80611 réponses à ce sujet

[Arashi08]

Reposted because im planning on going somewhere with this.

Arashi08 wrote...

So kind of an odd question but...how many people in the thread right now are writers?

[BleedingUranium]

Arashi08 wrote...


Reposted because im planning on going somewhere with this.

Arashi08 wrote...

So kind of an odd question but...how many people in the thread right now are writers?

I guess you could say I am, not that I do much.

[Revan87]

Arashi08 wrote...

So kind of an odd question but...how many people in the thread right now are writers?

Not yet but I'm working on it 

[Arashi08]

BleedingUranium wrote...

Arashi08 wrote...


Reposted because im planning on going somewhere with this.

Arashi08 wrote...

So kind of an odd question but...how many people in the thread right now are writers?

I guess you could say I am, not that I do much.

Ya that's basically me too.  Having a hard time writing while trying to resist anxiety and distractions lol.
anyway I'll wait a little while and see if there are any other writers online right now before I proceed with where im going with this topic,

[Andromidius]

Arashi08 wrote...

So kind of an odd question but...how many people in the thread right now are writers?

*raises hand*

[gunslinger_ruiz]

Arashi08 wrote...


Reposted because im planning on going somewhere with this.

Arashi08 wrote...

So kind of an odd question but...how many people in the thread right now are writers?

I guess you could say I'm writer, most of my stories are just written as a hobby though.

[Arashi08]

well that's enough I guess lol. 
 the main reason I ask is because as writers I fell we might have a better understanding of what it takes to write a story and also how important the ending is to the plot of any story.  while I was looking up some info about fixing my writing structure etc, I came across this nice tidbit of information regarding endings in stories.

Now it can be considered entirely opinionated, but I felt it was a good way to think about how an ending is so important, since it seems so basic:
http://www.pgtelco.c...ler/endings.htm

Now I ask the question: does the ME3 ending do these things?  And if it doesn't, does it really seem like the kind of mistakes that writers of Mass Effect, or BioWare in general, would make?  I think it is safe to assume that BW writers are experienced after all.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Andromidius wrote...

Arashi08 wrote...

So kind of an odd question but...how many people in the thread right now are writers?

*raises hand*

I Write as a hobby and have been doing it for 3 years.

[Andromidius]

Arashi08 wrote...Now I ask the question: does the ME3 ending do these things?  And if it doesn't, does it really seem like the kind of mistakes that writers of Mass Effect, or BioWare in general, would make?  I think it is safe to assume that BW writers are experienced after all.

Before I even read the article (I will) I'll just say this.

Bioware are highly experienced storytellers and writers.  The team itself did a great job with ME1 and ME2, though there was some shuffling with the team in ME3.  The company has provided twist endings in the past, and highly complex ones riddled with clues throughout the whole game.

So could they make a mistake this bad, and still be proud of it?  I think not.  Especially after the EC, which is an extremely thin veil of platification for the angry masses that actually doesn't do what people think - it gave no closure or answers that wasn't already in the game.  It was cleverly crafted to give the illusion that it did.

Now, the article...

Link is broken.

Modifié par Andromidius, 21 novembre 2012 - 06:08 .

[Arashi08]

Andromidius wrote...

Arashi08 wrote...Now I ask the question: does the ME3 ending do these things?  And if it doesn't, does it really seem like the kind of mistakes that writers of Mass Effect, or BioWare in general, would make?  I think it is safe to assume that BW writers are experienced after all.

Before I even read the article (I will) I'll just say this.

Bioware are highly experienced storytellers and writers.  The team itself did a great job with ME1 and ME2, though there was some shuffling with the team in ME3.  The company has provided twist endings in the past, and highly complex ones riddled with clues throughout the whole game.

So could they make a mistake this bad, and still be proud of it?  I think not.  Especially after the EC, which is an extremely thin veil of platification for the angry masses that actually doesn't do what people think - it gave no closure or answers that wasn't already in the game.  It was cleverly crafted to give the illusion that it did.

Now, the article...

Link is broken.

Really?  it works fine for me... oh well I'll just paste the text on here, but some of it might be choppy, hence why I just put the link in.  But we'll see how it turns out.


"Here's the thing: Endings. Endings are the thing. Endings are Every Thing.
At least when you are writing. Or reading.
Ending is not the cherry on top. Ending is so integral to your plot, you can't separate them. At least, not if you want to write anything anybody wants to read. The Ending is what you've been selling the whole time you planned, plotted, backstoried, character developed, and wrote your Great American Novel.

A good ending won't save a wretched story. But a bad ending will unfailingly kill a good story. The ending is why the reader just invested their valuable time reading your story, and if it stinks, then they've wasted that time. Your ending has to be good, or your story is doomed.

So what do I mean by a Good Ending? Does every story have to end with Happily Ever After?
No. Of course not. Good does not necessarily mean happy. But it should be satisfying. It should resolve the conflict, and tie up the main storyline and any secondary storylines you had. The ending should grow organically out of the plot and the action of the story, not come screaming out of left field at the reader, who can find no other justification for it than the whim of the author.

So...what makes a good ending?

#1 - Change


What makes a good ending hinges on the same things that make a good story. And the most important thing that makes a good story is change. If nothing changes, nothing happens. And if nothing happens, you've got no story.
So during your story, things changed. And your ending should help demonstrate this change, or illustrate its consequences, or highlight how things are different now, or show why the change was necessary, or...
You get the idea. The ending should deal with the changes that happened during your story.

Can the ending, and indeed the story, avoid change altogether and deposit the reader right back where they started? Well, sure. If done well, this could be effective. It could also be gimmicky, and leave a reader feeling cheated. And this is all assuming that it was done deliberately, with reasons behind the choice. I recently read a novel where the ending could be summed up as "and they decided to continue the status quo." When you thought over it and compared things at the beginning of the novel to how things stood at the end of the novel, even though there had been action and talk--lots of talk; long, deep conversations where people said important things--at the end things were just as they were in the beginning. The deep things these people had said, and then failed to act or deliver on, made them all look shallow, and untruthful. And you could have taken the whole of the novel that just happened, and tacked it on at the end to start all over again--and it would have made sense. At least as much sense as it made the first time.

The disaster was that it didn't seem to be intentional, or even planned. Everything in the story led the reader to expect one type of ending, and then what happened was not an ending at all--the story just sort of stopped. You could tell the author tried very hard to sell it as a real ending, a grand ending, and meaningful ending--but it didn't feel like an ending.

Don't do that.

#2 - Go back to the beginning


Didn't I just tell you not to do this? Well, no. This part ties into making your ending grow organically out of your story.

This is difficult to explain, but when you write, you make promises to the reader. From the very first paragraph of the very first page of your story, you are sending signals to your reader about what type of story you are telling.
Don't believe me? Consider these possible opening lines. Same situation; girl spies boy across crowded room.


He was tall, he was dark, he was handsome. And as I later told the police, when I first saw him he had neither a 7 inch kitchen knife in his belly nor a chalk form around his body.


I had never believed in love at first sight. Then one evening his electric blue eyes met mine across a crowded dance floor, and all of the sudden I could not remember the name of the man I danced with, the man I was to marry in six weeks' time.


I don't know why I couldn't stop staring at the man--I didn't know him from Adam. Maybe it was his height, or his arresting nature. Or maybe it was his burning red eyes and pointed fangs.
Each one of these lines tells you something about the story you are reading. They set your expectations for the things to come, and the ending to follow. The murder mystery will have a different type of ending than the romance, or the vampire story. Put the wrong ending on the wrong story, and you will have frustrated readers.
I know this seems obvious. But the mistake is more common than you think--ending a different story than you began. Look at your beginning, and look at your ending, and make sure they match.

#3 - Look at your characters


Your readers have spent all the time of your novel learning about your characters, caring about them, feeling them. If your ending wouldn't satisfy your characters, it won't satisfy your reader, either.

Remember the novel I told you about earlier, with no change? Another problem with that ending was this: two-thirds of the way through, our main character described, quite plainly, want it was she wanted.
And at the end of the novel, she was with a man who plainly stated he would offer none of those things.
It might have worked, if this was a story fundamentally about her and how she changed to be a person who would be happy with this sort of man. But as we already settled, there was no change. She was the same person at the end as she was when she described her dreams, only now she was involved with a man who would never consider living those dreams.

Given that, we the readers could not imagine her to be happy. And if she wasn't happy, how could we be happy?
Look at your characters, at who they are, at what they want. If your ending is to be a happy one, those needs must be met. If your ending is to be a satisfying one, those needs must at least be considered, addressed--even if not necessarily fulfilled.

#4 - Set the mood


One of the first things you probably decided about your ending, without even giving it conscious thought, was the mood. Think back to when you first conceived of your story. How did you envision it leaving the reader? Happy? Sad? Angry? Now sit down and read your ending as it currently exists. Think about how you felt when you finished writing it. Does it leave you the way you wanted to leave your reader?

I actually ran into this myself, with a story I wanted to have a happy ending. The first time I wrote the ending, though, it was a real downer. A death happens near the end of the book, and that death dominated my character's thoughts and actions. There were lots of happy things happening, including a wedding, but somehow the sadness of the death overshadowed all of it.

And of course the problem was entirely in my handling of it. When I rewrote it, all the same events happen. But this time the ending is happy and hopeful, even with the recent death.

The lesson here is that even if the events of your ending are just right, the tone of it could still be wrong. You may not need to change the action at all, just your telling of it."


EDIT:  and also I agree with you about BioWare having great writers, which is why it doesn't make sense that they would create such an...unfavorable ending while knowing how integral endings are to ANY story.

Modifié par Arashi08, 21 novembre 2012 - 06:20 .

[Andromidius]

Arashi08 wrote...Good does not necessarily mean happy. But it should be satisfying. It should resolve the conflict, and tie up the main storyline and any secondary storylines you had. The ending should grow organically out of the plot and the action of the story, not come screaming out of left field at the reader, who can find no other justification for it than the whim of the author.

This part in particular is a good thing to note first.

From a literal perspective, ME3's ending fails at this.  The whole 'Starchild' thing comes out of nowhere, throws the rest of the plot in the bin and magically creates a happy ending.  The entire rest of the story is essentially pointless.

From the IT perspective, ME3's ending does this perfectly.  The whole 'Reapers will try to indoctrinate Shepard' concept has been built up from ME1 up, as have their methods and the technology behind it, and their justifications for wanting Shepard alive and 'unaltered'.  They want an avatar for the new Reaper they are building, not a puppet like TIM.  The fact the Starchild is so jarring and out of nowhere should tell us that what we see isn't what it appears to be, the contradictory statements and circular logic, and the fact the main character goes for it without much of a fight.  Of course this means the ending is a cliffhanger, but a cliffhanger is still an ending.

Modifié par Andromidius, 21 novembre 2012 - 06:29 .

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Well the article certainly sums up why the endings of Mass Effect dosent work.

The ending taken litterally is the easy way out, the overly happy one, but Mass Effect has never been like that.

At the start of ME1 you have only about 5-10 minutes of calm before the distress signal from Eden Prime comes up. Then on Virmire you are simply dropped into the deep end, looses as squadmate (Richard L. Jenkins...heh I see what you did there Bioware) and ultimately fail to recover your objective (at least in the way everyone wanted you too.)

And from then on it is an upphill struggle throughout the games as you fight not just the enemies of the galaxy, but politicians who dont want to recognice the severity of the threat as well. Nothing is ever really handed to you easily, you always ahd to fight for it wether that be a verbal battle or an actual battle.

But that just dosent fit the ending where we are simply handed the solutions on a silver platter.

Modifié par Raistlin Majare 1992, 21 novembre 2012 - 06:33 .

[paxxton]

ROTFL. Beware of mad touch devices.

Modifié par paxxton, 21 novembre 2012 - 06:28 .

[Andromidius]

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...Virmire

*cough* Eden Prime *cough*

But yes, you're correct.

[Raistlin Majare 1992]

Andromidius wrote...

Raistlin Majare 1992 wrote...Virmire

*cough* Eden Prime *cough*

But yes, you're correct.

Doh, yeah I thougt of losing a squadmate and my thougts automatically turned to Virmire

[Arashi08]

Andromidius wrote...

Arashi08 wrote...Good does not necessarily mean happy. But it should be satisfying. It should resolve the conflict, and tie up the main storyline and any secondary storylines you had. The ending should grow organically out of the plot and the action of the story, not come screaming out of left field at the reader, who can find no other justification for it than the whim of the author.

This part in particular is a good thing to note first.

From a literal perspective, ME3's ending fails at this.  The whole 'Starchild' thing comes out of nowhere, throws the rest of the plot in the bin and magically creates a happy ending.  The entire rest of the story is essentially pointless.

From the IT perspective, ME3's ending does this perfectly.  The whole 'Reapers will try to indoctrinate Shepard' concept has been built up from ME1 up, as have their methods and the technology behind it, and their justifications for wanting Shepard alive and 'unaltered'.  They want an avatar for the new Reaper they are building, not a puppet like TIM.  The fact the Starchild is so jarring and out of nowhere should tell us that what we see isn't what it appears to be, the contradictory statements and circular logic, and the fact the main character goes for it without much of a fight.  Of course this means the ending is a cliffhanger, but a cliffhanger is still an ending.

I feel like, if the endings were literal, then the writers clearly made this mistake:

"The disaster was that it didn't seem to be intentional, or even planned. Everything in the story led the reader to expect one type of ending, and then what happened was not an ending at all--the story just sort of stopped. You could tell the author tried very hard to sell it as a real ending, a grand ending, and meaningful ending--but it didn't feel like an ending.

Don't do that."

[Andromidius]

Arashi08 wrote...I feel like, if the endings were literal, then the writers clearly made this mistake:

"The disaster was that it didn't seem to be intentional, or even planned. Everything in the story led the reader to expect one type of ending, and then what happened was not an ending at all--the story just sort of stopped. You could tell the author tried very hard to sell it as a real ending, a grand ending, and meaningful ending--but it didn't feel like an ending.

Don't do that."

Exactly.  Its such a rookie mistake that no self-respecting team of writers would feel proud about it.

But the idea that the champion of the Galaxy isn't as incorruptable or immune to the Reapers...  That's hinted at ALOT in ME3, and the ideas that no-one is safe from the Reapers and everyone is fallible has been a theme of the trilogy from the very start.

[Arashi08]

Andromidius wrote...

Arashi08 wrote...I feel like, if the endings were literal, then the writers clearly made this mistake:

"The disaster was that it didn't seem to be intentional, or even planned. Everything in the story led the reader to expect one type of ending, and then what happened was not an ending at all--the story just sort of stopped. You could tell the author tried very hard to sell it as a real ending, a grand ending, and meaningful ending--but it didn't feel like an ending.

Don't do that."

Exactly.  Its such a rookie mistake that no self-respecting team of writers would feel proud about it.

But the idea that the champion of the Galaxy isn't as incorruptable or immune to the Reapers...  That's hinted at ALOT in ME3, and the ideas that no-one is safe from the Reapers and everyone is fallible has been a theme of the trilogy from the very start.

Shepard wouldn't be an interesting character if she were immune to it.  That would take away any fear the player might feel from this actually frightening Reaper weapon.  It would ruin most of the tension that indoctrination is supposed to be making the player experience.  Shepard possibly succumbing to indoctrination has been my worry since ME1 and that is actually an interesting part of the story as well as Shepard's character development.

take that away, and Shepard just becomes one of those ridiculous action heroes who never really gets hurt and never has to really feel anything or worry about anything.

[Andromidius]

Arashi08 wrote...
Shepard wouldn't be an interesting character if she were immune to it.

Exactly. 

And it also makes other characters more interesting because they are fallible as well, namely Saren.  If he was just a 'bad guy' I'd not find him interesting, but its clear he's an Anti-Villian that's a victim of his own zeal and drive.  Not to say he's not a ruthless xenophobic arse, even before he became indoctrinated, but his tragedy and redemption make him interesting.

A bit like...you know who...from Dragon Age: Origins.  You hate him, you spar words with him, you draw weapons against him...  But ultimately he was only doing what he thought was best, and can be respected for it.

[Arashi08]

magnetite wrote...

Being a game developer isn't easy. If you do too much, people get dependent on you; if you do nothing, they lose hope. You have to kind of meet people halfway.

I mean, Extended Cut provides a little more closure, but say, seeing Tali on Rannoch rebuilding her house or Liara with blue children, or Garrus shooting bottle caps or having a cold beer on the beach with Shepard or whoever, that's kind of up to the player to imagine that. Sort of like meeting someone halfway.

No one is saying it is easy, being a developer, or just plain writing in general, is not easy by a long shot.  But the fact is this type of ending has been done before and done well imo.  Persona 3  is the best example I can think of right off the top of my head.  and a story's plot should never be hampered by time constraints, not crucial points like the ending.  KOTOR II, while Obsidian and not BioWare only cut out certain aspects of the game like side missions or character quests that didn't necessarily further the overall plot.

And does the EC really provide that much more closure just because of some slides?  It elaborates on the choices sure but I feel like the endings still lack one key element: consequences.  the EC doesn't provide much clarity about the overall consequences of Shepard's choice.  Sure, there are a few minor changes like EDI being on the memorial wall and people having green eyes and glowing skin, but I still didn't feel like there were actual differing consequences to the choices.  Aside from some minor changes, they were all basically the same.

I'm not saying they need to be put into a good/bad/neutral category, but there needed to be alot more differentiation with these choices so we actually got more of a sense for the consequences of our actions.  Each choice should have had a significantly different effect on the galaxy, otherwise it feels like the same choice with different colors.

That's my take at any rate.

[Andromidius]

magnetite wrote...

It's not the real ending according to a guy who worked on the game. The ending hasn't happened yet.

To be fair, that tweet was pretty cryptic.  Suggestive, certainly. 

But technically speaking no story has an 'end' unless the universe is destroyed with no chance of returning.  Though that is being pedantic even by my standards.

Modifié par Andromidius, 21 novembre 2012 - 07:10 .