Mass Effect 3 endings [SPOILERS OBVIOUSLY]

[Godwhacker]

Or it's just as simple as this - they thought they wrote a good ending, and were happy with it. And lots of people didn't like it. Happens all the time in books. And cinema. And television. Yes they 'fucked up' in so far as you didn't like the ending, but I'm not going to impute some grand cock-up of process in the writing just because a large chunk of their audience don't like the ending.

Funny, it just occurred to me that the process of writing for a studio or a tv show is crucially different to writing for a book in one way - there is no author-editor relationship, or indeed an author-agent relationship, to give outside feedback on a narrative. Even allowing for a group writing set-up, you've still got to have a bunch of pretty tough independent minds to constantly challenge and catch each other on ideas to keep stuff tight. Anything I've read of The Wire suggests that the reason it was so tight was because it was a group of writers who wrote shed loads of their own books coming together and working on a common project at David Simon's behest.

I'd guess it would be harder to get that kind of set up in a commercial company like Bioware who are geared towards producing a product with a heavy writing element. I'd be curious to know how they go about hiring writers and stopping from getting too psyched about a product from a company point of view, too locked into their own world not to question what they're writing.

That's a fair point. I mean, they did fuck it up, but that's not to say they weren't happy with it.

I still think that the nerd rage is justified. The ending, particularly that "the created will always rebel against the creators" line, is nonsensical. But even if you dispute that, it pisses all over plot details that people who have been really involved will care about. The Geth turn out to be nice. EDI turns out to be nice. The Arrival DLC says that blowing up a Mass Relay wipes out the system it resides in. And... well, there's a magical child who tells you that all the things trying to kill you have been doing so for your own good.

Again, the more you've played of Mass Effect, the more reasons they give you to hate the ending.

Further example: there's that thing in 'The Final Hours of Mass Effect 3' where they've circled "lots of speculation for everyone!". It's like they're saying "We don't know, why don't YOU decide? Answers on a postcard to the usual address". That's not a good ending to any story.

[Wizlah]

(which to me, was what the ending was really missing - those same three choices with your chosen squadmates there to advocate for or against them are suddenly much more interesting).

Yeah, that's a really good point. As ever, I scratch my head that I found marauder shields more annoying than the ending, given that I can clearly see where it could be improved. To me, it's my experience of Mass Effect in microcosm - I found the whole thing really involving despite a lot of the game. By comparison, I really enjoyed a lot of the witcher, but I just didn't feel as close to the characters or invested in it. And I can't figure out why, because those characters weren't written any better than a lot of the ME characters, although they were free of a lot of the clunky expositioned baggage that you had to get out of your companions in Mass Effect.

[Wizlah]

And... well, there's a magical child who tells you that all the things trying to kill you have been doing so for your own good.

I swear, if the avatar of the citadel/catalyst had been different, I'm sure people wouldn't have been as pissed. And as to the general nerd rage about inconsistency, I struggle to see why the ending of ME3 is worse then fudge of Arrival, or some of the more bizarre mechanics you see in ME2. I can see why if you didn't like those, you also wouldn't like the ending. Maybe it's just by the ending, there had been so much of that throughout the series that a lot of people had enough. Mabye some of the audience's tolerance for the apparent-make-it-up-as-you-go-along-bits was higher and so we just don't mind.

Further example: there's that thing in 'The Final Hours of Mass Effect 3' where they've circled "lots of speculation for everyone!". It's like they're saying "We don't know, why don't YOU decide? Answers on a postcard to the usual address". That's not a good ending to any story.

To me, that's proving that they've not really got what their audience like about the series. Like I said before, I'm pretty sure the suddenness and stark ending to Dan Simmon's The Fall of Hyperion mirrors a lot of the problems that people have with mass effect (It's been a long while since I read it, so I can't be sure), but it wasn't a problem in the book. An uncertain ending is not necessarily a bad one, so long as you can take your audience with you.

But certainly, suggesting that it will provide 'lots of speculation' is a poor reason for an uncertain ending. Any kind of ending will provide an audience with some basis for speculation - even if you give some kind of epilogue, it's not going to be enough for a devoted fan. They will theorise plenty about what could of happened next.

[Wizlah]

hrm. just looked at a wiki summary of the fall of hyperion. dan simmons did indeed do an epilogue to it. My memory plays tricks. pah.

[SanguineAngel]

Well, I just finished ME3 at last. Have to admit that I loved it. I had been avoiding spoilers so I am not initmately acquainted with this thread I am afraid but I can see why people might not have liked some of what happened. But really, the biggest flaws that I can see are the exact same flaws as those in the entire series since the start of ME2, namely that the behaviour of The Reapers makes virtually no sense.


Certainly, depending how you play the game, you have enough evidence to decide that synthetic will not necessarily rebel. But really? My interpretation in that the race or being who created the reapers would in no way be able to face their actions if they ever accepted that their "inevitable scenario" was not at all inevitable.

I think Mordin's character is the indication of this. His behaviour mirrored that of the catalyst - he could never accept the possibility that the genophage might not have been necessary. Even as he prepares to give his life he cannot face even that possibility. The implications would be overwhelming. Likewise for the catalyst. And so, yes, his justifications do not hold up. But I suspect that they were never supposed to.

[Kadayi]

Well, I just finished ME3 at last. Have to admit that I loved it. I had been avoiding spoilers so I am not initmately acquainted with this thread I am afraid but I can see why people might not have liked some of what happened. But really, the biggest flaws that I can see are the exact same flaws as those in the entire series since the start of ME2, namely that the behaviour of The Reapers makes virtually no sense.

Well this is the thing SA, essentially when they came up with the Trilogy there was a rationale that Drew K the main writer outlined, and it was all to do with the Reapers basically trying to save the universe from the threat of dark energy (brutal as their efforts may appear). There are hints of this scattered throughout the first two games, and it explained the giant terminator at end of ME2 as well. However when Drew K went off to work on TOR (and then left Bioware to do his own thing), the new head writer Mac Walters basically decided to scrap the entire thing and instead came up with this whole 'synthetics are the true menace!!!' angle.

[c-Row]

I swear, if the avatar of the citadel/catalyst had been different, I'm sure people wouldn't have been as pissed.

I really don't see the problem with the child. For me, it felt like a case of an advanced system taking the shape of something the user can relate to, and Shepard sure had some emotional link to the child, with the nightmares and all.

[Pace]

Well this is the thing SA, essentially when they came up with the Trilogy there was a rationale that Drew K the main writer outlined, and it was all to do with the Reapers basically trying to save the universe from the threat of dark energy (brutal as their efforts may appear). There are hints of this scattered throughout the first two games, and it explained the giant terminator at end of ME2 as well. However when Drew K went off to work on TOR (and then left Bioware to do his own thing), the new head writer Mac Walters basically decided to scrap the entire thing and instead came up with this whole 'synthetics are the true menace!!!' angle.

Sorry if this has been given somewhere before in this thread, but is there a reference for that? Also, how does it explain the giant terminator at the end of ME2? Thanks!

[Hypernetic]

I really don't see the problem with the child. For me, it felt like a case of an advanced system taking the shape of something the user can relate to, and Shepard sure had some emotional link to the child, with the nightmares and all.

How did it know that about Shepard though?

[Nalano]

How did it know that about Shepard though?

You spend a million years harvesting sapient beings, you get a few insights in how they think.

[Sketch]

Sorry if this has been given somewhere before in this thread, but is there a reference for that? Also, how does it explain the giant terminator at the end of ME2? Thanks!

The terminator thing is the 'core' of the reaper where the knowledge etc of humanity is stored. The rest of the reaper is built around that into the shape-thing we're used to.

[SanguineAngel]

Thanks, Kad that's pretty interesting info. I have to admit that knowing that does immediately throw the thing in a different light: Firstly, it's legitimately disappointing for people to know that the story has not ended as intended by the creator. The same thing happens in films quite a lot and is no less annoying. I guess it is a case of ignorance is bliss though - sometimes the new storyline might be better.

Secondly, it highlights for me that this new writer does immediately obsess a lot more about the whole synthetics overthrowing their creators angle. I mean, Legion & Tali's storylines both revolve around that, Javik REALLY goes on about it, the entire illusive man arc is about that, EDI and obviously the end. It sort of taints the whole game but is virtually unrelated to ME1 & 2 where the angle was extremely minor to the point that I would say not significant. ME3's obsessions does seem a bit left field.

Having said that, the original storyline as you describe does sound a little bit too typically Bioware. Given that original intent, however, the "Synthetics are the true enemy" angle does seem a little too straight forward. That matter had already been tackled entirely adequately - better than adequately even, by the Quarian/Geth conflict where whichever way you handled it, you had already resolved it. You'd made your conclusions. In fact, my final decision was very easy as I had already made my own conclusions on synthetic life half a game earlier.

Is there anywhere in particular I can find more detail about the original ending do you know? Sounds interesting at least.

[Hypernetic]

You spend a million years harvesting sapient beings, you get a few insights in how they think.

Insight != mind reading. Understanding the nature of the human mind? Sure. Why the kid though? How would it know about the kid? As far as we know Shepard never told anyone about his nightmares or about the kid at all. So unless you subscribe to the indoctrination theory..

Would it not have made more sense for the "entity" to appear as whoever died on Virmire? The reapers would actually know about that since the Geth were there.

Either way, the whole thing with the kid makes zero sense.

[goatmonkey]

I guess knowing the parts of Mass Effect I enjoyed the most came from the mind of Drew

Karpyshyn

I am now far more interested in whatever he does now he has left Bioware than whatever they do.

I really wish they had stuck to his ending while it was by no means earth shattering it did at least shed the Reapers in an interesting light and explain past plot holes rather than creating multitudes of them.

[Nalano]

Insight != mind reading.

You spend a few million years harvesting sapient beings, you learn a few practices along the way. For fuck's sake, it's canon that they mind control a wide variety of sapient beings just by being in the area. We're practically little more than disposable wifi peripherals to them.

I mean, seriously, we're talking millions of years of technological dominance. It's not like we're version 1.2 and they're version 1.4. We're still scratching our heads over logic boards and they've outpaced biology.

[Hypernetic]

You spend a few million years harvesting sapient beings, you learn a few practices along the way. For fuck's sake, it's canon that they mind control a wide variety of sapient beings just by being in the area. We're practically little more than disposable wifi peripherals to them.

I mean, seriously, we're talking millions of years of technological dominance. It's not like we're version 1.2 and they're version 1.4. We're still scratching our heads over logic boards and they've outpaced biology.

It's not mind control it's more like mind conditioning. They are influencing people's thoughts until they think the thoughts are their own. I suppose that is a form of mind control, but there is nothing I remember canonically about them being able to read minds. The indoctrination process seems to work more like schizophrenia than a form of mind control.

As for how advanced they are, they really aren't that advanced. For a civilization that has been around for (possibly) millions of years (all we really know is that they existed at least one cycle before the Protheans) they should appear to be Gods. Instead they utilize similar technology to us and indeed took hundreds of years to eradicate the Protheans. One would assume that a super advanced civilization who's sole purpose is to exterminate entire galactic civilizations would do a better job. If they have been around for millions of years they should have wiped out the current cycle in minutes.

In fact, their entire methodology is inefficient and illogical from a machine intelligence stand point.

[Kadayi]

Sorry if this has been given somewhere before in this thread, but is there a reference for that? Also, how does it explain the giant terminator at the end of ME2? Thanks!

http://www.strategyinformer.com/news...fect-3-endings

Thanks, Kad that's pretty interesting info. I have to admit that knowing that does immediately throw the thing in a different light: Firstly, it's legitimately disappointing for people to know that the story has not ended as intended by the creator. The same thing happens in films quite a lot and is no less annoying. I guess it is a case of ignorance is bliss though - sometimes the new storyline might be better.

Secondly, it highlights for me that this new writer does immediately obsess a lot more about the whole synthetics overthrowing their creators angle. I mean, Legion & Tali's storylines both revolve around that, Javik REALLY goes on about it, the entire illusive man arc is about that, EDI and obviously the end. It sort of taints the whole game but is virtually unrelated to ME1 & 2 where the angle was extremely minor to the point that I would say not significant. ME3's obsessions does seem a bit left field.

Having said that, the original storyline as you describe does sound a little bit too typically Bioware. Given that original intent, however, the "Synthetics are the true enemy" angle does seem a little too straight forward. That matter had already been tackled entirely adequately - better than adequately even, by the Quarian/Geth conflict where whichever way you handled it, you had already resolved it. You'd made your conclusions. In fact, my final decision was very easy as I had already made my own conclusions on synthetic life half a game earlier.

Is there anywhere in particular I can find more detail about the original ending do you know? Sounds interesting at least.

There was essentially going to be a hard choice at the end. Sacrifice humanity and go with the reapers plan to save the rest of the galaxy, or reject the idea and attempt with the other races to find a way to defeat the imminent dark energy threat. Obviously this was the outline, but with Drew K off elsewhere it got usurped by Walters with the stopping the inevitable rise of the synthetics storyline.

Personally I prefer the dark energy outline because neither outcome requires the waving of a magic wand. It's a decision that is reliant either on allowing the reapers to carry out their grizzly task, or choosing not to and facing an uncertain future. No need for Ghost babies, destruction of mass relays, undermining of all that you've achieved or massive amounts of suspension of disbelief as with the Synthesis ending. To quote the guy in the nerd rage video it's 'talkie techie Sci-fi' which is exactly what the series roots itself in during the first couple of games.

[SanguineAngel]

I particularly liked Drew K's references to the Reapers as twisted nations. In his version of things, perhaps their solution could be viewed as the best course. In effect, all those hundreds of thousands of individuals who are invested into the Reaper could live forever. The species wouldn't die out but really ascend.

Would have been nice to see that sort of thing expanded upon.

I think I would have preferred Drew to stay on just for the fact that I reckon the whole thing would have been more consistent in general. And the Dark energy threat I will grant you is actually more interesting than the racism morally unambiguous synthetics thing

Also, on the topic of the ghost kid - that's the sort of story telling by implication that doesn't need spelling out. It is blatantly obvious that the catalyst can interact with Shep's mind in some form simply because that is happening and we have been privy to his dreams and that is all you need to know. I think going to the effort of explaining it would have been a bit patronising.

[Pace]

Thanks for that Kadayi.
Seems like the story component of ME2 had essentially zero bearing on ME3 then. (really though, that human reaper was pretty dumb.)

One other question in case anyone feels like fielding it: at the end of ME1 we stranded the reapers in dark space by closing off the citadel relay. So, how exactly did they get back? Were they just held up those couple years in transit? If that's all it makes most of the plot of ME1 a bit pointless as well.

[Hypernetic]

Thanks for that Kadayi.
Seems like the story component of ME2 had essentially zero bearing on ME3 then. (really though, that human reaper was pretty dumb.)

One other question in case anyone feels like fielding it: at the end of ME1 we stranded the reapers in dark space by closing off the citadel relay. So, how exactly did they get back? Were they just held up those couple years in transit? If that's all it makes most of the plot of ME1 a bit pointless as well.

That WAS the plot of ME1... You were delaying their invasion by a few years....