Auld Wulf wrote...
I think it just didn't belong in the mainstream, and that was the problem. The mainstream likes black and white stories, endings which are always blithely and obliviously happy, and things which are meant to be taken literally.
If you look at the vast majority of what's out there right now, within the mainstream, then you can see that this is very much catered too. Artsy stuff is on the outer-edge, and by indies rather than mainstream publishers. You wouldn't see something like Journey being developed in-house by Activision. I think the main deceit with Mass Effect is that it was developed by a publisher who'd always provided exactly what the mainstream looks for -- unchallenging content.
Then, to them, Casey Hudson goes and ruins everything with his symbolic endings, which can't be taken literally, aren't black and white, and aren't air-headedly blithe.
I mean, you have the Great Big Evil (the Geth Heretics), you have the Unquestionably Good (usually Shepard), you have the Token Bad Choices (which are moustache-twirling in how cheesy they are, and not actually meant to introduce any nuanced morality in the game, so they're just there for fun), and you have the Kill Everything plot. It was a simple, easy to understand thing. The mainstream had no problem with it because it sat nicely next to their other games.
It was closer to Call of Duty in space than most people would admit.
Then you had ME2 which crept away from that bit by bit throughout its story, then ME3 began to move away from it in large steps but the process of ME3 was enough to keep mainstreamers on board. Finally, you had last moments of ME3, where Casey Hudson just tossed the mainstream book out of the window.
"But... this isn't the good guy destroying the bad guy! I want to kill things! I wanna kill a Reaper! Why am I not killing a Reaper? I want to shoot this kid! Why am I talking to a kid? What the [censored] is going on?!! [Stream of expletives.] What's this with the choices? What? I just want to kill things! I want to kill the bad things because I'm a good guy! Tell me how to kill the bad things!!! What? The relays get destroyed, and the Geth and EDI die too? That's not a happy ending! [String of expletives.] WHERE IS MY HAPPY ENDING?"
And there you have it.
Ugh, I don't usually resort to insults but everything you say is such pretentious bullcrap that it really does amaze me. Bioshock Infinite ending, that was well done, it was hinted throughout that the nature of reality was being disturbed, that the symbols allude to overarching themes rather than conventional plots and the twist at the end was magnificent. Metro 2033, that was also a strange ending but it fits with the storyline whilst also raising the themes of extinction, free will and truth yet again and everyone likes those endings too and moreover they aren't pretentious bull**** in the sense that they pretend to be metaphysical when in fact they actually have nothing to say, they actually echo consistent themes and ideas, abstract as they are throughout the game so whilst they are strange ideas they are always CONSISTENT.
You and ME 3's endings on the other hand have one thing in common, you have this warped sense that by invoking lofty notions of 'reality' and 'existence' without actually exploring it, that somehow makes one deep and profound when in fact no symbolism exists because there's no way to actually decipher that meaning or analyse it thoroughly. You claim that 'ME 2 was shifting away' from this black and white scenario which is total bull and you know it. The Geth were presented as conflicted beings in ME1 who treated the Reapers in a spiritual manner as shown on Feros when you see their shrine. In ME 2, everyone is like 'THE COLLECTORS ARE SO EVIL, WE'VE GOT TO KILL THEM, WE'RE THE GOOD GUYS'. In ME 3 there is absolutely no analysis of the 'metaphysical condition' of the Reapers until 5 minutes before the ending. In fact, for most of the game, you don't even hear their side of the story and when you do see them they're usually blowing up a few children and a puppy to pieces but Bioware still pleads for you to understand their plight! Bioshock is symbolic and interesting because whilst the story serves you all these unique and interesting ideas, the conclusion then weaves them all together into one final analysis of the nature of reality and free will, and so does Metro 2033.
In ME 3, all the themes of war and suffering and death get shoved out of a window and some strange pseudo-metaphysical idea about organics killing themselves by synthetics appears. This isn't ingenious, it isn't metaphysical, it's inconsistent writing and the actual analysis of the themes is exceptionally weak and illogical. The fact that so many people were still pissed off at synthesis endings(which depicts the Universe as in a golden age of technological progress and beauty and whatever else) isn't because it doesn't offer a happy ending but because it doesn't offer a LOGICALLY CONSISTENT ending. You're inability to actually appreciate the conflict the ending presents with the rest of the Universe(probably because you haven't even played ME 1 I'm certain) is because you presume that the mere mention of the themes is something symbolic and enlightening. It isn't. Everyone who plays the game can see it isn't. Anyone who watches Star Trek realises the writers of that show would set themselves alight then blow their brains out due to the shame they bear if they suggested that an ancient war by synthetics waging war on organics to stop organics making synthetics could be solved by a magical ray of energy which subtly alters the DNA structure AND somehow induces organic materials AND emotions in robots suddenly made everyone love each other and then stopped the war. They'd blow their own brains out because it was such an awful ending.
This is the truth pure and simple, and the fact that abstract endings such as Bioshock Infinite and Metro 2033 have been applauded and ME 3 is STILL criticised exemplifies this.
Modifié par Interloper, 28 mai 2013 - 09:06 .
Retour en haut
