reapers moved the Citadel because they found out about the Crucible, why is it suggested earlier that they'd already begun constructing the beam/conduit/thing-that-I can't-remember-the-name-of?

How did Shepard manage to survive Harbinger's beam?

What happened to the squad members who joined you in the assault?

How is Shepard managing to breath in an area that appears exposed to open space?

If the Catalyst controls the Reapers as is implied, what was the purpose of Sovereign?

Why couldn't the Catalyst simply activate the Citadel's Mass Relay? Why tie that function to the Keepers?

Why does the Catalyst look and sound like the little boy? Is it reading Shepard's mind, or was the kid a hallucination from the beginning?

Why are the writer's re-introducing the synthetics are dangerous angle from ME1 when all of our interations with synthetics besides the Reapers since then has indicated that they're simply misunderstood? The OP mentions that the Reapers probably have proof of their assertion. Okay, but that's pretty meaningless unless we can see the proof as well. For all we know the Catalyst is lying, or just straight up wrong.

For that matter are we now meant to believe that the Reapers aren't synthetics? Is the Catalyst not an AI? If they are, how come they haven't destroyed all organic life?

Why don't we get any chance to argue with the Catalyst? Yeah I get that Shepard is probably on Death's door at that point, but it's still really out of character.

How is the Crucible doing all the things it does? This applies mostly to the Synthesis/Green ending. Mass Effect has always provided some sort of explanation for the more unusual technologies, but making an entirely new replacement for DNA and retrofitting every single synthetic and organic in the entire galaxy with it is way beyond anything we've seen before. For that matter how does that effect AIs that don't have physical forms? For example, EDI wasn't just inhabiting Eva Core's body, so is the Normandy part organic now? Just the AI core behind the med-bay? And what's to stop these new synth-organics from creating an all-synthetic lifeform later? Man, the Synthesis ending just keeps throwing up new questions the more I think about it, so I'll just stop there.

Why is Joker running away, and how did your squad members get from London to the Normandy?

What happened to Mass Relays exploding with the force of a supernova when destroyed? The blast wave pretty clearly damages the Normandy, so did Shepard just kill pretty much everyone? I mean, those blast waves are visible from above the freaking galactic plane.

In two of three endings the Reapers aren't destroyed. Where do they go? Back to dark space to hibernate for eternity?

If Shepard survives the destroy ending, he doesn't seem to be on the Citadel anymore. Are we meant to believe that someone who was already just about dead managed to survive entry into Earth's atmosphere with ruined armour and no oxygen supply? The last time something like this happened to Shepard it took the Lazarus Project to bring him back to life, and this goes beyond even that.

You see Joker and two squad members get off the Normandy. What happens to the rest of the crew? Assuming they all survived, the Normandy has a crew of maybe forty people. Is that even enough genetic diversity to start a viable colony? Even if it is, pretty much everyone is going to have to get breeding, even the gay crew members. Do the dextro characters just straight up starve to death? If they don't, then do the levo characters starve? Does the result of the synthesis ending make these problems a non-issue? To make something clear, it's this plus the exploding relay stuff that makes me, and presumably a lot of other "haters", think that the ending is too bleak. If there weren't so many horrifying implications surrounding the ending I'd probably be satisfied with the ending's tone. Well probably not satisfied exactly, but certainly a hell of a lot less frustrated.

Assuming the relays didn't kill nearly everyone, how does galactic civilisation recover without the relays? FTL travel is dependant upon fuel supplies and locations suitable for discharging drive cores, and even without those concerns, doesn't it still take about three decades to go from one side of the galaxy to the other? At the very least anyone living in isolated locations dependant upon imported food stuffs are probably screwed.

How does the genophage cure play out? Does Krogan culture mellow out, or is there a repeat of the Krogan rebellions?

Yeah I can still think of more stuff so I'm just going to stop now. Like that Plinkett style review that's floating around points out, by the time the game is over narrative cohesion has gone on permanent vacation. While it is possible to guess at answers for these questions, for most, if not all of them, we really shouldn't have to. There's leaving some questions unanswered to create a sense of mystery, and then theres just not making any sense. There are just so many loose ends, so little closure, and so little consistency.

 

[Seanfall]

I hate it when people use this word of 'sacrifice' for the ending of mass effect 3. Because it's NOT sacrifice. like. at all.

A sacrifice is a choice. You see two options and you choose to give your own life up for a certainty (you believe) of some kind of victory.

A perfect example of this is Dragon Age: Origins. The Warden has to make a tough call. Sacrifice them self to kill the arch-demon for good, or put their trust in a shifty, morally-questionable sorceress.

THAT is a perfect example of sacrifice.

Mass Effect 3 however is just shock tactics, or a weak attempt at it. When I was buying the game I KNEW they were going to kill Shepard and I KNEW it was going to be simply because 'this is how you make a memorable ending'. This. IS. Bullshit. It is also very lazy writing.

Endings are NOT memorable because the hero dies at the end. Endings are memorable because the hero overcame great odds. This is not what happens in Mass Effect 3, and writers kind of need to realize that.

Look at Bioshock the good ending shows the main hero living, and with all his daughters, and dying of old age. This is a good ending, and it's memorable. He overcame great odds and was rewarded for doing so.

In Mass Effect 3, Shepard dies (no matter what) and...what? Nobody wins. Earth is destroyed, the races are scattered and this has solved nothing, in fact analysis reveals it has made many many many more problems for the Mass Effect Universe.

"Dur Hurr the main character dying is controversial and dramatic" no it's not. The death of your main character MUST feel organic. It must feel that this is what the game was building to, that there was no way this could be accomplished without this momentous sacrifice, and it MUST be a sacrifice! A CHOICE! NOT me being railroaded into choosing my preferred death.

Lastly, there is respecting the main character. Look how much Shepard has already sacrificed. Friends, Family (in some cases), loved ones, humans, turians, spectres, a chance at a normal life. LIFE ITSELF in one case! Shepard has ALREADY given up so much, and then you're just going to take the rest in the end? (For gender pronoun purposes i'm going to use my shepard for refference, a girl.)

My shep WANTS to stop fighting, but on her own terms. She'd probably find a comm system and tell everyone to glass the Reapers, and then...I don't know..use the Citedal as a battering ram, escaping just in time in a shuttle as it plowed through several dozen reapers, and cause chaining explosions that take out more and fight to some bare victory, but a victory none-the-less and go on to have little blue babies.

This is the thing, Shepard deserves a happy ending above all else. shepard has ALREADY given up so much that killing her at the end feels like a slap in the face to the player who watched Shepard struggle up to now, and to the character who isn't given a fighting chance.

TL;DR.

1) Sacrifice must be a choice, a real choice. Not a railroad (See also: Mordin Solus' death)

2) Endings Must feel organic, and the ending must make sense. Not thrown in because you want to be 'shocking'.

3) Respect the sacrifices of your main character, who has already given up so much to this cause, don't demand their lives as well unless the ending would truly feel empty without it.

*applause* Well said. Shepard's already given up so much, seen friends and allies died. Must he really die too? Hell some of the people who died, did so you could live. That not only disrespects Shepard's personal sacrifices but the ones of the those who died too.

 

[Vuljatar]

Transhumanism is not a narrative theme of the series. It is touched on only very briefly in the third game. Therefore the Synthesis ending does not make sense from a thematic standpoint (in addition to obviously not making sense from a logical one).

The Control ending makes sense, but only as a bad ending. One major narrative theme of the series is that any attempt to control the Reapers--and indeed most attempts to study them--is doomed to end in indoctrination.

Synthetic/organic cooperation and coexistence is a narrative theme of the series. The Destroy ending ignores this by requiring the destruction of all synthetic life.

Not to mention the myriad continuity errors, including your squadmates teleporting from earth to the Normandy (which is for some reason fleeing the battle), and the Mass Relays exploding, yet apparently not destroying their solar systems in spite of what we have seen in the past.

I dislike the ending because it is stupid, not because it is sad. I firmly believe that the majority of the hate towards the ending is also for this reason. If you think differently, if you believe that most of the critics wanted a sunshine and rainbows ending, then good for you--but it makes no fucking difference at all to the argument if you can't refute my points (or the ones in this article). http://www.gamefront.com/mass-effect-3-ending-hatred-5-reasons-the-fans-are-right/

 

[VivaciousDeimos]

Welcome to the Escapist, please enjoy your stay.

Now then, with respect, I disagree. Your post was well written and thoughtful, but I simply don't agree with your main themes. Perhaps it has to do with how each person plays their Shepard, but thinking about it, the main themes present in Mass Effect for me were: Unity, Self-Determination, and Hope.

I don't have much time tonight, so a few brief, random points before I go to bed:

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.

Shepard's story is totally a Hero's Journey. [a href=http://jmstevenson.wordpress.com/2012/03/22/all-that-matters-is-the-ending-part-2-mass-effect-3/] There is no way it isn't.[/a] Yes, Shepard starts out as an exceptional soldier, and they're famous with humans and the Alliance, but that's about it. The entirety of ME1 is, in fact, you rising to become an even greater Hero.

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.

This is absolutely correct, in that I don't accept what the Starchild is saying, and synthesis is terrifying. You yourself liken it to rape. This is not a good sign for a conclusive, satisfying ending. It's one of those things that seems to get increasingly stupid the more you think about it. You merge synthetic and organic life and the Reapers leave of their own accord--Shepard isn't controlling them. What's to stop the freshly minted cyborgs from creating new AIs down the line? Or is all technology going to now magically be organic as well? And what's to stop the Reapers from coming back and starting the whole thing over again?

So when I say one of the themes for me is Unity, I mean "the unity of diverse cultures for a common goal, while keeping those said cultures diverse"; synthesis is kind of one huge slap in the face to that.

Forgiveness:

Now this section was interesting, and stood out to me quite a bit more. I'm just going to go ahead and say it: Shepard is not a tragic hero. Shepard does not have a tragic flaw, and has not made a tragic mistake that they must atone for through death. Again, maybe this is one of those things that is more heavily dependent on play styles, but the worst that mistake that my Shepard made was destroying the genophage data in ME2, and the consequences and, resolution of that mistake were all handled on Tuchanka before the end of ME3.

Mordin is a beautiful example of a tragic hero, if you're looking for one. His tragic mistake was modifying the genophage, and his redemption and subsequent death, are found in curing it; in directly undoing the damage he helped cause. This type of arc doesn't fit with Shepard.

...in the end Thane died because he believed in you

I know this might be petty cherry-picking, but I need to address this. Thane didn't die because he believed in you. Thane died because he was terminally ill and was stabbed in stomach by an assassin. Who he took out like a BOSS, btw. Thane was always going to die, no matter what you did, and he chose to make his end more meaningful. I'll agree that there are deaths that Shepard is entitled to feel guilt over; Thane's is not one of them.

In the end I think that Shepard has a healthy dose of Survivor's Guilt and PTSD, but she didn't make the kind of mistakes that would push someone into Redemption Equals Death territory.

To conclude my various ramblings: if the three themes that you detailed are the themes that you got from the ME series, then yes, the endings work thematically; I would still say they're executed terribly. But I would argue that those aren't in fact the main themes. At least not the ones I picked up on, and so the endings, for me at least, were quite...problematic.

 

[GimpyGimli]

That was a good April Fools!

Almost got me..

 

[jshrike]

I just want to point a couple things out, because I'm tired and don't feel like writing a whole lot.

1) You can't say the ending would be great if the cut scenes at the end weren't bad. As someone with a literary degree and a minor in film studies, you should be acutely aware that the last thing you experience at the end of the work is generally considered the ending regardless of whether a better ending point occurs earlier in said work. While I don't think your overall analysis is necessarily wrong, right out of the gate you concede that the endings are not, in fact, great. Just as you feel, legitimately by the way, that the ending should not negate everything that came before it, you likewise cannot make the claim that everything that happens after what you perceive as the ending does not influence the overall meaning behind that ending.

2) I agree that sacrifice is a major theme in the game, so much that even if there was an ending where Shepard lives and walked off into the sunset everything that came before would still give it a sense of bittersweet. I think that is a testament to the caliber of writing throughout the series and the game. However, I dismiss the notion that it solidifies the notion that Shepard HAS to die. The potential for it is there, but for every "You won't be alone for long" or hint that death is looming, there are also just as many conversations where someone says "They killed you once and it just made you angry". Additionally, the notion that Shepard deserves to live because he's better then everyone else makes him the worst person alive is so fundamentally misguided that you really should know better, OP. Shepard as a character doesn't care if he lives or dies. He's portrayed as a hero. It's the audience that wants Shepard to live.

My final point is this: The basic nature of the options at the end I don't think are necessarily bad. However, it's the presentation of them that fails. You could have every single point you've brought forward, OP, presented it in a far more cohesive and in depth way, and I think the majority of people would accept it. The change of tone that I feel most people are complaining about is not that the essence of the choices is a change in tone, but the entirety of the Catalyst and the three choices it presents to you. It takes the game from a semi-realistic dark sci-fi and turns it into space magic. At least for me, that's where the change in tone occurred.

Also, as far as the actual endings go, I can see and potentially agree with your analysis on the control/merge options, but not with the destroy, specially under you entropy analysis. If Shepard goes with 'destroy' he isn't proving the Reapers are correct about the synthetic/organic life issue. If anything, he's proving that they're the ones, ultimately, to blame. The Reapers have killed an untold number of sentients over the years. I don't think it's difficult to say that they deserve to die. What the destroy option does is essentially make them terrorists. It is saying "If you kill us, you will also kill these innocents". Which also ties back into the weirdness of the endings. Essentially, why would it? Initially I thought that the Geth would be killed because they have the Reaper code, so destroying the Reapers would destroy their code, ultimately killing them. However, it's not just the Geth, it's all synthetic ("Even you are part synthetic"). Somehow, the Reapers' existence is tied in with all synthetic life? That just seems really lazy writing to me.

If you go destroy, and do enough crap, Shepard didn't actually die, so that sort of negates about 80 percent of your arguments, not to discount them because they are well thought out. It also negates the Catalyst's inference that, since Shepard was rebuilt with synthetic parts, he would die. Which makes the assertion that the Geth, or ALL synthetics, would also be destroyed considerably more suspect. But, of course, there's no possible way to know what happened in regards to that because they didn't offer any kind of conclusion after you made your choice. But hey, since the decision is where the game 'ends', I suppose it doesn't really matter.

 

[endtherapture]

Entropy:

I'm sorry but do you know what Entropy means? Entropy isn't something cyclical or that something is bound to happen - entropy is the natural progression of an isolated system from order to disorder - something bound to happen is inevitability. Entropy is inevitable but inevitability is not entropy.

Entropy is definitely not a core theme of Mass Effect and I don't know where you got that from. The core theme of Mass Effect is strength through diversity, or maybe humanity finding it's place in the galaxy, both themes are thrown out the window in the end due to the ending and how it played out.

Sacrifice was also not a main theme of the game - it might have been a sub theme but it's proven false since you can get EVERYONE to survive the suicide mission.

 

[Shadowkire]

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).

How about this to convince you of the theory(or at least that something weird is happening):

Shepard can live if you choose to destroy the Reapers(and have a high EMS).

Shepard is badly injured by Harbinger's beam, shot by Marauder Shields, bleeds for 5-10 minutes, causes the machine to explode(the one you destroy to choose the destroy option) in his face, the cinematic shows the Citadel exploding with him in it, damage from burning up on reentry as he falls to earth, and finally the collision with the ground.

Shepard my be tough but he is not THAT tough.

Edit:
Also, as others have pointed out, sacrifice is not a theme of the series as you can frequently choose options that will let you have your cake and eat it to.