Darkzabre wrote...
I think the ending was executed poorly because they did not follow some simple rules of writing.
1) Do not introduce new characters or themes at the end. It breaks immersion, not because they do not have a purpose but because they do not follow the flow of what has come before. As you may have guessed, I am referring to the catalyst. Reading up on both sides, I have determined that it was a mistake to introduce him both in that form (the child rustled many jimmies with the overdrawn attempt to manipulate emotion) and at that time. To be used, he needed to be introduced beforehand. The added kicker that he bottlenecked the choices, which I even see as somewhat necessary given the implications for thousands of endings and the desire to set up future stories, was also unforseen. To be effective, it needed to be implicated earlier in the story to a higher degree. We had been conventionally defeating reapers, albeit at great cost, up until this point and that is naturally what will be expected. Finally, the reapers were always the major theme. To change it to synthetics vs. organics (which was at best a secondary theme) was a neat idea. Made things bigger than the war at hand...potentially to make it even more significant and impactful. But to do so without much indication and with 14 lines of dialogue is poor execution and leaves things feeling flat. Good endings can be predicted, not because they are cliche, but because they are already written into the rest of the text.
I think if anything, the worst part was the introducing of the Crucible at the start of the game. That was the random plot element. I really can't understand why people think the issue is the space boy. I liked the ending, given that the ending HAD to be about the Crucible, but I much would have preferred a game without it. The idea that the Protheans managed to build the Crucible even though the Reapers attacked through the Citadel is the ludicrious thing to me. To me, the ending was good DESPITE the problem of the plot
Synthetics vs Organics was a theme through out the whole game - even in ME1, when you first see the Geth worshipping the Reapers I got the impression that this wasn't as simple as it seemed. I loved that the ending meant I had to make a massively difficult decision regarding the fate of synthetics - and thematically it was just really rehash of the heretic geth problem - to save them, do you control them?
2) If a character acts against their usual motivations, you must explain the reason. Two people who get looked at here. Shepard and his blind acceptance of the catalyst logic and Joker retreating the battle. Both probably had a good reason, reasons that can be inferred if you think about it. That is certainly not the point. The point is that character reversals break immersion if not explained. That is simply conditioned in us from all the literature that we have read beforehand. It needs to be accounted for, and they have admitted so for the Extended Cut.
I didn't have so much of an issue with Joker retreating, mainly because none of my characters survived so to me it didn't feel like Joker was abandoning the fight with the crew - rather that he was trying to escape the blast. I probably would have this issue if my ending had turned out differently (so I guess I was rewarded for not doing the random planet scanning quests
) I also don't see how Shepard could do anything BUT blind acceptance of the logic at that point (plus, if you don't accept the logic, the only thing to do at that point is destroy the reapers and you are given that option)
3) Closure is required not for everything, but for things that characters have become invested in (to a reasonable degree). The player became incredibly invested in the fleet that they were building, it needs closure. The player became incredibly invested in the Krogans, that required (full) closure. The player became invested in the LI, that requires closure. The player became invested in space-batman, that requires full closure. People became invested in the squadmates from ME2 and ME3, they all need closure. While a wall of epilogue text would not satisfy many, the Dragon Age epilogue was classy and is a great template for what kinds of things need closure vs. what does not. People will assume the worst about what is not explained. That need not be mocked, for most that is simply their nature. It does need to be accounted for.
Krogan closure: Genophage cure release or not. Not sure how Bioware could have done anything more with this? LI: well, both me and my LI died - that's definitely closure... However, a DAO epilogue text would be welcome, which is what I hope Bioware's extended cut ending is going to be like, rather than a fundamental change in the ending (because honestly, the only way the ending could be better for me is if the whole game is rewritten without the Crucible in it. That isn't going to happen, and I enjoyed the game despite my issues with the concept itself)
Retour en haut
