Why BioWare Shouldn't Change Mass Effect 3's Ending

The following article contains no spoilers.

by

The petition calling for a new ending to Mass Effect 3 currently has 37,714 votes. BioWare should ignore every single one of them.

As any work of art, Mass Effect 3 should be discussed, dissected, and critiqued. It doesn't have to be loved. It doesn't even have to be liked. As paying consumers, gamers have the right to be dissatisfied with a game, its content, or its ending. They are free to comment, rant, or rave. They are even free to start a petition. But none of this requires BioWare to listen.

While this petition only represents the feelings and voices of a very small subset of the gaming community, it is the second time in a month that BioWare has been the subject of large-scale ire.

Imagine we lived in a world where artists regularly changed their art based on audience demands. Imagine Monet repainting Water Lilies in black and white because people objected to color. Imagine Salman Rushdie trashing The Satanic Verses because people objected to its implications. The very idea of allowing any work of art to be changed, edited, reshaped, reworked, deleted, or destroyed because someone, somewhere, didn't like it would render all art meaningless. Art is the creative expression of an artist or a group of artists. It's not a free-for-all exercise in democratic rights.

There are plenty of examples, both in the games industry and outside of it, of fan communities demanding creators change a piece of art for any number of reasons. Making these demands is nothing new. But that does not absolve those that do it. Gamers are consumers, and Mass Effect 3 is a product. Gamers are audiences, and Mass Effect 3 is a piece of art. The two are separated by the process of creation. Mass Effect 3, despite the range of choice it allows players in creating a personal experience, is a preconstructed entity. Every single pixel in the game is owned by BioWare: gamers play the game that was made for them. They can choose to play it how they want, but they do not own those choices.

Some people have argued that in Mass Effect 3, BioWare has delivered something different from what it promised. This is irrelevant. In its role as both an art object and a consumer product, Mass Effect 3 remains the property of its maker. As a final product, it is the expression of those who created it, and its sole objective is to be consumed--not re-created--by its audience. Apart from the times that BioWare asked the community for its thoughts, no one but the development team was involved in creating the game.

Art does not side exclusively with the artist, nor does it side exclusively with the audience. A work of art is brought into being by the creation of a two-way relationship between both entities. A video game like Mass Effect 3 cannot be fully realized until it is played by an audience that must be allowed to react and respond to the work.

But the work of art is done; it is finished. Altering or deleting a work as a direct result of audience reaction/demand fractures the relationship between artist and audience, and renders the original work meaningless. If BioWare does change the end of Mass Effect 3 to mollify a handful of goading voices, the game itself would no longer be the expression of its original creators. It would cease to be art.

[CORRECTION: The article originally contained the following statement: "It cannot be altered or deleted. Doing so would fracture the relationship between an artist and the audience, and it would render the original work meaningless." Upon reflection, this statement was misleading and has been altered to correctly reflect the writer's original intention. GameSpot regrets the error.]

Discussion

2025 comments
jason4774
jason4774

Late to the party, but hell, I'll bite.

To defend this ending as "art", I'd like to see what kinda paintings you have on your walls.

If the Mass Effect series were a love story, it would go like this.

A guy in Los Angeles has no friends, but he has a belief, that if he follows his heart, it will lead him to where he needs to be. Then a girl in Sydney leaves home, feeling that if she follows her heart, she will end up where she needs to be, with who she needs to be.

We watch them, live strong, but solitary, often painful, but inspiring lives, but they remain alone. They dream of each other, without ever seeing heir faces.

Then, one day, in Argentina, they meet. They talk. They laugh. They feel complete. They make love. They understand that their whole lives, they've earned this love, because they always followed their hearts. It brought them across the world, to be together, and they will have the rest of their lives to discover where their love will take them from there.

And nine months later, the girl gives birth to a unicorn.

The end.

And, no, I will keep the unicorn in. Otherwise, the story loses it's meaning, and artistic integrity.

Erupit2
Erupit2

Wow, fuck you Laura Parker. You are a horrible person, and a worse journalist. I will hereby never listen to anything Gamespot has to say again, because they were dumb enough to give you a forum to spread your retarded bullshit.

 

Unless this article is re-printed someday with grammatical errors in a dead language, there will never be a worse article written, ever - Laura Parker, you have written the penultimate bullshit article of all time.

ademaster25
ademaster25

This comment has no spoilers.

 

I read this article when it was first posted, but decided I won't comment till I played it. I just did. And now seeing how/why everybody protested, I  can finally understand their pain. Me and my cousin sat down and discussed the themes at the end of the game and agreed with how everything turned except with concept of closure: to close it at that point speaks nothing but pure insincerity and a delibrate (and improperly done) cliffhanger, for whatever reasons we may never know. Argue all you want, but there's a big difference between an ending with an intangible conclusion and one that is simply incomplete - even from a storytelling perspective.

 

Art in its very nature is bound to be disagreeable, but at the very least should pass a message. And ending it at the point they (Bioware) did passed up the perfect opportunity to do so. And that, in my opinion renders this article as the total BS that it is.

 

LonelyKorok
LonelyKorok

I complete agree with this article and scoff at most of these comments. In this day and age, "children", which includes 18+ imbeciles, think that games must give them exactly what they expect. However because of this, logic is completely thrown out the door in place of "AWESOME SCRIPTED CUTSCENES" or "HAPPY ENDINGS." When considering the situation all lifeforms are in during Mass Effect 3, the ending makes complete sense. Not only that, it is necessary. You have spent three games rallying people together to stop a larger-than-life threat that could completely obliterate existence. Think about that. If the Earth were to blow up this very moment, any trace of our relevance or cause would be washed away in a matter of seconds. It did make sense to have the ending it did, but the gaming community is so used to CoDs and Halos that they can't truly experience good storytelling. Irregardless of minor story facts, like this article states, it is entirely up to the developers how a story will go. We can be unsatisfied or content, but in the end the game is complete. Making an amendment would only paint Bioware as incompetent as a creative entity. And I think I can say that for those of you who no longer purchase a Bioware game because they refused to cradle you in their big, multi-million dollar arms, good riddance.

 

Nathan V

Writer/Editor at interactivedistractions.com

Mujikins
Mujikins

Ok Laura, you've probably only looked at the game cover of mass effect 3 so far with absolutely no idea about the actual content. You should probably play the game before writing an essay on your opinions. Now back to the problem here, mass effect 3 is not just a game, it is an experience where players are given choices to adapt Shepard as close as they can to relate the character to themselves. There's two types of Shepard you can be. Paragon and renegade. I personally chose paragon while others may choose to be a renegade. The problem is that over 40 hours of that experience doesn't make any difference in the ending for either a paragon Shepard or renegade Shepard. It all depends on a shitty variable that you have to improve by playing multiplayer. There's many people out there including myself who want to experience mass effect in the single player domain; the way it is supposed to be. Making different choices to get the kind of ending one can expect. But mass effect 3 just goes horribly wrong with that and Suddenly our choices don't matter. You should atleast play through the game before writing such crap. Guess they hire just anybody at gamespot, Australia.

PushyPillow
PushyPillow

Look, while I appreciate the fact that someone can try to defend the ending of Mass Effect 3. It ultimately comes down to the fact that Bioware claimed that player choice mattered when it really didn't. A player can make the worst possible decisions, get as many people killed as they could, and still get the same endings as someone who got everything perfect. While I'm not going to disagree that something as wonderful as the Mass Effect series is in fact art. It is a completely different medium than that of an artist. The difference is that while the significance and meaning behind a painting can be abstract and is up for debate, the Mass Effect series has never before done that. Everything in the story has been literal and definitive. Choosing to save the Citadel Council or let them die was not a metaphor. Destroying or saving the Collector Base wasn't up for interpretation for what it meant.

I'm trying to find the best way to ask this, but there's no indirect way to do so: Have you even played the Mass Effect trilogy? Because reading your article, it gives me no reason to believe you have. Instead, it really just sounds like someone who wanted to support an artsy fartsy hipster decision. In all honesty, if you've played the game, then watched as all your "major" choices get ground up into tasty war asset paste, then being at least a bit upset about that would be the proper reaction. But when you defend an ending that makes no sense and has plot holes bigger than the black hole beyond the Omega 4 (another thing you needed to play the trilogy to understand), then you clearly don't understand why people are upset.

Okay, this comment has been long-winded enough. Summary:

-Mass Effect is not a painting and has people who bought it being told what to literally (not metaphorically) expect.

-The ending made no sense and had no explanation to a series that had otherwise blown our minds with logical truths to unravel.

-You clearly didn't love the series as much as the majority of us. So why are you writing an article on it? By the way, that's a rhetorical question, ma'am.

 

Also, on a side note, who didn't love the music for the ending though? Best part of it. Really captured a feeling worthy of an end to Mass Effect. It just would have been better if the ending could leave us with half as good a feeling.

Sticker704
Sticker704

I draw a tree earlier. To me that's a work of art. Would it get put in a museum? No. Why should Mass Effect 3's ending be called a 'work of art' or go on about the team's 'artistic vision' then? Load of rubbish. 

SagaciousFrank
SagaciousFrank

I agree, the ending should remain is it is. But it is still a tenuous and cop-out pile of faeces. It didn't make any sense. And Bioware should not have hyped up the ending and claimed things they probably well knew they could not deliver on. So in a sense, all they did was talk to get people to buy it and make lots of money. Sadly for the consumer, you have already parted with your money long before finding out that the promises were entirely empty.

ahfavro
ahfavro

Laura, I believe that your argument is irrelevant because Mass Effect 3 proves how video games are no longer works of art tailored for an audience, rather they increasingly becoming a product sold to consumers. Mass Effect 3 (ending aside) was probably one of the best games ever made, however parts of the game felt rushed, most notably the ending, but some smaller parts of the campaign itself felt rushed. Personally, the only idea that makes sense to me would be buisness-related rather than creative and that is central to my point. When profit motivations exceed creative motivations, the outcome becomes a product created for a market rather than art for an audience. Art has an audience, this implies that the artist knows and respects their audience and therefore is creating something that they will enjoy. Bioware is not stupid and knew what their audience wanted; an ending that was effected by both the historical and recent actions of the player, with endings that gave some indication of what specifically happened after the game. Mass Effect 1 and 2 were art. Mass Effect 3 -prior to the endgame- is probably the best form of art in the history of gaming.

 

Your argument, that art is the sole property of its creator, does not make sense because the clearly rushed ending of mass effect 3 made the game a product shipped for consumption, rather than a form of art. Art is a relationship between the artist and his audience. The audience's reaction is irrelevant, they may hate it or love it but if the creation is crippled by external economic interests, it ceases to be art and becomes a product. As such, Bioware has a responsibility to remove the product (the ending) from its art, and instead make it the complete form of art they intended it to be. 

 

As an audience, we have the right and the responsibility to demand accountability from our artists. If they decide to take an artistic route we don't agree with, that's an issue of personal taste not artistic responsibility. If our artists decide that making money is more important than delivering a completed work of art, then that is wrong. Selling a well-timed product to a large and loyal market with high demand is good business. But presenting a flawed and incomplete piece of art as a final work is incredibly bad art.

 

 

DrCruel
DrCruel

Remember, these are the same people that fired Jeff Gerstmann for doing an honest review of "Kane & Lynch".

kiba6x
kiba6x

Laura, how you can even compare video game with work of art like Monet. You are not a gamer if you dont see the diffrence. And what about the wonership ??? For you the game community is equal of fast-food consumers! And you neglect the participation of gamers in the creating process - beta testers, mod creators, even level designers ARE GAMERS. You ARE NOT a gamer!

bd555
bd555

Ok, first, I wouldn't compare a video game to a work of art like Monet or Rembrandt. Second, art can be objectively better or worse. There's a reason why a work by Raphael is hanging in a museum and your 5th grade art project isn't. Hence, there can be better or worse endings to a novel. If an ending to a novel is unsatisfying, and/or stinks, a good editor will tell the author to go back to the drawing board and try again. Or, even better, the author himself will self-critique and keep trying until he gets an ending that is satisfying and does not have huge plot holes. This is one reason authors have rough drafts--they are continually trying to improve. So, yes, BioWare certainly can listen to a community and redo an ending just as an author can listen to an editor or other feedback and rewrite an ending. After all, this is a video game and not an actual painting or published novel so redoing an ending is perfectly feasible.

adrian07ch
adrian07ch

This is the only fking site where I see an approval of that stupid ending of Mass Effect 3. You can take your philosophical and artistic reasons and shove them right up your butthole. If we are not those to decide how it should be, then who are you to define art and what satisfies customers? You speak for Bioware here, you don't speak for those who actually read your bullcrap.

-JMD-
-JMD-

I LIKED THE ENDINGS!! Am i the only one? God Dammit! You guys wanted what? PPL in a after-party after kicking the ripers rear end? To all the actions, there are consequences! To destroy or even, to control all the reaper forces, there must be some price to pay!

CylonRaider01
CylonRaider01

Realy that's the reason? Ok i agree IF they didnt promised that every1 will have total control of the game.IF they didnt promise that they wont rip out stuff from the game and sell it as dlc,then yeah they shouldn't change anything.If they said from the beginning "Hey Fem Sheps and bro Shep the game play will be good but WE decide how it ends not you" then the situation will be different but they did the opposite way.In my oppinion the game was rushed to sell sell sell the crap out of it,and left alot of plot holes that they should fix from the beginning by adding to the endings more details about what will happen with the rest of races,etc if i chose to control reapers,destroy synthesis.That they should change not the whole stuff.

magnetiite
magnetiite

For anyone who says that Bioware created Mass Effect 3 and gave us the tools to create whatever story we want, thus making us the "artists". Did you create the textures, animation, story, and all the stuff in between? No you didn't. So you are not the artists. You are the audience. Mass Effect 3 is not a product, it's a work of art which we are just along for the ride. It's like a movie. We are there to observe the work of art which is the movie they created for us. We are not there to demand that the movie's creator change the ending as we see fit. I would hate to see the ending to a great trilogy that was written by a bunch of angry self-entitled gamers on an internet forum.

-INKling-
-INKling-

I totally agree with this article. I appreciate frustration about the lack of diversity in the endings but ultimately Bioware had to find a medium between telling a great story and trying to accommodate hundreds of decisions that may have led to an unsatisfactory result. Ultimately Bioware told us a great story and let us define our experiences along the way.

Hreath
Hreath

@carlogz, if the paper drawn on that you mean is the main game story line, i agree with that. But the part of game story line is effect by players choices from previous series, therefore we are more than put the color ONLY. Further, players is the 1 decide paragon or renegade path to determine how to continue the story, yet again this mean that we as gamers more than put colors. Bioware is artist?? too wide to argue, you & i have different opinion on this therefore is meaningless to continue this. Don't get me wrong as i m not insult you, because we are discussing the main topic of this game i.e. "THAT ENDING" of which many players are FRUSTRATED include me. Thanks for your reply and hope to have you feedback.

zenstrata
zenstrata

It felt like all the actions my character had taken, all the things I had done, were completely meaningless. The game felt empty and pointless. The ending to a series like this Matters! It matters a lot. For years we have been hearing the Bioware line concerning mass effect series, how our actions would have deep and significant impacts on the storyline. And then we reach the end to find out that was pretty much all a lie. We were deceived. False advertising, no sense of closure, hit out of left-field by a completely unexpected curve ball, the list goes on. People have a right to be pissed. I hope the upcoming DLC which adds to the game addresses these concerns. If it does not I will be much more hesitant about spending money on bioware products in the future.

zenstrata
zenstrata

I must say, you are mistaken Laura. The audience matters. This is obvious to anyone who makes money off their product. The idea however is not to give the audience what they expect, that would be boring. But to give them something they will mostly enjoy. This does not mean the ending must be 'happy' or 'sad', but a production and ending which makes the audience content is a very worthy goal. Art does not exist in a vacuum. It is not only to beheld by its own standards. To put it quite simply, Bioware is selling a product. There are certain expectations the customer has of this product. If those are not fulfilled for the majority of purchasers then there is a problem. To put it another way, I loved the mass effect series. The first two games I have played at least 5 times each, all the way through. Doing everything in them. The third one I have only played through once. This was because, to me - the ending was really really bad. It made little sense in relation to the rest of the series, it did not give any sense of closure or completion. It felt like it was tacked in from something else entirely and made me literally shrug my mental shoulders and say to myself - "what the heck was that? Is that really the end? What a load of ****!!".

Coren_Larken
Coren_Larken

I still wonder how Star Ocean: the Second Story on PS1 could have (i believe) 83 possible endings based upon recruitment and relationship levels and ME3 has so few... Apples to Oranges, yes...I just think they could have done better. It's not the end of my gaming world, it's just disappointing.

carlogz
carlogz

@ asyland. It is not your say if the "art" is finished or not. It's Bioware. Obviously, the painting is not a video game. But changing it would be a big problem. Bioware should keep the ending and just add a DLC to it. The fact is, Bioware gave you an ending and the audience took it and threw it back at them. It doesnt mean it wasnt finished, it just means that the audience didnt like it. But that doesnt mean they should change it. Think about it, If the audience said that that the ending of Mass Effect 3 was crap but decided to not go to extremes in order to change it. Bioware would still keep the ending. The fact is, the audience complained way too much to the point that Bioware sadly gave in to shut them up (ofcourse they would put it in a nice way ("Consideration for their customers")) @Hreath for your metaphor, Bioware are the artists. Yes, they did gave you painting tools and paper to draw on. But that paper already has a drawing on it. They just gave you the option of what color you would want to put on it. But in the end, its still the same drawing.

asyland
asyland

The work is not "finished". This isn’t a painting that is to be framed and frozen in time. Games are interactive and fluid forms. Altering this form of art does not render it meaningless. You lump together all forms of art, when in fact, different forms of art demand different forms of interaction and consideration. A DLC with an alternate ending will not diminish the original game, as it can be either be purchased and played, or not. As for the reason for the alteration, Bioware was never obligated to do anything but listen (As a merchant hoping to sell their goods, they should at least do that). This is art, but as you pointed out, it is a product as well. You can’t fault Bioware for listening to their customers. They were not required to offer an alternate ending. This was their choice. A choice made, if you read Dr. Ray Muzyka's post, out of consideration for their customers. Complaining that they should not alter the ending is as invalid as those who say they should. Finally, I realize that game journalists are passionate about the art of games, but it seems that many are making this a bit too precious. I doubt that this will have the devastating effect on games that many journalists seem to think it will.

Riterdando
Riterdando

Putting art and products on the same footing doesn't quite cut it. Salman Rushdie may not denounce his "Satanic Verses" because the Ayatollah didn't like it, but Microsoft does release patches for Windows when problems are found, doesn't it? So the folks at EAWare have to decide whether they are "artists" who defend their "freedom" until they go bankrupt or they are a company that wants to keep its customers. Me, I'd like to have one of the developers stand in front of me and claim the endings of "Mass Effect 3" are a deliberate expression of his artistic viewpoint, so I can laugh to his face.

Hreath
Hreath

"But none of this requires BioWare to listen" - Cup cake send to Bioware, Donation to alter the ending, Amazon allow refund to ME 3 customer and 50,000+ (90%) players in Bioware forum vote against the ending. Enough? It that mean you allow the Bioware to CHEATED all the fans by releasing such article. If your boss cheat you of the increment of salary, you remain silent? No wonder Bioware really happy to give the fans disappointment lately, 1st is Dragon Age 2 and now ME 3. The reason is because have your support. You have some business interest in that company? "This is irrelevant" - Your boss declare you will be director of the company, then he withdrawn what he say. Is that irrelevant to you? Bioware is not the artist, they give us painting tools & the papers and let us to draw what we want. After we finish 1st 2 stage of the picture, suddenly Bioware throw 3 different color to our painting and claim it must be like that, question come into my head, why they given us the painting tools (ME) to us at the first hand? We are the 1 give soul to Shepard not Bioware, they merely create it and pass to us to make choices. "Original work meaningless" - This words should use on us not defending Bioware, From ME 1 To 3 (five years), effort that we put in become wasted. Just like whatever your article write and you boss keep changing it totally, feel happy about it?

wallydog63
wallydog63

Sorry Laura but you are so way off. To say what you're trying to say would imply that the ending has meaning, but if the ending is a worthless piece of ...........burnt bread (fooled you), then nobody wants to eat. Therefore getting something less offensive to the pallet (tasted better for some of you younger people), it comes out better for everyone. As I have said in other posts, Shakespeare, Beethoven, and other greats have changed there works on the criticisms of others. Are you implying that Bioware is better then them? It's quite simple really. In college, you're writing a paper and your professor tells you the stories good but you need to change parts of it. Do you tell them no. That it would offend your artistic sensibility's. No. it's called correcting a mistake. One that should have been done before it ever shipped. Call it a warning to Bioware to get back to there old ways or people wont buy there artistic BS anymore. Let me ask you one question Ms Parker. Did the old Bioware (Pre EA era) ever make this kind of mistake that led to such hatred and controversy? Answer: no. They were loved by all. Can they say the same now?

TheSBDroid2
TheSBDroid2

All this comes at the assumption that the fans are wrong and changing the ending is a bad thing. The vast majority of fans are displeased with the ending, not a "handful of goading voices". Seems to me you haven't read the Bioware forums lately. If you lose your target audience there's no one to appreciate your "art". If there's no one to appreciate your art you cease to produce it as it's meaningless. I think it's wonderful that a company listens to their fan base to the point of the chance that they might ruin their creation in the process for them. The sole fact that this is even considered says how much Bioware cares for their fans. This act should be applauded. You ma'am, are wrong.

iowastate
iowastate

throughout my life there have been a lot of games I didn't like. video games and a lot performances by by the Demons especially in recent seasons but I haven't done much about any of it aside from some grousing to my telly. if they don't like the endings these folks can whinge all they want but you bought the game and they don't guarantee you will love the gameplay any more than a theatre can guarantee you will love the film or play you came to view. what is wrong with folks these days

MooncalfReviews
MooncalfReviews

Love this article. Bioware have taken the fans input thing to a level which has compromised the quality of their work, somewhat. Fans always demand, and they always demand about a million different things. To cater to them all is to create a horrible mish-mash of popularity. Bioware need to aim somewhere between this level of fan pleasing, and the level they had back when they created Jade Empire. Sure, listen to your fans, but don't sell what makes your games unique just to please X people who wanted to see X character in all of the 10 sequels. I also liked the ending, though, however brief it was. It was thoughtful, tense, and sort of beautiful.

Varyalanis
Varyalanis

Fantastic that people are bringing up the issue of whether games are art. It hardly matters. What is the crux of the issue is that a game is by nature interactive, whether you call it art or not. This interactivity requires that (and in the case of the Mass Effect trilogy is emphasized) players are able to control their character's actions, which is what the ending of Mass Effect 3 does not take into account. If there are objections to that based on the gamer being allowed to only make decisions within a framed narrative, then I point out that the gamers were promised a high level of interactivity and therefore a high level of self-determination within the game. If the game had not promised this self-determination and influence of the player, then I doubt that there would have been so much upheaval about the endings. On a side note, it might even be lazy game-design, incorporating barely any of the decisions made over the course of three games into the endings.

eothan
eothan

im also pissed of with Laura Parker had to say, Fu$% 0ff bi#%& and let BioWare respond the way they want, is the fans asking for a new ending not the critics, they just nervous because if ending changes that would affect their "Credibility" when RAITING GAMES

weslag
weslag

Film directors will often release Director's Cuts of their films because they didn't agree with the studio's choices. Correcting a mistake made by either the producer or developer doesn't necessarily affect the integrity of the "art". For good or bad, Lucas is still updating Star Wars to this day, how is this any different?

esfuerzo31
esfuerzo31

go send your arts fartsy thoughts to your community college professor. its not so much an art issue as it is a proper ending. The ending is not so much art issue but a hastily hashed attempt to finish the game = unprofessionalism. I think I don't agree with the ending because its not an ending; rather, i can forsee that EA and bioware had hoped this would happen so they could sell us DLC, which i suppose makes me feel better knowing that they'd be idiots not to capitalize on this opportunity..

grey_fox1984
grey_fox1984

@kerwinramos Those characters may not have had a huge impact on the overall outcome of Shepard's story- but the point was that Shepard had a huge impact on the outcome of THEIR stories. Your choices do matter- did you broker peace between the Geth and the Quarians? or did you kill one or the other? Did you manage to keep Miranda alive, or is she dead? (or going back to Mass Effect 2, did you manage to keep anyone/everyone alive). All of those things matter to the outcome of your overall story, even if they weren't referenced in the ending video specifically- did you forget they happened the way they did because they were absent from one cinematic at the end of the game?

grey_fox1984
grey_fox1984

@Volgin I chose the synthesis ending- the green electronic glow on all of the characters, suggest (in my interpretation) that the line was blurred between synthetic and organic- removing the inevitable war between the two by effectively making them all the same. Similar to how David (in project Overlord) was able to interface with the Geth, I believe now all organics and all machines will be capable of interfacing with each other. Yes you are right, the ME relays were destroyed, making interstellar travel next to impossible. But can you say with absolute certainty than with the current merging of organics and synthetics, allowing all of the most brilliant minds of the ME universe to interface with each other like machines, working at full capacity, can't possibly construct new Mass Effect relays or find a new system of interstellar travel altogether? As far as the supernova Mass Relays go, I'm sure the nature by which they were destroyed has something to do with the different outcome. The organic/synthetic synthesis had never been done before and therefore, does not have a precedent. I can only assume sending green energy that rewrites the genetic code of everything in the galaxy through the relays, destroying them from the inside out, would have a different effect than crashing an asteroid into the outside of it.

kerwinramos
kerwinramos

who cares if it is wreav or wrex, geth or quarians, destroy or save collectors base. all the same ending. why should we play ME and ME2? the choices did not matter at all.

ForeignReviewer
ForeignReviewer

Mass Effect is maybe art, but remember: Art is either free, or someone pays for it (maybe even orders it), be it sculptures, painting, etc. If the purchaser dislikes it, it won't be paid for, or changes will be requested. These games weren't free.

arijit_unreal
arijit_unreal

I liked the ending ...... the story part. You get a few choices. I appreciate what Bioware has done here but clearly there are many anomlaies in the game that contradict each other. I enjoyed the game though. [SPOILERS] I hate that sparkly new character they introduced just before the end of the game. How in the world did the crew survive? Shepherd took a couple of 'em in battle with him. They were in the same shuttle as Shepherd. Exactly when did they get the chance to board the Normandy ?? They should have followed Shepherd to death and all .... [spoiler]

mahdisnake09
mahdisnake09

i really appreciate that ending i liked it who says that game ending must be nostalgic and romantic?? i liked that and rly want bioware to be more realestic

albusfr
albusfr

Terrible article. Video games are by far the most interactive medium of artistic expression that we have invented so far. Mass Effect series has also been one of the most interactive games in the industry where they ACTIVELY involve the player choice to shape the story. Therefore players have a vested interest on a far deeper level than simply watching a movie or looking at a painting. Also don't forget all the numerous promises Bioware had before releasing the game. They stated on numerous occasions that the ending will tie up all loose ends, that they VARY DRAMATICALLY depending on how you play and that to do things any other way will go against Mass Effect's core themes. It turns out the ending we got are so far off its not even funny. This kind of crap really damages player-developer relationships. I know for one that I most certainly won't be buying anymore from Bioware. After DragonAge2 and Mass Effect 3, i've had enough. I don't even have the desire to play through Mass Effect 1-3 anymore...just wish i can sell off my games and be done with the series.

The_GooBear
The_GooBear

BTW if u watch the ending again you'll noticed that the relay core is dispersed and shot into the closest systems relay in chain reaction. There's no Eezo around when they are destroyed. An asteroid a lot larger than a relay impacted with the one that wiped a system. As for the catalyst, idk. I didn't find anything off.

The_GooBear
The_GooBear

@sircyrus I think everything fell together pretty well other than the fact that the moments after your decision is very brief. I've played all of the DLC for ME2, it was my fav of the series. Did asteroids take out those Mass Relays? I believe that's what caused the destruction of the Batarian star system

Darth_Ultima
Darth_Ultima

Sorry to say but the people who were not happy with the ME3 ending are not a small vocal minority. Almost everyone I have spoken too in my personal life hates the ending. Enough people hate the ending with such a passion that it has ruined the entire game for them. My personal feelings are that the ending failed to deliver what people wanted closure and answers and even if they "fixed" the ending it would not change how the game originally ended. Bioware lied about everything regarding the ending and as a result have lost my faith. I will not be pre-ordering anything from them until I hear via word of mouth whether it is good or not.

rhymesmatter
rhymesmatter

@jason4774 i never believed that if i returned to this article i would have found such a brilliant and yet spot on comment regarding this farce called ME 3 ! That made me smile mate! :)

siralucard0011
siralucard0011

ADDENDUM TO ABOVE:


nd honestly, some people like depressing endings and whatnot.  I don't, but that's the point:  This series had something for everyone up until 3.  In 3, you have the choice of FOUR endings, all of which are depressing.  Did you want some depressing in 2?  Let a squad mate die.  Did you want some hope in 3?  Go fuck yourself.  See the problem?  The endings were good for what they were (except synthesis, which made NO sense and NO attempt to explain in any reasonable fashion how exactly you throwing yourself into a laser was supposed to rewrite the DNA of things that don't even HAVE DNA TO REWRITE), but they were all so samey that you felt like everything you'd done up until that point didn't matter.  Why bother saving the Geth if you just have to wipe them out because the game says you do?  Why bother having a love interest if you either get to commit genocide or forsake them completely?  Why bother resisting the Reapers so hard if you're just gonna let some out of control AI talk you into agreeing with him in a matter of minutes?  Hell, control didn't even make sense at all.  So what if Shepard made it to the Citadel?  It was a fluke (well, really, it's because he's a badass).  Like this millions of years old AI program is going to just suddenly hand over the controls to the Reapers to some random organic...  Just doesn't add up.  There was just no variety and no way to end this game the way you wanted to; the way you'd played it.  It was all up to the designers, which honestly is how most games are, but ME has always been in the hands of the players.

KiwiNaki
KiwiNaki

Calm down Erupit2. It is an opinion.

 

I did not like the ending either, but it was not the first time I have said that and I doubt it will be the last. It is not the ending I wanted or expected to this series and I struggle to see those last 15mins as the same story I spent 100 hours experiencing. But it was still Biowares story, despite the illusion of choice. It is what it is. There is no need to attack people about it.

 

The ending sucked, yea, but the 100 hours before it was well worth the time and money.

Basically just get over it.

FearDarkness
FearDarkness

 @Sticker704 Your drawing of a tree would be a "work of art" regardless of quality, a work of art is a classification of any work using creative thought for the purpose of being art. In that sense many things can be works of art, architecture, literature, comics, video games, movies, kindergarten students crayon drawings... it doesn't matter. Artistic vision is a flowery way to say creativity, it holds a positive connotation but doesn't necessarily mean that the art created is good. Just some cheerful clarification on word use. :)

PushyPillow
PushyPillow

People didn't like the ending because it made no sense, which you'd realize if you put some thought into it. People didn't like the ending because it ruined the sense of player choice which Bioware has prided themselves at providing. Well, neither logic or choice really mattered at the end. None of the choices that players had made in the series created over the course of five years mattered. Instead, they got shoved through a food processor and packaged as war asset points which couldn't be distinguished from one another. So, yeah. Canned Wrex is worth a whopping 30 points. Isn't that grand?

vinman3333
vinman3333

 @magnetiite actually most movie endings are shown to test audiences before release and the studio picks the ending the test audience approved  because it is a product (ask any producer)

RC-DC
RC-DC

@kerwinramos Why should we live life? For the experience. For the journey. We don't live life for the ending. Because I think it pretty much sucks for all of us.