831 réponses à ce sujet

[calis_riakel]

Eternalsteelfan wrote...

Warning: Long as hell. Jesus.

Very nice read, thanks for posting and seems to gel with my interpretations of the series and ending as a whole.

[f1ndmenow]

I enjoyed it

Modifié par f1ndmenow, 17 mars 2012 - 06:19 .

[aimlessgun]

Good read.

[Chris150150xx]

Great post, thanks

[redhaudiof]

Perfect explanation of what is wrong through a story-perspective. I'm actually taken aback by how clear and descriptive this post is. I take my hat off to you sir.

Please learn from this post, BioWare. And implement it.

[King_Gabs]

HOLD THE LINE!

[E5150_Julian]

long as hell but worth it. Hold the line

[Edje Edgar]

Casey Hudson on the ending:

"We always intended that the scale of the conflict and the underlying theme of sacrifice would lead to a bittersweet ending—to do otherwise would betray the agonizing decisions Shepard had to make along the way. Still, we wanted to give players the chance to experience an inspiring and uplifting ending; in a story where you face a hopeless struggle for basic survival, we see the final moments and imagery as offering victory and hope in the context of sacrifice and reflection."

I have no idea to which game he is refering. I havent made an agonizing choice once. Guess his story wasnt as clear as he thought.

Modifié par Edje Edgar, 17 mars 2012 - 08:15 .

[Edje Edgar]

Double post

Modifié par Edje Edgar, 17 mars 2012 - 08:14 .

[Dr_Hello]

@ Original Poster / OP

I agree with a lot of what you had to say. I also think that the ending writing was a bit neglected and forced. Perhaps they ran out of time... Nevertheless BioWare did an excellent job at creating the Mass Effect universe, the characters, their stories and emotional journey, the hybrid gameplay of RPG, action and adventure, and all the rest. Let us not forget that.

Back to the ending(s),
I saw quite a few plotholes as well. Here are some identified:

- One of the most flagrant plotholes in any of the available endings is,
for instance how did Liara who was on my Shepard's squad got to the
Normandy?!

- Next is, what are the chances of the Normandy
crash-landing on an Earth-like planet in the Galaxy?! Very slim. Could
it be an unknown planet in the Sol system? They couldn't have used the
Mass Relay, could they?

- Everyone coming out of Normandy seems
indifferent about what just took place back there on Earth and the
Citadel, which makes us wonder: do they care about Shepard? esp. the
love interest? no mourning?

- For a series which relied upon and
successfully portrayed romantic and emotional content, not having any
type of closure for Shepard's love interest seems very odd.

-
Another plothole is to do with mass relay. If I recall well, in a
previous ME game, Harbinger mentioned if a Mass Relay is destroyed, it
creates a massive explosion in that system. So with all the Relays
exploding, a lot of life and planets would have been destroyed as a
result...? That happens in all endings. A dreadful thought and 'ending?'
therefore, not hopeful at all, it feels like failure to Shepard's cause
and the mission. No victory possible even though we are treated with a
final scene of the Stargazer which feels disconnected, easy way out and
contrived.

- With all the Mass Relays gone, all the species
gathered around Earth, in the Sol system, for the final fight are
stranded. Where do they go live? What resources are around for them to
survive? Does that lead to chaos?

(Taken from my other post, social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10098213/24#10104010)


Catalyst child and decision moment
I didn't mind the Crucible child so much. I was actually glad they revealed the catalyst, for what it was. I thought it was a nice twist to have the kid, who died in the beginning and who haunts Shepard's dreams/nightmares, be the form or image chosen by catalyst. This implies the Reaper master have scanned and browsed Shepard's mind and consciousness. (That's why the indoctrination theory has been a popular speculation which would make the whole ending sensical and meaningful)

I also found the decisions laid out to Shepard to be rather interestingly profound, even subversive depending on how one looks at them, and understood their consequences could only lead to being epic and profound. Unfortunately the endings were not well thought out, which thus dispelled the epic and profound aspects of the decision.

Furthermore, I was hoping meeting the child would lead to a rather cerebral moment -- moment of truth -- but again unfortunately the debate between Shepard and the child was too one-sided and cut-and-dry. If Shepard / gamer had sets of questions available, to satisfy their curiosity and puzzlement, maybe then the whole ending segment would have been better received in gamers/viewers' mind eyes even though they are full of plotholes...


Not so conventional afterall
I wouldn't exactly call Mass Effect as 100% conventional storytelling. Although it does employ some conventional or rather familiar story mechanics and structure, it definitely contains some of the most original and atypical content I've seen in games... and even movies if compared with most of the Blockbuster movies which are all very one-dimensional and unoriginal.
I welcome and like stories which break from the 3 acts-norm and I think storytelling medium such as cinema -- which Mass Effect and other games employ, that is cinema techniques -- doesn't necessarily have to always be about 'telling', cinema is indeed a visual medium above all and, when well executed, staged and sequenced, the 'showing' (non-verbal sequences) can be more compelling.
A great example of non-verbal cinematic sequences is 2001: Space Odyssey's ending and the entire 3rd act: Voyage to Jupiter. It's mystical and compelling to experience, the viewers might not know exactly what they are seeing (yet), nevertheless they can feel something profound and significant is being shown to them. And there is logic to back it up, not just metaphors, as we have now found out after people's analysis.


Brevity and inconsistency
The non-verbal ending sequences might have worked well but, as you'd mentioned, because of their brevity, they feel rushed, not fully thought-out, leaving uninspired questions, confusion and plotholes behind.

And I much agree with your comments about the tragic (or not) hero. BioWare did a great job with Mordin's character and death, it makes total sense, as well as Thane's character death. Not so well developed for Shepard's if he/she needs to die. I was prepared to see Shepard sacrifice him/herself but not so prepared for the subsequent events which imply the whole of galaxy and every gathered species around Earth are scr_w_d. That can't be called a victory in any shape in any meaningful way


Death? but at least better closure
If Shepard dies in version whereby gamers didn't accumulate enough points or assets or whatever, that's very understandable. Gamers just have to try harder therefore. If there's an ending whereby Shepard survives, if gamers excelled, that also works fine... Afterall it's a game and can do what movies or books can't, i.e. design more than one choice and outcome...
In the endings which lead to Shepard dying for good, a funeral scene could have helped to bring closure because right now we are all wondering how did his/her mates and especially the love interest react to his/her sacrifice. If not a funeral scene, maybe an erected statue of Shepard and we see survivors and his/her loved ones come pay respect. ME does a great job at humanizing characters but fails to do so in the final minutes of the series.


Romance / love interest
ME beautifully shows how relationship starts and evolves. Watching the relationship evolves from a mere romance to ME3's "I Love You" is heartfelt... Regretfully, that feature is totally disregarded and of no consequence in the endings. That can only make the gamer think what the point was about the love interest... To break people's heart in the end?


Open-ended
My guess as to why BioWare left it all ambiguous and loose-ended, including the Shepard-survives ending, is because they don't know what they want to do next with the series and wanted to leave opened possibilities. The same goes for the other characters. They might come back in DLCs or other entire ME games, or disappear forever. Nonetheless, the ending cutscene of ME3 could have been better written if not executed on screen... It seems the DLCs are going to be very important more than ever!

EDIT: Added / rewrote parts

Modifié par Dr_Hello, 18 mars 2012 - 12:19 .

[Rane7685]

Eternalsteelfan wrote...



6. Shepherd is not a tragic hero. A common debate I see is between people who think there should be a happy ending and people who think such an ending would be out of place or impossible, sometimes refering to Shepherd as "tragic". The simple fact is, Shepherd has no tragic flaw nor does he make a tragic mistake; had such a tragic characteristic existed, it could be a foregone conclusion he would die. Overcoming the Reapers may be an impossible task, but the impossible is
routinely overcome in the Mass Effect trilogy and other epics. As is, there is nothing in the story that would railroad Shepherd towards an inevitable demise, the difficulty of his task makes his death likely, but there's nothing that should remove the possibility of a happy ending. This may be why many people want a "happy" or "brighter" ending, there's no setup nor payoff to Shepherd's death and without those it may feel cheap; storytelling is all about setup and payoff.

For an example of a good tragic hero, look no farther than Mordin Solus. His tragic mistake was the creation of the genophage. When a desperate need for krogan intervention arose and the genophage was the reason they refused, Mordin fulfilled his tragic role by sacrificing and redeeming himself. There's a big setup for the genophage throughout the series and Mordin's involvement is setup in the second game as a huge internal conflict for him. In three, this all pays off beautifully with either his redemption or brutal murder at Shepherd's hands before he can succeed. This is proper execution for a tragic character. From what I've seen, this is one of the most beloved and well-received storylines in the game; compare that to the ending's reception.


These points were written as a stream of conscious, I'm sure there are plenty of things I've missed or didn't feel like going in depth about, but I think those are some of the most important ones.

I agree with everything you said up until the part I quoted. Allow me to discuss why, although not a tragic hero, Shepard's story is still better served by death.

First and foremost depending on how you played the game and the choices you made you could potentially regard Shepard as tragic. If you fail to unite etc etc those failings could (and perhaps should) result in said tragic end. However for this rebuttal lets assume you play perfectly (unite everyone etc).

A major theme in Mass Effect 3 is sacrifice and loss. Throughout the citadel you hear some tragic stories. As you proceed through the game you witness first hand some great sacrifices (Mordin and Thane to name just two of the most poignant sacrifices). There are many more (Victus' son, Kalreegar) the sense of loss is endemic throughout the entire game. So whilst I agree Shep himself may not be tragic inherently it is in keeping with the broader themes of the narrative that Shep's story should make the ultimate sacrifice.

As an example of how this serves the greater narrative; look at the BSN boards re favourite moments. Mordins death always ranks very highly but one we dont see is Grunt. In my playthrough I saved the rachni queen and ordered Aralakh company to assist in her evac costing them their lives. To buy us time to escape Grunt offered to buy us time. What followed was an incredibly moving scene as we saw Grunt's last stand and apparent death. It was moving and well directed. However all emotion I was feeling quickly evaporated on seeing him survive. I was relieved but the scene lost a lot of its potency. This scene wouldve been a highlight had Grunt died although I admit that this is speculation on my part.

You have suggested that a major theme is hope and I agree but this hope is not served with Shepards survival but rather an epilogue showing the 'hopeful'/pleasant ramifications of your actions. My ideal ending is very similar to yours in fact. I believe Shep shouldve died activating the console/crucible. Following his demise you see the reapers die perhaps some unity of galactic civilisation (turians and krogans shaking hands, quarians and geth rebuilding rannoch etc etc). and the futures of your squadmates (happy endings for edi/joker, etc etc). This is consistent with both themes of sacrifice/loss and hope. Shepards story has come to an end and death is a powerful emotional ending but with an appropriate epilogue is not so tragic. Rather this sacrifice is uplifting, poignant and in my opinion very satisfying

[Dr_Hello]

Edje Edgar wrote...

Casey Hudson on the ending:

"We always intended that the scale of the conflict and the underlying theme of sacrifice would lead to a bittersweet ending—to do otherwise would betray the agonizing decisions Shepard had to make along the way. Still, we wanted to give players the chance to experience an inspiring and uplifting ending; in a story where you face a hopeless struggle for basic survival, we see the final moments and imagery as offering victory and hope in the context of sacrifice and reflection."

I have no idea to which game he is refering. I havent made an agonizing choice once. Guess his story wasnt as clear as he thought.

I can see where he's coming from with his comment.

I wrote the following in another posting with his comment in mind:


From: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10098213/24#10104010

I understand - and agree with the fact that - the endings were meant to
be of epic consequence due to the nature and magnitude of the battle -
man fighting demi-gods type of scenario - and that they would be
bittersweet, with strong possibility of the hero dying, since sacrifice
is a central theme in ME... but hope also, I find, is another central
theme and the endings 'feel' void of hope, fails to inspire hopeful
thoughts.
Maybe it's because of the way the endings are presented,
were executed from script to screen... which leads me to my next
thought.

The epic consequence is portrayed so vaguely and briefly
that it creates confusing thoughts, mixed feelings and lack of closure,
especially for the gamers who did play the whole series and know the
story and character details well.  Imagine watching a TV show which last
100++ hours and you are given an ending which wraps it all up (after
Shepard made his choice in the Citadel) in about 5 min.


I think he could have achieved what he was setting out to do, but the result wasn't well thought through as well as executed. And because of the plotholes, it feels unnatural and against logic for gamers to accept and rationalize what they saw in the ending cutscene. This simplest example is, with all mass relays gone, all the species gathered around Earth, in Sol system, are stranded. Where they'll find food and live? How and can they cohabitate? It's looking bleak and not hopeful at all...

... That cannot be interpreted as Victory, unless something magical took place??!! Doubtful.


EDIT: Grammer and tweaked wordings

Modifié par Dr_Hello, 17 mars 2012 - 11:36 .

[Devils-DIVISION]

Read the whole thing. BioWare would learn a thing or... Nay, they would learn MUCH from you!

[Dr_Hello]

Rane7685 wrote...

Eternalsteelfan wrote...



6. Shepherd is not a tragic hero. A common debate I see is between people who think there should be a happy ending and people who think such an ending would be out of place or impossible, sometimes refering to Shepherd as "tragic". The simple fact is, Shepherd has no tragic flaw nor does he make a tragic mistake; had such a tragic characteristic existed, it could be a foregone conclusion he would die. Overcoming the Reapers may be an impossible task, but the impossible is
routinely overcome in the Mass Effect trilogy and other epics. As is, there is nothing in the story that would railroad Shepherd towards an inevitable demise, the difficulty of his task makes his death likely, but there's nothing that should remove the possibility of a happy ending. This may be why many people want a "happy" or "brighter" ending, there's no setup nor payoff to Shepherd's death and without those it may feel cheap; storytelling is all about setup and payoff.

For an example of a good tragic hero, look no farther than Mordin Solus. His tragic mistake was the creation of the genophage. When a desperate need for krogan intervention arose and the genophage was the reason they refused, Mordin fulfilled his tragic role by sacrificing and redeeming himself. There's a big setup for the genophage throughout the series and Mordin's involvement is setup in the second game as a huge internal conflict for him. In three, this all pays off beautifully with either his redemption or brutal murder at Shepherd's hands before he can succeed. This is proper execution for a tragic character. From what I've seen, this is one of the most beloved and well-received storylines in the game; compare that to the ending's reception.


These points were written as a stream of conscious, I'm sure there are plenty of things I've missed or didn't feel like going in depth about, but I think those are some of the most important ones.

I agree with everything you said up until the part I quoted. Allow me to discuss why, although not a tragic hero, Shepard's story is still better served by death.

First and foremost depending on how you played the game and the choices you made you could potentially regard Shepard as tragic. If you fail to unite etc etc those failings could (and perhaps should) result in said tragic end. However for this rebuttal lets assume you play perfectly (unite everyone etc).

A major theme in Mass Effect 3 is sacrifice and loss. Throughout the citadel you hear some tragic stories. As you proceed through the game you witness first hand some great sacrifices (Mordin and Thane to name just two of the most poignant sacrifices). There are many more (Victus' son, Kalreegar) the sense of loss is endemic throughout the entire game. So whilst I agree Shep himself may not be tragic inherently it is in keeping with the broader themes of the narrative that Shep's story should make the ultimate sacrifice.

As an example of how this serves the greater narrative; look at the BSN boards re favourite moments. Mordins death always ranks very highly but one we dont see is Grunt. In my playthrough I saved the rachni queen and ordered Aralakh company to assist in her evac costing them their lives. To buy us time to escape Grunt offered to buy us time. What followed was an incredibly moving scene as we saw Grunt's last stand and apparent death. It was moving and well directed. However all emotion I was feeling quickly evaporated on seeing him survive. I was relieved but the scene lost a lot of its potency. This scene wouldve been a highlight had Grunt died although I admit that this is speculation on my part.

You have suggested that a major theme is hope and I agree but this hope is not served with Shepards survival but rather an epilogue showing the 'hopeful'/pleasant ramifications of your actions. My ideal ending is very similar to yours in fact. I believe Shep shouldve died activating the console/crucible. Following his demise you see the reapers die perhaps some unity of galactic civilisation (turians and krogans shaking hands, quarians and geth rebuilding rannoch etc etc). and the futures of your squadmates (happy endings for edi/joker, etc etc). This is consistent with both themes of sacrifice/loss and hope. Shepards story has come to an end and death is a powerful emotional ending but with an appropriate epilogue is not so tragic. Rather this sacrifice is uplifting, poignant and in my opinion very satisfying

I don't think you're getting the point the OP is making.

Yes the deaths of Mordin and Thane were handled well, narrative-wise.

The problem isn't with the death of Shepard. Many of us knew that's what can very well await him/her.
It's how it's handled after the fact. If a lead character, and especially the main protagonist, has to die, then have at least one scene after death to create closure for the ones - his/her mates, love interest and even the audience - who knew and loved him/her.

I can bring a good few examples of the death and commemoration of hero as done in other work of storytelling... but the point is:

Instead of a proper post-death scene, we are treated with a Stargazer scene which is contrived and impersonal. In all the endings (forget the one in which Shepard apparently lives), the very last image we see of Shepard, the central character, the actual gamer in many ways (as gamer has been playing Shepard through 3 long games), is a burning image of him/her, going up in flame, in different colors. Even Darth Vader -- once hero turned antagonist -- gets a proper, solemn funeral scene in Star Wars. This scene allows for surrounding characters and audience to take a moment to reflect upon his life and what just took place. That's an important missing piece in the endings of ME. 

Modifié par Dr_Hello, 18 mars 2012 - 12:32 .

[Crasher027]

 I agree largely with the OP except one point;

I believe the Catalyst/guardian/smallmagicgodchild at the end was explaining that the reason the Reapers periodically wiped out all life, wasn't exactly because synthetics couldn't get along with sentient organics, it was because of the inherent risk synthetics (like the Geth) possed to all life, not just the sentient. Which is a reasonable point, synthetic creatures don't need living creatures for anything. The best way I've come up with to think of the Reapers coming to kill all life, isn't entirely reproduction, rather more like trimming a hedge... Wipe out the advanced life so synthetics are never put in a position where they can destroy all life. I might be speaking out of my ass though, the ending was a bleary eyed haze that I walked away from confused and disoriented. 

Otherwise entirely agree though. 

[Arppis]

Great post and good read.

I didn't think the endings were so bad. But it does suck that there is lack of closure. They propably wanted players to "piece out" the missing bits themselves and make their own conclusions.

Edje Edgar wrote...

Casey Hudson on the ending:

"We
always intended that the scale of the conflict and the underlying theme
of sacrifice would lead to a bittersweet ending—to do otherwise would
betray the agonizing decisions Shepard had to make along the way.
Still, we wanted to give players the chance to experience an inspiring
and uplifting ending; in a story where you face a hopeless struggle for
basic survival, we see the final moments and imagery as offering victory
and hope in the context of sacrifice and reflection."

I have no
idea to which game he is refering. I havent made an agonizing choice
once. Guess his story wasnt as clear as he thought.

To be fair, he propably means the Geth Vs. Quarian decission, if you haven't set it up just right. It's a hard choice if you are forced to choose between the two. Not to mention if you want the Salarian help in the Tuchanka, you need to betray both, Wrex and Mordin. That's a hard thing to do too.

Ending decission is hard in a way too. You can kill synthetics in expense of killing the Reapers. You may sacrifice your life to find a "middle ground", but you know Reapers will get away with it. Or you can manipulate all living things in galaxy, to make sure synthetics and meatbags don't fight ever again.

But yeah, if your mind and morals are clear, it shouldn't be too hard decission to make.

Modifié par Arppis, 17 mars 2012 - 09:11 .

[DeadLetterBox]

Great post, thank you.

Also worth noting is that in a video game the writers have an option that screen writers do not. They can put in the ending that is expected where the hero lives, the ending that is expected where the hero dies saving everything, and the weird artsy ending. They don't have to choose. I don't understand why they decided to limit themselves like this, but it's unfortunate.

[Edje Edgar]

Arppis wrote...

Great post and good read.

I didn't think the endings were so bad. But it does suck that there is lack of closure. They propably wanted players to "piece out" the missing bits themselves and make their own conclusions.

Edje Edgar wrote...

Casey Hudson on the ending:

"We always intended that the scale of the conflict and the underlying theme of sacrifice would lead to a bittersweet ending—to do otherwise would betray the agonizing decisions Shepard had to make along the way. Still, we wanted to give players the chance to experience an inspiring and uplifting ending; in a story where you face a hopeless struggle for basic survival, we see the final moments and imagery as offering victory and hope in the context of sacrifice and reflection."

I have no idea to which game he is refering. I havent made an agonizing choice once. Guess his story wasnt as clear as he thought.

To be fair, he propably means the Geth Vs. Quarian decission, if you haven't set it up just right. It's a hard choice if you are forced to choose between the two. Not to mention if you want the Salarian help in the Tuchanka, you need to betray both, Wrex and Mordin. That's a hard thing to do too.

Ending decission is hard in a way too. You can kill synthetics in expense of killing the Reapers. You may sacrifice your life to find a "middle ground", but you know Reapers will get away with it. Or you can manipulate all living things in galaxy, to make sure synthetics and meatbags don't fight ever again.

But yeah, if your mind and morals are clear, it shouldn't be too hard decission to make.

A dark setting is a bleak and hopeless setting. At no point during Mass Effect is this
apparant. I pretty much saved everything and everyone every time. Apart from Kaidan or Ashley you could save everyone:

ME 1: Kaidan or Ashley, both soldiers who knew the risk. Heroicly sacrificing themselves to save their friends.
ME 2: Everyone's cool here.
ME 3: Mordin: Sacrificed himself to cure the genophage. This wasn't Shephards choice but his own, his own redemption.
           Thane: Sacrificed himself to save a counciler. He himself calls this redemption, the last act of an assassin is to stop another. In addition, he was dying anyway, this death was better then dying in bed.
           Legion: Sacrificed himself to give free will to the Geth. This was his gift, his choice.

Apart from the ones in ME1 these were all choices made by the NPC's themselves! It was their sacrifice, their choice, not Shephards (the player). Besides these weren't 'hopeless' deaths, every one of them sacrificed themselves for a better world. Which is completely out of tone with a dark setting.

All conflicts between 'friendlies' could be solved peacefully by Shephard, meaning no choice was necessary at all:

ME1: Wrex
ME2: Miranda- Jack and Legion/Tali. The latter even become quite close because of this...
ME3: Turian- Krogan (Salarians cop out but don't hamper in anyway, and dissidents support shephard even when he cures the genophage). Quarian-Geth, happily ever after.        

It doesn't quite feel like a dark setting when even death is impermanent, Shephard dies and is resurrected (gloom & doom here). The Normandy is destroyed only to be rebuilt better, faster and stronger. The only species we know that was destroyed by the Reapers, as a last act of defiance, made sure the galaxy had a fighting chance next time around.
          
The central theme of Mass Effect isn't dark at all. It is about hope and courage, about fighting no matter the odds, about never giving up. All these themes are abandoned at the end, when Shephard loses hope, when he gives up. When he chooses to surrender.

All the sacrifices were made pointless when Shephard is FORCED to kill himself, which leaves the universe slightly less screwed up then was originally intended by the antagonist. It didn't become a dark sci-fi story till the last 5 minutes. When we're told that Shephard is nothing but a man, facing gods, and giving up.

[DeadLetterBox]

Edje Edgar wrote...

[
A dark setting is a bleak and hopeless setting. At no point during Mass Effect is this
apparant. I pretty much saved everything and everyone every time. Apart from Kaidan or Ashley you could save everyone:

ME 1: Kaidan or Ashley, both soldiers who knew the risk. Heroicly sacrificing themselves to save their friends.
ME 2: Everyone's cool here.
ME 3: Mordin: Sacrificed himself to cure the genophage. This wasn't Shephards choice but his own, his own redemption.
           Thane: Sacrificed himself to save a counciler. He himself calls this redemption, the last act of an assassin is to stop another. In addition, he was dying anyway, this death was better then dying in bed.
           Legion: Sacrificed himself to give free will to the Geth. This was his gift, his choice.

Apart from the ones in ME1 these were all choices made by the NPC's themselves! It was their sacrifice, their choice, not Shephards (the player). Besides these weren't 'hopeless' deaths, every one of them sacrificed themselves for a better world. Which is completely out of tone with a dark setting.

All conflicts between 'friendlies' could be solved peacefully by Shephard, meaning no choice was necessary at all:

ME1: Wrex
ME2: Miranda- Jack and Legion/Tali. The latter even become quite close because of this...
ME3: Turian- Krogan (Salarians cop out but don't hamper in anyway, and dissidents support shephard even when he cures the genophage). Quarian-Geth, happily ever after.        

It doesn't quite feel like a dark setting when even death is impermanent, Shephard dies and is resurrected (gloom & doom here). The Normandy is destroyed only to be rebuilt better, faster and stronger. The only species we know that was destroyed by the Reapers, as a last act of defiance, made sure the galaxy had a fighting chance next time around.
          
The central theme of Mass Effect isn't dark at all. It is about hope and courage, about fighting no matter the odds, about never giving up. All these themes are abandoned at the end, when Shephard loses hope, when he gives up. When he chooses to surrender.

All the sacrifices were made pointless when Shephard is FORCED to kill himself, which leaves the universe slightly less screwed up then was originally intended by the antagonist. It didn't become a dark sci-fi story till the last 5 minutes. When we're told that Shephard is nothing but a man, facing gods, and giving up.

Agree 100%

[Half_Moon]

Rane7685 wrote...

Eternalsteelfan wrote...



6. Shepherd is not a tragic hero. A common debate I see is between people who think there should be a happy ending and people who think such an ending would be out of place or impossible, sometimes refering to Shepherd as "tragic". The simple fact is, Shepherd has no tragic flaw nor does he make a tragic mistake; had such a tragic characteristic existed, it could be a foregone conclusion he would die. Overcoming the Reapers may be an impossible task, but the impossible is
routinely overcome in the Mass Effect trilogy and other epics. As is, there is nothing in the story that would railroad Shepherd towards an inevitable demise, the difficulty of his task makes his death likely, but there's nothing that should remove the possibility of a happy ending. This may be why many people want a "happy" or "brighter" ending, there's no setup nor payoff to Shepherd's death and without those it may feel cheap; storytelling is all about setup and payoff.

For an example of a good tragic hero, look no farther than Mordin Solus. His tragic mistake was the creation of the genophage. When a desperate need for krogan intervention arose and the genophage was the reason they refused, Mordin fulfilled his tragic role by sacrificing and redeeming himself. There's a big setup for the genophage throughout the series and Mordin's involvement is setup in the second game as a huge internal conflict for him. In three, this all pays off beautifully with either his redemption or brutal murder at Shepherd's hands before he can succeed. This is proper execution for a tragic character. From what I've seen, this is one of the most beloved and well-received storylines in the game; compare that to the ending's reception.


These points were written as a stream of conscious, I'm sure there are plenty of things I've missed or didn't feel like going in depth about, but I think those are some of the most important ones.

I agree with everything you said up until the part I quoted. Allow me to discuss why, although not a tragic hero, Shepard's story is still better served by death.

First and foremost depending on how you played the game and the choices you made you could potentially regard Shepard as tragic. If you fail to unite etc etc those failings could (and perhaps should) result in said tragic end. However for this rebuttal lets assume you play perfectly (unite everyone etc).

A major theme in Mass Effect 3 is sacrifice and loss. Throughout the citadel you hear some tragic stories. As you proceed through the game you witness first hand some great sacrifices (Mordin and Thane to name just two of the most poignant sacrifices). There are many more (Victus' son, Kalreegar) the sense of loss is endemic throughout the entire game. So whilst I agree Shep himself may not be tragic inherently it is in keeping with the broader themes of the narrative that Shep's story should make the ultimate sacrifice.

As an example of how this serves the greater narrative; look at the BSN boards re favourite moments. Mordins death always ranks very highly but one we dont see is Grunt. In my playthrough I saved the rachni queen and ordered Aralakh company to assist in her evac costing them their lives. To buy us time to escape Grunt offered to buy us time. What followed was an incredibly moving scene as we saw Grunt's last stand and apparent death. It was moving and well directed. However all emotion I was feeling quickly evaporated on seeing him survive. I was relieved but the scene lost a lot of its potency. This scene wouldve been a highlight had Grunt died although I admit that this is speculation on my part.

You have suggested that a major theme is hope and I agree but this hope is not served with Shepards survival but rather an epilogue showing the 'hopeful'/pleasant ramifications of your actions. My ideal ending is very similar to yours in fact. I believe Shep shouldve died activating the console/crucible. Following his demise you see the reapers die perhaps some unity of galactic civilisation (turians and krogans shaking hands, quarians and geth rebuilding rannoch etc etc). and the futures of your squadmates (happy endings for edi/joker, etc etc). This is consistent with both themes of sacrifice/loss and hope. Shepards story has come to an end and death is a powerful emotional ending but with an appropriate epilogue is not so tragic. Rather this sacrifice is uplifting, poignant and in my opinion very satisfying

Shepard's story might be better served by his death but he's saying that Shepard was not portrayed as a tragic hero. He's beaten the odds countless times before and though the story might be better served by his death, it wasn't a certainty, it shouldn't have been the only recourse at the end.

[Klijpope]

Hey, it seems there's a kind of consensus forming over what went wrong.

While the Catalyst and the choice is being debated, everyone is in agreement that the aftermath cinematic is confusing, vague, and offers no closure.

If that showed how and why Joker et al escaped, and showed that life went on on Rannoch and Tuchanka (or not), and that the relays didn't kill everyone, we would just be arguing over the resolution in the polarised fashion they say they wanted, rather than everyone universally feeling shortchanged to some degree.

[Eternalsteelfan]

This is not something I'd have expected in a million years to return home from work to find in the morning...

Amdnro wrote...

Eternalsteelfan, YOUR THREAD IS ON FORBES!!

It's good to see the art of storytelling finding attention in this whole ending situation and I'm incredibly honored to be a part of it. I just want to say thanks for all the lively debate and the support for the points I've tried to raise.

Edje Edgar wrote...

Arppis wrote...

Great post and good read.

I
didn't think the endings were so bad. But it does suck that there is
lack of closure. They propably wanted players to "piece out" the missing
bits themselves and make their own conclusions.

Edje Edgar wrote...

Casey Hudson on the ending:

"We
always intended that the scale of the conflict and the underlying theme
of sacrifice would lead to a bittersweet ending—to do otherwise would
betray the agonizing decisions Shepard had to make along the way.
Still, we wanted to give players the chance to experience an inspiring
and uplifting ending; in a story where you face a hopeless struggle for
basic survival, we see the final moments and imagery as offering victory
and hope in the context of sacrifice and reflection."

I have no
idea to which game he is refering. I havent made an agonizing choice
once. Guess his story wasnt as clear as he thought.

To be
fair, he propably means the Geth Vs. Quarian decission, if you haven't
set it up just right. It's a hard choice if you are forced to choose
between the two. Not to mention if you want the Salarian help in the
Tuchanka, you need to betray both, Wrex and Mordin. That's a hard thing
to do too.

Ending decission is hard in a way too. You can kill
synthetics in expense of killing the Reapers. You may sacrifice your
life to find a "middle ground", but you know Reapers will get away with
it. Or you can manipulate all living things in galaxy, to make sure
synthetics and meatbags don't fight ever again.

But yeah, if your mind and morals are clear, it shouldn't be too hard decission to make.

A dark setting is a bleak and hopeless setting. At no point during Mass Effect is this
apparant. I pretty much saved everything and everyone every time. Apart from Kaidan or Ashley you could save everyone:

ME 1: Kaidan or Ashley, both soldiers who knew the risk. Heroicly sacrificing themselves to save their friends.
ME 2: Everyone's cool here.
ME 3: Mordin: Sacrificed himself to cure the genophage. This wasn't Shephards choice but his own, his own redemption.
           Thane: Sacrificed
himself to save a counciler. He himself calls this redemption, the last
act of an assassin is to stop another. In addition, he was dying
anyway, this death was better then dying in bed.
           Legion: Sacrificed himself to give free will to the Geth. This was his gift, his choice.

Apart
from the ones in ME1 these were all choices made by the NPC's
themselves! It was their sacrifice, their choice, not Shephards (the
player). Besides these weren't 'hopeless' deaths, every one of them
sacrificed themselves for a better world. Which is completely out of
tone with a dark setting.

All conflicts between 'friendlies' could be solved peacefully by Shephard, meaning no choice was necessary at all:

ME1: Wrex
ME2: Miranda- Jack and Legion/Tali. The latter even become quite close because of this...
ME3:
Turian- Krogan (Salarians cop out but don't hamper in anyway, and
dissidents support shephard even when he cures the genophage).
Quarian-Geth, happily ever after.        

It doesn't quite feel
like a dark setting when even death is impermanent, Shephard dies and is
resurrected (gloom & doom here). The Normandy is destroyed only to
be rebuilt better, faster and stronger. The only species we know that
was destroyed by the Reapers, as a last act of defiance, made sure the
galaxy had a fighting chance next time around.
          
The
central theme of Mass Effect isn't dark at all. It is about hope and
courage, about fighting no matter the odds, about never giving up. All
these themes are abandoned at the end, when Shephard loses hope, when he
gives up. When he chooses to surrender.

All the sacrifices were
made pointless when Shephard is FORCED to kill himself, which leaves
the universe slightly less screwed up then was originally intended by
the antagonist. It didn't become a dark sci-fi story till the last 5
minutes. When we're told that Shephard is nothing but a man, facing
gods, and giving up.

This is a very interesting post, many good points worth looking at.



This post with Casey Hudson's new message has given me a great deal of hope for the future of Mass Effect and it's endings. We have held the line, my friends.

[Letator]

Arcataye wrote...

malra wrote...

I think
your missing the point that they literaly took the ending from Deus Ex
and put it in the end of Mass Effect 3. What do you call that? of
course you may have w

Hey! It was better than this, atleast Jensen told us something about what happens next. Cyborg babies. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/uncertain.png[/smilie]
If you were talking about Human Revolution that is.

Nah, the original.  Here's a refresher...


And to the OP.  Helluva post!

Modifié par Letator, 17 mars 2012 - 12:50 .

[Grasich]

Excellent post. Shepard is simply NOT a tragic hero. Mordin, Thane, and Legion played out their deaths fantastically. I really loved those scenes. Hell, I cried during them, but Shepard dying....? Sure it should be possible, but it should also be possible to have a heroic ending.