I hope this is more readable.
First of all, the following obviously has spoilers for the ending of Mass Effect 3. You’ve been warned.
It seems the popular thing to do on the internet recently is to sound in on Mass Effect’s ending. The controversy that has now resulted in not just fundraising petitions but also legal action has ruffled the feathers of fans, “fans” and trolls alike. Many scoff in disbelief that I am in the camp that actually regards the ending as one of the best video game endings in recent history.
The following are statements that I have read from those who oppose the endings. They are common opinions circulating around the ‘net, and I decided to examine each before giving my own reasons in support of Bioware’s story choices:
“The ending does not reflect the choices Shepard made through the course of three games.”
It is entirely accurate to make this statement: the end of the game presents you with three choices and those choices do not change no matter what you do before that point. However, this final choice was not supposed to be about what Shepard has done in the past…it was about what Shepard is going to do right now. Shepard held the fate of all known organic and synthetic life in her hands (which is how I view the pistol symbolism…Shepard either lays it down to embrace synthetics or shoots it to oppose them).
The reason this choice was so difficult and felt so weighted is because not only was there no paragon option, but the choice ultimately was made based on what the player’s moral code was. Let me put this into context by using my endgame as an example. I had played as a paragon Shepard for three games, uniting galaxies and uplifting the hope and spirits of everyone. I hated Cerberus and I hated the Illusive Man’s ideas of controlling Reapers. At the end of the game, staring down those choices, I had to sit and think about which one was right. I knew that the Reaper threat would be stopped, Shepard would die and the relays would be destroyed. In theory this choice will have the same immediate outcomes, but Shepard is ultimately rewriting generations of life in the future!
This choice is bigger than one individual can truly comprehend no matter how epic of a hero they were previously. The way I played Shepard reflected her desire for free will and her hope that organic life’s ability to control their destiny will prevail. With those morals in mind, I chose the option to destroy synthetic life and not break the cycle permanently. I reasoned this as the best option because now Shepard once again gave humanity and other civilizations a chance to fight like she did.
While destroying synthetics was a hard pill to swallow (the Geth and EDI make that choice bittersweet), I was confident like the Catalyst was that synthetic life would rise once again, but hopefully this time chaos would not occur. So you see this ending was not about where Shepard has been, or even about what happens ten minutes after Shepard makes her decision. It is about what kind of person Shepard, and by extension the player, is.
This choice actually represents what the role-playing genre of video games should be all about: the player must make an excruciatingly hard decision that changes the direction of the game entirely…in this case it changes the canon of the Mass Effect universe in potentially three very different ways.
Mass Effect 4 (if set in the future after Shepard dies) cannot ignore Shepard’s choice; either we will see the Reaper cycle beginning again, Reapers being controlled in some form, or all life will now be a synthetic-organic hybrid made to resemble Shepard. Those are three very different outcomes…we just don’t get to see that future because we were looking at the universe through Shepard’s eyes and her story came to a very dramatic end.
There is also another, much less long-winded reason why Shepard’s choices were not going to reflect the end game. Shepard’s choice reflected the journey she took; yes Shepard got to destroy the Reapers, but how did she do it? Did she resolve the turian/krogan conflict peacefully? Were the geth destroyed, or were the quarians? If Shepard didn’t make the choices she made in Mass Effect 3’s build-up to the climax at the end, Shepard couldn’t have even GOTTEN to Earth to take it back. The game did an excellent job of showing cause and effect and tying up loose ends from the previous two installments.
I never went into the end of the game expecting whether I saved the Rachni or not to be the ultimate decision-maker in how this finished.
2. “The ending makes no sense and has too many large plot holes!”
The ending makes perfect sense; after the mission on Thessia we learned that there is some greater AI controlling the Reapers. A master plan akin to the theory of intelligent design has been in motion since way, way before the current events in the game. Basically, this AI has been preserving space by controlling the organics that cause chaos in the form of space discovery and creating synthetics while allowing simpler organic races to develop. In Mass Effect 1 and 2, Shepard showed the Reapers that humans were not a simple race…perhaps we could argue that the attention humanity got from them really was all Shepard’s fault (along with those who discovered the mass effect technology in the first place).
Fans arguing against the plausibility of this Catalyst plot seem to believe the point of all of this needed to be explained. What these fans do not realize though, is that explaining this would be akin to trying to answer questions about life beyond Earth and if there is a God…it is too big of a concept to just give some dialogue about.
The Catalyst and intelligent design are similar concepts that are largely open to interpretation of the individual playing Shepard…for Bioware to create a story and universe that makes players question their own humanity and reason for existing in space is nothing short of magnificent.
Now I’ll examine the plot holes that many fans are pointing out. In the ending cinematic, several things are shown including the Normandy jumping through a relay, the mass relays being destroyed, and Shepard’s squad landing on an unknown planet. The first question people have been asking is why was the Normandy in a relay jump? The Normandy was holding the front lines with the rest of the naval fleets flying about above Earth. We see the Crucible activated and charging up to fire…
I can only assume that the following happened:
-Fleets were told to retreat for fear of being destroyed by the Crucible…no one knew what exactly it would do beyond destroy the Reapers somehow.
-Joker was escaping in fear of the Crucible’s power like everyone else. The Normandy had Hackett still on board and I’m guessing he gave commands to retreat from the Crucible after it activated. I realize this is hypothetical and we can’t possibly know what Joker was doing, but unfortunately this was not explained.
Another issue fans have is how could the Normandy have picked up the two squad mates that were with Shepard before she entered the beam?
Again, here are some points to consider:
-There could have been time for the Normandy to land and get them to safety.
-However Cortez managed to make it out, the other squad mates possibly did the same thing…maybe there was a shuttle they used or maybe the Normandy itself landed on Earth. We don’t know how long it took for Shepard to make it to the Citadel controls and activate the Crucible. I personally have difficulty in believing the Normandy landed that close to the beam to pick up people, but again it is not a plot hole exactly because there could easily have been an explanation.
Finally, there is the matter of the mass relays exploding. These relays are said to wipe out star systems when destroyed as discussed in the Arrival DLC. We know though the relays did not explode in a predictable manner since they were destroyed not by brute force, but by the Crucible. Some unknown that no one could account for is the reason Joker and the squad survived…again, I know that this seems like a threadbare explanation, but it is one nonetheless.
Much like everyone else I would love for Bioware to comment on these particular parts of the ending, but unlike everyone else I am not calling it a plot hole until the ending is proven to contradict canonized information which so far there is no evidence to support or refute anything that occurred. 3.
“The last message telling people to play DLC and multiplayer cheapens the experience and is a shameless attempt to get more money out of us!” Mass Effect 2 had amazing DLC…from new characters to bridging the gap between ME2 and 3, it greatly added to the experience of the storyline. No one complained when ME2’s ending came with an option to keep playing to experience DLC or to start a new game plus.
Bioware wants people to remember that though the story of Shepard has ended, Mass Effect as a whole has not. DLC will come and probably expand an already rich story with new missions. Multiplayer’s influence on the end game is something I haven’t seen for myself yet and personally I want to make that happen. I also estimate that if Bioware even has a vague idea for a Mass Effect 4, eventually DLC like the Arrival will bridge some transition.
Bioware has provided excellent reasons for fans to keep playing Mass Effect even after the story has ended…it isn’t a crime for them to want to remind you of that. They deserve to try and make profit off of the highly successful game that they have devoted a lot of time and effort on. 4.
“The ending makes everything that happened in three games irrelevant!” This is perhaps the argument that makes the least bit of sense. Over the span of three games Shepard discovered the Reapers, the origin of mass relays, the truth behind the Citadel, and that there is a cycle that purges all organic life for reasons unknown (until ME3 that is).
In order for Shepard to even have gotten to the end of the trilogy, the following had to have happened:
-The fight against Saren
-Project Lazarus and the suicide mission
-Uniting the races to take back Earth If even one of those failed, Shepard would have never gotten to the beam. That is pretty obvious.
I realize though that more people harbor feelings of irrelevance because they spent all this time getting invested in a character and didn’t see any pay off in the form of a “happy” ending. Obvious foreshadowing through the game hinted at Shepard’s death and by extension the player also dies. The ending continues a story that was never just about Shepard, but the fates of all races and synthetics in the Mass Effect universe. I won’t go into more detail about how Shepard was ultimately the vehicle of a much larger story, but know that the ending was achieved thanks to plot cohesion in three games. Now I shall give my evidence in support of the ending’s brilliance:
The ending was a very gratifying final nod at the symbolism of Shepard.
No one really talks about why Shepard was chosen as the name of our protagonist. It doesn’t take a genius to figure it out either. Shepard’s name is an intentional play on what a Shepard is; through her actions Shepard led and united others under one common mission and ultimately delivered them to a brighter future (we hope).
Shepard first was the leader of humanity in ME1, and then the leader of a group of unlikely allies in ME2…in ME3 Shepard led galaxies to rise up against the Reapers. Did you catch the scene after the credits though? The child in the scene referred to our commander as “The Shepard.”
Considering that Shepard made a God-like decision at the end of ME3, Shepard being revered as quite omnipotent makes sense.
Depending on what ending you chose Shepard became either the leader of the Reapers, the leader of an entirely new species that is synthetic and organic, or Shepard delivered the organic races into a time of peace much like herding sheep to safer pastures.
2. The ending is open to interpretation and leaves the plot ripe for expanding in future games. Though Shepard was informed of the immediate results of her actions, the sonic boom-like impact her choice has on all life in space will be felt for centuries. We don’t know how the future will be though; what will happen when the cycle starts again if you chose the right path? How does controlling the Reapers change things for humanity if you chose the left? What will a generation of synthetic-organic hybrids be like if you chose the path straight ahead? Consider how far into the future that scene after the credits was.
What was really going on in that moment? Were the grandfather and child completely organic? How advanced is space travel again? The glimpse of the future was purposefully vague so that players can determine for themselves what exactly was going on. 3. The end game decision had no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ choice. There was no red or blue text to tell you how to respond. There was no dialogue wheel to show which choice was the paragon move or which was a renegade ending.
Bioware created a moment where you could ponder the pros and cons of your choices without wondering how this might affect any preconceived notions someone had about doing a ‘paragon-only’ play through or getting just renegade points.
Shepard’s humanity and own uncertainty in ME3 is one of the central themes to the narrative, and when Shepard is reduced to a broken soldier with only a pistol the game pulls at how the players would respond to that abrupt turn of events.
Regardless of how people felt about the ending, I doubt anyone can say they didn’t hesitate in choosing a decision without some serious thought first.
4. A masterful narrative shift occurs, making this not an ending but a new beginning. The way the ending was planned could not have been acted out more brilliantly. The Reaper beam rips through the charging group of ragtag survivors as they attempt to make an all-out footrace to the beam.
Players watch this happen and get the first jolt of panic when they realize Shepard for the first time will not be okay. The controls, no matter how forcefully you hit the buttons, simply direct a limping commander towards their goal. Shepard sluggishly lifts an arm to shoot a pistol at oncoming husks and staggers into the Citadel. I cannot be the only one who wanted to scream at Shepard to shake it off and sprint ahead to find Anderson, but that is exactly what we are supposed to feel.
It is obvious in this moment that Shepard’s story is ending as she struggles to point her gun at the Illusive Man and falls onto the controls of the Citadel shutters. When the Catalyst begins to speak, the change from Shepard’s story to one that is about just the Mass Effect universe begins.
Shepard has little time to speak to the Catalyst before prompted with a decision; she is confused and suddenly seems small when confronted with a vastly superior AI and an opportunity to rewrite destiny appears in the form of three paths leading to her ultimate demise. I didn’t feel like I was even playing Shepard in those moments; I felt like I was playing God and that to give someone that responsibility seemed unfair.
Through this entire process Shepard has been filled with the hope and support of everyone she rallies…would anyone support her now as she changes the fates of all organic and synthetic life? As we watch Shepard die, the ending doesn’t just stop there…it continues the story as we see Joker and the squad crash land on an unknown planet. Seeing them climb out and simply take in a new world that appears unsullied by technology is like a clean slate or a breath of fresh air.
Playing Shepard feels like a first-person narrative even though players of video games are always viewers of a story…this definitive switch to being an observer of uncontrollable events is Bioware’s way of saying “but wait, there’s more.” After the credits ended I felt an even greater sense of new beginnings when an unknown child looks up at the universe Shepard once navigated and hopes that maybe they too can become a hero.
5. Foreshadowing and clever story decisions lead to the final, encompassing theme that has always been present in each game: Space is full of infinite possibility. Mass Effect isn’t as cut and dry of a trilogy as many might think it is. Sure, we are largely invested in Shepard’s story to a point where we forget that everything happening is larger than life. Most heroes in video games save the world; Bioware best gives a representation of what it is like to save an entire universe.
In Mass Effect 1, we learn that humans are still pretty new to the intergalactic exploration thing. As a result, humanity seems like the kid eating glue in a room full of gifted kindergarteners. However thanks to the heroism of Commander Shepard, it is humanity that discovers the Protheans (who were vastly superior to all races existing today) and that they were wiped out by the Reapers (who everyone regarded as a folk tale).
We also learn (though it really doesn’t sink in until now) that the Reapers believe it is their job to eliminate all organic life (again, we don’t know why until ME3). Shepard spends the entire game trying to tell people that this enemy is bigger than Saren, and even at the beginning of Mass Effect 2 it is obvious no one still really understands the scope of these events.
In ME2 though, we learn that not even Shepard could have prepared for the information dropped on the universe thanks to a high-stakes mission aided by Cerberus. The Protheans were not the only ones controlled by the Reapers; the geth and collectors all felt the indoctrination of these synthetic foes. We see how the Reapers work, and we see that this suicide mission is really only a small victory in what is soon to be an all-out war spanning star systems.
Mass Effect 3 plot is larger than any previous game; it is quite literally a massive war that is affecting everything in its path. Even beyond the grand scale of the Reaper attack, we learn that even the Reapers are part of someone else’s master plan for all life in space. It is a plan no one can comprehend, not even Shepard.
We learn at the very end that not only was the Illusive Man right, but Shepard’s belief in choosing her own destiny might be just wishful thinking. The ending draws in so many theoretical and hypothetical thoughts it makes sorting through the information a little difficult, but I don’t believe this is a result of vague storytelling…I think Bioware intentionally created a situation where the player is supposed to be confused.
I don’t think anyone has gone their entire life without asking one of the following questions:
-Is there life out there in space besides Earth?
-Is there a God, or a master plan?
-Is this all some intelligent design at work?
-What is the value of a life?
-Do we control our destiny?
-Are there alternate realities?
All of these questions are central themes that all float around the largest theme of Mass Effect: space is ****ing big and will always be an unknown.
Did anyone catch EDI’s dialogue about 1+1=3? She actually does a great job pondering the existence of parallel universes and alternate timelines.
Shepard doesn’t know what to say to the AI and neither would I if someone dropped that information on me. EDI and the geth are two examples of weighing in on what constitute life, and what it means to be alive. The Illusive Man’s goal to control the Reapers seemed flawed and evil ever since ME2, but in ME3 we have to ask ourselves in the very end if really he was right all along: the Reapers indoctrinate organics to allow lesser races evolve and this technically keeps them alive.
Certainly controlling the Reapers would advance humanity, too. Even Saren’s thought process may have some valid points since he was really just an example of indoctrination before The Illusive Man. The exploration in the Cerberus base also brings up quite an interesting moment where Shepard questions if she is already indoctrinated as a result of project Lazarus. I began to wonder the same thing, especially after seeing the Catalyst and after the Catalyst comments on how synthetics have made Shepard’s entire journey possible.
There is a great theory about this that I won’t elaborate upon (look it up on the internet…you’re bound to find it) but it is another possibility that is left open to player interpretation as a result of a wonderfully thought-provoking ending. There it is…seven pages of Word document about just the ending of one of my favorite games (and I didn’t even get into any of the indoctrination theories circulating around).
I respect the opinions of others, and I would love to participate in healthy discussion about why others liked or disliked the endings.
That being said, I have one final message I wish to deliver directly to the vocal minority viciously attacking Bioware: please, please stop.
While certainly vocalizing a view point and desiring for commentary from Casey Hudson and the creative team behind him is a harmless want, there is a right and wrong way to go about it. I would love to see more expansion in the form of DLC (particularly an interactive epilogue) on the events at the end of Mass Effect 3 because I welcome more detailed information on my favorite game universe.
Those that are trying to take legal action because they didn’t like the creative choices someone made in an art form ultimately are taking us back to a time where freedom of expression was not allowed, especially if a majority of a population disagreed with it. This is not the first time you may disagree with how a story ends, and it won’t be the last; unfortunately changing endings to satisfy your selfishness is the biggest slap in the face anyone could deliver to art mediums and storytelling in previously unconventional forms like video games. Lord knows there are things I dislike in Mass Effect…Liara’s entire character is one of them. That doesn’t mean I want Liara removed from the games and replaced with some other asari. Let’s show some tolerance, everyone, and move on from this.
Editors note: While I disagree with most of this the article was articulate and thoughtful and worthy of a 2nd look so I tried to make it more readable.
Modifié par frostajulie, 20 mars 2012 - 08:45 .
Retour en haut