831 réponses à ce sujet

[vargatom]

Eternalsteelfan wrote...

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."

That is correct - but Mass Effect has tried something that has never really been done before, which is to deeply involve the audience in the story. Sure, many storytellers around a campfire have probably payed attention to their audience's reactions and changed the story a bit to better fit their expectations, and Bioware were looking into it with Baldur's Gate and KOTOR, but never to this extent, no-one ever tried to give this much freedom to the player in defining the main character of the story. 

So it is very likely that the previously established practices of non-interactive storytellig won't work in this new approach. Bioware has to make it up as they're going and there's obviously going to be disagreements along the way. But all in all I think they're right not to stick to the old rules.

[InfiniteDemise]

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.

FFS, this ending was pure crap. Even if you want to toss out this extremely well-written post because it's an "opinion", "a space-wizard did it" is not a valid freaking ending to anything. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with catharsis.

Modifié par InfiniteDemise, 17 mars 2012 - 11:16 .

[InfiniteDemise]

vargatom wrote...
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.

It's certainly is wreckage. It's god-awful.

Your post was well-written, and if you were defending an ending, even if it was unsatisfying, that was as well written as your post, I would agree with you.

ME3's ending, however, wasn't.

Every "choice" presented to Shepard was completely abberant to what the story preached over and over through the entire series.

Not to mention the Normandy sequence. Ugh, what crap.

[AndreasShepard]

Amazingly well written post.

[joopark]

Hold the line! Great article!

[Thumb Fu]

Long post is long... And a very good read. I agree mostly with what you have to say.

For me the most jarring thing is the fact the endings has no closure, the entire game is filled with excellent story elements that each come to a satisfying end, be it sad or uplifting i wont go into the details you all know the story. The end just happens, your given 3 choices, something happens, then all of a sudden we're left with question.

Was Shepard indoctrinated, what happened to my crew that was with me in London, how did they get onto the Normandy.

To be perfectly honest i like the ending of the game a LOT right up until we see the ship flying away from the explosion, just a but more explanation of what happened from me making my decision and the ship crashing, then possibly some closure on each crew member, or at least the most important ones (Liara, Tali, Garrus, Ash/Kaiden. We all know what happened to Wrex and every other character from previous games has decent closure imo)

Its just... its not finished, the ending leaves too much to the imagination, i don't like it that way. i NEED to know! And "speculation from everyone" what the hell kind of "closure" is that? Did they really expect people to think "yeah, i'm happy i know all the fact and can see where the galaxy/characters go from here" with that ending?

As i've said i did enjoy the ending mostly its just unfinished. I'm not necessarily after a change in the ending, just an elaboration from the writers, if that's in DLC form great. I just can't wait till they are allowed to talk about it!

Modifié par Thumb Fu, 17 mars 2012 - 11:21 .

[vermore]

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.

Frankly,  if I wished to spend $80 on what boils down to intellectual novelty (stories without catharsis) I would do so.  I chose to spend $80 on a Science Fiction adventure game that up until the last 2 minutes was absolutely fantastic.  I believe the OP captures the logic that is typically used to induce the desired reaction in the consumer of the story.  The function of an adventure game neccessitates the form that is presented by the OP.  To do otherwise is a betrayal to the consumer.  While its great that you fell I should be appreciative of this betrayal because of its novelty, the fact remains I spent a good deal of money for something that due to its lack of catharsis makes me want to forget all three games.  I will explain why below. 

To be more incisive on my expectation of catharsis in this game, I will refer to the post above from sherpa.  The ME universe works best for me when I am immersed in the relationships I have with my shipmates on the Normandy.  The character writing I feel was actually quite good.  One of my favorites was Mordin.  It was actually a huge payoff watching his sacrifice.  Same for the lines when Thane is dying.  Spectacular.  This sort of experience leads one to expect a connection along the same lines for the ending.  In other words, the designers took great care to pull my heartstrings when it came to my companions.  They really built relationships.  To such an extent that my motivations became only vaguely about the epic Reaper confrontation and more about making sure Jacob got to see his unborn child, or Tali getting to build her beachfront villa on Rannoch, or Jack enjoying being a part of something at long last, or making the sacrfices of Mordin and Thane worth something.  In other words, the game design encouraged a player to make the fight about the other soldiers in the foxhole with you.  I began to trust that this is the way it would be.  This either demands catharsis or is asking for a form of ptsd (though infinitesimal to the real thing in comparison).   

What we get from the three endings is the end of everything I found worthy of fighting for.  It left me feeling that I might as well have sat back down on the floor and watched the reapers take everything.  That way there was hope that the next cycle would be as poignant as this one.  Rather I get several versions of clumsy "highbrow" bludgeoning about some vague and distant hope after all is destroyed.  It would be easier to take if I could connect to the survivors.  If the grandfather at the epilogue was my grandson from a love interest for instance.  But there are no such connections.  Even the survivors of the Normandy are in a rough spot and few in presentation.  So what made the ride so great was CHANGED at the end to something that seemed to belong to an Epicurean exposition on the meaning of life.  Not what I paid for.  But moreover, it wasn't intellectually honest to the material we had seen up to that point.  I don't deny that there are some borderline masochists that enjoy angst and meaninglessness as some kind of badge of intellectual superiority.  But I personally don't appreciate having it forced on me by slight of hand.  Let me choose to see such novelties myself rather than be tricked into it.

Therein lies the point.  Storytelling establishes a pattern.  This pattern can be presented as a formula. The consumer of the story has a reasonable expectation of seeing a conclusion that at the very least is intellectually true to the story, usually guided by the formula.  In this case, it is not.  This can be demonstrated by reading the OP's original post.  By saying that following this formula is not valid, and that we should all be equally appreciative of this thematic switcheroo in and of itself as some kind of genious is the equivalent of giving us an intellectual wedgy.

[LdyBelial]

Excellent original post! Thank you Eternalsteelfan!!!

[Apathy1989]

Excellent read thanks.

Its good to have a thought through break down on WHY its a failure from a writers point of view. All of us non-writers can only react with our emotions and base observations.

[Dr_Hello]

nomoredruggs wrote...

Half_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.

Agreed. Mordin's and Thane's paths are so well and clearly written as tragic figures, not so well for Shepard's.

Ref: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10022779/17#10111576

Modifié par Dr_Hello, 18 mars 2012 - 02:38 .

[SpideyKnight]

Very well written and done. Saved me from having to write something similar myself. That people think the God-child is a Deus Ex Machina has always struck me as absurd. He is nothing, don't ascribe any value to him. He gives some meaningless and nonsensical exposition about the Reapers and then just sits there like the nothing he is. Poorly written, and poorly implemented mouthpiece indeed.

[Logiwonk]

Does anyone else think that Bioware should hire the poster to this article? Seriously. Pay this man money to make mass effect better.

[JohnAirey]

Thoughtful and well written post - clearly took you some time thanks.

In a way what I found most disappointing about the endings is that, as you were saying regarding Mordin's character, some (most) parts of the story are so brilliantly written. It proves how good bioware are at story writing, how could they be so good for 99 hours of gameplay and then get 10 minutes so wrong.

[Biggtuna]

Support the indoctrination theory!

Modifié par Biggtuna, 18 mars 2012 - 04:44 .

[milkymcmilkerson]

 Great post OP.

If this story were being workshopped I think an almost unanimous response from the other writers would be that it didn't quite earn it's ending. 

I believe that the series is about hope, desperation and sacrifice, and in that respect the current endings sort of work. Throughout the three games almost all of the main desicions the player gets to make involve choosing between hopeless options. While most decisions work out in the grand scheme, sometimes they required loss. I think the current ending reflects this, however; it's in the execution that it fails, and for all the reasons the OP points out. 

The choices the writers made to introduce a character out of nowhere felt silly and gimmicky, and the starchild at the end felt way to much like the author stepping in and saying, " Hey, THIS is what I want YOU to get from all of this," instead of trusting the players to be intelligent enough to pick up on these themes though out the series. I don't believe that the writer shouldn't give the audience anything, like James Joyce in Finnigan's Wake, but if a writer feels like they need to explain simple things like theme then obviously the writing isn't doing its job, or the writer isn't letting the story go where it needs to go. These endings are clever or thought provoking, but clumsy and artless.

Also, why even bother with giving the player choice at that point? I've been hearing a lot of talk about how it's not the destinationn, but the journey; so given that, what purpose did it serve to make this final, all encompassing choice at the end? I think the game would have been better served if they simply focused on a cohessive (for the series) ending, and truely let or choices be just about the journey, rather than give us these three choices at the destination that really don't have any meaning or relation to what we did for the last 100 or so hours, and don't have any weight since there's no acknowledgement of the consequences. If I were sitting in on the development of the game, and was told to weigh in on these endings, I would have said to settle on one, make it relative to anything that the player could have done throughout the course of the game, and reflect our decisions in the resolution.

I loved this series. In fact, I loved this game. It was best of the thre, story included however the ending just plain stunk. It didn't ruin the series for me, but it just stunk. :/

Modifié par milkymcmilkerson, 18 mars 2012 - 03:55 .

[milkymcmilkerson]

and to add to my last post; Did we really need another reason why the Reapers where doing what they were doing? Didn't we already feel satisfied with "they're crazy, old, and want to murder/harvest us" explanation that was established in ME1 and ME2? I certainly was.

Less is more sometimes.

Modifié par milkymcmilkerson, 18 mars 2012 - 04:13 .

[Biggtuna]

Cast away your disbelief! Shepard was indoctrinated! Everything after Harbringer's final beam incapacitating Shepard was a hallucination! His gun had unlimited ammo! The Illusive Man appears out of nowhere! He is unable to argue with the Catalyst. He is led to believe that controlling the Reapers is possible, which is not. It is preposterous to believe a mere human can control the Reapers. Destroying them seems rash and Renegade! Moreover, it seems to be the wrong choice as presented by the Catalyst. Synthesis is presented as viable, as it supposedly ends the cycles of destruction. But to a thinking mind, this seems a horrible scenario. The boy is presented by the reapers to Shepard to manipulate him to somehow take pity on the synthetic races. The boy is imaginary! You, the player have been fooled. This criticism of the endings was predicted. The three endings seem to be the only options, when this is counter to the entire story hitherto.

I am not the first, there are many who have discovered this, I owe my belief to their efforts.

[milkymcmilkerson]

Biggtuna wrote...

Cast away your disbelief! Shepard was indoctrinated! Everything after Harbringer's final beam incapacitating Shepard was a hallucination! His gun had unlimited ammo! The Illusive Man appears out of nowhere! He is unable to argue with the Catalyst. He is led to believe that controlling the Reapers is possible, which is not. It is preposterous to believe a mere human can control the Reapers. Destroying them seems rash and Renegade! Moreover, it seems to be the wrong choice as presented by the Catalyst. Synthesis is presented as viable, as it supposedly ends the cycles of destruction. But to a thinking mind, this seems a horrible scenario. The boy is presented by the reapers to Shepard to manipulate him to somehow take pity on the synthetic races. The boy is imaginary! You, the player have been fooled. This criticism of the endings was predicted. The three endings seem to be the only options, when this is counter to the entire story hitherto.

I am not the first, there are many who have discovered this, I owe my belief to their efforts.

That's a very interesting theory. I can sort of see that, however I would change it to say that he was indoctrinated after he arrived on the Citadel, therefore; everything was real up to the point where SHepard passes out before he can "fire" the Crucible.

However, with that in mind, why present the ending in this way? It's not clever to hold so much back from the viewers, just annoying. If Shepard was indoctrinated, tat the end of the trilogy, and everything was lost, then they should have shown that (unless the plan is to make us pay for some more DLC a few months from now that TRUELY ends the game, which is lame, but Id still buy it.)

[runwhileucan]

Really good read. You made some awesome points.

[Edje Edgar]

Biggtuna wrote...

Cast away your disbelief! Shepard was indoctrinated! Everything after Harbringer's final beam incapacitating Shepard was a hallucination! His gun had unlimited ammo! The Illusive Man appears out of nowhere! He is unable to argue with the Catalyst. He is led to believe that controlling the Reapers is possible, which is not. It is preposterous to believe a mere human can control the Reapers. Destroying them seems rash and Renegade! Moreover, it seems to be the wrong choice as presented by the Catalyst. Synthesis is presented as viable, as it supposedly ends the cycles of destruction. But to a thinking mind, this seems a horrible scenario. The boy is presented by the reapers to Shepard to manipulate him to somehow take pity on the synthetic races. The boy is imaginary! You, the player have been fooled. This criticism of the endings was predicted. The three endings seem to be the only options, when this is counter to the entire story hitherto.

I am not the first, there are many who have discovered this, I owe my belief to their efforts.

You'll just crash all the harder if your theory is proven wrong

[thrashmental]

Very Nice post OP

[TeGhar]

Thank you OP.

It's really nice to read all these great posts made by people with deeper insight in PR or in this case storytelling. It's also reassuring that people with more knowledge on the mater find the ending lacking.

For me I'm more confused by the ending than angry about it. I even expected it to end with the death of Shepard and some railroading, because this ending sets the rest of the franchise off.

For now I will just patiently hold the line and wait for some sort of official explanation and ideally a fix to the ending.

[Peranor]

5 stars! Excellent post!

[Gigerstreak]

Thank you OP.

[Mandemon]

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.

What "brave and bold" is in "SPACE MAGIC:wizard:" and "LOTS OF SPECULATIONS FROM EVERYONE"?

When you write story, it needs to be consistent with itself. Especially is you have 2 previosu stories to go with it. In this case, said consistency is broken in last 5 minutes, by a compelty new plot device that breaks the entire structure of the story, pushes resolution that was never before even theorised, leaves reader with whole bunch of new questions rather than answer old ones and finally, declares the story over.

Claiming it to be "brave and bold" or "art" requires you to be able to jsutofy ending outside it simply being "art", because to that I can answer "what is true art and what is pretentiosu art"?