What if the original ME 3 ending had been the true one?

Recommended Videos
Mar 12, 2013
96
0
0
Hammeroj said:
Oh, they're allowed to have some. Nobody said EA is literally making their games for them.
This is what you said originally.
Hammeroj said:
Never mind that I find it hilarious you think there's any "artistic integrity" within a developer owned by EA in the first place.
Hammeroj said:
They do what they can within the constraints EA puts them in, "artistic integrity" as a catch-all is really a non-sequitur when we're talking about corporate game development. I'll say what I told you in another thread, your cynicism has much room to grow yet. Learn to differentiate design/artistic decisions from business decisions.

I find it offensive and sad that people wouldn't see the cause for all the absolutely garbage and lazy aspects of the ending. There is absolutely no way Bioware - or, hell, almost anyone - would willingly make an ending as shit as that. What's next, are you gonna try telling me Dragon Age 2 was also a result of Bioware's "artismal integritits"?
So, a developer can't have any artistic integrity because you didn't like the ending? How shallow can you be? I don't get why people keep making it sounds like artistic decisions and business decision are mutually exclusive.

For me at least, when the product is shipped, whether is good or bad, I want the ending to stay the same. Do you find how absurd this whole situation is? Fans now can demand the developer to make them a new ending because they didn't like the original one?

This is a terrible example, but it would be like George Lucas CGI an extra scene where Chewbacca received a medal at the end of Star Wars because that's what fans are crying for it.
 

Olas

Hello!
Dec 24, 2011
3,226
0
0
So there's this dark energy phenomenon that's almost never been mentioned in the series up until now and the reapers were designed to stop this dark energy phenomenon by... harvesting DNA? What kind of sense does any of that make?

That ending would have been much worse than the one we got.
 

Kroxile

New member
Oct 14, 2010
543
0
0
TheVampwizimp said:
I immediately disliked the dark energy ending right when I heard about it. I had already finished ME3 and done some thinking on how to make sense of the ending, and it's a whole lot better than how the original ending would have gone.

Let's say that everything in ME3 was the same as it is now, all the way up until the ending sequence when the Catalyst appears and flips the galaxy upside down. At this point Shepard would be presented with 2 options (1 less than 3, I might add, which is marginally worse than what we did get). In one, Shepard is greatly increasing the likelihood that in a million years (or however long) the entire universe would fly apart and nothing would exist ever again. Pretty bad. In the other, Shepard is ending the human race, handing the entire species over to space monsters to be indoctrinated, liquified while still alive, and fed into a single brain in the hope, I repeat, hope that when it is finished they will have a possible solution to the inevitable death of the universe.

So basically, Shepard has to decide either to murder his entire race on the off chance that it will help everybody else out in the very, very, very long term, or wipe out those squidy bastards once and for all and accept that eventually, all good things must come to an end.

That would be the HEIGHT of a bullshit ending. It's no choice at all, you are either a genocidal fuck for no adequate reason, or you realize that these self-proclaimed saviors of the universe are doing far more harm than good and drop them like a batarian terrorist asteroid. The former option would require your version of Shepard to be completely emotionally neutral, like a reaper himself. No person could spend the better part of their life serving humanity, doing everything in their power to save people and get rid of the bad guys, and then turn around and give up his entire race to be sacrificed by the very monsters he has been trying so desperately to stop, in the vague hope of a solution to an ill-defined and immeasurably distant problem. Human emotion does not allow for that response. It is a ridiculous choice to put at the end of a story where your MAIN PURPOSE is to make friends, unite people against evil, and connect with your fellows on an emotional level.

After hearing what was originally planned, I am damn glad it got leaked. I will take our current ending, flaws and all, over that idiocy any day.
I think the fact that you're getting so fired up over it is indication that, if explained properly, it would have been an excellent end to an excellent trilogy
 
Dec 10, 2012
867
0
0
Kroxile said:
TheVampwizimp said:
I immediately disliked the dark energy ending right when I heard about it. I had already finished ME3 and done some thinking on how to make sense of the ending, and it's a whole lot better than how the original ending would have gone.

Let's say that everything in ME3 was the same as it is now, all the way up until the ending sequence when the Catalyst appears and flips the galaxy upside down. At this point Shepard would be presented with 2 options (1 less than 3, I might add, which is marginally worse than what we did get). In one, Shepard is greatly increasing the likelihood that in a million years (or however long) the entire universe would fly apart and nothing would exist ever again. Pretty bad. In the other, Shepard is ending the human race, handing the entire species over to space monsters to be indoctrinated, liquified while still alive, and fed into a single brain in the hope, I repeat, hope that when it is finished they will have a possible solution to the inevitable death of the universe.

So basically, Shepard has to decide either to murder his entire race on the off chance that it will help everybody else out in the very, very, very long term, or wipe out those squidy bastards once and for all and accept that eventually, all good things must come to an end.

That would be the HEIGHT of a bullshit ending. It's no choice at all, you are either a genocidal fuck for no adequate reason, or you realize that these self-proclaimed saviors of the universe are doing far more harm than good and drop them like a batarian terrorist asteroid. The former option would require your version of Shepard to be completely emotionally neutral, like a reaper himself. No person could spend the better part of their life serving humanity, doing everything in their power to save people and get rid of the bad guys, and then turn around and give up his entire race to be sacrificed by the very monsters he has been trying so desperately to stop, in the vague hope of a solution to an ill-defined and immeasurably distant problem. Human emotion does not allow for that response. It is a ridiculous choice to put at the end of a story where your MAIN PURPOSE is to make friends, unite people against evil, and connect with your fellows on an emotional level.

After hearing what was originally planned, I am damn glad it got leaked. I will take our current ending, flaws and all, over that idiocy any day.
I think the fact that you're getting so fired up over it is indication that, if explained properly, it would have been an excellent end to an excellent trilogy
Eh, I think the fact that I'm so fired up over it is just because I am an uber-fan of the entire trilogy, and I like to think about these things way too much. I didn't even dislike the original ending. I could debate it for hours, weighing its flaws and its merits, but at the end of the day I am not disappointed by the result we got. What I know of this other possibility (which of course isn't everything, but I can only go on what information I have) makes it sound like it would have been way worse. So I am glad I live in this universe and not the ones that got screwed by a worse ending.

Unless there are universes with better endings than the one we got here...in fact, there almost certainly are...Damn! Where's a dimensional portal when you need it?
 

solemnwar

New member
Sep 19, 2010
649
0
0
Okay after reading these summaries of the original ending...

I prefer the one we got. No really. 100% serious. It makes more sense to me that reapers are harvesting galactic civilisations, letting them continue on for (theoretically) forever, while at the same time ensuring that none of them can really make an AI that will wipe out all organic life ever, at least until they can figure out how to make AI stop turning against organics.

This dark energy thing... no. How does harvesting civilisations in cycles, effectively killing any continued knowledge they could make if they had been allowed to go on, help in any way?
 

tautologico

e^(i * pi) + 1 = 0
Apr 5, 2010
725
0
0
Guy Jackson said:
Dryk said:
Tom Waits said:
I'm more disgusted at BioWare's decision to change the ME3 ending to make internet cry babies happy. I mean, how about show some self-respect and grow some backbones for your product. Just thinking about it making me sick.
They changed the ending already at that point, what backbone?
Exactly. A backbone would have resulted in them keeping the original ending.

On topic:
IMO the original ending was way better, but I have to say that's a relative statement. For me the writing went off the rails at the Lazarus Project and just got worse after that, and by the time I was at the end of ME3 I'd long since stopped caring.
I love the Mass Effect series, overall, but the start of ME2 was seriously disheartening. After thinking about it I decided Bioware was never good with plots, but they make good characters, and that's what I like in ME. They made decent stories before only because they strayed very little from the Campbellian Hero's Journey (using it as a template for storytelling, which is bad enough), with the downside that all the stories for their first games are the same. Once they were forced into not reusing the Hero's Journey by making sequels, it became obvious how bad they were.
 

Animyr

New member
Jan 11, 2011
385
0
0
I'm not sure about the specifics of the DE ending (ie Reapers essentially being an R&D group trying to eliminate fuel pollution). But it has several major advantages over the one we got.

1. The human reaper (and thus the entire second game) is pertinent to the overall plot.
2. Since the reapers are in a hurry, several of the plot holes in the second game (why the collectors are in such a hurry, etc) are explained.
3. Earth is actually important. In the game we've got, everyone's always talking about how they need to retake earth, when so far as we can tell earth isn't special. In the DE plot, it would be; presumably the reapers would have dedicated much of their effort to harvesting it.
4. The ending revolves around a scientific process we've actually seen before (harvesting, as opposed to the crucible space magic).
5. The ending twist would present the real threat as something we've at least had referenced and might take seriously (star implosion, as opposed to theoretical genocidal synthetics that don't even exist).
6. It actually gives the title of the series significance (you have to wonder why, out of all the possibilities, they named the series after Mass Effect technology).
7. It is possible for Shepard to live. Because hey, options are cool.
8. It explains several elements of the existing ending, like why they were collecting human bodies on the Citadel. In fact, I strongly suspect that that part was leftover from the DE plot. It makes a measure of sense with DE and none of the ending we got.
9. It does not require much backstory to explain (wheras the ending we got necessitated multiple dlcs to retcon in exposition dumps in an attempt to give the events of the ending context).
10. It doesn't require a new villain to be introduced.
10. It doesn't directly spit in the face of the stories themes about cooperation and unity and overcoming your differences. The ending we got essentially says that we can never be united, and all three main endings has shepard breaking character and implicitly accepting this claim despite all evidence to the contrary.

So, yeah, I'd say it's less problematic. If they'd worked up to it for most of ME3, maybe changed some details to make the reapers more menacing and iron some stuff out, I'd go with that. If they'd worked your other choices into it, of course. That also helps, regardless of the actual ending. Really though, the most important thing they had to get right about the ending was the focus on character and choice. If they'd done that well, I think most of us would have forgiven the reapers having a stupid motivation, or none at all. For me, it's their blunders on that, not the plotting itself, that's the ending's main problem.

Apparently the new DLC kind of fixes that though.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Alright here is pretty much what should be the "final" word on the subject, which is to say there probably won't be one. Simply put the bottom line is that there is more to this entire issue than what the ending was. It comes down to the developers promising that the ending of ME3 would not be an "A B or C" choice. They also promised that all of the questions involved in the series up until this point would be answered. A lot of the rage comes from an app that was released after the fact giving behind the scenes interviews where the Devs flat out said that they lied about everything that was said ahead of time, that they never had any intention of answering all the questions as promised, etc...

People seem to have this bizzare idea that this is just about a truely terrible ending, and really it's not. There is so much more to it than that, and that is why the problem is unlikely to go away as long as EA/Bioware exists, and I expect this issue to constantly resurface when new games are released by them, and every time they make a promise. UNLESS EA/Bioware changes the ending which they should do at this point.

The refusal to change the ending has also inspired a lot of rage, because at the end of the day you have pressure from the industry for EA/Bioware to not cave in simply because in doing so it would encourage fans to rally more often against the industry when it does something like this. A lot of the anger comes from EA/Bioware and the industry trying to claim "creative integrity" when in reality there is evidence from their own word in the app and such, not to mention the leaks, that they themselves had no integrity with the ending and were changing things around at the last minute while lying, and going with an idea suggested by a young fanboy that got taped to the door of one of the higher ups. At the end of the day the entire problem was them sacrificing creative integrity in order to turn Mass Effect from a trilogy into an ongoing franchise where they could string out the central questions of the series indefinatly, rather than having to do any real work on the series and you know, come up with something fresh within the same universe.

This raises the question of course as to how they should have ended the series. The answer to that is rather straightforward. Mass Effect generally follows a pattern, especially Mass Effect 3. That is to say that it gives you a nasty situation where you ultimatly have to make a desician between two less than ideal alternatives, and let your own morality and desired character arc affect Shepard's desician, HOWEVER there is always another solution that represents a sort of "true" path that overrides "Paragon" and "Renegade" options and gives you an ideal "heroic" outcome where you save everyone.

To put things into the context of Mass Effect 3, you might be faced with a situation where you have the choice of say saving an alien race and getting them as an ally for the final battle, or saving an agent and getting him and his men as allies. However if you played previous games and a certain companion of yours had their side mission completed and survived the mission at the end of ME2 your able to save both, and have the added benefit of that companion throwing into your overall alliance as well.

The problem with the ME3 ending above and beyond everything is that all of the options your given suck in their own distinct and special way. What's more all of them intentionally "write out" Shepard (at best with a "maybe" survival). There is no "good" or even upbeat outcome, and that doesn't fit within the theme of the series where as an epic hero the whole point of Commander Shepard is that he/she routinely wins the no win scenario. While it's impossible to track every paticular desician made up until that point (though to be fair Bioware DID promise that, which makes a failure to deliver their fault), there should be a perfect "true" ending for those who played the entire series and did everything right. Basically if you managed to save all your companions in ME2, gather pretty much all of the assets in M3, etc... there should be an ending where the good guys start seriously kicking butt on the Reapers since at this point you've allegedly got stuff based on their own technology, as well as things even they have never fought before like (if I remember) what amount to singularity warheads via one of the assets. At the end of the day the way a perfect scenario would largely play out is that The Reapers wind up facing a united galaxy (something they try and avoid) with technology being developed that is equal to, or even beginning to surpass their own. Earth flat out drives off The Reapers, learns their secrets, and the galaxy is saved, should very much be an option. Let Shepard get a medal and retire or wind up an Admiral, or acting as the new head of the Spectres or whatever.

The point here being that the endings are crap, but might stand better if the game followed it's existing spirit that there is ALWAYS a way out for a dedicated player who has been following the series from the beginning.

To be honest I think a good part of the problem was also that EA/Bioware got too fixated on trying to make Mass Effect self contained so people wouldn't feel like they were "missing out" too much by not playing the other games. However that kind of continuity was part of the point of the series, and truthfully in Mass Effect 3 the pattern should have continued up to the ending where there was a fitting, happy ending. The existing endings on the other hand work for a player who ONLY played ME3 with a ME3 Shepard and has through the entire game been faced with either/or situations as opposed to having allies from previous games save the day if you did all their stuff and kept them alive.

To restore good will, what EA/Bioware needs to do is pretty much create that ending for the people who had been playing a character through all 3 games. Not extend a terri-bad "choose your own suckage" ending and insult everyone paying attention.

What's more I think it's important for the industry to concede to the wishes of the customers when something like this happens (especially given the reveals in that app, and the promises that were made).

People who never really "got it" probably will continue to be tired of this, but honestly I don't think it's going to go away. Especially seeing as EA/Bioware seems intent on doing more with the series. When you build a fanatical fanbase, lie to them, and then stab them in the back so bad that it retroactively turns every bit of joy they formerly derived from a series to disgust, you shouldn't be surprised when it doesn't end within a year.

It also needs to be understood that this isn't just about ME3 though that is where a line is being specifically drawn, it's also about EA/Bioware's other flubs... "Dragon Age 2" and "The Old Republic Online" inspired their own degree of anger, and really when they pushed things with the ME3 ending it all kind of exploded. It's important to understand this is the end result of a pattern of behavior, not in response to one specific incident. If EA/Bioware wants to win back some of it's support it needs to start making meaningful gestures... not the borderline insult that was the "extended ending".
 

UrinalDook

New member
Jan 7, 2013
198
0
0
Tom Waits said:
For me at least, when the product is shipped, whether is good or bad, I want the ending to stay the same. Do you find how absurd this whole situation is? Fans now can demand the developer to make them a new ending because they didn't like the original one?
I have to wonder why you're so adamant that creators can't go back and tinker with a project without destroying their own 'artistic integrity'. Tell me, have you seen Blade Runner? Have you seen the original theatrical cut with the awful, half-arsed Harrison Ford narration over the end? The ending that drops the recurring theme of dreams, the dark connotations of Rachel's limited life span and all of the little hints that Deckard is a replicant in favour of footage from the Shining and sunshine and rainbows drivel? Have you seen the more thematically consistent, arguably more engaging director's cut with intact dream sequences, and a darker sense of ambiguity?

Because if you have seen both, I simply cannot believe you'd be so convinced works of fiction should remain untouched once they are revealed to the public.

For that matter, what are your opinions on J.R.R. Tolkein rewriting segments of The Hobbit to better fit with the Middle Earth domain, to better tie in with Lord of the Rings? Are you suggesting that one of the great paragons of fantasy literature has no artistic integrity because he went back and changed one of his works?

Finally, I find your notion that artistic integrity is something that is apparently granted or revoked on the whim of the audience a little counter-intuitive. Does the artist have no input on when and how their 'integrity' is tarnished?
 

floppylobster

New member
Oct 22, 2008
1,528
0
0
RT said:
floppylobster said:
RT said:
Sorry, no. Nothing can be stupider than synthetics destroying organics to prevent synthetics destroying organics.
I barely paid attention to the ending but even I got that it was more like pruning back a tree rather than cutting it down. It made sense to me.

But bastardofmelbourne is explaining it better. He obviously paid full attention.
Even so... who the fuck cares? The amount of stupid in other areas makes it irrelevant.
If you mean throughout the entire series, then I totally agree.