Ce sujet est ferméHalf_Moon wrote...
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.
Musings of a Screenwriter: The Ending Thread
Débuté par
Eternalsteelfan
, mars 15 2012 11:27
#426
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 12:49
nomoredruggs
-
- Members
- 841 messages
Retour en haut
#427
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 01:05
Smp
-
- Members
- 20 messages
Thank you for sharing your expertise - this is a great post and a very interesting read.
#428
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 01:22
_Cmdr Shepard N-7
-
- Members
- 11 messages
Long as hell but well worth the read.
#429
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 01:34
laughing sherpa girl
-
- Members
- 550 messages
I'm not a screenwriter, but i do hope you wont hold that against me. At one time i WAS one of those starving Marin county street artists, but then i got a job. However, one thing i have always been is a soldier. You see, you can leave the military, but the military never leaves you, especially when you've been to a war that made no sense whatsoever beyond watching a countries willingness to kill as many of its own people as it can, for really, no good purpose.
because of that war, I've ended up doing an amazing amount of learning about war, mostly because going to sleep at night with the military channel on is the only way i can to this day, keep the nightmares away. Now, its true that when Boudicca was slaughtered by the Roman legions there was no party, but, well Boudicca lost that war. The Romans, feeling justified that a woman could no longer make them look silly, simply returned to their normal lives.
When the Greeks, finally defeated Xerxes, they certainly celebrated. Hell, they made monuments of it. But, George Washington did not die, neither did Jefferson, Adams, or Franklin. Patton DID die, in a car accident after the war was over, or very close too the end of the war. Richinbaker didn't die either ( going back a few years ) and MacArthur stood on the deck of the USS Missouri as the Japanese signed their surrender.
My point here is that, Hero's don't die. Musashi didn't die. Of all the Hero's i can think of, only Yi Sun Shin died in combat ( Alexander the Great, died after his conquests while heading for home, from a disease ). Even Shaka Zulu went on to unite his people and form a mighty and great tribe.
My point here is that, even though the artist foresaw angst in his execution, that's not what came across. What came across was that, the artist cryptically and for no reason out of left field decided that No matter how hard you try, You will lose. No matter the company you keep, no matter what anyone does, you will die, in combat. You did not win, there is no celebration.
When a hero DOES die, now that's another story. Mist people view their hero's as something cherished beyond life itself. Most of the time, our real hero's turn out to be our buddies in the foxhole next to us. Its a true statement that, in Vietnam, we weren't fighting for a cause, we were fighting for each other, and when your buddy got killed, well, it made a lot of us do things that no normal human could even comprehend ( remember My Lai? ).
There is no angst in combat. Angst is one of those emotions that seems to reside completely in the pervue of the young heart. There are no young hearts on a battlefield, only young bodies. the heart of the young man or woman who walked into that battle, is dead, and what walks away may have the same body, but they will never be who they were. Angst, should never have even been considered. Its almost insulting that it was..
Topping all the above, Bioware spent five years building this legend in such a way that its almost expected that there will be a victorious celebration such as there has been after every major war in human history. There was no celebration here. The reapers, win or lose, win regardless. Shepard becomes history's greatest loser, and his team become earmarked as the greatest cowards of all time since they run away.. That really set me back there.. here they are, in the galaxy's fastest ship, with armament equivalent to any reaper, and instead of fighting, they run away.
Please, don't try and be arts-y farts-y with this. Be up front and real. Shepard would not have lost that war, he would not have died like that. History does not bear it out. Just write it honestly and if you don't know what your writing, grab a vet and ask their opinions. Don't try to be all angst-y on us. its insulting. Unless you have been in combat there is no possible way for you to know or understand what combatants feel, so stop already, don't even try. Its insulting to every man and woman on the face of the earth who has worn a uniform and served their country in time of need.
I probably didn't make any sense, but i did need to say my piece.
because of that war, I've ended up doing an amazing amount of learning about war, mostly because going to sleep at night with the military channel on is the only way i can to this day, keep the nightmares away. Now, its true that when Boudicca was slaughtered by the Roman legions there was no party, but, well Boudicca lost that war. The Romans, feeling justified that a woman could no longer make them look silly, simply returned to their normal lives.
When the Greeks, finally defeated Xerxes, they certainly celebrated. Hell, they made monuments of it. But, George Washington did not die, neither did Jefferson, Adams, or Franklin. Patton DID die, in a car accident after the war was over, or very close too the end of the war. Richinbaker didn't die either ( going back a few years ) and MacArthur stood on the deck of the USS Missouri as the Japanese signed their surrender.
My point here is that, Hero's don't die. Musashi didn't die. Of all the Hero's i can think of, only Yi Sun Shin died in combat ( Alexander the Great, died after his conquests while heading for home, from a disease ). Even Shaka Zulu went on to unite his people and form a mighty and great tribe.
My point here is that, even though the artist foresaw angst in his execution, that's not what came across. What came across was that, the artist cryptically and for no reason out of left field decided that No matter how hard you try, You will lose. No matter the company you keep, no matter what anyone does, you will die, in combat. You did not win, there is no celebration.
When a hero DOES die, now that's another story. Mist people view their hero's as something cherished beyond life itself. Most of the time, our real hero's turn out to be our buddies in the foxhole next to us. Its a true statement that, in Vietnam, we weren't fighting for a cause, we were fighting for each other, and when your buddy got killed, well, it made a lot of us do things that no normal human could even comprehend ( remember My Lai? ).
There is no angst in combat. Angst is one of those emotions that seems to reside completely in the pervue of the young heart. There are no young hearts on a battlefield, only young bodies. the heart of the young man or woman who walked into that battle, is dead, and what walks away may have the same body, but they will never be who they were. Angst, should never have even been considered. Its almost insulting that it was..
Topping all the above, Bioware spent five years building this legend in such a way that its almost expected that there will be a victorious celebration such as there has been after every major war in human history. There was no celebration here. The reapers, win or lose, win regardless. Shepard becomes history's greatest loser, and his team become earmarked as the greatest cowards of all time since they run away.. That really set me back there.. here they are, in the galaxy's fastest ship, with armament equivalent to any reaper, and instead of fighting, they run away.
Please, don't try and be arts-y farts-y with this. Be up front and real. Shepard would not have lost that war, he would not have died like that. History does not bear it out. Just write it honestly and if you don't know what your writing, grab a vet and ask their opinions. Don't try to be all angst-y on us. its insulting. Unless you have been in combat there is no possible way for you to know or understand what combatants feel, so stop already, don't even try. Its insulting to every man and woman on the face of the earth who has worn a uniform and served their country in time of need.
I probably didn't make any sense, but i did need to say my piece.
#430
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 02:46
Ryokun1989
-
- Members
- 334 messages
It looks like you take some kind of template and try to put mass effect in it... Do you work for the hollywood screenwriters guild or something? Because then I understand why you don't like ME's ending.
Otherwise, most of what you say is just a way of you interpreting stuff and saying, I am a screenwriter so listen to me. Well I am a gamedesigner and was involved with the writing of many theatre plays and games by now and I don't agree with you sorry. Some writers choose for no catharsis and for a game like Mass Effect that is a new and bold step to take. I never thought a series like this could or would do that, but now they did, it's like a miracle in storytelling happened. But most people won't get that anyway. So Casey and co keep the ending how it is please.
Otherwise, most of what you say is just a way of you interpreting stuff and saying, I am a screenwriter so listen to me. Well I am a gamedesigner and was involved with the writing of many theatre plays and games by now and I don't agree with you sorry. Some writers choose for no catharsis and for a game like Mass Effect that is a new and bold step to take. I never thought a series like this could or would do that, but now they did, it's like a miracle in storytelling happened. But most people won't get that anyway. So Casey and co keep the ending how it is please.
Modifié par Ryokun1989, 17 mars 2012 - 02:49 .
#431
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 03:11
NotCras
-
- Members
- 38 messages
laughing sherpa girl wrote...
I'm not a screenwriter, but i do hope you wont hold that against me. At one time i WAS one of those starving Marin county street artists, but then i got a job. However, one thing i have always been is a soldier. You see, you can leave the military, but the military never leaves you, especially when you've been to a war that made no sense whatsoever beyond watching a countries willingness to kill as many of its own people as it can, for really, no good purpose.
because of that war, I've ended up doing an amazing amount of learning about war, mostly because going to sleep at night with the military channel on is the only way i can to this day, keep the nightmares away. Now, its true that when Boudicca was slaughtered by the Roman legions there was no party, but, well Boudicca lost that war. The Romans, feeling justified that a woman could no longer make them look silly, simply returned to their normal lives.
When the Greeks, finally defeated Xerxes, they certainly celebrated. Hell, they made monuments of it. But, George Washington did not die, neither did Jefferson, Adams, or Franklin. Patton DID die, in a car accident after the war was over, or very close too the end of the war. Richinbaker didn't die either ( going back a few years ) and MacArthur stood on the deck of the USS Missouri as the Japanese signed their surrender.
My point here is that, Hero's don't die. Musashi didn't die. Of all the Hero's i can think of, only Yi Sun Shin died in combat ( Alexander the Great, died after his conquests while heading for home, from a disease ). Even Shaka Zulu went on to unite his people and form a mighty and great tribe.
My point here is that, even though the artist foresaw angst in his execution, that's not what came across. What came across was that, the artist cryptically and for no reason out of left field decided that No matter how hard you try, You will lose. No matter the company you keep, no matter what anyone does, you will die, in combat. You did not win, there is no celebration.
When a hero DOES die, now that's another story. Mist people view their hero's as something cherished beyond life itself. Most of the time, our real hero's turn out to be our buddies in the foxhole next to us. Its a true statement that, in Vietnam, we weren't fighting for a cause, we were fighting for each other, and when your buddy got killed, well, it made a lot of us do things that no normal human could even comprehend ( remember My Lai? ).
There is no angst in combat. Angst is one of those emotions that seems to reside completely in the pervue of the young heart. There are no young hearts on a battlefield, only young bodies. the heart of the young man or woman who walked into that battle, is dead, and what walks away may have the same body, but they will never be who they were. Angst, should never have even been considered. Its almost insulting that it was..
Topping all the above, Bioware spent five years building this legend in such a way that its almost expected that there will be a victorious celebration such as there has been after every major war in human history. There was no celebration here. The reapers, win or lose, win regardless. Shepard becomes history's greatest loser, and his team become earmarked as the greatest cowards of all time since they run away.. That really set me back there.. here they are, in the galaxy's fastest ship, with armament equivalent to any reaper, and instead of fighting, they run away.
Please, don't try and be arts-y farts-y with this. Be up front and real. Shepard would not have lost that war, he would not have died like that. History does not bear it out. Just write it honestly and if you don't know what your writing, grab a vet and ask their opinions. Don't try to be all angst-y on us. its insulting. Unless you have been in combat there is no possible way for you to know or understand what combatants feel, so stop already, don't even try. Its insulting to every man and woman on the face of the earth who has worn a uniform and served their country in time of need.
I probably didn't make any sense, but i did need to say my piece.
It totally makes sense and I really like your points. The reason we have percieved undefeatable odds is so that one can overcome them later, not so we can get killed by them, its terrible storytelling... plus if EA was trying to make Mass Effect 3 accessible to everyone, they clearly didnt get it right if the ending only makes sense to a select few people. They should be shooting for the highest common denominator, an ending that has closure and is not so bleak! Talk about them being total hipocrits....
#432
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 03:17
NotCras
-
- Members
- 38 messages
Ryokun1989 wrote...
It looks like you take some kind of template and try to put mass effect in it... Do you work for the hollywood screenwriters guild or something? Because then I understand why you don't like ME's ending.
Otherwise, most of what you say is just a way of you interpreting stuff and saying, I am a screenwriter so listen to me. Well I am a gamedesigner and was involved with the writing of many theatre plays and games by now and I don't agree with you sorry. Some writers choose for no catharsis and for a game like Mass Effect that is a new and bold step to take. I never thought a series like this could or would do that, but now they did, it's like a miracle in storytelling happened. But most people won't get that anyway. So Casey and co keep the ending how it is please.
Ok so i wont bring up any arguments on the storyline because im not good enough to argue with a screenwriter (no sarcasm btw). Ill take it from a money standpoint. I paid $80 for this game. I do not feel in any way shape or form that this game was worth my money. As much as video games try to be art, there will still be an aspect of them that remains a product. In addition, unlike books and movies, video games are a changing thing. You dont see books sending out typo fixes right? Since I am a consumer (and consumers are ALWAYS right xD), and since our demands are not reasonable (we are not asking them to radically change the game, an added on part to the current end would totally suffice) I feel that Bioware should at least consider an ending change.
Plus, they even stated how "nothing is canon" in Bioware, so that makes a changed ending even more possible.
Some of my thoughts on this matter are on a blog link that i posted earlier. please read it! (its on thread page 15)
Modifié par NotCras, 17 mars 2012 - 03:18 .
#433
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 03:29
Wildhide
-
- Members
- 334 messages
DeadLetterBox wrote...
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%
Thirdededed
#434
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 03:45
raptorly
-
- Members
- 10 messages
Thanks for the post eternalsteelfan. It was a good read—not bad for stream of consciousness.
Bioware, please listen to these arguments. They are completely valid and sound. The OP is expressing my frustrations and concerns with Mass Effect 3 in a valid, logical manner. These are the problems we see, the problems we face, and the problems we live through as we played ME3.
Bioware, please listen to these arguments. They are completely valid and sound. The OP is expressing my frustrations and concerns with Mass Effect 3 in a valid, logical manner. These are the problems we see, the problems we face, and the problems we live through as we played ME3.
#436
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 04:37
TheCrakFox
-
- Members
- 743 messages
Well said.
Hopefully Bioware is paying attention to threads like this and not just presuming people want a happier ending.
Hopefully Bioware is paying attention to threads like this and not just presuming people want a happier ending.
#437
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 08:28
Eternalsteelfan
-
- Members
- 207 messages
Ryokun1989 wrote...
1. It looks like you take some kind of template and try to put mass effect in it... Do you work for the hollywood screenwriters guild or something? Because then I understand why you don't like ME's ending.
2. Otherwise, most of what you say is just a way of you interpreting stuff and saying, I am a screenwriter so listen to me. Well I am a gamedesigner and was involved with the writing of many theatre plays and games by now and I don't agree with you sorry. 3. Some writers choose for no catharsis and for a game like Mass Effect that is a new and bold step to take. 4. I never thought a series like this could or would do that, but now they did, it's like a miracle in storytelling happened. But most people won't get that anyway. So Casey and co keep the ending how it is please.
Once again, the numbers are my own:
1. What you call a template I'd call story elements. There are no hard and fast rules for storytelling, or any art really, but after thousands of years of human history and practice, we have a pretty good idea of what elements work.
No, I'm not a member of the Writers Guild but I appreciate the thought. I'm not sure my membership would somehow enlighten you as to why I don't like the ending, but the points I've tried to raise or emphasize will give you an inkling.
2. It's a bit offensive to me that you are implying all I've said is "I am a screenwriter so listen to me". I had only provided that credential to give context to what I was about to write in the OP: a look at Mass Effect 3's ending through the lens of storytelling. The points I look at in the OP stand on their own.
3. The entire Mass Effect trilogy, that is including 3, is full of catharsis.
4. Since this discussion is about the ending and you mention your desire that Bioware keep it the same, I'll assume you are referring to the ending when you say "miracle in storytelling". Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but as someone who disagrees with you very much, I suggest looking at all the strong points raised by myself and others.
#438
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 08:57
Doppelgaenger
-
- Members
- 351 messages
This simply deserves more attention!
#439
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 09:02
Tyrf
-
- Members
- 158 messages
Eternalsteelfan wrote...
A. First, a few pet peeves. Tropes are very popular for making generalizations about parts of stories we dislike, but they have a tendency to be overused and misused.
The Crucible isn't a MacGuffin.
The Crucible isn't an example of deus ex machina.
By your definitions, would the Catalyst be a MacGuffin and Star Child be a Deus Ex Machina?
Anyway, nice post.
#440
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 09:10
ElectronicPostingInterface
-
- Members
- 3 789 messages
Thank you for the Mordin comparison.
#441
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 09:15
Pinkflu
-
- Members
- 593 messages
Great post! Was really interesting to read, and articulated my own feelings nicely.
#443
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 09:23
Foulpancake
-
- Members
- 307 messages
great read, makes a lot of sense and more backing that the only logical conclusion i can come up with for that train wreck of an ending is the Indoc theory...only thing that makes sense to me
#444
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 10:05
Eternalsteelfan
-
- Members
- 207 messages
Tyrf wrote...
Eternalsteelfan wrote...
A. First, a few pet peeves. Tropes are very popular for making generalizations about parts of stories we dislike, but they have a tendency to be overused and misused.
The Crucible isn't a MacGuffin.
The Crucible isn't an example of deus ex machina.
By your definitions, would the Catalyst be a MacGuffin and Star Child be a Deus Ex Machina?
Anyway, nice post.
A MacGuffin, not at all. I've seen some interesting ideas that could argue for the Catalyst as a form of deus ex machina, my favorite is that when he tells you to wake up he's akin to the gods of old bringing the protagonist back to life like in some ancient play.
#445
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 10:11
MrIllusion
-
- Members
- 45 messages
I really enjoyed reading that. But I'm interested in how to move forward.
It's possible for film and television to have a director's cut version. But I assume that those versions have scenes that were already filmed, just edited out due to creative differences.
In the case of games where new content can be added in, is there any standard framework or process that can be used to correct the flaws in the ending? In particular I thought this line was interesting:
It almost sounds as if there is some "formula" to guide which literary device goes where.
It's possible for film and television to have a director's cut version. But I assume that those versions have scenes that were already filmed, just edited out due to creative differences.
In the case of games where new content can be added in, is there any standard framework or process that can be used to correct the flaws in the ending? In particular I thought this line was interesting:
Eternalsteelfan wrote...
the protagonist and the antagonist
face off in the climax yet it's TIM who we deal with in the resolution,
it just feels off to me.
It almost sounds as if there is some "formula" to guide which literary device goes where.
#446
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 10:16
Vhalkyrie
-
- Members
- 1 917 messages
Wouldn't the Starchild be deus ex machina though? It exists no where else in the series, to suddenly being the omnipotent oracle to explain it all. It allows us to end an entire galactic war with a single choice.
Modifié par Vhalkyrie, 17 mars 2012 - 10:25 .
#447
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 10:21
knightoftaurus
-
- Members
- 72 messages
I've reblogged this elsewhere because your post was simply amazing. I think there are many of us without your particular background who are unable to describe WHY we feel so let down with the ending because we can only use in-game terminology, or else stuff relating to our own backgrounds. Your use of going through the particular points (while bringing in the discussion on how films/video games work through arcs) really made sense to me.
Thank you for posting this, and I hope Bioware sees this and pays attention.
Thank you for posting this, and I hope Bioware sees this and pays attention.
#448
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 10:36
breatheeasy88
-
- Members
- 15 messages
Great post by the OP as well as Edje Edgar and others. I just hope pride doesn't get in the way of things for the people who worked on the series.
#449
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 10:38
Eternalsteelfan
-
- Members
- 207 messages
MrIllusion wrote...
I really enjoyed reading that. But I'm interested in how to move forward.
It's possible for film and television to have a director's cut version. But I assume that those versions have scenes that were already filmed, just edited out due to creative differences.
In the case of games where new content can be added in, is there any standard framework or process that can be used to correct the flaws in the ending? In particular I thought this line was interesting:Eternalsteelfan wrote...
the protagonist and the antagonist
face off in the climax yet it's TIM who we deal with in the resolution,
it just feels off to me.
It almost sounds as if there is some "formula" to guide which literary device goes where.
Like I said a few posts up: "There are no hard and fast rules for storytelling, or any art really,
but after thousands of years of human history and practice, we have a
pretty good idea of what elements work."
Stories are such a part of our culture and lives that people can just feel it when something is bad or off about one, even if they can't explain why. The elements of story, the formulas, the structures, these are all things we know on some level of consciousness or another.
#450
Posté 17 mars 2012 - 10:49
vargatom
-
- Members
- 64 messages
I have a couple of things to add to the opening post and the entire thread in general...
First, the Deus Ex Machina issue has been foreshadowed ever since Mass Effect 1.
It was quite clear that Sovereign was bigger and stronger than any other ship in the known galaxy, thus an entire legion of such ships could not be defeated in a simple battle. There were only two possible ways to deal with them: either the completely unlikely way of somehow convincing the Reapers to stop, or the sudden discovery of a previously unknown force that's even stronger than the Reapers. There were also a lot of hints about the Citadel holding even more secrets; but in retrospect it seems that these hints and the foreshadowing weren't apparent enough to everyone.
The criticism about lack of closure is quite unjustified in my opinion. Mass Effect 3 is actually a long sequence of almost all the conclusions to both the small and large stories from the first two games.
One could argue about how complete an ending has to be to satisfy everyone, but history never really ends, so where should the line be drawn? We can assume that Liara is going to be alive for a thousand years after the final battle, so should the ending cover that entire time span? Or should it follow until the end of the next cycle in another fifty thousand years?
In my opinion most of the stories were resolved at a reasonable depth, from supporting characters through squad members to big interspecies conflicts. Sure, one can look at Lord of the Rings and its appendices detailing entire family trees of the surviving characters, but it's far beyond reasonable expectations. There's another big reason why Bioware shouldn't release such information but I'll get back to that later.
The main cause for this criticism is probably that the resolutions aren't neatly packed together near the game's end, and this has made a lot of people to expect even more material at the time it's traditionally presented in other games, movies and books. But it wasn't there, so these expectations were left unfulfilled.
However, I believe that the main reason why people have problems with the ending is that they always thought it to be all about the story. Most of these players are interested in finding the best way to win the game, they believe that there are right and wrong choices, they want to know exactly what happens to the characters after Shepard leaves them. This was also evident with ME2's ending where the community did not rest until the exact math formula of computing the results was uncovered.
Playing the game this way is wrong in my opinion as it is not a test that the player has to pass, it's more like a mirror - it isn't about figuring out the right choices, but instead about defining the player's own morals and values through the various decisions. The game did not embrace or condone these choices, but merely presented the consequences. Yes, there was a level of success/failure involved in how thorough Shepard was with the squad building in ME2, resulting in more or less deaths during the suicide mission - but even that was not about judging the player's moral choices.
One probable cause of this confusion is how both ME1 and ME2 has failed to properly implement a morality system, by punishing players not sticking to one kind of choices. The new general reputation based approach in ME3 is a far better approach, even if not entirely perfect, because it still suggests a bit that one can be better than the other, it's still far too easy to mistake it to be like the dark and light sides of the Force in Star Wars.
So in my opinion the game's main focus lies in underlying themes like choice, responsibility, and dealing with consequences - and the story is just a vehicle to explore these themes in a meaningful way. A short summary of a species' history and current situation would not be enough to get the player involved and invested enough to give the choices significant emotional weight and meaning - it is necessary to present it in detail and through individual characters. Yes, the game could explore all these individual character stories in further depth, but then it would never end, as there's so much left to do with them even after the final decision of Shepard.
But in light of the above, that final decision is also explained to be mainly about the player's personaility and values and morals, and the consequences shown are once again secondary. They're meant to provide a certain closure, but the more important aspect of the final choice should once again be what the player learns about his/her own self. It is a really, really big decision after all, about the fate of the entire galaxy, and even the choice of not making a decision is offered.
It also doesn't invalidate any of the previously made decisions, even if the player ends up destroying someone who was previously saved. If anything, those previous decisions should make the final choice even more complex and difficult, asking the player to seriously consider everything before commiting to one. Are you really ready to sacrifice something you worked so hard for previously, or will you beable unable to look beyond that personal bias?
This is also why, in my opinion, the traditional rules of storytelling and screenwriting can't really be applied. This is an interactive process that asks the audience to get very deeply involved, and in turn a lot of what is described in any other media has to be an internal process taking place within the player. This is also why the ending has to leave certain things open enough so that everyone can fill in most of the blanks to their own liking. Just because there are no blue babies in the final cinematic, it doesn't mean that Shepard and Liara haven't had any, somewhere - the Normandy may be close enough to Earth and the Commander might have survived so that they can still be together.
And it would be impossible to create an ending for every possible kind of player preference anyway - some may wish to have three kids, some may want to keep serving as a soldier without a family, but others could prefer a more tragical ending. It was better to leave it open to the player's imagination.
So, all in all, the ending is certainly not perfect, but it's not the kind of wreckage that the most vocal fans seem to believe. It also makes a lot of sense in the light of what the series have really been about - at least in my opinion - which is to provide a mirror for the player to explore one's own morals and values in a way that no other art form (books, movies etc.) can.
First, the Deus Ex Machina issue has been foreshadowed ever since Mass Effect 1.
It was quite clear that Sovereign was bigger and stronger than any other ship in the known galaxy, thus an entire legion of such ships could not be defeated in a simple battle. There were only two possible ways to deal with them: either the completely unlikely way of somehow convincing the Reapers to stop, or the sudden discovery of a previously unknown force that's even stronger than the Reapers. There were also a lot of hints about the Citadel holding even more secrets; but in retrospect it seems that these hints and the foreshadowing weren't apparent enough to everyone.
The criticism about lack of closure is quite unjustified in my opinion. Mass Effect 3 is actually a long sequence of almost all the conclusions to both the small and large stories from the first two games.
One could argue about how complete an ending has to be to satisfy everyone, but history never really ends, so where should the line be drawn? We can assume that Liara is going to be alive for a thousand years after the final battle, so should the ending cover that entire time span? Or should it follow until the end of the next cycle in another fifty thousand years?
In my opinion most of the stories were resolved at a reasonable depth, from supporting characters through squad members to big interspecies conflicts. Sure, one can look at Lord of the Rings and its appendices detailing entire family trees of the surviving characters, but it's far beyond reasonable expectations. There's another big reason why Bioware shouldn't release such information but I'll get back to that later.
The main cause for this criticism is probably that the resolutions aren't neatly packed together near the game's end, and this has made a lot of people to expect even more material at the time it's traditionally presented in other games, movies and books. But it wasn't there, so these expectations were left unfulfilled.
However, I believe that the main reason why people have problems with the ending is that they always thought it to be all about the story. Most of these players are interested in finding the best way to win the game, they believe that there are right and wrong choices, they want to know exactly what happens to the characters after Shepard leaves them. This was also evident with ME2's ending where the community did not rest until the exact math formula of computing the results was uncovered.
Playing the game this way is wrong in my opinion as it is not a test that the player has to pass, it's more like a mirror - it isn't about figuring out the right choices, but instead about defining the player's own morals and values through the various decisions. The game did not embrace or condone these choices, but merely presented the consequences. Yes, there was a level of success/failure involved in how thorough Shepard was with the squad building in ME2, resulting in more or less deaths during the suicide mission - but even that was not about judging the player's moral choices.
One probable cause of this confusion is how both ME1 and ME2 has failed to properly implement a morality system, by punishing players not sticking to one kind of choices. The new general reputation based approach in ME3 is a far better approach, even if not entirely perfect, because it still suggests a bit that one can be better than the other, it's still far too easy to mistake it to be like the dark and light sides of the Force in Star Wars.
So in my opinion the game's main focus lies in underlying themes like choice, responsibility, and dealing with consequences - and the story is just a vehicle to explore these themes in a meaningful way. A short summary of a species' history and current situation would not be enough to get the player involved and invested enough to give the choices significant emotional weight and meaning - it is necessary to present it in detail and through individual characters. Yes, the game could explore all these individual character stories in further depth, but then it would never end, as there's so much left to do with them even after the final decision of Shepard.
But in light of the above, that final decision is also explained to be mainly about the player's personaility and values and morals, and the consequences shown are once again secondary. They're meant to provide a certain closure, but the more important aspect of the final choice should once again be what the player learns about his/her own self. It is a really, really big decision after all, about the fate of the entire galaxy, and even the choice of not making a decision is offered.
It also doesn't invalidate any of the previously made decisions, even if the player ends up destroying someone who was previously saved. If anything, those previous decisions should make the final choice even more complex and difficult, asking the player to seriously consider everything before commiting to one. Are you really ready to sacrifice something you worked so hard for previously, or will you be
This is also why, in my opinion, the traditional rules of storytelling and screenwriting can't really be applied. This is an interactive process that asks the audience to get very deeply involved, and in turn a lot of what is described in any other media has to be an internal process taking place within the player. This is also why the ending has to leave certain things open enough so that everyone can fill in most of the blanks to their own liking. Just because there are no blue babies in the final cinematic, it doesn't mean that Shepard and Liara haven't had any, somewhere - the Normandy may be close enough to Earth and the Commander might have survived so that they can still be together.
And it would be impossible to create an ending for every possible kind of player preference anyway - some may wish to have three kids, some may want to keep serving as a soldier without a family, but others could prefer a more tragical ending. It was better to leave it open to the player's imagination.
So, all in all, the ending is certainly not perfect, but it's not the kind of wreckage that the most vocal fans seem to believe. It also makes a lot of sense in the light of what the series have really been about - at least in my opinion - which is to provide a mirror for the player to explore one's own morals and values in a way that no other art form (books, movies etc.) can.
Modifié par vargatom, 17 mars 2012 - 11:04 .
