161 réponses à ce sujet

[Mathias]

http://www.writersdi...f-novel-endings

When you look at the Mass Effect 3 ending, and then check out this article, it's a pretty funny read. If only because you see how much someone over at the ME3 team has no idea what they're doing, when it comes to endings. Such as:

Don’t introduce any new characters or subplots. (Catalyst)

Don’t describe, muse, explain or philosophize. (Catalyst)

Do Afford redemption to your heroic character. (Seeing as how most players weren't satisfied or felt guilty for their choice at the end, i'm gonna write this off as a fail)

Do Tie up loose ends of significance. (Post EC is up for debate, but Pre EC this was definitely not accomplished)

Don’t change voice, tone or attitude. (Catalyst, among many things)

Don’t resort to gimmicks. ("No quirky twists or trick endings. You’re at the end of your story, and if your reader has stuck with you the whole time, it’s because you’ve engaged her, because she has participated. The final impression you want to create is a positive one. Don’t leave your reader feeling tricked or cheated.")

[iiNOMADii]

I don't necessarily agree with the ending having to be a super happy fun time, but yeah...the catalyst was one of the biggest complaints I have about the game.

[Chaotic-Fusion]

SuperMAC wanted to test his newfound power of torching successful franchises.

[Memnon]

Reading this and the Pixar 22 rules of storytelling makes me wonder ... BW should release their own guidelines on storytelling. Ten ways to annoy an alienate your customers

[Han Shot First]

iiNOMADii wrote...

I don't necessarily agree with the ending having to be a super happy fun time, but yeah...the catalyst was one of the biggest complaints I have about the game.

I agree with that.

I think Bioware had the right idea when aiming for a bittersweet ending, they just executed very poorly.

[darkway1]

We all know the writers are super solid,for Mass3 to be released with such a half arsed ending and keeping in mind the semi finished release of DA2,it strongly suggests management issues......someone gave orders to release these products before fully completed.....it's either that or Bioware's mentality is to finish their work via DLC.

[satunnainen]

Oh great, the universities have started and every prospective creative writer rushes here after first few lessons to have a go at Bioware writers. I guess the other 289 variations of this same thread have been deleted so you thought you need to start a new one.

Modifié par satunnainen, 18 septembre 2012 - 02:30 .

[macrocarl]

Butt hurt thread #1,000. Please use your search button. I mean, or just scroll down a page or 2.

[darkway1]

If the Bioware writers did their job correctly with regards the ending we wouldn't be having this discussion.......would we.

[eddieoctane]

iiNOMADii wrote...

I don't necessarily agree with the ending having to be a super happy fun time, but yeah...the catalyst was one of the biggest complaints I have about the game.

What's hilarious about that statement is that the OP didn't say this either. He simply said don't introduce new characters, get philosophical at the last second, change the tone, or resort to gimmicks while still tying up loose ends of the plot and giving the hero a chance at redemption. Nowhere does any of that say "Let the hero win, come out unscathed, grab his/her lover and ride into the sunset under a ticker-tape parade." None of those rules the Op quoted need the sunshine and puppies, the SW medal ceremony, or a big, happy reunion.

[3DandBeyond]

iiNOMADii wrote...

I don't necessarily agree with the ending having to be a super happy fun time, but yeah...the catalyst was one of the biggest complaints I have about the game.

Ok, come on.  Super happy fun time?  This is one of the things that is so often said about when someone states they wanted a happier ending.  All they want is rainbows and bunnies.  Not true.  We wanted variety and context and a range of endings.  We wanted our actions to have real consequences.  Don't do good enough then everything is destroyed and everyone dies.  But, do good enough, try really hard, work things out, and you can save the galaxy and even save your friends and then even save Shepard.  And even so, the galaxy is in a mess, billions have died, many past cycles of life have been snuffed out.  Palaven is burning, the Earth is a wreck, Thessia in ruins, and so on.  Shepard has suffered and sacrificed and is bent and even partly broken, but alive.  Shepard already has died once and lost friends who did the noble thing for good reasons-to save others and to help Shepard win this fight.  But there's a lot of rebuilding and heartache ahead. 

Super happy fun time?  No, that exists in the dang slides right now-commit atrocities and you get super happy fun time now.  I wanted something more along the lines of real reality and cause and effect-actions with consequences, not choices with sappy slides after deciding the fate of everyone in the galaxy in god-like fashion.

The goal of 3 games and one over-arching story was never met.  And major themes were abandoned.

The OP never deals with the idea of a happy ending at all.  And stories are not all to be written with that in mind.  But stories do have internal promises and if happier endings are implied throughout and that is not maintained, the story has derailed.  Immersion suffers when the emotional part of the story is abandoned.  It's like creating a love story in one book in a series and then getting to the next book and the characters have no idea they're supposed to be in love (oh gee that never happened did it?)

Writing is as much or more a craft than it is art.  Anyone can write.  Not everyone can write well or write good stories, but there are certain rules to follow-you can bend them, but shouldn't break them without a good reason and if you can't write well enough to handle what you just broke.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 18 septembre 2012 - 02:46 .

[darkway1]

People are quick to forget the original ending.......compare that to the EC ending......both endings were supposed to say the same thing,apparently?

[Han Shot First]

But, do good enough, try really hard, work things out, and you can save the galaxy and even save your friends and then even save Shepard.

The problem with structuring an ending according to that model, is that it ultimately renders any ending where squadmates die as being lesser, as it requires the player/Shepard to make mistakes in order to lose people. That removes any emotional impact that those death scenes would have otherwise had. Mass Effect 2 is a good example. In order to lose people on the Suicide Mission Shepard has to make tactical or strategic blunders that ultimately undercuts the death scenes of those squadmates.

For that reason Virmire is far superior to any character death during the Suicide Mission.

As much as I love Mass Effect 2 and the Suicide Mission, it would have been better if some losses had been unavoidable. A perfect run should have been one where you lost maybe 3 or 4 squadmates, rather than one where the entire team made it through.

[PrimeOfValor]

darkway1 wrote...

People are quick to forget the original ending.......compare that to the EC ending......both endings were supposed to say the same thing,apparently?

Yes, it is true, but the EC is kind of mixed yet it still has the same problems compared to the origanl endings. Personally, I would rather perfered talking to harbinger rather than the Catalyst, but then again we wouldn't get the leviathan DLC.

[eddieoctane]

darkway1 wrote...

People are quick to forget the original ending.......compare that to the EC ending......both endings were supposed to say the same thing,apparently?

The original high-EMS destroy was undoubtedly the best ending. You're told Shepard will die along with the Reapers and the Geth. You see the Reapers die and Shep survive. So it remains totally plausible that the Geth survived as well. Then the EC comes down to reinforce the synthesis is the only right answer and that anyone who disagrees is just a troglodyte who can't comprehend BioWare's artistic vision. Refuse is added as a simple middle-finger to everyone who got their only measure of catharsis pre-EC but dumping a mag into the Catalyst before deciding on which flavor of suicide was best.

Though I'm not sure how both are meant to convey the same thing.

[3DandBeyond]

darkway1 wrote...

People are quick to forget the original ending.......compare that to the EC ending......both endings were supposed to say the same thing,apparently?

Yes, ha ha ha.  Nothing was fundamentally changed with the EC (so we were told), so the clarity meant they'd explain things that the original endings showed.  We didn't understand that the Normandy evac'ed Shep's teammates before the conduit.  The original endings clearly meant that that happened.  We just didn't understand that.  We didn't understand that Joker ran away because he was told to, so we needed it clarified.  We didn't understand that when it was said no one made it to the conduit, that what they meant was no one made it to the conduit but then yes Shepard did make it, even when it could have been Anderson or Marauder Shields that hit the button to allow the crucible to dock.

We didn't understand that the relays that clearly were meant to destroy the galaxy (pre-release statements and in game content said this), so we needed clarity to better understand this would not happen.  And we didn't understand that the crashed Normandy would be instantaneously fixed and fly off even though all tech might be damaged, so that Shepard's psychic friends could come looking for a torso that is still sitting somewhere in rubble.

We didn't understand that by shooting the kid or refusing the choices we'd cause insta-death to rain on the galaxy.

We didn't understand a lot apparently.  Except we did.  We did understand this stuff, even when it didn't all fit together.  We understood it didn't fit together-that the endings didn't fit ME 1 and 2 or even 3 itself.  And we understood that the endings seemed to even contradict other parts of the ending.  In saying we needed clarity, BW was saying we didn't understand all this.  We understood enough and we didn't like it.  We still don't.  Putting a party dress on, applying lipstick to, and giving an elephant a lot more to say doesn't make it any less an elephant.

[Toxic Waste]

DO Resolve the central conflict. You don’t have to provide a happily-ever-after ending, but do try to uplift. Readers want to be uplifted, and editors try to give readers what they want.

iiNOMADii wrote...
I don't necessarily agree with the ending having to be a super happy fun time, but yeah...the catalyst was one of the biggest complaints I have about the game.

I was all for Shep dying at the end, I was expecting it as a matter of fact. I just wanted his/her death to have more meaning then what was given in the original ending. The EC did better but still left many questions unanswered.

Plus there where elements in the first 2 games that could have been used to come up with a better ending.

3DandBeyond wrote...
Ok, come on...blah blah blah

This was not posted because school is in now, it's just common sence. Folks want stories...any story and exspecialy the ones they really like...to make sence. Replaying the three games I find more plotholes then I thought. That is simply poor writing. I am one to overlook some of it. Star Trek has plenty of plot holes, but it is made up for with good story telling.

I still love the games, I just feel it could have been so much better.

eidit - I think I misquoted 3DandBeyond, for that I appologize.

Modifié par Toxic Waste, 18 septembre 2012 - 03:03 .

[Applepie_Svk]

darkway1 wrote...

If the Bioware writers did their job correctly with regards the ending we wouldn't be having this discussion.......would we.

Better questions are :
If BioWare is realy so proud about their original ending - which was nice, clear and easy to understand without metagammig or headcanoning , why they have even created Extended Cut DLC ?

Why they were trying so hard to explain that mess so they totally failed and change it into another even greater mess ?

Why they are now retroactively trying to fix the problem of ending via paid DLC as explanations ?

Why they were saying - we are listening - when they were instead of listening just handpicking what they liked from feedback ?

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 18 septembre 2012 - 03:03 .

[Optimus J]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

It's almost like Walters made this into a checklist with the intention of violating every one of these rules.

Yes, he did under strict ordersof Casey Hudson. Walter describes the process on FINAL HOURS.

[darkway1]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

darkway1 wrote...

If the Bioware writers did their job correctly with regards the ending we wouldn't be having this discussion.......would we.

Better questions are :
If BioWare is realy so proud about their original ending - which was nice, clear and easy to understand without metagammig or headcanoning , why they have even created Extended Cut DLC ?

Why they were trying so hard to explain that mess so they totally failed and change it into another even greater mess ?

Why they are now retroactively trying to fix the problem of ending via paid DLC as explanations ?

Why they were saying - we are listening - when they were instead of listening just handpicking what they liked from feedback ?

Mass3 was perfect in everyway,the EC ending was created for stupid,thick people like me......I guess. 

[3DandBeyond]

bigmass41 wrote...

darkway1 wrote...

People are quick to forget the original ending.......compare that to the EC ending......both endings were supposed to say the same thing,apparently?

Yes, it is true, but the EC is kind of mixed yet it still has the same problems compared to the origanl endings. Personally, I would rather perfered talking to harbinger rather than the Catalyst, but then again we wouldn't get the leviathan DLC.

I truly believe had the catalyst been anything other than the kid, people would have clearly seen the choices as not doable.  And if it had been harbinger (I can envision great dialogue and having a really cool confrontation), and if the dialogue had been the same-I control the reapers, no one would have wanted to have made a choice.  You want me to choose synthesis, no way Harby.  I think whether people want to believe it or not the form of the kid does cause a certain disconnect in the mind.  I've seen some say they don't like him at all, but he's a tragic or even sympathetic figure.  I totally dislike him.  I could never see him as sympathetic because his programming is flawed and his assertions are, but because he is in a non-threatening form, people can't help but see him as not totally to blame. 

I'd have loved to have the AI be something else-I wouldn't mind him trying to be a deceiving kid or an antagonistic harbinger as well as TIM and Anderson, all trying to get Shepard to make a choice or if the endings were not based on making a choice, all trying to get Shep to set off the crucible.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 18 septembre 2012 - 03:10 .

[Ithurael]

The don't resort to Gimmicks was one that played a rather big role to me. The whole twist ending, the forced org vs synth conflict, and starkid itself seemed waay to "gimmicky". And to tell the truth, I fully expected to meet some sort of "god" creature at the end of this series. However, bioware just pulled off the ending in the least effective way they could.

And, as a result, these attempts at art are == to actual art to some. I have seen a few things that some people deem as 'art' - no comment.

[futurepixels]

Toxic Waste wrote...

Replaying the three games I find more plotholes then I thought. That is simply poor writing. I am one to overlook some of it. 

I still love the games, I just feel it could have been so much better.

Modifié par futurepixels, 18 septembre 2012 - 04:31 .