LinksOcarina wrote...
...
Regardless, Shepard living or having the chance of living, in the context of what was written, makes little sense in the end. As I said earlier, the scene needs to be completely reframed to make that even possible, and the writers did not want to change the ending to their story like that.
Nothing whatsoever makes sense in the context of what was written. Living or having the chance of living isn't any more ridiculous than dying in that sequence. Shepard doesn't have to stand in the fire for red. Blue magical electricity could just as easily scan an intact person as disintigrate him, and the same is true of magic green lazer beams.
If you can wrap your mind around destroying all AI in the galaxy by blowing up one power conduit, creating an AI replica of a living person by running a million volts through them, or infecting every living thing and every intelligent computer system with a virus comprised of nucleic acids and nano-circuitry that is created when a man goes into a big green beam of light, it is a pretty light lift to make those thngs non-lethal. It's all profoundly stupid, so saying that it would be nonsensical for Shepard to survive it is kind of pointless.
Frankly I don't know if the writers, generally, wanted to change up the ending or not. Clearly someone felt it was necessary to address the extreme dissatisfaction that consumers (and reviewers who had finished the game) were expressing, but by that point BioWare was in crisis mode and Dr. Ray Muzyka had assumed direct control. He made a decision to plant both metaphorical feet firnly within "artistic integrity" territory, so we got the "Extended Cut" that doubled down on the star kid and colorful space magic.
We'll never really know whether the writers wanted to change the ending. Certainly some of them, like Patrick Weekes, seemed to tacitly acknowledge the failure of the ending, but none of them ever publicly got on board with (for example) the call to use "indoctrination theory" as an excuse for a do-over. What we will be able to do, eventually, is to inform our guesswork with the direction that ME4 takes with the narrative. Kasey Hudson and Mac Walters are both still in positions of creative control over the franchise, even though game development has been moved to Montreal. (Side note: I hope we get at least one female character with a French Canadian accent, it gets my vote for sexiest accent on Earth.)
It is no hyperbole to state that the ending of Mass Effect 3 broke the game universe and damaged the IP. It will be interesting to see what is done in Mass Effect 4 to fix it. In my opinion, a prequel would "triple down" on the ME3 ending and probably end my interest in the franchise, barring a miracle*. A sequel, on the other hand, would permit careful choices, creativity, and a little bit of handwaving to put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
It shouldn't be difficult. The Reapers are gone, many corpses were removed by governments and scavengers but some can still be found on remote battlegrounds. Rumors persist of surviving Reapers retreating to uninhabited systems. Shepard hasn't been seen since the the battle. Rumor has it that he was bedly injured but survived, although other rumors say he is controling the surviving reapers as some kind of AI. No one believes that, but it is a popular "urban myth." The Geth suffered heavy casualties but recovered quickly after the end of the war, and protect Rannoch vigorously. Hammer out a canon and move forward.
_____
* One possible miracle is that Drew Karpyshyn might write more Mass Effect material to reboot the franchise. In a recent interview he suggested that after the third novel in his trilogy goes into print towards the end of 2014, he might take on more Star Wars or Mass Effect writing jobs.
Retour en haut
