When you get a spare moment from all the time you spend not reading what I’ve actually written (“Tom Chick hates stories in RPGs!”), look up the difference between imply and infer.
For instance, I’m inferring that you’re an idiot.
-Tom
Soma
2922
I’m of the opinion that the whole game IS the end. The beginning of ME3 is the massive and overhelming invasion by the Reapers (not just on Earth but accross the galaxy), and the game itself is always about this last throw of a dice on this super magical weapon that may or may not wipe out the Reapers. The whole game is about Shepard winging it with events, rather than a methodical opposition against the Reapers. Surely those count as “resolving” the Reapers storyline?
While I do understanding the ending can change people’s opinion, e.g. Hollywood focus group test different endings for blockbusters, in this case it just doesn’t apply for me. That star child in the last 15 mins is just a curve ball in the end, echoing all the dreams and so on. That last 15 mins of negative impression does NOT invalid my previous 100+ hours of positive impressions over 3 games (OK the 10 hours managing the inventory in ME1 doesn’t count).
I feel like people would have similar debates over Bladerunner’s very different versions, if they had Internet back then.
Well, a) Bioshock would not be broken as a whole just because the ending sucked, and b) no, I would not describe Bioshock’s ending as broken. To be honest, I don’t think I’d even have a problem with it if it appeared in a different game where that sort of very videogamey boss fight would be contextually appropriate. It’s just out of place in Bioshock. But Bioshock is a different game than Mass Effect 3 and its ending has different issues. And I would describe Mass Effect 3’s ending(s) -in particular- as being broken. In particular, the brief sequence of cutscenes after the ending choice has some pretty severe clarity and continuity issues. Or did, at least - it’s my understanding that’s where the extended cut DLC really overhauls things.
I see what you did there. That’s a pretty clever way around terms like “vast majority”. :)
-Tom
Oh come on, Tom. I’m not one of the people that’s been arguing with you about what proportion of people had an issue with the ending, as if that were in any way meaningful. I think we can safely agree that there were tens of thousands of people who were putting pressure on Bioware to change the ending. That counts as “widespread” in my book, and if Bioware’s decision to make that change was truly made under duress (which it certainly didn’t seem to be as far as I can tell), it was presumably enough people for Bioware to consider it an issue. Just as obviously, it’s a tiny fraction of the number of people that bought the game.
FWIW, the official press release says:
We have reprioritized our post-launch development efforts to provide the fans who want more closure with even more context and clarity to the ending of the game, in a way that will feel more personalized for each player.
So maybe not acknowledging issues per se, and certainly not changing the overall thrust of the ending’s narrative, but fleshing it out in a way that I for one felt it desperately needed. I suspect I’m still going to have issues with the overall narrative of said ending whenever I get to playing the extended cut (the whole starchild/three-way-choice thing seems like a bad fit to me) but I’d rather a functional ending based on design and writing decisions I disagree with than one that I really truly believe is broken.
Yes, they clearly state that they are giving the people what they want. Nowhere have they said that this is a correction or fix. Which I gather is not relevant to you, but is to me.
I don’t read it that way. It’s a response to feedback, certainly, but Bioware giving the people what they want would have resulted in a completely different ending. Instead, they expanded the existing ending, which only makes sense if they felt they failed to fully convey what they were going for the first time around.
I’m not surprised you didn’t read it that way, but it’s all there. They’ve “reprioritized” their “development efforts” to provide “more closure” and “more context and clarity”. New and improved! Keep buying our stuff! It’s a press release, you’re not going to see any dark confessions there.
But how about any Bioware employee tweets, Casey Hudson or the writers or the developers unofficial statements or unguarded comments? Did they say they released an undercooked or broken game before its time due to pressure from EA, or anyone else? I’ve never seen it. You throw around the word “broken” pretty cavalierly, but again, you base this on nothing but your own sense of dissatisfaction. And I don’t find that convincing.
I was just joshing you. Again, I have no idea whether it’s widespread, because that word isn’t really meaningful in this context. But I do know it was loud, and I think the volume is the more relevant characteristic.
-Tom
I’m coming up to the end of my playthrough of ME3 (yes, I started late and it took while). I have a pretty good idea what’s awaiting me, but I still am a bit hesitant to finish it because I really don’t want the experience marred by the memory of a dissapointing ending.
Right now it’s fantastic, and I’ve enjoyed the whole series immensely.
Whatever words they might have used, just look at what they actually did though. By far the biggest change is that the plot hole where you see the Normandy at the end is fixed. How did the Normandy escape? How come it had people on board that were with you in that final battle? That’s the biggest hole they plug. I’d say that’s “more closure”. The other big thing they did was to make the conversation with the crucible longer so that you have “more context and clarity” about the decision you’re making. It still didn’t change the choices or the consequences presented in the ending, those remained the same. They just plug that idiotic plot hole and provide more context before you make your three way decision. (Well, four way, I really appreciated them adding that fourth option of choosing none of the three choices, that was also a huge change and well appreciated by me).
So I think it’s pretty clear that they stuck to their guns in terms of content, just using the opportunity to actually cover up plot holes and lack of context at the end, just like they said. The little ending movies might be a little different, but they don’t change anything about the ending. The Normandy coming in BEFORE the final battle pick up your team and leaving is the only way the ending scene from the original made any sense, and they added that, thankfully.
There is one additional change to the ending that I was surprised affected me so much. Right at the very end of the game when the old man is talking to his grandson, after he’s done talking, and you’re pondering how on earth the Normandy could have gotten out of there with the teammates who were with you, a little pop-up message box appears that says something along the lines of: “Shepard is a Legend! And you can follow more of his adventures by buying DLC!” Which left a really bad taste in my mouth. I was really surprised how much more favorable I was towards the ending once the Extended ending DLC took away that comment and replaced it with a message thanking their fans. I don’t know if it was just pandering that was successful, or if it’s just the missing naked cash grab DLC message.
Kadayi
2931
Christ, not this ‘enders’ guff again? Seriously wholesale likening critics of ME3 to tea partiers. It was a risible ad hom last time, now it’s just plain embarrassing…
/shakes head
There’s a lot more wrong with ME3 than the last 15 minutes alone. Certainly the combat model is improved (I enjoyed the MP), but beyond that it’s pretty much deficient in every way versus the first and second games in terms of both narrative engagement and opportunity. The conversations get dramatically dumped down to the extent that for large tracts of the time, you’re simply listening to conversations rather than participating in them (you might as well be hitting the page scroll key). What the actual level of Bioware’s general narrative is really secondary tbh (it’s not Shakespeare, we can agree on that). What’s important as a player is the opportunities it affords you to work with it and feel you’re somehow having an impact.
I mean seriously where’s the option to tell the Krogan to buck their ideas up and that curing the genophage would be their reward for helping the alliance defeat the Reapers because time is of the essence? That would be the real renegade choice, not fucking them over on Tuchanka at the last minute after a wild goose chase. Shepard running around being space Jesus and curing the galaxy of its ills (and fitting in some disco dancing at the Citadel on the way) whilst Earth is effectively being pulverized by the Reapers was just ill conceived. I think starting the game with earth under attack was a massive mistake.
The war needed to be presented more in the form of colony worlds being wiped out (and off the galactic map) as the Reapers advanced across known space whilst Shepard marshaled the rest of the galaxy rather than this idea that the Reapers attack everywhere all once. This would of given more credibility to the downtime moments as it was a case of building up a sizable battle fleet to face them head on and given more credence to the idea that there would be some climatic showdown over one system (or even just the Citadel…the Reapers usual harvest starting point).
I also think making TIM a bad guy from the off rather than a questionable ally whose humans first opinions could of been played off against those of the alliance and the council (but who could still pull a Judas at the end) would of been a better route to go down. The meteoric rise of Cerberus from shadowy organisation in the first game, through to galaxies largest paramilitary operation in a matter of a few years just kind of beggars belief tbh. Plus Cerberus exploiting Reaper tech from the off of ME3 completely makes a mockery of the option to destroy the human Reaper in ME2 entirely.
RickH
2932
That particular straw man can’t have much straw left in at this point.
Again, it’s not about my dissatisfaction, though I freely admit to being dissatisfied with many aspects of the ending they chose to bring to the table. I was also dissatisfied with the ending of Bioshock and the ending of Deus Ex: Human Revolution, but those games execute the ending they have to offer in a functional way. Mass Effect 3 does not, and I’ve already repeated more than once why I feel that is the case. I don’t care if Bioware thinks it is or not. What’s important is that they took steps that, in theory, will have fixed it. (I mean, yes, I would be uncomfortable with the precedent set if they took those steps, not because they wanted to, but because they felt exterior pressure from players, but if it made the game better that’s still the important thing as far as I’m concerned. My worry would be about the next time.)
Malkav11, the only thing I can say at this point is, just because you keep saying the game is broken doesn’t make it so.
Quaro
2935
Get Leviathan and Ashes. Leviathan in particular.
I’m not saying the game is broken. I’m saying the ending is broken, and that’s because it is.
Same thing. A game with a broken ending isn’t broken? And you base the “brokenness” of the game on nothing beyond your own dissatisfaction, and here we go chasing our tails again.
No. The ending is a tiny fraction of the overall experience, with disproportionate weight in the mind because it’s the last thing you experience. I think Mass Effect 3 is overall a very good game with a few niggling issues. Certainly significantly better than Mass Effect 2, which I found generally disappointing if still worthwhile. I only end up arguing about the ending because people make blatantly false assertions about it like “people who didn’t like the ending just wanted a happy ending!” (a bleak ending that made narrative and logical sense would have been awesome!), or “the whole game is the ending” (ending of trilogy, yes, ending of game 3’s story arc, no), or, y’know “you base the brokenness of the ending on nothing beyond your own dissatisfaction”.
Scuzz
2939
The ending is only truly upsetting in that you discover that all the work you have done assembling a “team” have no real meaning regards the ending you are given. There is an ending that is acceptable, just not what you were led to believe might happen.
I haven’t played Leviathan, but Ashes is best when used from near the beginning of the game, as the extra character has pertinent dialog throughout the game. If he bought Ashes now, near the end of the game, he wouldn’t really get much value out of it at this point in his playthrough.
And don’t forget to get the free ending DLC that fixes the plot holes.
