Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb News

567 Comments

Sticking the Landing

Patrick's lengthy conversation with Entertainment Weekly writer Jeff Jensen on that ending, the concept of fan entitlement, and the perils of player agency.

No Caption Provided

UPDATE: Make sure you read my story from last week, too: "When It's Over, It's Over." I consider this a compliment to that.

--

[Note: This story does contain spoilers about the ending to Mass Effect 3 and TV show The Sopranos.]

The conversation about Mass Effect 3 continues, albeit one that's died down in the past week. That's unsurprising, as players wait to hear about BioWare's next move.

Will the studio change the ending? I'm betting not. Will the studio release downloadable content that provides more context and closure, and will that probably have been the plan all along? I'd say that's likely, but remains unclear.

As part of my story last week about the intense, polarizing, and government-filled reaction to the ending, I spent 30 minutes on the phone with Entertainment Weekly senior writer Jeff Jensen, himself a fellow Mass Effect fan, devotee at the shrine of Lost, and a frequent commentator on pop culture. Much of our conversation did not make it into my piece, but it felt worth sharing, especially the discussions about the concept of fan "entitlement," the precarious nature of endings, and the design struggles of player agency.

Let's contextualize this a bit, too.

This chat happened just as BioWare made its first public statement to fans, and Jensen had not finished the game, though he had read about the endings. As such, we didn't dive much into the narrative misgivings players with the final moments of Mass Effect 3 (which, believe me, I'm with you on), and focuses on the bigger picture.

Hope you enjoy it. It's a bit talky.

-

Mass Effect 3 was the culmination of hundreds of hours of playing in a universe for many people.
Mass Effect 3 was the culmination of hundreds of hours of playing in a universe for many people.

Jeff Jensen: I’ll be honest with you, I only began playing Mass Effect 3 about a week and a half ago. I actually wasn’t really into it in the beginning, and I got distracted by other things, so I have to return to it, but catching up to the controversy is fascinating.

Giant Bomb: It’s interesting because, unlike other mediums, when there’s a television show, when theres’s a finale, or there’s a movie that’s a conclusion to some multi-part series, you can consume that in an hour-and-a-half, two hours. Mass Effect 3 took me 40 hours to finish. It’s not as simple as just booting it up one night so you can catch up, and find out what happened.

Jensen: You felt burned? Were you burned, personally?

GB: Not really. I was disappointed. They were going for something a little more audacious and bittersweet, and I do think a lot of the reaction has stemmed from that. A lot of people play these games to be the good guy that accomplishes everything, and video game endings, as a whole, the trope is that you’re the hero that’s unbeatable and everything turns out alright in the end. They went for something a little more mixed: things are out of your control. Bad things are going to happen no matter what you do, what choice you make. People have some real trouble processing that. Some wanted this “you saved the princess” ending that games have always have. Personally, as a player, it’s really important that they’re having this reaction. You don’t see that very often with a video game.

Jensen: A couple things about that. To prepare for this interview and other things that I’m working on, I actually went and read some sites and actually spoiled everything.

What I find interesting about what you're saying is that...it’s an interesting nuance that you’re talking about. It sounds like whatever scenario you choose, Earth blows up, right?

GB: Earth doesn’t necessarily get destroyed, but the mass relays do get destroyed. The thing that has allowed the universe to be unified, that goes away. In some sense, it’s the universe starting over. Some of them, Shepard dies, some of them, Shepard lives, but as far as I can tell, none of the endings I saw, and none of the endings I’ve read about, involve you saving the day in every capacity. There is no way, no matter what you do, that everything’s going to be alright for everybody. Bad shit happens at the end of Mass Effect 3, and there are consequences for that. I do think that’s part of the reaction--it’s an interesting reaction for BioWare to purposely provoke, but I think it’s an important one. In some way, it’s a commentary on the fact that these games are largely about player choice, and at the end, there’s a subversion of that. Part of this is out of your hands. Maybe that’s looking into it too much, but I do get a sense that there’s a purposeful subversion of the player to reflect that no matter what you do, bad things are going to happen.

Jensen: I really like what you’re saying. It sounds like what BioWare really wanted exactly the kind of dialogue that we are having here, which is, I think, they hoped we could get to the end and everyone that plays this game...it’s having exactly the kind of emotional experience that you’re having but also the kind of reflective experience that you’re having, which seems really worthwhile, and pretty quality. But instead, it gets unfortunately minimized into just the simple issue of satisfaction and catharsis and all that.

No Caption Provided

GB: Specifically, Lost was the first analogy that came to mind. I’m sure, as someone that writes a lot about TV and movies, you witness fan entitlement, or the sense of entitlement that fans feel when they’re on this long journey. Whether it’s a series of movies over several years or a TV show over several years, fans come to expect certain things. I’m curious what you’ve perceived over the years, whether from Lost or other shows and movies, how creators in those mediums deal with that sense of entitlement from fans, given the creators themselves have a vision in mind for how they want things to play out.

Jensen: What I would say that the controversies around the finales of Lost and Mass Effect and other examples, too, that we see in pop culture, like for example last year with the television show The Killing, which also kind of flummoxed a lot of people with how they ended the first season. What we are reminded of is that in entertainment, and especially in the mediums of television and video games, they are ultimately service industries. Which is to say the customer is always right, and that’s going to be frustrating for storytellers to hear because ultimately you exist, your product exists, at the whims and desire of your consumer base. If they’re happy, if they’re unhappy, they’re right. Even if they’re wrong, they’re right. You have to deal with it, right? You have to deal with it.

You look at BioWare’s response to this, the Facebook post last [week], and they are basically out there saying “We hear you, we understand your complaints, we’re looking at some possibilities about what to do, but we want you to know that we hear you.” This just goes to show that even if, behind the scenes, the creators at BioWare are like “Damnit, they didn’t get our story! To address the complaints represent a compromise of our artistic vision.” That sucks, but they’re right. You just have to deal with it.

The similarities between Lost and Mass Effect--there’s another similarity, too. Over the past decade in television, we’ve seen a creative medium come into its own and take some bold leaps forward, but there’s still some room to grow. I think after The Sopranos--or, more specifically, after Twin Peaks--I think a lot of TV storytellers became enamored with this notion that TV writing can be an art and I can be an artist, and I can have my own show and tell my own story and it’s my story, my world, my rules, and I’m going to tell you a story and you’re going to listen to it, and you’re going to follow it, and if I bring you to a certain end that is maybe not necessarily a happy ending or the ending that you want, it’s still my story. It has to be my story if it has any artistic integrity.

The audience push back is “no.” As much as the viewer benefits in this era of artist auteur television, in which the most interesting television is being made by singular creators with singular visions that are just telling their own story, viewers who become fans and who immerse themselves and give themselves over to it and devote so much time to thinking about it and talking about it and dreaming into it, they get a sense of ownership. Their agenda becomes projected onto your agenda. If you’re a writer, if you’re a television network, you benefit from that and you can’t run away from that because they’re keeping you in business. When you get to the end, sometimes what you have is this effect, this clash between shows that the artist, the writer, was creating and the show that the viewer, the fan, thought they were watching. When there’s no sync-up, there’s profound dissatisfaction. For the creators of Lost or the creator of The Sopranos, David Chase, that kind of sticks. At the very least, what you hope for is “Well, okay, you didn’t like my ending, but can you appreciate it? Or can we talk about it?” But, instead, that hopeful conversation gets swallowed up by the vitriol that comes with a more consumer orientation that’s more “I expected one thing and instead you gave me a lemon,” if that makes sense.

When The Sopranos faded to black without absolute resolution, not everyone was happy.
When The Sopranos faded to black without absolute resolution, not everyone was happy.

With video games, it’s interesting because I think video games are on a similar creative trajectory. Video games, the art of video games, has grown by leaps and bounds, I mean, ever since its introduction. The entire history of this medium is defined by radical innovation every other year, it seems. The exhilarating part of watching this industry is watching a medium of entertainment grow and blossom before its eyes, and there’s another aspect to it, too, which is very different from watching any other entertainment medium blossom over the past, you know, 100 years of pop culture, which is...I don’t know if people who were fans of movies or fans of rock music during the golden age of those periods said things like “it’s really cool now, but just wait 10 years from now, because we can all be where it’s going.” Video games are different. The best video games not only are really, really good, but as of right now, they capture your imagination for what they could be 10 to 15 years from now. We have this weird dilemma where we’re exulting what the medium can do, even as we’re bucking up against its limitations here and now. And that brings me to Mass Effect.

The interesting thing about Mass Effect is that it’s on the cutting edge of this whole idea of player choice. There’s a sort of choose your own adventure kind of thing. My dilemma playing Mass Effect is usually, as much as I really appreciate the idea and I understand what they go for and I understand how it affects the story, at the same time, I’m always keenly aware that it never really does what I really want it to do. There’s some kind of creative, artificial intelligence within the game that is constantly changing the game in robust, profound ways in response to your choices, instead of just shunting you to one, two or three other options that don’t feel dramatically different from each other. They’re not choose your own adventure games, it’s choose your own nuance games. It seems like Mass Effect 3 butts up against that, especially with its ending, and also butts up against something else, too, which is...hearing about the controversy about Mass Effect 3, it makes me wonder if the artist creators of the game over at BioWare, how much control over their storytelling do these artists really want to seed to the player?

At the end of the day, one of the exciting storylines that is emerging out of the past 10 years of video games are these creators who see video games as a means of artistic expression, a way of telling a story that expresses ideas that they want to challenge people with, that they want to get people talking to. And the most impactful way to do that is to limit potential interpretations and choices in a story, instead of opening it up open source like and making it everything you want it to be.

It seems to me that these possible endings that Mass Effect 3 gives us at the end of the game are like “Yeah, your choices throughout the game have affected your fate in terms of whether you live or die, they affect, to some degree, your character, but we still want a certain [set] of pre-determined endings that are designed to facilitate the certain point that we have about the world, certain ideas that we want you consider, certain conventions that we want to debunk, and pursuing an artistic agenda like that is tricky when you also want to create a game in which the player, in some ways, is being lead to believe they are the defining artistic decision maker in the game, if that makes sense.

No Caption Provided

GB: There’s definitely that rub between the player and the creator. An unintended consequence of BioWare’s player choice model was an end where players felt like they were gonna have more agency over that conclusion. And maybe it's not so much that they had written their own ending in their mind, but they’d made all these decisions along the way. Knowing game development, a lot of this is largely just a function of they have 18 months to produce a thing, so there’s only so many outcomes they can produce in X amount of time, but my large takeaway from all of this is that it’s a positive thing, showing how much players can care about a story.

But you’re right, once you’ve handed over the keys of the kingdom to the player, they also expect certain things. You can fall back to the passive entertainment experience excuse with TV and movies because the interactive part happens on the periphery and the creators can always retreat back to saying “at the end of the day, what matters is what’s canonical in the television series--that’s a passive experience that we’re writing and presenting.” But games aren’t that way. Mass Effect is definitely totally separate from that--it’s not just you shooting from the beginning of the level to the end of the level. You’re choosing which characters live and die, which races live and die, which planets survive and don’t. Once you’ve given people that power, you’ve opened the box, the genie is out of the bottle. Players feel like they should have this unique impact on this world and how it plays out, and it’s what makes the world "entitlement" feel...it doesn’t seem to work as well for the reaction. Entitlement’s a really easy word to apply to it, but in some sense, players should feel entitled when they’ve been told they’re the ones who are entitled to make these decisions.

When they get to an end that isn’t satisfying, an end where BioWare says they want to make a statement, that goes directly contrary to the player and the agency they had during that experience. I imagine, as a developer, that’s really tough, especially as games try to embrace this whole cinematic appeal and trying to take what lessons they can from other mediums. Games are inherently interactive, and when you start to take steps further to involving player in the story, you’re going to have consequences for the player’s emotional reaction when you take that away from them.

Jensen: There’s something that you’re also touching on here that I really like, which is a really good point. Regardless of your story, whatever medium you’re experiencing a story, what do we want from endings is a really big picture topic here. Some of the themes that you talked about at the beginning of our conversation here come into play, things like the video game experience offers you the chance to be a hero, and hero stories are all about taking their fate into their own hands and are able to impose their will on a world. They may succeed, they may fail, a lot of that depends on skill, but they get to impose their will on the world for better or worse. You go into a very long journey in which you are executing this kind of heroic function--you expect the opportunity to save the day. You think that should be an option that’s available to you, and, in this case, that’s not. In that way, a traditional ending, or what we want from an ending to that kind of story, is subverted. In other ways, just in general, what we want from endings is catharsis, especially a series finale.

When BioWare opened the box with players choices, it opened itself to this kind of reaction.
When BioWare opened the box with players choices, it opened itself to this kind of reaction.

Even though my guess is we may not see the Mass Effect the franchise, it seems to me what was being presented to us was that this is the end, this is the last game at least with this character, in a really involving, immersive, creative endeavor. Here, we really do see analogs to things like Lost or The Sopranos, where a fan base that’s large and rabid and loyal and passionate and really, really invested--they’re not only getting what the final game or final episode, the end of a story, they’re getting the door slammed on a huge part of their lives, a significant thing in their lives. To that end, an ending, then, must give you something more. There’s an expectation of something more. There’s something like a massive emotional catharsis. The ending of Lost really tried to go for that, they tried to win on emotion. “This is the end for all of us, my friends, and we’re all going away, in more ways than one. It’s been a long journey--bittersweet, sad, wonderful, joyous.” And they send us out with tears and a surge fo emotion. Lost completely triumphed int hat regard, but in other areas that people were expecting, the more intellectual areas, payoffs of certain storylines that people were invested in and mysteries that they were really invested in, the storytellers never said “We’re not necessarily as interested in that.” For a lot of people, that was a huge part of that entertainment experience, and they didn’t get it. The catharsis was incomplete.

There seems to be a similarity here with Mass Effect 3, with a fan base that has gone through these games and come to the end, and they want the full meal catharsis--they want everything. They want a heroic end, or the possibility of a heroic end. They want an emotional send-off, they want resolution of certain mysteries, and they all want it to be coherent and skillfully done, and all that. It sounds like Mass Effect just didn’t nail that landing.

GB: When I watched the end of Lost, the emotional arc worked perfectly fine. Yes, I was there for the mysteries and that was the fun of the week-to-week nature of that show, but at the end, I got the emotional closure with each of the characters. It’s different from player to player, just as with each viewer of Lost or any other television show. But with Mass Effect, what they brought to the end was, yes, the mysteries were important, and, yes, the resolution of the conflict with the Reapers was important, but it was the player’s agency. People talk about it in terms of the ending, but it was really just about these very binary choices presented in front of you that didn’t seem to reflect the agency that players had brought in throughout this entire adventure. As a result, they didn’t get get closure through their own agency, which was the motivational factor for these three games, which is why they brought their saved games from one game to the next. It’s interesting to see BioWare run into that as they start to contemplate how they address the reaction.

Jensen: I’m reminded of that whole idea of the observer effect, as well as schrodinger's cat. There’s a world of possibilities inside that box, until you get to the end and you get to the action of opening that box, and looking at it, and in that moment, then, all possibilities collapse and one remains, and only that option remains. Ultimately, then, this experience that was defined by the romance of mystery and possibility suddenly now becomes only defined by this one concrete resolution.

I’m reminded that with Lost--this is a show, week after week, captured your imagination and allowed you to dream into it an infinite number of possibilities and they were really good and clever about it. “What is going on? What is going on?” The interesting thing that happened about the end of Lost is that I honestly think the ending of Lost was an attempt by the show runners to actually communicate a specific point that they had, but while retaining, for the viewer, the quality that they identified as the defining characteristic of Lost, which was mystery, which was should the legacy of this show be one in which we’re still debating and still wondering and theorizing and still speculating years afterwards. I think they thought that by not being clear and concrete and definitive on many of the mysteries that people wanted resolved, they felt they were remaining thematically and artistically true to their creative enterprise and the entertainment experience that we had, which was the conversation about it, the debating about it, the comparison of theories about it, the arguing over it. They tried to thread that needle right at the end with an ending about, “how can we give closure and how can we end the story on our terms that is also satisfying to the audience but is true to the greater whole of this show?” Tricky, tricky. Because it makes you aware that you fundamentally usually watch something and endings usually come to us.

When we get an ending to a story or a final chapter of a story or a final shot, you realize that they’re fundamnetally different animals than the entertainment experience that preceeded it as a whole. The entertainment experience that preceeds an ending is all about sustained tension and sustained mystery, and that final thing is just resolution.

Colored endings may have seemed clever on paper, but players did not respond very well.
Colored endings may have seemed clever on paper, but players did not respond very well.

Endings often just can’t win. Most screenwriters will tell you the hardest part of any movie, any story to tell, is just the end. It’s the thing that changes the most, it’s the endings that are the most fought over among collaborators, they’re the things that are just the hardest to land. Some people get it really, really right, some people get it really, really wrong, and some people land anywhere in-between and our attitudes about them can change. The thing about controversial endings, though, is this: five years from now, my friend, we will all say that the ending of Mass Effect 3 was genius! We’ll catch up to it.

I’m not going to say that people feel that way about Lost, but I would say that people feel that way about The Sopranos. Many, many years after the ending of The Sopranos, The Sopranos just ignited a storm of “oh, that was genius! Genius!” “Genius? Are you kidding me? They wimped out! They didn’t have the guts to tell us what they wanted!” Which is the final fate of Tony Soprano. Defenders of that finale said “Yes, they did. Don’t you get it?” and the people who hate it go “Wait, you’re saying that I’m stupid?” And you go into that downward spiral. Years later, the truth of the matter is, the people who hated it then are probably no greater fans of it now, but in the cooling of it all, the cooling of the vitriol, there is some appreciation. There is grudging appreciation in that camp of “I get what he was saying. I get what he was going for.” And, ultimately, what you remember is that “I defined my enjoyment of that series not by that final moment, but by seven, eight seasons of the greatest television show even written.” That’s how we remember The Sopranos. I think that’s how that’s the fans of Lost are going to remember that show. I think that, for better or worse, the final season of that show will be remembered as something of a cautionary tale. I happen to love it. Do I love it as much as the five seasons before? No, but I really respect and like and was moved by what they did. I think, the further we get away from Lost, it will get more defined by the things that it did right and revolutionary versus the issue of audience satisfaction.

I think Mass Effect as a franchise, these three games taken together, I just can’t see how it’s not regarded as anything less than a landmark. There’s so many things to enjoy about these games and this world and the creative accomplishment of this series than just those final moments. When I played those first two games, the narrative arc of it is maybe one of the things I like the least. I love the way it looks, I love the character design, I love these worlds--there’s so much to really enjoy and love about it. Given some time, people will remember all of what they loved about this thing and now the resolution of it all.

Patrick Klepek on Google+

567 Comments

Avatar image for dany
Dany

8019

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Dany

God, so much dumb in the comments. Patrick is not saying fans want a happy ending or that fans should not be entitled. Read it.

Avatar image for thehumandove
TheHumanDove

2520

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By TheHumanDove

This is what happens when game journalists read each others articles instead of what the fan reaction actually is. It ISNT about a fairly tale ending, and saving everyone. It's about the fact that a game so focused on choice, gives you almost the entirely same result, regardless of 'choice'. That, accompanied by a mess of an ending that is riddled with plot holes and nonsense, is why people hate the ending. That's why. Please, for once, fucking understand that.

Avatar image for sonicboyster
SonicBoyster

508

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By SonicBoyster

A fun read but I was reallying hoping Giantbomb would at least be a little more attentive to the gaming community. The community wasn't looking for a happy ending, at least, not the majority of it. The charity drive made the whole movement look terrible by asking for a happier ending. Spending time around reddit as well as the bioware forums and our own it's readily apparent that we just wanted an ending that fit the lore and made any kind of sense. It wasn't really about a happy ending from the start, and the media warping every conversation into this discussion about happy endings is making the community look far more closed minded and terrible than the diverse spectrum of opinions that are out actually out there.

Avatar image for trucksimulator
trucksimulator

623

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By trucksimulator
@Dany said:

@purplethoughnotquite said:

This is article is disappointing; I like Klepek and this article would be fine if the criticisms weren't warranted. I thought the ending was awful and here I am being told I'm self entitled because ??? Yeah, this is great. Thanks, games journalism.

Read the damn article, that is not the purpose that Patrick makes.

I did and the article is still going along the lines of the strawman created by most games journalist. Get all mad and call us all dumb instead though, hooray you.
Avatar image for mutha3
mutha3

5052

Forum Posts

459

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By mutha3
@Dany said:

@mutha3: Read the article, Patrick goes back to that point.

I have read the article. Have you read my second post? I'll reiterate:
 

You eventually adress the lack of catharsis/closure, but I'm not seeing you acknowledging that a lot of people just think  the ending is stupid and poorly written.

Avatar image for darkdragonmage99
darkdragonmage99

744

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By darkdragonmage99

I'd like to make myself very clear here it's not about not having a happy ening.  
 
Fuck the ending I was expecting and hoping for was to fight to the last man against unbeatable odds and lose. 

Avatar image for nuclear_mouse
nuclear_mouse

84

Forum Posts

655

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By nuclear_mouse

@Dany said:

God, so much dumb in the comments. Patrick is not saying fans want a happy ending or that fans should not be entitled. Read it.

As mentioned a lot earier in the thread, the tone of the article still makes that "happy ending" point seem like the main reason for a lot of people. Simply mentioning some people want more closure isn't really enough to change that feeling given how the article presents its points.

Avatar image for lautaro
Lautaro

454

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Lautaro

@Dany said:

God, so much dumb in the comments. Patrick is not saying fans want a happy ending or that fans should not be entitled. Read it.

GB :Not really. I was disappointed. They were going for something a little more audacious and bittersweet, and I do think a lot of the reaction has stemmed from that.

Sure he also does say that fans aren't entitled, he also kind of says that Bioware mishandled the ending by not having more choice.

He does heavily imply that the unhappy ending is a key factor though.

Avatar image for pj
PJ

1195

Forum Posts

705

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

Edited By PJ

I had no problem with the ME3 ending. I felt that it was in line with the whole game series that your always in a bad situation. Than only by some miracle or cleverness will you get out of a situation intact. The forces you face through out the game just keep ramping up until your at a point were you can't see any way of coming out if alive.

The Reapers have been written up as such a huge force that for hundreds of thousends of years not a single being has ever defeated them. Their force is so overpowering that you soon realize that you have to make a huge sacrifice to beat them. If it were any easier then the Reapers would have died a long time ago.

If you could have just pushed a Reaper self-destruct button at the end and everyone comes out alive and well would belittle a lot of the games story.

I don't feel like them sacrificing the story they've been telling for player satisfaction is a better option.

Avatar image for thefncrow
thefncrow

32

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By thefncrow

I've been really frustrated over this ME3 ending stuff and especially how GB has covered it, because my complaint about the ending basically gets entirely glossed over.

I don't really care that the ending is bleak.

I don't really care that Shepard dies in most of the endings.

What I care about is the fact that everything after Shepard climbing on the elevator doesn't fit with the games that preceded it. What I care about is that the ending takes one of the key themes of the entire Mass Effect series and subverts it without any real reason for subverting it. What I care about is a Shepard who spent the entirety of 3 games acknowledging that having a diversity of life is important and who tried to bring together all the major species in the galaxy by cooperation and not subjugation who somehow flips a switch in the final moments of the game and is willing to go along with the whole "there can be only one" spiel of Space Kid.

What I care most about, though, is that ME3's ending basically forces you to submit to the Reapers. The final choice isn't about how to rid the galaxy of the Reapers, but about how to force the Reapers' solution upon the entire rest of the galaxy, to force some method by which there will be no diversity of life, with the end of the Reaper invasion being essentially incidental to that solution. Either you destroy the sentience of synthetic life, thereby rendering it as something less than what can be properly called "life", or you just flat destroy all synthetic life outright, or you blend all synthetic and organic life together (and don't think about the implications of that for more than 2 minutes or you'll realize how dumb this option really is).

I don't need a happy ending, or an ending where Shepard lives. I need an ending that meshes narratively and thematically with the story that came before, and on that level, the ending of Mass Effect 3 is a complete and utter failure. If Bioware was insistent on this specific ending being the end of the Mass Effect trilogy, then they needed to produce wildly different versions of Mass Effect 1, 2, and 3 in order to seed the themes and plots that they would need to execute this ending instead of spending those games seeding a bunch of themes and plots that explicitly counteract their intended ending.

Avatar image for nuclear_mouse
nuclear_mouse

84

Forum Posts

655

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By nuclear_mouse

@PJ said:

If you could have just pushed a Reaper self-destruct button at the end and everyone comes out alive and well would belittle a lot of the games story.

This isn't the sort of ending a lot of people are clamoring for at all. Again, its not about people surviving or getting a happier ending. Most of the comments in the thread are aligned with that.

Avatar image for dany
Dany

8019

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Dany

@Lautaro said:

@Dany said:

God, so much dumb in the comments. Patrick is not saying fans want a happy ending or that fans should not be entitled. Read it.

GB :Not really. I was disappointed. They were going for something a little more audacious and bittersweet, and I do think a lot of the reaction has stemmed from that.

Sure he also does say that fans aren't entitled, he also kind of says that Bioware mishandled the ending by not having more choice.

He does heavily imply that the unhappy ending is a key factor though.

Most of Patricks complaint is the lack of choice, the lack agency the player has and how the closure provided was inadequate. I believe that specific comment is more related to the audaciousness of the ending.

Avatar image for darkdragonmage99
darkdragonmage99

744

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By darkdragonmage99
@PJ: I would have rather fought to the end with all the forces the galaxy could muster and lose then have a magic sky child show up and give me three option and save the galaxy by destroying it. 
Avatar image for deactivated-5a46aa62043d1
deactivated-5a46aa62043d1

2739

Forum Posts

496

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Not everything is about Lost, Patrick. It wasn't even that great of a show.

Avatar image for geardraxon
GearDraxon

148

Forum Posts

1174

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By GearDraxon

Best part of these comments so far? The percentage that stopped reading because they apparently thought the entire article was about the "we want a happy ending" portion of the disappointed players. I don't understand the rage when discussion turns to examination of the players - if you're looking for more "the ending was stupid and bad and also dumb" pile-on, there's plenty out there.

This article doesn't simply say "gamers are self-entitled," it tries to explore *why*, in this medium as well as others, we feel invested in long-form stories, and have such high hopes for their endings.

Avatar image for cavemantom
cavemantom

273

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By cavemantom

I think this discussion gives the ending too much credit as an artistic endeavor.

Artistry doesn't require a visionary, or an auteur. It's way too intangible to pin to any person, and all the art theory in the world can still lead you astray.

At this point, two things are clear: There never was a continuous story thread planned for Shepard's trilogy, and Casey Hudson took crafting the ending entirely upon himself. The point I want to make with these 2 things is that Mass Effect was never about some singular vision, and for BioWare and Hudson to hang their hats on that for the last 15 minutes of a 3 game trilogy is silly.

Developers like Valve and Irrational continually display that iteration, collaboration and play testing are infinitely more important than any one man's "vision," or any limp claims of "artistic integrity."

Portal 2's ending was astounding. It plucked every string in my heart. It surprised me. It delighted me, and it didn't require an expository Epilogue DLC to do it. It wasn't the brainchild of one person. It wasn't even the original plan for the game's ending; the basic idea was just a joke among the devs that actually resulted in Chel's death.

Collaboration, iteration, and play testing gave us that ending to Portal 2.

It's that much more egregious that a game sold entirely on "player choice" would have one ending decided by one man.

PS: A Mass Relay exploding would be comparable to a supernova. Good luck surviving that, Earth.

Avatar image for duecenage
Duecenage

321

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 6

Edited By Duecenage

It's like Jensen said about Schrodinger's cat, if they gave us all those epilogues, they would be painting themselves into a corner. With the ending a vague as it was, they're free to come up with things for the next Mass Effect game. If they came up with epilogues, they'd have to retcon half of them to begin anew.

And to those that thought those choices in the end didn't mean anything. The couple of minutes I paused and reflected on all the choiced I made. Losing EDI and the newly reformed Geth to destroy the reapers, my goal over an ENTIRE 3 games, controlling the reapers for who knows how long, maybe until I come to realize that the starchild was correct and resume the pattern in a few thousand years... or synthesize everyone, a choice that no one else knew about or could express their opinion about.

I had to seriously reflect on this, and in the end I set out to accomplish my main goal. I didn't completely trust the control option, it would probably be fine for the lifespans of my friends and crew, but I could degrade and resume the cycle, probably end up being the new starchild or something. I felt bad considering the synthesize option. How could I change everybody without hearing out how they feel about the whole thing, that was too god-like for my tastes. Though it pained me to do so, I destroyed the synthetics. I'll miss EDI and it's a bummer about the geth, but to me it was the lesser of all 3 "evils" if you would.

So yeah, at least for me all of the decisions I made throughout the series as a whole affected my choices at the end.

Outside of that, they had a few disjointed scenes, but nothing that really bothered me. I'm kind hoping that all Bioware adds to the scene is Joker noticing something off about the Citadel, flying down and grabbing your guys and saying "Shit, we gotta book it out of here, this ain't right!" Then as he's flying off you see your non-squad friends fighting on the ground looking up at the Normandy as it flies off into space before turning back to the husks and tearing into them some more. That way, the only hole I had an issue with would be filled and the ending can play out the same way it currently has.

Avatar image for lepuke
Lepuke

343

Forum Posts

179

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

Edited By Lepuke

To throw just about everything (my) Shepard works for out the window in the final 1% of the story is lame.

I worked hard to unite every damn race in the game possible, hell even the Rachni were with me at the end. I felt that it was important. Throughout my play through the game repeatedly reminded me it was important. Shepard's death I am totally fine with, if all the means provided towards the end felt sufficiently worth it.

But the payoff at the end of the day is that all that effort and searching didn't really mean shit.

Probably that bugs me the most about it all. Sure there are other reasons, but that is the worst offender to me.

To sum up this post I will simplify it to... "Hey Bioware DM, I roll to disbelieve."

Avatar image for worlddude
WorldDude

235

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By WorldDude

Another well-written Mass Effect 3 article and more people who barely read it here to complain about it. Yay!

Avatar image for barrabas
Barrabas

521

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 17

Edited By Barrabas

I have nothing against the article, but man the industry really needs a moritorium on this topic as a whole. This topic has been discussed to death and then discussed some more.

Avatar image for dany
Dany

8019

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Dany

@WorldDude said:

Another well-written Mass Effect 3 article and more people who barely read it here to complain about it. Yay!

Fucking A, this shit is annoying.

Avatar image for wrenchninja
WrenchNinja

271

Forum Posts

25

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 10

Edited By WrenchNinja

@PJ said:

The Reapers have been written up as such a huge force that for hundreds of thousends of years not a single being has ever defeated them. Their force is so overpowering that you soon realize that you have to make a huge sacrifice to beat them. If it were any easier then the Reapers would have died a long time ago.

The Reapers have only ever achieved anything during the Reaper cycle because they surprised every species till Shepard's cycle. The Keepers signal the Reapers and then the Reapers wipe everyone out in the citadel. They now have control of every mass relay in the galaxy and can turn them off and on at any time. They now have population and census data on the entire galaxy. They can now systematically wipe out organic races system by system without them having to face any kind of real counter attack.

Shepard's cycle is different. The Reapers could not immediately control the citadel and thus gave the races a chance to prepare. We are shown that they are quite fallible, not indestructible or unbeatable, with Sovereign being destroyed by only a portion of the alliance fleet, a destroyer being defeated by a thresher maw and an orbital strike. Uniting the races would have been a clear possibility for victory as this has never happened and it should have been option to tackle the reaper threat. Of course instead we have space magic.

Avatar image for mutha3
mutha3

5052

Forum Posts

459

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By mutha3
@WorldDude said:

Another well-written Mass Effect 3 article and more people who barely read it here to complain about it. Yay!

I read the article. I also had things to complain about.
 
Bite me, I guess.
 
@WrenchNinja
 
I'll never understand the weird obsession a certain portion of the ME fanbase has with the reapers.
 
Like....they're not that interesting, guys. They're pretty generic villains, oversized cuddlefish. Spooky. No one played Mass Effect for the reapers.
Avatar image for lautaro
Lautaro

454

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Lautaro

@Dany said:

@Lautaro said:

@Dany said:

God, so much dumb in the comments. Patrick is not saying fans want a happy ending or that fans should not be entitled. Read it.

GB :Not really. I was disappointed. They were going for something a little more audacious and bittersweet, and I do think a lot of the reaction has stemmed from that.

Sure he also does say that fans aren't entitled, he also kind of says that Bioware mishandled the ending by not having more choice.

He does heavily imply that the unhappy ending is a key factor though.

Most of Patricks complaint is the lack of choice, the lack agency the player has and how the closure provided was inadequate.

I am not trying to be contrarian or anything, I see that Patrick also does acknowledge your points. The complaints about lack of player agency and closure are closer to the problems people actually had. I don't know where this unhappy ending stuff comes from though.

Saying things like "People have some real trouble processing that. Some wanted this “you saved the princess” ending that games have always have." helps nothing. I don't see people making that argument.

To each their own though.

Avatar image for nuclear_mouse
nuclear_mouse

84

Forum Posts

655

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By nuclear_mouse

@Dany said:

@Lautaro said:

@Dany said:

God, so much dumb in the comments. Patrick is not saying fans want a happy ending or that fans should not be entitled. Read it.

GB :Not really. I was disappointed. They were going for something a little more audacious and bittersweet, and I do think a lot of the reaction has stemmed from that.

Sure he also does say that fans aren't entitled, he also kind of says that Bioware mishandled the ending by not having more choice.

He does heavily imply that the unhappy ending is a key factor though.

Most of Patricks complaint is the lack of choice, the lack agency the player has and how the closure provided was inadequate. I believe that specific comment is more related to the audaciousness of the ending.

So are we ignoring the "bittersweet" qualifier of the statement just because it better matches your interpretation of the article? It's not hard to see why people are coming to the conclusions they are.

Avatar image for distrato
Distrato

68

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Distrato

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/03/15/upset-mass-effect-fans-entitled-gamers-or-responsible-consumers/

"If you ran a restaurant and the food you served wasn’t any good, would you prefer to have your customers leave and never come back or would you prefer to hear their complaints and give you a second chance? Would you mockingly refer to them as “entitled” restaurant-goers? For that matter, are people who eat at your restaurant entitled to a good meal?"

I'm so sick of linking to Forbes articles but they are genuinely the only site that "gets" what people are upset about. Video games "journalist' won't understand because their relationship with developers causes a conflict of interest.

Avatar image for ursus_veritas
Ursus_Veritas

413

Forum Posts

7803

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 7

Edited By Ursus_Veritas

@Duecenage: Dude, get out of my mind! That is exactly how I felt about the ending, right down to the deliberations and the final choice I made. To me, rather than having all of my choices suddenly come and impact the game right at the end, it felt like my decisions were met and concluded over the whole game. The journey was for all those decisions to come to fruition along the way. That's why I hope this new DLC stuff is more clarification rather than any significant change - I just want the Normandy stuff explained more than anything, everything else I was personally fine with.

Avatar image for zombie_bigdaddy
zombie_bigdaddy

141

Forum Posts

14

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By zombie_bigdaddy

I find funny (sad) how Bioware specifically said they wouldn't pull a Lost for the end of ME3 ( i think it was the lead writer or Casey). And now that's the first thing people compare it to when they try to defend it.

Avatar image for dany
Dany

8019

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Dany

@Lautaro: He says some, and some probably do but through the rest of the article, I don't see where he picks up on that point because that 'save the princess' ending is what a few fans wanted. But yes, I agree that 'portion of the fanbase' is really small.

@XNaphryz: I thought the ending was bittersweet when I played it, I think the issues people have with the endings are the childchild, RBG cut scenes and the epilogue.

Avatar image for dany
Dany

8019

Forum Posts

416

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Dany

@mutha3 said:

@Dany said:

@mutha3: Read the article, Patrick goes back to that point.

I have read the article. Have you read my second post? I'll reiterate:

You eventually adress the lack of catharsis/closure, but I'm not seeing you acknowledging that a lot of people just think the ending is stupid and poorly written.

He points out the reasons, why he at least, thinks the ending is bad.

Avatar image for redravn
RedRavN

418

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By RedRavN

How am I entitled for wanting an ending that makes some sense? I like the concept behind the ending but the execution felt lazy, rushed and stupid. You "professional" game critics really think that people will look back in ten years and somehow not care about the inconsistancies and plot holes in that huge all encompessing mess that is ME3's ending? Get real. If anything gamers should be more entitled and people should have returned the game if they were dissapointed enough.

When a major band releases a major album that sucks people are not entitled if they shit all over it and tell people to stay away. They are only responsible consumers.

This is not even touching on the lying advertising that bioware shat out promising things that were not there. How is it defensible that things would be the exact opposite of what they said in press releases before launch. Patrick I feel like you've competely missed the point here.

Avatar image for madnesshero88
madnesshero88

56

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By madnesshero88

I don't dislike sad endings. MGS4's ending was no where near happy, but it was complete, it had closure, it had emotion, it had a payoff. The MGS series had just as much crazy shit to tie up as ME (maybe more), and it did it in a near perfect way. So don't tell me there's no precedent for a series with rabid fans and lots of crazy shit going on having a good ending.

Avatar image for memphisslim
MemphisSlim

73

Forum Posts

49

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By MemphisSlim

I'm disappointed. Not in the article, but in a lot of these comments.

I was on your side when it came to a lot of the dismissive elitism coming from a shocking amount of gaming journalists over this ending discussion, but the staff at GB are not part of that. Patrick even waited to play the game through and assess the situation before making this article, and users STILL flamed him despite having a quite reasonable take. He even SAYS outright near the start that he AGREES about the specific narrative missteps that went on, but that this article was about the bigger picture (done with much less condescending arguments than other sites).

I swear, this is why the level-headed users don't bother to lump themselves in with the mules and prefer to stay silent.

Avatar image for marblecmoney
marblecmoney

599

Forum Posts

113

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 9

Edited By marblecmoney

An interesting read even if I don't agree with everything said. A couple thoughts: I don't think people are really upset that the endings are color coded as much as they're upset at how similar all the endings are. Aside from whether the reapers blow up and leave and whether Joker has crazy cyber veins all 3 endings are shot-for-shot the same. I think that really amps up the idea that in the end none of your choices really matter. Even the final choice barely affects the games finale. The ideas that in five years or so people will look back and respect what they tried to do with the ending is, at least for me personally, just false. I guess I really can't know that but I strongly suspect it. The ending of The Sopranos (which I never followed, I might feel differently if I had) did something interesting and maybe in a way daring so I think people can at least appreciate it for that. The end of Mass Effect 3 is simply poorly done in my opinion. I could go on and on about things I didn't like, but I think everything not to like about the ending is already out there so I'll just leave it at that. And everyone in the comments has already gone on about the notion that people are mad because they didn't get to "save the princess." There was more to this article than that and Patrick seems to understand that that's not really the problem most people have. Heck, I'm sure that to some people or to some extent for others that is part of the problem. More than anything I think people are just tired of hearing that, especially when it's made out to be the big reason why those "entitled" gamers don't like the ending. *EDIT* I guess my formatting doesn't stick when posting from an iPad. Giant wall of text looks like shit.

Avatar image for aetheldod
Aetheldod

3914

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Aetheldod
@Dany said:

and the epilogue.

Or lack of it :( 
I know why I hated the ending tho ... because I just wanted Liara to have the blue babies , just a simple (ok tangible ) nod would suffice .... ie the stargazer being an asari. Im torn because in a way I like the more "intelectual" possibilities of the actual ending , but at the same time I agree with all the detractors with the incosistencies and general lamenes of the whole deal.
Avatar image for dancingjesus
DancingJesus

80

Forum Posts

1333

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 16

Edited By DancingJesus

Great article Patrick. Very thoughtful and full of wonderful insight.

I appreciate this kind of coverage on Giant Bomb.

Cheers.

Avatar image for c_cage
C_Cage

57

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By C_Cage

it's not just entertainment that is a service industry it's most commercial art. To create for some one is a service.

Avatar image for lord_punch
Lord_Punch

184

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By Lord_Punch

Something else has been bothering me about the ending, and I haven't noticed it in any of the other discussions.

Let's presume that the ending is taken at face value. No Indoctrination Theory at the moment. Why does the Catalyst give Shepard the 3 choices to rid the universe of the Reapers?

The Reapers are winning by leaps and bounds. All the races of the galaxy have pinned their hopes on a long shot (The Crucible.) Commander Shepard makes it to the beacon and is transported to the Citadel, and eventually makes it to The Catalyst. The Catalyst believes in a very specific dogma (Organics will always create synthetics, Synthetics will always destroy their creators,) and he repeats this dogma to Shepard. Shepard poses no physical threat to the Reapers nor to the Catalyst in his/her condition at that moment. So, why does the Catalyst decide to interrupt the cycle, decide to let Shepard end the Reapers once and for all, and let Shepard decide how to do so?

The Catalyst did not change its mind about its beliefs, it did not express any desire to quit the cycles with the Reapers, and it was not under threat from Shepard nor from anyone else. The only change that happened was that a human made it to the platform with the Catalyst for the very first time, which doesn't change any of what I previously stated.

So, I must ask once again: why does the Catalyst give Shepard the 3 choices to rid the universe of the Reapers?

Avatar image for thatguyfosho
thatguyfosho

73

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By thatguyfosho

If I worked at a company where my managers sent me out on a 4.5 year journey to ensure maximum cooperation between mine and other firms in order to displace another larger one, I would be incredibly displeased when in the end my managers basically told me to fuck off and most of all of my work didn't reflect what actually happened.

Avatar image for mormonwarrior
MormonWarrior

2945

Forum Posts

577

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 21

Edited By MormonWarrior

My real problem wasn't a sense of entitlement - I mean, there is some since the makers of the game do hand the reigns over to you and say there's no canonical story. My real problem was that the ending was nonsensical, lacked common sense, and flew in the face of the tone and build up of the story to that point. For that ending to be one potential ending would be okay...maybe. It felt like the game makers, whether they meant it or not, were basically saying "screw you" to their entire audience. The ending feels like one big deus ex machina or something, some lame excuse to force an ending that doesn't resonate with the idea of player agency and the impact of personal choice. The trouble is there shouldn't be an ending. There should be your ending. Whether that's happy or not is not the point. Whether it feels earned and jives with the whole narrative arc is more important.

Have you seen this video? I don't agree with everything he says, especially the part about there being a "bad" ending (again, I should be the one to decide if my ending is good or bad). But he makes salient points about why the ending just made no sense for the character of Shepard and the world he was a part of.

Avatar image for cavemantom
cavemantom

273

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By cavemantom

@RedRavN said:

How am I entitled for wanting an ending that makes some sense? I like the concept behind the ending but the execution felt lazy, rushed and stupid. You "professional" game critics really think that people will look back in ten years and somehow not care about the inconsistancies and plot holes in that huge all encompessing mess that is ME3's ending?

I dunno. 10 years later, we all realize just how awesome The Matrix: Reloaded and The Matrix: Revolutions were, right?

I thought that was the point BioWare and Mr. Jensen were trying to make: in 10 years, we'll all see The Architect explaining to Ne... er... Shepard how human existence is all part of some cycle of machine-driven genocide and we'll think, "Genius!"

Avatar image for spaceinsomniac
SpaceInsomniac

6353

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By SpaceInsomniac

Jensen: You felt burned? Were you burned, personally? 

GB: Not really. I was disappointed. They were going for something a little more audacious and bittersweet, and I do think a lot of the reaction has stemmed from that. A lot of people play these games to be the good guy that accomplishes everything, and video game endings, as a whole, the trope is that you’re the hero that’s unbeatable and everything turns out alright in the end. They went for something a little more mixed: things are out of your control. Bad things are going to happen no matter what you do, what choice you make. People have some real trouble processing that. Some wanted this “you saved the princess” ending that games have always have.

 
Yeah, literally almost no one cares that you can't "save the princess".  
http://www.giantbomb.com/mass-effect-3/61-29935/what-did-you-think-of-the-mass-effect-3-ending-poll/35-540016/#50
Avatar image for iliyamoroumetz
IliyaMoroumetz

22

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By IliyaMoroumetz

So, the long and the short of it is;

The gaming public are too stupid to understand the 'artistic vision' of egotistical writers who are trying to make a movie and not a video game.

So, it's good to know that you guys hold the same amount of contempt for the players of the game just like the rest of the gaming media, tossing the word 'entitled' as though that's the only word they know.

Avatar image for liquidus
Liquidus

993

Forum Posts

29

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

Edited By Liquidus

I was wondering if I should actually read this article because I know I'd probably just get pissed off at Patrick's lunacy and so I went ahead and gave him the benefit of the doubt. Sure enough, I was irritated by the first 3 paragraphs of the conversation. Seriously, people need to read this article if they seriously think the Mass Effect 3 ENDING(because there is ultimately one ending) is anything more than a failure.

Avatar image for strangematter
strangematter

13

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By strangematter

I find it somewhat ironic that Patrick praised the ending to Lost because of its focus on the characters, when the ending of Mass Effect 3 eschews basically all of the character development you had done over the past five years in favor of a wedged in artistic statement. ME2 got it right-- while the ending was the culmination of that game's story, the device used to conclude that story was firmly centered on your crew. It balanced plot with character in a way that resonated with most of their fanbase. And by its very nature it could be either triumphant or tragic. You can clear the mission with your entire team intact, returning to the Normandy like McArthur to the Philipines, or you can suffer losses, and finish your mission at the expense of the characters you've grown close to for the preceeding 40 hours. And all of that is based on your choices. It works.

There's nothing like that in ME3. All of the character development, all of your emotional attachment to the cast is suddenly superceded by this whole new conflict that you have to make a snap judgment on. It betrays not only a lack of concern for player agency, but a failure on the part of the writer to understand what his game is even about.

Avatar image for sonicboyster
SonicBoyster

508

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By SonicBoyster

When the foundation of the article is a misunderstanding of, or a sweeping generalization of the user-base you're going to get a negative reaction. The ideas about player investment and handing the keys over and then snatching them back to form a coherent narrative are all totally worth discussing, we just need to be a little more careful about how we launch into such a discussion, that's all. People on the boards here love Patrick, and that isn't going to change over a single article, but it's sort of like getting into a discussion about spirituality in video games by opening it up with "We all know the vast majority of gamers are heavily religious" and then spinning the rest of the article out of this premise. There's not much foundation there in reality and it's going to warp my perception of the article in knowing that the author is looking at the industry through a fish-eyed lens and isn't seeing things for what they are.

Avatar image for ptys
ptys

2290

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 14

Edited By ptys

I think everyone's missing the point of why they're not happy with the games conclusion. It's not just the ending that's amiss, it's the whole second half of the game! Once you leave the Citadel for the second time, the story just starts to wrap itself up regardless at what pace you want to take it. There's no Illium, no Omega or Noveria to explore and chit-chat with NPC's... it's an action game with RPG elements. The fact that Mass Effect 2 was such an unprecedented leap from the first in only two short years gave everyone (developer and fans) the unrealistic expectation that they could pull off another masterpiece in such a short time. I remember the collective sign of relief when BioWare announced they were delaying the release till March as I think we all just knew, they weren't going to be able to wrap up such a huge story in just 18 months. Had they not wasted valuable time an resources in the online component maybe they would have had a shot, but this story is just too huge for a two year development cycle. Makes me hope Rock Star or Blizzard pick up the IP as BioWare are just at the mercy of EA and their desperate attempts to catch up to Activation.

Avatar image for pyrodactyl
pyrodactyl

4223

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By pyrodactyl

You know why the discussion on ME3's ending hasn't died yet?

Not because it isn't an happy ending. Not because none of our previous choices matered at the end.

The only reason we're still talking about this is: the ending IS NOT GOOD.

I'm tired of explaining why and this guy does a better job than me anyway

People who try to defend the ending or discusse the fan outrage just don't get it after weeks of debat.

I'll just speek louder so some of them will hopefully hear it this time:

IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT JUST A LITTLE BIT, THE ENDING OF ME3 FEELS LIKE IT WAS WRITTEN BY A 5 YEAR OLD WHO NEVER PLAYED A MASS EFFECT GAME BEFORE.

In the same goddamn game that brought us some of the most impactful story moments of the video game medium.

Avatar image for mrpandaman
mrpandaman

959

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

Edited By mrpandaman

@WiqidBritt said:

@Aegeri said:

@mutha3 Not to mention, that ME3 and ME2 actually spend a good chunk of their story SUBVERTING the concept that AI will always destroy their creators - especially for a Paragon Shepard. This makes the final part of the game even more pants on head stupid.

Except for the part where Shepard is asserting that it doesn't have to be that way... why do you assume it's true just because the Reapers believe it's true? You spend the whole game trying to prove the Reapers aren't all knowing unbeatable mechanical gods, so why do you take what the catalyst says as absolute fact? Control the Reapers, make them go away and let the peace you established between the Geth and Quarrians exist (and the romance between Joker and EDI) if that's what you believe will happen.

The ending is based on a snap decision. The Catalyst gives you no other choice. Earth will fall and there is absolutely no way that even with the combined forces your Shepard has assembled, you cannot win. You have no choice, but to take a blind leap that whatever choice you take, this will be the solution for organics to survive; that the Catalyst is telling the truth.

Also, the Catalyst shouldn't have been confined to being represented by that child, but all the other important crew members that died along the way. And about what is happening to the Mass Relays and the Normandy, I don't believe the Mass Relays exploded in gigantic explosions, but self-destructed in ways that they were rendered unsalvageable and useless. The Catalyst when used, dispersed all the fleets around Earth (but that doesn't explain why certain crew members somehow got onto the Normandy).

Anyways, I don't think it's that journalists have not read fans' reaction, but that the reaction has been this jumbled reaction that only in the last week and a half did it start to become clearer. There are things that some fans are saying that are contradicting their own statements such as not wanting a "happier" ending, but at the same time are asking for elements of an ending that asks for it be "happier." It's kind of been a confusing mess, these last few weeks concerning ME3. Developer, press, and fans not really understanding each other as well as they could.

Avatar image for cavemantom
cavemantom

273

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By cavemantom

@Lautaro said:

@Dany said:

@Lautaro said:

@Dany said:

God, so much dumb in the comments. Patrick is not saying fans want a happy ending or that fans should not be entitled. Read it.

GB :Not really. I was disappointed. They were going for something a little more audacious and bittersweet, and I do think a lot of the reaction has stemmed from that.

Sure he also does say that fans aren't entitled, he also kind of says that Bioware mishandled the ending by not having more choice.

He does heavily imply that the unhappy ending is a key factor though.

Most of Patricks complaint is the lack of choice, the lack agency the player has and how the closure provided was inadequate.

I am not trying to be contrarian or anything, I see that Patrick also does acknowledge your points. The complaints about lack of player agency and closure are closer to the problems people actually had. I don't know where this unhappy ending stuff comes from though.

Saying things like "People have some real trouble processing that. Some wanted this “you saved the princess” ending that games have always have." helps nothing. I don't see people making that argument.

To each their own though.

I'll make that argument, then! Or, at least something close.

There should've been an ending that resulted in Shepard preventing the entire galaxy from being stranded in the Dark Ages.

Tangentially, it is just our galaxy. What about the rest of the universe? There aren't any synthetics or organics to worry about in the rest of the fucking universe? We just lucked out in inhabiting the only galaxy with myriad intelligent life forms and a race of robots built to kill them?