Magnificent And Important Advent Calendar: Day Sixteen

By RPS on December 16th, 2012 at 12:00 pm.

Day Sixteen of Advent is of course St. Angela’s Day, the day on which we remember that despite our differences, we can all get along if we just ignore each other and internalise our hate into some sort of ulcer or embolism. So with this in mind, let’s gently peel back the flap to see what’s behind Horace’s unwelcoming glare today.

It’s… Mass Effect 3!

Jim: I couldn’t and didn’t anticipate the amount of noise this would generate. On the one hand I didn’t foresee the ending being quiet so objectionable to so many, and on the other I couldn’t have imagined the extent to which they would have been shouted down by internet commentators with different views. I was left in the middle – as satisfied as I’d expected to be by the ending (when are they ever good?) but at the same time pleased with what I’d seen in the game. Yes, I disliked the combat much more than I had when playing Mass Effect 2 (I can hardly even remember 1, now, but I don’t think I liked that much either) but everything else in the game had rung my bell quite competently.

Mass Effect 3 did big, dark fates pretty well. The opening was calamitous, the ending seemed (to me at least) suitably final. An apocalyptic orchestral strike at the end of a very long composition. And there are certain movements in that overall piece that I really did find affecting. One death, a heroic sacrifice, particularly – I think you know the one – made me nod: Bioware knew what they were doing.

I think there’s something else here, though. Which is to say that we really love Guns & Conversation. The reason so many people care so fervently is that these games really speak to us, whatever their problems. We want choice, we want character, and we want studios who can build thriving, fascinating worlds that we want to explore and care about. The Mass Effect games, I hope, represent the first step in making a mature version of that. You could write a science fiction, I suppose, of the sci-fi games to come. Perhaps this is just the prologue. At least that’s what it feels like to me.

Alec:

It’s not really possible to think or talk about Mass Effect 3 on its own terms, is it? It’s very much part of a picture, and all about trying to bring resolution to relationships and characters built up over a half-decade. I found myself far more excited about prospect of meeting Wrex and Mordin again, of seeing what had changed on the Normandy and revisiting worlds affected by my choices in earlier games than I was by the idea of shooting and levelling up and buying model spaceships. There was the sense that I was in the late stages of some titanic Fighting Fantasy book, waiting with excited nervousness to see if I’d made wise decisions or not, to see if I really could make it all the way to the end.

Perhaps that’s what Mass Effect 3 did best – a sense throughout that we truly were in the climactic stages of this grand space adventure, rather than wandering casually through the galaxy. It’s that more consistent excitement/tension/end of the universe spectacle that most shone in this slice of a much-changed trilogy, though I do have to force myself to remember past the deflation and cod-mysticism of the limp ending proper to recall the grand and thrilling doom of the game’s bulk.

Though, perhaps, I should most admire Mass Effect 3 for often defeating my antipathy towards cutscenes. Having built up some excellent, nuanced and highly likeable characters over the course of three games, I was engaged in the cinematics in a way almost no other game manages. On the other hand, this does mean I’m solely praising the game for its presentation rather than its mechanics. I am a mite disturbed by that.

Even if I am writing these words purely due to emotional manipulation, let’s not shirk from high praise for how deft said manipulation was. I even cried like a tiny baby when [redacted] nobly met their fate while seeking a resolution to the Krogan genophage sub-plot which had run through all three games. Truly, their xenoscience studies ranged from urban to agrarian. A fitting end to a well-loved character – and one that, melodramatic license aside, made absolute sense within the broader arc of the series. I guess that’s also why I found the ultimate ending so wretched by comparison – I’m here to see science, not magic, save the universe. It’s those earlier, per-character endings that made Mass Effect 3 the conclusion the series needed.

John: I’ve said everything I can think of to say about the ending of Mass Effect 3, and why it was great. I think it’s important to discuss the other 99.5% of the game too, which was also fantastic.

Looking back at the trilogy, the second part stands out as my favourite – just the song alone is enough to secure that – but III is definitely the most accomplished. It takes a mature step forward, develops a lot more focus, and delivers some massive dramatic beats. What had been made comfortable in the first two games was destroyed, ripped apart, any notion of stability in the lives of the characters we’d grown close to taken away. But at the same time it built on the history you’d created, delivered on choices you’d made – even unknowingly – and let me pursue a relationship with a character begun in one game, and beautifully continued in another. That alone makes Mass Effect 3 utterly unique, and Samantha Shepard’s relationship with Garrus felt so distinctively mine. Their parting words, their final moments in that much discussed ending, were heartbreaking and wonderful, not just because they were expertly written and completely appropriate to the two strongly developed characters, but because the relationship had felt real beforehand.

And I think that hints at the most important thing about Mass Effect 3. Despite the torrents of bullshit that were spoken about the game, it absolutely did deliver on the choices you’d made in all three games, and your decisions absolutely did have massive consequences. An entire race died at the hands of another, and decisions I’d made in Mass Effect 2 dictated how much influence I could have over it in the third game. Characters I’d previously saved were present to make a difference in my experience, and those I’d failed weren’t there to impact my story further. Relationships had meaning, and the events throughout the game (and that’s what is so agonisingly missed by the frothing few) were the result of the last few years of playing this series. And even that final moment, that ultimate ending – while not directly linked to a binary switch I’d flipped in a previous game – my decision was absolutely influenced and driven by the character I’d been for over 100 hours, the friendships she’d had, the experiences she’d been through, and the ongoing telling of a massive space opera that dramatically peaked at that point. To pretend it wasn’t based on how I’d played the game would be madness.

Few games can claim to have done what Mass Effect achieved. Despite so many gaming series having not only reached their third part, but even their 13th, none has ever created such a strong bond between all three, none has created a true trilogy. Mass Effect was a true trilogy.

.

224 Comments »

Sponsored links by Taboola
  1. Ruffian says:

    Looking back, I think alot of the ruckus over ME3 was probably raised, in part, due to most people (i’m betting) having fairly similar save files for it – i mean I certainly tried my best to keep as many people alive as possible through the first two games. I would wager that most other tried to do the same thing, and as such missed out on how things would’ve been different had so and so been dead. I have to wonder if this is something that Bioware should’ve given more consideration for. Just a random speculation.

  2. bill says:

    People got so excited about ME3 that it seemed to be almost more than a gaming event. I had a couple of friends that I didn’t even think played games talk about it.

    It made me want to try ME2 and ME3, but god damn it i can’t make it through the incredibly dull opening of ME1. I keep trying, but it’s just so not fun. And everyone keeps going on and on about FemShep, but she’s absolutely horrendous in the first part that i’ve played. Totally unlikeable and characterless.

    I want to get to the chewy center, but I can’t get through the metallic tasting wrapper.

  3. Alice says:

    I honestly can’t understand how can anyone with even moderately developed capacities for critical thinking about stories and narratives consider ME3 ending as anything but deeply flawed.

    Even if you ignore the pathetic introduction of a deus ex machina (and I don’t see why anyone should), you cannot ignore the glaring plot hole (that became even more pronounced with the Extended Cut’s addition of the “fourth option” in which reapers destroy galactic civilizations once again), which is simply — why?

    Why on Earth would Starchild allow Shepard to take any action at all? It says that the Crucible added new options, but clearly the Crucible did not in any way limit, hinder or obstruct the reapers in their destruction, otherwise the possibility of failure (the fourth option) would not be available.

    Since reapers are still clearly fully capable of succeeding in their intention, the question arises: why should Startchild allow Shepard to destroy the reapers or remove the AI (Starchild) that controls the reapers? The AI was created to find a solution for coexistence of synthetics and organics, namely the synthesis of the two. There is no logic in Starchild allowing Shepard to act against what is the Starchild’s only goal and purpose of existence.

    If the game ending were logical, the only available solution would be Synthesis — choosing either Destroy or Control would result in immediate destruction by the reapers, like in the fourth, added ending, because the AI simply would not allow it. That would be a better conclusion of ME3 because at least it would make sense as a part of the whole story, it would be logical.

    Unfortunately, the whole piece of shit of a solution that Synthesis is would still remain, and all the questions that go along with it — how did the Crucible achieve synthesis between all organics and all synthetics? Did it magically rewrite all of living DNA to include bits of selected computer code, or just the DNA of the intelligent races? Did it rewrite the code of all synthetic beings to include bits of DNA in some way, or did it grant them some kind of emotional insight into the whole “living” thing? Did it make synthetics mortal, or organics immortal, and how? Etc.

    What John said — that the choices you made in the games mattered in the end – is true, actually. You can choose different endings, and based on how you did in the game, you’ll achieve different results.

    But that’s not the problem, the problem is that the ending makes no sense.

  4. Sorbicol says:

    Having first played the game through without a save file (don’t ask) I can say that the character development in this series of games has been uniformly superb – certainly only matched by what Bioware did in Baldur’s Gate 10 years before. Playing it without a save file (and, interestingly without saving absolutely everyone you can) turns it into a horrid mish-mash of a game where the missing characters scream out that they are missing. It also makes a mockery of the Krogan situation, and the entire Rachni situation as well.

    Actually the Rachni thing is the games greatest blunder regardless, including that ending. To have that as one of the the major plot points in the first game and then just let it dribble to an utterly non-sensical “end” in the third was really piss poor writing of the highest order. If they really didn’t know where to go with it then they should have ditch them in the 2nd outing (the best game in the series by far) and then just Aria T’Loak to the main story like they clearly wanted to do all a long. In the end they ballesed that up too with some distinctly mediorce DLC.

    Stand Alone ME3 wasn’t really that great a game – not bad, just not that good. Add it to the toher 2 though and it becomes something really quite special, but you have to add it to the other 2.

    Good, if overlooked multiplayer on it too. in the end I think I spent more time paying that than I did the main story, without ever really intending too. And not just to get my galactic readiness score up either.

  5. zaphod42 says:

    If you’re going to bother to redact Mordin Solus name, you might want to redact a few other lines too. I mean seriously, Rock Paper Shotgun,

    “Truly, their xenoscience studies ranged from urban to agrarian.”

    You might as well just fucking say HEY GUYS MORDIN DIES IN THIS ONE. :(
    I haven’t gotten to play ME3 yet. Huge spoiler.

    I mean, I could have figured it out just from the genophage context, you gotta be more careful. But to quote the Gilbert and Sullivan joke… agh.

  6. rocketman71 says:

    “Despite the torrents of bullshit that were spoken about the game, it absolutely did deliver on the choices you’d made in all three games, and your decisions absolutely did have massive consequences”

    Now now, THAT is bullshit.

  7. Yosharian says:

    Awful, boring game, and such a step down, even compared to the watered-down game that was ME2.

  8. iucounu says:

    I still haven’t played the controversial ending – despite really liking ME3 – because every time I load it up I get sucked into the extremely entertaining multiplayer. I’m about 90% in and seem to have stuck there.

    I simply don’t play online shooters – I barely play anything multiplayer – so to find that I keep coming back to it is really interesting to me. I like the shooting, I’m actually quite good at it, and the vast array of characters and powers keeps the variety up.

    I have a feeling it’s a bit of a cult classic.

  9. Alceste007 says:

    Quite to my surprise, I really enjoyed the multiplayer aspect of Mass Effect 3. I also really enjoyed the single player up to the ending. The ending was pretty awful, but the rest of the game was simply awesome. Mass Effect 3 is definitely one of my favorite games of 2012.