Yes, you are correct but Mass Effect is not a movie! It's not a book, a TV show, podcast or any other kind of media I've seen wheeled out either. When was the last time you went to a movie that was over a day long and constantly stopped to give you the chance to dictate the dialogue and the direction of various plot points? Using the "movie" argument is like comparing cheese to fishing because they both feature in the food-chain at some point!
But, I said there would be an analogy and so there shall be. Let me start by saying that I am not suggesting that anyone who liked the ending is automatically wrong to think so. I might not be able to see why they like it or see how it can offer any kind of closure but far be it from me to start name-calling and insulting. I'm also not going to go into the many reasons why the endings make sod-all sense and make no effort to reward me for all that hard work because it's already been done a thousand times (and yet some people still can't at least see where we are coming from!).
No, my intention here is to offer up a slightly easier to understand, real-world example of why I, and many people like me, assert that ending(s) should reflect our choices rather than being a "one size fits all" ending we got fobbed-off with as well as to argue against the assertion that we have no right to "interfere" with BioWare's creation.
Look at what happens when a new model of a car is released. Scores of engineers and designers set to work with a vision in mind and from that vision will come drawings, models, prototypes, computer-generated wireframes, artistic impressions and eventually, photographs. In addition to the outer shell, other people will be working on things like the engines, wheels, suspension, transmission, seats and a million and one other things that come together to create a vision of the new model, as they see it. In this regard, the creation of a video game is not much different.
However, what happens when you decide "I want one!" and go to your local dealer with a vested interest? You are shown a "showroom" car, something that shows off the best the car can be or at least a combination of things that it could possibly come with. You will most likely take a test-drive too and so all this I will liken to a demo of a game. It gives you an example of what the final-outcome could be like.
So you take the test-drive and think: "Yeah! That's for me!" and then what? You are sat down by Mr. Salesman who then offers you brochures that outline the hundreds and hundreds of potential options for your car, which they will then build to your specifications. This is exactly how Mass Effect works!
Throughout the trilogy it gives us lists of choices to choose from. The game makes us pick from lists because there are only so many options one could take that are rational in the same way the dealer asks you to choose what engine you'd like in your car. Again you have to choose from a set list because, if not, there would always be one berk who would try to order a car with no engine because he's worried about global-warming.
So, like we do in the game, we make our choices. Colour, engine-type, wheels, bodykits and any number of interior options from seats to the colour of the dials. The whole idea is that, while you acknowledge you will still be getting a particular model of car, it will have your own unique stamp on it due to the choices you make. This is also no different to how Mass Effect progresses in that we are asked over and over what our choice is, be it choosing the colour of our armour all the way up to wether or not the Illusive Man gets his Collector Base or not. The idea is that all our choices ultimately have an impact on the final outcome.
Or so we were lead to believe!
So, you tick all the boxes for the stuff you want and ignore the stuff you don't before giving the dealer-man some money and sign on the dotted line. I liken this to the process of playing through the game(s), making all our choices, making friends, gaining loyalties and building war-assets (or not) to the point where you feel you are ready to launch the final assault.
Imagine then how you'd feel when you arrive to collect the car you specced to your own tastes with a hopeful gleam in your eye, only for the dealer to present you with a base-model that reflects next-to, if not nothing of the choices you made earlier. Oh and the dealer then mentions that the horn-button makes the rear-lights explode and that he's put all the wheels on inside-out; the steering wheel is in the boot and one of the seats is 90-degrees out of alignment with all the others. Finally he hands you a legal-document that says you must accept this car - no arguments. No matter that it's not the car you crafted and that it's more bonkers than The Chuckle Brothers on LSD - take the car!
Oh and when you turn on the engine, all the motorways disintegrate.
I don't know about you but I would not be impressed! I'd ask that the dealer give me the car that I was promised I'd get, I.e one that reflected my choices during the ordering-process. Think then how you'd feel if a bunch of people strolled up as you made your initial complaint / demand / refund request and, wthout bothering to see what your problem was exactly, screamed that you still have a car, that it looks like one in an advert or brochure and that it was designed by experts. "How dare you demand they change it, you entitled, whiny ****!", they shriek without bothering to at least hear you out.
Yes it WAS designed by experts but, if the dealer was going to spring this on me, why give me all those choices, big and small, and constantly remind me that they would shape the final outcome, be it the car or the game? I might as well have gone in, pointed at a used-car or the demonstrator car and said: "Yeah, that one'll do..."
While I freely accept that this analogy may not be perfect, I'd say it fairly accurate and I put more than a little thought into it. Oh and please don't try telling me that cars cost a lot more than games, this is about the principle rather than any actual cost.
I could go on and say that things like a better sound-system or carbon-ceramic brakes cost extra and so in that way they can be likened to DLC - nice to have but totally optional.
You also may have noticed that I bever said that, even if the car DID reflect all your choices, it would be guranteed to be as perfect as you imagined. And this ties in very nicely with all the "happy ending" / "bitersweet ending" kerfuffle.
Maybe your pairing a Diesel engine with an automatic gearbox sounded like a sensible option at the time but the reality turns out be that it gives the car all the alacrity of a stoned elephant. You may have chosen a manual gearbox because it wastes less of the engines power but the constant movement asssociated with changing gear aggravates a back-condition you have (this happened to my Dad, by the way). In these cases you'd have no grounds to complain because you made your choice and the dealer delivered, for better or worse, and the only thing you can do is make a different combination of choices next time in the hope it will be better.
That last paragraph pretty much sums up what many, if not all of us who rejected the ending to Mass Effect 3 are asking for!
For better or worse, at least give us an ending that makes sense and reflects all the choices we made. If one of our choices, or a combination thereof, means that we get a less than happy ending then fine, we'll remember that for the next playthrough in the same way that we will remember not to request certain options that made our new car to fall short of what we expected it to be. It may be perfectly plausible that your choices resulted in you being perfectly happy with the state of the Galaxy what your decisions meant for everyone else in the same way that your new car may be everything you expected and more. We're not asking for it to be a given but a possibility - big difference right there.
Modifié par WardyLion, 21 mars 2012 - 11:04 .
Retour en haut
