In response to the original question:
Leaving aside the question whether ME3's ending is really irredeemable or not from a reasonably objective viewpoint, and regardless that ending options exist I can choose with a reasonable level of mental effort at interpreation, it does still leave a bad taste in my mouth.
The reasons for that, however, are not so easy to determine. Is it because the OE even existed which I found so depressing? Is it because of the thematic inconsistencies in the Synthesis ending? Because of the forced sacrifice theme? Because of the fact that the EC is sugaring up the endings (which is appreciated) but doing not so much for consistency? Because the trilogy started out as a reasonably good SF story and then veered off to deal with "essences of species" and "soul cannons"? Because the ending expects me to put my faith in ME's god analogue who is also the Bigger Bad of this story?
Which of all these things are objective flaws, which contribute to my emotional dissatisfaction? I find this not easy to decipher. The ME3 endings have a history that does not leave my opinion of the final version untouched.
In hindsight, there were four defining moments in my experience of ME3's story, which made me increasingly realize that it wasn't a a story written for me.
The first one was at Thane's deathbed, when I couldn't opt out of the line "You'll not be alone long". That was when I realized my protagonist wasn't my character any longer.
The second one was when unconscious Shepard started floating upwards on that platform and came face to face with....the god-analogue of the MEU. The aesthetics of the scene are suggestive, and I felt the game kick me with the message "You mere human cannot hope to win. You need the help of a higher power."
The third one was when the Catalyst said "I control the Reapers", when I realized that I wouldn't only have to put my faith in a god-analogue, no, I had to put my faith in an *evil* god-analogue. Never mind that the terms "good" and "evil" cannot be reasonably applied to the Catalyst, that's how it came across on an emotional level.
The fourth one was when I realized that whatever I chose, I ended up creating a universe which could be described as a luddite's dream (in the original endings).
So what do all of these have in common? They all allude to religious themes (the last one alludes to Ragnarök). So asked "What did the most damage to ME3's endings" (leaving aside the question of whether they're really irredeemable) my answer is: religion did. Religious themes that were forced into a classic SF story, the attempt to use the "higher power" allusion to exact unwarranted trust from the protagonist, a dark age defined as the desirable post-Ragnarök renewal, the barely masked idea of the protagonist "sacrificing their soul" in Synthesis, the premonition of death and the dreams.
Did this make the ending irredeemable? Maybe not from an objective viewpoint, though epic storytelling flaws do exist. What it did, however, was to make the ME trilogy "not my story" on a fundamental level, and the fact that the story promoted so many traditionalist stereotypes didn't help at all. I fought this by writing up my own interpretations, reinterpreting much of the BS in more appropriate terms. One of the results is my Synthesis compendium thread. But in spite of that, and in spite of the EC which gave me an outcome I could identify with, ME3's endings still leave a bad taste in my mouth, and the blame for that can be laid squarely at the feet of the religious themes.
Modifié par Ieldra2, 24 juin 2013 - 12:00 .
Retour en haut
