831 réponses à ce sujet

[Eternalsteelfan]

Corrected small factual error in OP about Mordin's work on the genophage:

Weskerr...
You made an excellent analysis of Mass Effect 3's ending and how it
violates the laws of good storytelling. I just wanted to point out a
minor mistake you made: You said that Mordin Solus created the
Genophage. That is incorrect. He modified the Genophage.

Thanks.

milkymcmilkerson wrote...

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.

I support this sentiment very much. "Art is the elimination of the unnecessary".

In general, I don't think going deeper into the Reapers' motivation is bad, it just wasn't executed well (Catalyst exposition).

[DarkCloudd]

Very excellent post Eternalsteelfan, you helped me to make sence of what I was having a hard time wrapping my head around in regards to the ending of the game!!

[Xandurpein]

This is another brilliant post about why the end in Mass Effect 3 fails so spectacularly:

Fred_MacManus wrote...

You people at Bioware need to read this, then sit back and THINK about it.
http://www.themetaga...oblem-with.html

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

[Doppelgaenger]

vargatom wrote...

So it is very likely that the previously established practices of non-interactive storytellig won't work in this new approach. 

That is an assumption without any basis. Not only that but all I have read and experienced concerning conventional rpg storytelling suggest the following: If a person can craft his or her own story through an interactive medium they do not like it to loose. The old vampire the Masquarade rulebook explicitly states in the section about storytelling for the dungeon master that you CAN NOT EVER let a story end on a low point/loss/situation where the player has no control, simply because they will feel like they themselves have lost, are on a low point, and have no control.  A story can have low points, momentary defeats and whatnot even character deaths as long as at the end of the evening and at the end of the story the players go home feeling like they accomplished something, that they succeded that they triumphed because they are their figures. In this case they are commander Shepard but this ending rips that away from them. They get a kick in the groin and the message 'too bad' it didn't matter in the end anyway. I experienced this myself one time. Where the adventure ended in a "tragic" defeat. This was the WORST EVER rpg session for me, because all the struggles (and it was a real struggle to get there oh boy) meant NOTHING.

[ed87]

Nice writing there

[ed87]

Xandurpein wrote...

This is another brilliant post about why the end in Mass Effect 3 fails so spectacularly:

Fred_MacManus wrote...

You people at Bioware need to read this, then sit back and THINK about it.
http://www.themetaga...oblem-with.html

"You didn't hate the ending because it made you feel sad, or angry, or cheerful. You hate it because it frustrated you. It stopped you from feeling as a human should feel. Made even worse, because it did such a great job of making you feel as you should for the last hundred hours. It brought you in and showed you true art. Then denied you the reason you played at all."


This guy!!! ...This is the guy!!!

[Mighty_BOB_cnc]

Yes, this thread, plus what this guy said.  Combined they are a force of unstoppable truth!

ed87 wrote...

Xandurpein wrote...

This is another brilliant post about why the end in Mass Effect 3 fails so spectacularly:

Fred_MacManus wrote...

You people at Bioware need to read this, then sit back and THINK about it.
http://www.themetaga...oblem-with.html

"You didn't hate the ending because it made you feel sad, or angry, or cheerful. You hate it because it frustrated you. It stopped you from feeling as a human should feel. Made even worse, because it did such a great job of making you feel as you should for the last hundred hours. It brought you in and showed you true art. Then denied you the reason you played at all."


This guy!!! ...This is the guy!!!

[Apathy1989]

Xandurpein wrote...

This is another brilliant post about why the end in Mass Effect 3 fails so spectacularly:

Fred_MacManus wrote...

You people at Bioware need to read this, then sit back and THINK about it.
http://www.themetaga...oblem-with.html

Just read the whole thing. Incredibly post and hits the nail on the head.

[TheWerdna]

Interesting read, like how it talks about both what was good and what was bad.

[Vhalkyrie]

SpideyKnight wrote...

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.

That is the definition of deus ex machina.  It provides a nonsensical explanation, then the player is given a single button choice to end a billion year cycle.  Just like that.  Click your "I win" button of choice.  OP explained why the crucible is not (its purpose is described).  The starchild's final interaction is to present the player these bizarre 'options'.

Modifié par Vhalkyrie, 18 mars 2012 - 09:03 .

[NekOoNinja]

Thank you. Very good read.

[julian08]

Shepard does have a tragic flaw. Did you see the guy dance?

Seriously though, very interesting read, thank you for putting this together. It is quite illuminating to see a professional opinion about the ending.
And by now, Forbes is constantly quoting screenwriters and PR experts from the BSN. Two weeks ago, I'd have laughed in your face if you had told me that.

[M12311]

Xandurpein wrote...

This is another brilliant post about why the end in Mass Effect 3 fails so spectacularly:

Fred_MacManus wrote...

You people at Bioware need to read this, then sit back and THINK about it.
http://www.themetaga...oblem-with.html

Yes that one is an equally brilliant analysis as well.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

@OP: Nice post. Well said.

My comment: I put about 40 hrs into ME3 not including multi-player (just to get EMS up to 100%). I paid the $10 for Javik whom I felt was pretty much essential for lore and not a hired gun like Zaeed. I stayed up way way too late way too many nights more than I should have (I'm talking 3 am).

Losing Earth was expected. The little boy was dying was an old ploy but it still got me. I cried doing the Turian missions when I met Garrus. I got Tuchanka back for the Krogan and cured the genophage, but the prospect was scary, but I figured they could populate the now vacant Batarian worlds. I was angry when I saw what happened to the Rachni. I had rewritten the Heretics, only to have seen them rehacked again, so I gave the Quarians their homeworld, Rannoch at the expense of the Geth -- I'm a monster. Peace Admiral Adama style. Thessia broke my heart.

So I spent time making sure I had gathered all the resources necessary, before taking on the Illusive Man and making trip to the Citadel. And then The Citadel had moved. And then we're retaking Earth. I play Paragade Shepard who always completes her mission. Her mission is to destroy the reapers. So I get a choice of Red, Green, or Blue. I pick Red for destroy because the little f*** Starchild deserves to die. And then Bioware gives me this for an ending? And Javik somehow magically teleports to the Normandy to be Adam and Eve with my love Liara?

Why after 40 hrs of play can I only remember the last 15 minutes? Why is it that after 60 hrs of play for each of the other two games I can remember the rest of them besides the final battles? It's like the last 15 minutes of this particular game have been traumatizing. After 5 years they give us this ****?

No. I don't buy this indoctrination bullcrap. See my signature.

[Vhalkyrie]

Unless Bioware comes out with a DLC fix, this is the ending I'm going to pretend happened.
http://www.youtube.com/watch

This shows that the entire Starchild scene was unnecessary.  The same open ended questions still exist, but it is more emotionally satisfying because we aren't left with the question: "Why is the starchild here?"  The explanation the starchild gives does not answer the questions we're left with.  Thus, it could have been omitted entirely without affecting the outcome.

Modifié par Vhalkyrie, 18 mars 2012 - 11:46 .

[Devils-DIVISION]

This wonderful thread cannot go unnoticed! It is fantastically written and beautifully points out why it failed! BioWare could learn a lot from you!

Holding the line!

[DocDoomII]

Eternalsteelfan wrote...

The Crucible isn't an example of deus ex machina. Again, we know all along that the Crucible's function is to stop the Reapers, it's introduced at the beginning of the story, it's importance is reinforced throughout, and it's function during the climax is in line with what is expected. An example of Mass Effect ending with deus ex machina would be: the Reapers win the battle of Earth and are seemingly unstoppable, suddenly, and with no previous justification, an even more advanced race emerges from deep space and destroys the Reapers, saving Earth. The difference is obvious; one is a clearly defined plot device, the other is a magical fix with no precedent in the story.

Agree.
But isn't the glittering godly brat classifiable as a deus ex machina?
He literally pops out of the frakking nowere and resolve the whole plot in like 20 seconds and offers the (only) solution to the problem: genocide+genocide/mindcontrol+genocide/dna tampering+genocide.

[Mighty_BOB_cnc]

Vhalkyrie wrote...

Unless Bioware comes out with a DLC fix, this is the ending I'm going to pretend happened.
http://www.youtube.com/watch

This shows that the entire Starchild scene was unnecessary.  The same open ended questions still exist, but it is more emotionally satisfying because we aren't left with the question: "Why is the starchild here?"  The explanation the starchild gives does not answer the questions we're left with.  Thus, it could have been omitted entirely without affecting the outcome.

Link broke.

[Nightfire78]

Xandurpein wrote...

This is another brilliant post about why the end in Mass Effect 3 fails so spectacularly:

Fred_MacManus wrote...

You people at Bioware need to read this, then sit back and THINK about it.
http://www.themetaga...oblem-with.html

This and OP are really great and interesting posts. Puts some thoughts into words that I hadn't been able to articulate as yet and adds some connections that I hadn't fully recognized. Maybe whoever wrote up the current ending should read them for tips on how to avoid similar "problematic" writing issues in future

[Emberwake]

Eternalsteelfan wrote...

The Crucible isn't an example of deus ex machina. Again, we know all along that the Crucible's function is to stop the Reapers, it's introduced at the beginning of the story, it's importance is reinforced throughout, and it's function during the climax is in line with what is expected. An example of Mass Effect ending with deus ex machina would be: the Reapers win the battle of Earth and are seemingly unstoppable, suddenly, and with no previous justification, an even more advanced race emerges from deep space and destroys the Reapers, saving Earth. The difference is obvious; one is a clearly defined plot device, the other is a magical fix with no precedent in the story.

The crucible isn't the deus ex machina... the Starchild is. The crucible is a device, one that is introduced earlier in the story. The Starchild is a character that appears at the end with no rational connection to the previous events. He is one of the most clearcut examples of deus ex machina I've seen in years.

Hold the line.

[J-Reyno]

"We do not do acts and expect no consequences. Even when we do an act at some goal, and fail, we still get a consequence. Frustration is the absence of EVEN FAILURE. The sick feeling people got was utter frustration at there not being more gameplay, more narrative, to either explain what they just saw, or to fulfill those original motivations. People are upset, not because there was no 'happy ending' as Bioware seems to think, but because there was no ending for most of the story. If we can enjoy sadness on a meta-level, this is because there is something above emotions we feel as pleasure. In this same way, there is something above emotions that we feel as pain. This is frustration."

I could not agree with this more. Just thinking about the ending and the lack of closure (as this guy puts it, consequences) gives me this sick, gutted feeling. Labeling it frustrating is completely accurate. Gah...

[Federally]

I like your post OP, really nails BioWare to the wall.

Everything they worked to create in the lead up to the last 10 minutes was abandoned.

ME2 setup Harbinger as the main antagonist yet he falls into obscurity.

A central theme of the entire trilogy involved over coming our differences and seeing eachother as equals. In ME1 this regarded humans and aliens, in 2 and 3 it turned to organics and synthetics. Yet at the end we are told this is impossible?

Where did the common formula of motivation, action, consequence go? We are not just left with no consequences for our final actions but told that the consequences shown us for our earlier actions were false.

All they had to do was setup a final fight with Harby, blow him up, Garrus gives you a high five and you get down with LI on a pile of rubble. Really wouldn't have been hard to pull off an okay ending.

[chkchkchk]

Thanks for this, Eternalsteelfan. I won't protest if you make your nice essay even longer.

[Mighty_BOB_cnc]

I think I'll go cry myself to sleep now.

[Eternalsteelfan]

Mighty_BOB_cnc wrote...

I think I'll go cry myself to sleep now.

Uh, not a reaction I was hoping for.