Editorials and Features

Forum for Editorials and other News Features

Second Take: Mass Effect 3

  • EurydaceEurydace652,646
  • JEBERNARDJEBERNARD685,118
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 06:12
    Well written article. When I first finished ME3 I just sat on my chair and reflected on the 250+ hours that I had put into finishing the entire trilogy. No way were 20 minutes going to ruin the entire journey for me!!!

    Personally, I believe that there was no logical way for BioWare to create individual endings for every single player based on the thousands of variables that went into each play-through of the trilogy. People were expecting an ending that was tailor made to their individual Save File(s). It could never happen!!!
    JEBERNARD
  • Junts26Junts26137,810
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 06:36
    The original ending never bothered me as much as some, but I agree that the Extended Cut is a significant improvement. I think that, as much as there is a weakness in the importance of decisions, its that too many of your decisions over the course of the first two games, even ones that seem significant and momentous (about the Rachni and others) in many cases only result in whether you get or how strong a war asset you get, and too many of them end up having clearly correct paths (choose x for the best outcome) or indifferent results (for example, the decision whether or not the save the Council has an equal result in war asset strength; the assets you get for saving the council exactly offset the assets lost in damage to the human fleet).

    It was disappointing to see those decisions end up determining whether you got an extra 25 points of war asset and nothing more in some cases.

    Most of the larger scale stuff, and major decisions made in ME3 itself (Krogan, Geth, etc) are much better and much more satisfying.
    Mike
  • NMANOZNMANOZ979,427
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 06:55
    I went with Destruction.
  • misfit119misfit1191,175,071
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 06:58
    This was a confusing read. It seems to drift a bit but I think I get what you were going for. If I misconstrued something feel free to correct me, good sir! It's debating about video games, nothing to be taken too seriously.

    That said I respectfully disagree. Let me explain why ME3 actually ruined my ability to look back and think of the journey as anything other than sour fruit at this point.

    I didn't expect the game to be tailored to my save file. I didn't expect every decision to from ME1 down to have an impact on ME3's ending. What I overall did want was a story that actually made sense when taken as a narrative whole. Looking back at the games from the start you can see that the whole "Organics will always be destroyed by their Synthetic creations" theme does run through the games. Notably in the Geth. They were a huge threat in the first game, then in the second game we learn that they could easily turn to servants of the Reaper's again and become a galactic threat with them doing so in the third.

    But when you actually look back at the story, knowing what you know by the end, it actively makes the journey even stupider. Every time you fought the Geth in ME1? The fault of the Reapers. Hostile Geth in ME2? Those same stupid idiots who worked for the Reapers. Fighting Geth in ME3? Hey, it's the Reaper's again! But wait, here comes Shep! He stops the Geth in the first one, can peacefully, or not, deal with them in the second and bring the entire war to a peaceful resolution in the third if he really tries. Organics will always be destroyed by their creations... unless someone actually intervenes and stops it.

    Beyond a few AI in the first game most of the synthetics work just fine and are some of the nicest people in the series. At no point do we see synthetics run amok without something prompting it. The narrative of the games just doesn't support the Reaper's thesis. This is a massive problem for the entire premise of the series in retrospect.

    Because of this the whole thing was, pardon my french, fucked once they decided on what the Reaper's whole schtick was. The whole organics must be murdered to preserve them is just so inanely overdone in fiction and stapling it on to the Reaper's just ruined them. The Reaper's should have a point. There should be some logic to them. There should be a cold, calculating logic to their actions if they're going to be these massive AI ark type entities. But since the games don't support their actions it makes them look like malfunctioning AI. It reduces the destroyers of galaxies to bad programming errors. It just... argh!

    I actually bought the trilogy for PS3 and just can't bring myself to start playing it because, as a writer, this narrative clusterfuck just stops me dead in my tracks.

    I also massively have a problem with how the endings are framed. Except Control. It makes complete and utter sense in the context of the narrative and fits the games.
    * Destruction: Destroy all synthetic life in the galaxy. What? Why? Why not just destroy the Reapers? Why is this idiotic child telling me that I can either let the Reaper's do their thing or destroy ALL synthetic life in the galaxy? It always felt really forced and like the developers wanted to take the obvious choice and make it harder by saying "But if you destroy them you'll kill EDI and she's awesome!" That's some hack writing right there.
    * Synthesis: Okay, this is the one that really always gets me frothing at the mouth. Shephard is choosing to make a change to the entire universe, at the prompting of the little idiot, that will alter the galaxy on a fundamental level. Without their permission. With no real knowledge of what it will do. All you get is a "It'll stop the cycle. Somehow. Shut up and kill yourself already." It's the laziest of writing and it does nothing to actually make this ending compelling beyond it being the hardest one to unlock.

    Yes, this happens every time someone opens themselves up to debate on the endings, why do you ask?laugh
    Looking to boost any MP achievements I don't have for any game I own.
  • HalwendeHalwende399,171
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 07:32
    Exactly Mr Tavore, spot on

    I do remember that initial confusion at the end cut scenes and feeling a little disappointed, but it was nowhere near enough to taint the immense pleasure I got from playing the trilogy in the first place

    I've pre-ordered Andromeda and so will be giving Bioware the benefit of the doubt, and my support ($$). If i don't like it well, their developers still worked hard and deserve my money - and I'll just go re-play ME3
  • ElyohElyoh1,098,074
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 07:33
    I wish I hadn't finished it until the extended cut was out, definitely helped.

    I really liked the Mass Effect universe, I'm not so keen on the story.
    No God, know fear. Know God, no fear.
  • CubivoreCubivore528,709
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 09:25
    Mass Effect 3 was crap from the second you were introduced to Kai Leng (the most embarrassing character I've seen in a game maybe ever). The number of complete failures in the storytelling and characters are absolutely through the roof, from start to finish it was terrible. The biggest problem with the ending was that it was so easily and blatantly bad that it took focus away from everything else in the game that was awful. In the 25 years I have been gaming, no single game has disappointed me as thoroughly as Mass Effect 3.
  • mamaanimamaani1,802,772
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 09:27
    I only hoped my shepard come back to SR2....
    Why Bioware didn't made happy Ending Even there are many endings??
  • Sir Dane IIISir Dane III871,421
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 09:30
    I don't really think about the ending. I like to think that the game actually ended with the Citadel DLC and all the nods it gave to the journey you had been on, that felt much more satisfying and provided much more closure for me.
  • BlackxRyanBlackxRyan1,067,829
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 10:01
    I disagree too, I absolutely loved Mass Effect 3.
  • NegativeCreep08NegativeCreep081,083,458
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 10:46
    Cubivore said:
    Mass Effect 3 was crap from the second you were introduced to Kai Leng (the most embarrassing character I've seen in a game maybe ever). The number of complete failures in the storytelling and characters are absolutely through the roof, from start to finish it was terrible. The biggest problem with the ending was that it was so easily and blatantly bad that it took focus away from everything else in the game that was awful. In the 25 years I have been gaming, no single game has disappointed me as thoroughly as Mass Effect 3.
    There were definitely a number of narrative flaws, such as Cerberus going from a shadowy background organisation to an ultra evil empire who are suddenly strong enough to take over the Citadel. I did hear a story that EA brought someone else in at the 11th hour to write the ending and the creative team had no input. I cannot believe that was their end game when they made ME1 and 2
  • matdanmatdan862,284
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 11:36
    I am going to avoid mentioning how much of a beaten dead horse this subject is, because the dead horse has been beaten into a pulp at this point.

    Mass Effect 3 is the cause of so many decisions impacting on one game and nobody having any idea of how to tie it all together.

    The final battle is so underwhelming and lame that it makes everything you do seem meaningless. Save some mercs, the Leviathan, Rachni, Asari, Salarian, Wrex, Krogan, Zaaed and so on it doesn't matter. None of them impact the final battle in any meaningful way or have any real standout moments. You don't even get to have a battle with the original reaper Harbinger. Don't even get me started on how little the Geth were seen in the battle.

    As disappointing or controversial as this game is, the new Andromeda game won't be able to top moments like your first time entering the Citadel, Suicide Mission or the Citadel DLC storyline.
  • SchinderdivSchinderdiv871,681
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 11:54
    Here's my 2 cents... I don't remember the story line, and I mean at all. I have no idea how the game had ended for me, and I just played it a couple of years ago. What I do remember is a die-hard, fight-for-your-life, intense-as-all-hell, balls-to-the-wall final battle that I came so close to losing so many times but kept persevering through until I made it through to the end... What's this say? To me, the game ended being about survival & combat proficiency, rather than story-telling & dialogue as it had seemingly started out as.

    Regardless of this, I do NOT have bad memories of the final moments of ME3 - although I don't remember the end of the story, it couldn't have been that bad either. Not great for a game that started with an incredible story to tell, but in its defense - humans seem to love to make things seem worse than they are.
    'Member? WickedDeath : "That used car salesman Larry herb will be saying what an amazing deal it is..."
  • CubivoreCubivore528,709
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 13:23, Edited on 18 March 17 at 13:30 by Cubivore
    NegativeCreep08 said:
    I did hear a story that EA brought someone else in at the 11th hour to write the ending and the creative team had no input. I cannot believe that was their end game when they made ME1 and 2
    It was two writers (who were already on the team) locking themselves in a room and writing the ending in one night with no input at all from the rest of the writing team. On the one hand this is like the dumbest way to write anything ever, on the other hand the writing was already, well let's be very charitable and call it 'extremely uneven', in ME3 as it was so I dunno if it having more input would've saved it.

    matdan said:
    Mass Effect 3 is the cause of so many decisions impacting on one game and nobody having any idea of how to tie it all together.

    The final battle is so underwhelming and lame that it makes everything you do seem meaningless. Save some mercs, the Leviathan, Rachni, Asari, Salarian, Wrex, Krogan, Zaaed and so on it doesn't matter. None of them impact the final battle in any meaningful way or have any real standout moments. You don't even get to have a battle with the original reaper Harbinger. Don't even get me started on how little the Geth were seen in the battle.
    The thing with the final battle is, I was actually on board with some of the implications of the original ending with the relays being destroyed. Having all those ships stranded over Earth could've made for a really good sequel as the various species would be basically forced to colonize other planets/moons in our solar system and fight for survival.

    But no, they changed that aspect of the ending because they had the very incorrect idea that people were upset because the ending was dark and depressing. Man, dark endings are great and we need more of them. No, people were upset because the ending made no sense in the context of the series, not because it was grim. That ending broke the rules of its own series, both in terms of gameplay and story.
  • MaliiciousMaliicious633,397
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 13:23
    misfit119 said:
    This was a confusing read. It seems to drift a bit but I think I get what you were going for. If I misconstrued something feel free to correct me, good sir! It's debating about video games, nothing to be taken too seriously.

    That said I respectfully disagree. Let me explain why ME3 actually ruined my ability to look back and think of the journey as anything other than sour fruit at this point.

    I didn't expect the game to be tailored to my save file. I didn't expect every decision to from ME1 down to have an impact on ME3's ending. What I overall did want was a story that actually made sense when taken as a narrative whole. Looking back at the games from the start you can see that the whole "Organics will always be destroyed by their Synthetic creations" theme does run through the games. Notably in the Geth. They were a huge threat in the first game, then in the second game we learn that they could easily turn to servants of the Reaper's again and become a galactic threat with them doing so in the third.

    But when you actually look back at the story, knowing what you know by the end, it actively makes the journey even stupider. Every time you fought the Geth in ME1? The fault of the Reapers. Hostile Geth in ME2? Those same stupid idiots who worked for the Reapers. Fighting Geth in ME3? Hey, it's the Reaper's again! But wait, here comes Shep! He stops the Geth in the first one, can peacefully, or not, deal with them in the second and bring the entire war to a peaceful resolution in the third if he really tries. Organics will always be destroyed by their creations... unless someone actually intervenes and stops it.

    Beyond a few AI in the first game most of the synthetics work just fine and are some of the nicest people in the series. At no point do we see synthetics run amok without something prompting it. The narrative of the games just doesn't support the Reaper's thesis. This is a massive problem for the entire premise of the series in retrospect.

    Because of this the whole thing was, pardon my french, fucked once they decided on what the Reaper's whole schtick was. The whole organics must be murdered to preserve them is just so inanely overdone in fiction and stapling it on to the Reaper's just ruined them. The Reaper's should have a point. There should be some logic to them. There should be a cold, calculating logic to their actions if they're going to be these massive AI ark type entities. But since the games don't support their actions it makes them look like malfunctioning AI. It reduces the destroyers of galaxies to bad programming errors. It just... argh!

    I actually bought the trilogy for PS3 and just can't bring myself to start playing it because, as a writer, this narrative clusterfuck just stops me dead in my tracks.

    I also massively have a problem with how the endings are framed. Except Control. It makes complete and utter sense in the context of the narrative and fits the games.
    * Destruction: Destroy all synthetic life in the galaxy. What? Why? Why not just destroy the Reapers? Why is this idiotic child telling me that I can either let the Reaper's do their thing or destroy ALL synthetic life in the galaxy? It always felt really forced and like the developers wanted to take the obvious choice and make it harder by saying "But if you destroy them you'll kill EDI and she's awesome!" That's some hack writing right there.
    * Synthesis: Okay, this is the one that really always gets me frothing at the mouth. Shephard is choosing to make a change to the entire universe, at the prompting of the little idiot, that will alter the galaxy on a fundamental level. Without their permission. With no real knowledge of what it will do. All you get is a "It'll stop the cycle. Somehow. Shut up and kill yourself already." It's the laziest of writing and it does nothing to actually make this ending compelling beyond it being the hardest one to unlock.

    Yes, this happens every time someone opens themselves up to debate on the endings, why do you ask?laugh
    The reapers do have a point though. They don't just obliterate everything once they feel it's been long enough. They have given each cycle of life a certain amount of time to create a society that The Reapers then judge and determine to eliminate it or not. In the scope of the series there has only been one decision made by the Reapers, that of elimination, but that does not mean that another outcome isn't possible.

    The Reapers even left the Mass Effect relays for each civilization to use in the hopes that an intergalactic society could be created that was up to their standard.

    As for the endings:

    *Destruction: Destroying all synthetic life has an incredibly wide-ranging impact than destroying the Reapers. Since the geth, especially the rogue Geth, have such a close connection with the Reapers it would be reasonable to think that Reaper tech could live on through the Geth. Not to mention the Humans themselves have even sought to integrate Reaper tech into their own VI's (think the Rogue VI mission in ME2, I believe). In contrast, we have seen this time and again with the Reapers eliminating organic life time and again. As far as we know they failed at least once because the Prothean's managed to save some of their species. While it is an incomplete option given the game itself has already created room for error because a Prothean survived the Reapers, if this is the route you were going to choose you would absolutely need to eliminate all Synthetic life to cleanse whatever systems you had of any possible Reaper tech to prevent something like this from happening again.

    *Synthesis: I do agree that this is the worst of the endings primarily because it pretty well equates to indoctrination. Or at least it's a gateway to such an event happening, and it would be a disaster for the entire universe.

    *Control: Again also not a very good option. What makes you or anyone else think they are capable of controlling a Reaper? Look at what happened to Saren, he was a great Spectre and he thought he was working with the Reapers the whole time but that was clearly not the case. Again, in my mind this choice just equates to indoctrination.

    *Refusal: The added choice. Personally, this is the choice I made (after the DLC came out) which agreed with the Shep I played throughout all 3 of the games. Previously I had chosen destruction. This ending is much more in line with the history of the Mass Effect games up to that point. The cycle continues and eventually when enough information is discovered/built up throughout the cycles the Reapers are destroyed, knowing you had in large part to do with that.

    I don't really understand why you keep referring to this "little idiot" sure it is a VI of a kid but he is far from an idiot. He is a representation of literally all the information all the cycles have built up over time.
  • APB PlaysAPB Plays578,430
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 13:28
    I'm surprised no one has yet mentioned the secret ending, the one with the two second clip that seemed to indicate Shepherd survived. For me, it was that clip combined with the fan developed Indoctrination theory that took the ending from terrible to brilliant for me.

    Of course, the ending slowly faded back down to terrible as the ME3 team made it clear that the Indoctrination theory was just that, a fan theory to cover for shoddy writing. But I'll keep believing in the Indoctrination ending. Makes the ending more palatable in my book.
  • BreakBaconBreakBacon39,743
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 14:51
    i'm actually one of the few people i know who appreciates the story as much as i do
  • AllgorhythmAllgorhythm652,880
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 14:59
    Well written article. To me, the ME trilogy is one of the truly great RPGs. It immerses you in the story it tells. I consider the first game to be the best game in the trilogy in that it was (IMHO) the most tightly plotted and had the most artistic unity.

    Mass Effect 2, though still a great story, to me did not seem to be as crisp as ME1. On the other hand, technically it was better (IMHO) so it was another great game. I enjoyed ME3. I thought it was a good game. Unlike some players, I did not feel disappointed or betrayed. Rather, I approached the game with the feeling that Bioware had set the bar so high with the first two games that they would be hard pressed to culminate the trilogy with a crescendo.
  • DadIsAZombieDadIsAZombie297,335
    Posted on 18 March 17 at 15:02
    If the game faded to black with Shepard sitting there with Anderson watching the Reapers burn, Mass Effect would have gone down as the best story in gaming history. The final goodbyes with all the characters you put 7 years in with was perfectly done. The "starchild" nonsense at the end was just Bioware trying to give OCD gamers the closure they would undeniably bitch about if they didn't get. Naturally, they bitched anyway... I'm concerned about the new game. I can't imagine caring about the new experience the way I did the original but I'll definitely give it a chance.
Want to join in the discussion? Please log in or Register For Free to comment.
Hide ads
Hide ads