Feedback: Mass Effect 3 Ending Controversy

Posted: April 4, 2012
Feedback: Mass Effect 3 Ending Controversy
Blair Herter and the Feedback crew finally addressed Mass Effect 3's controversial ending.

Comments are Closed

  • CarneysRage

    Man, I Reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaally need to get this game. This is the second podcast that I can't listen to because of it.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 8:42 PM
  • coLtrain2000

    First of all, let me say that I agree with Nikole that the ghost kid was pretty lame.. That being said, I think a major point that Stephen made is being overlooked.. The ending that she got WAS her ending, whether she liked it or not.. Only by going back and rapid-fire trying out all three options was she able to break down the similarities between the choices she could have made.
    In a game where the decisions you make literally mean life or death for the people in that universe, I think it's important to accept the consequences of your actions, rather than perseverate on the differences between the outcomes that could have been.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 8:07 PM
  • Yuffie*Kisargai

    this ending clearly upset someone but her reasoning was sound. I try to 100% games as well to get the best ending which I did in FFXIII-2. This best ending was just some 30 second clip which involved fighting every enemy in the game so i thought it would be something more meaningful. Don't agree that games should be made to please the most people, also why i hope the cod bombs this year to strength that fact, becuase then creativity will no longer be necessary and the video game market will get flooded in twilight.

    I think you guys should talk about these new system rumors because I feel more light needs to be shed on the possibility that it could happen. You guys that G4 likely already heard/read this but here http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/p lugged-in/hello-brave-world-co nsole-gaming-003839870.html. This has a real chance of happening because EA has already gotten away with it. Thanks for your time.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 7:15 PM
  • U_NO_HOO

    I think nikole was somehow possesed by all the hateful spirits of the entitled whiny brats on the internet in this episode. The others at least seemed to be trying to understand both sides of the arguement but everything she said basically boiled down too "the game didnt END exactly how I wanted so the WHOLE FRANCHISE is now horrible. And if you disagree with me your wrong, and I will continue to cut you off every time you try to state your case"

    Posted: April 6, 2012 6:21 PM
  • Pie47

    Some people wanted a happy endng. Others wanted a dramatic ending that ends in a bang. Why not add both. Some destroy everything while others kill everyone to control the reapers.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 6:04 PM
  • Ender_IF_

    Hahahahahahahah Nikole is a bit of a brat in this episode. You really wanted TIM in full reaper form? Rofl, its ridicolous. Why is it generic? Are u mentally ill? Its generic because everybody does it! Dineys movies have generic endings!

    For the record, you were indoctrinated. Enjoy

    Posted: April 6, 2012 3:33 PM
  • Frostybob

    1. The Arival dlc for ME2 established that destroying a mass relay resulted in the destruction of the solar system that it was in. ME3 ends with the destruction of all mass relays. The implication is that all life in every system that had a mass relay is now wiped out.

    2. I took Edi and Ashley with me on the final mission and then during the cinmatic I saw both of them get off of the Normandy with Joker. The implication is that they abandoned Shepard on earth and returned to the Normandy before he went up to the citidel in the beam. Alternately they were knocked out and woke up after Shepard went up, then they went back to the Normandy. A side note is that Ashely was my paramor in that playthrough and she walked off the Normandy without a trace of sadness.

    3. I find it rather arrogant and presumptious to insult people's intelligence by saying they must be too pedestrian to understand. I found it to be more of a Bait and switch. One of the underlying principles for the whole series was that paragon and renegade choices making a difference in your major confrentations. They did this right up to the final encounter with the Illusive Man. Yet you have no more chances to affect your discussion with Astro boy. They promised there wouldn't be an ABC ending prelaunch and yet that is exactly what they delivered. If they had not made that promise possibly 60% to 80% of the uproar would have been eliminated.

    4. It was their product their created universe and their over arching plot. But it was the players story. I made 12 full playthroughs from ME1 through 2 but now knowing the end of ME3, the desire to make another trip through the series has been crushed. I cant build up a new character with their loves to just know they have no chance, none at all of surviving.

    On a more constructive note. Something I would like to see in the future is for there to be some way to modify the weapons of Squadmates on the Normandy. This would be helpful in as much as sometimes you might like to change the load outs of all squadmates at the same time not just the ones your taking with you. Also, this prevents the anoyance of relolizing I forgot to upgrade this or that gun at the procurement station after a mission is begun. They had this kind of dynamic in ME1 and 2 but is missing in 3. Now the only way to access the weapons of a squadmate is to take them on a mission.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 2:55 PM
  • Energy_Vampire1974

    I have a dilemma, help me out people.

    Should I buy Mass Effect 3 for PS3, or give up the multiplayer and get it for Xbox and continue my character from the first 2 games. (I'm not paying for Xbox Live)

    Is there a big difference if I continue my character or play as a default Shepard?

    Posted: April 6, 2012 2:52 PM
  • Vancoor

    http://social.bioware.com/foru m/1/topic/355/index/9727423/1< br />

    Posted: April 6, 2012 12:59 PM
  • Keysor

    The following post is somewhat trollish.

    Those people who understand/accept the ending tend to be intelligent. Those who really just wanted to "save the princess" for the millionth time are not very bright. Bioware aimed high with their ending and sadly the response from gamers indicates that they simply aren't mature enough to appreciate it.

    I'm just glad we have people like Steven who are trying to advance the medium beyond adolescent power fantasies. Sorry Nikole but if all gamers were like you they would certainly be a lot more attractive, but our games would be incredibly bland.

    P.S. Nikole was right about one thing. You really needed to discuss the indoctrination theory.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 12:20 PM
  • Keysor

    Well I wrote a full post but despite that fact that it contains absolutely no profanity this annoying filter won't let me post it. Seriously G4 what is going on?

    Posted: April 6, 2012 12:16 PM
  • BlizzCo

    I want Christopher Paolini to write a new ending for the Inheritance Cycle...yeah...not gonna happen. And why should video games be any different?

    Posted: April 6, 2012 10:36 AM
  • Bloodthr0e

    You know what the ending of Mass Effect 3 tells me? That even though you could've made many different choices, in the end 'all roads lead to Rome'. Which in case you weren't aware means: different paths can take one to the same goal. If that's the point Bioware was trying to make, they certainly hit home with it. Too bad the other fans can't see this.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 10:29 AM
  • JMan1c1347

    I like how we have to listen to a one non-committal (Blair) followed by a guy who if you've followed feedback for a while you would know he never even liked Mass Effect & didn't finish all the games (Stephen) & another guy who half the time can't even put what he wants to say into words. (Donnell) & just one REAL fan (Nikole.)

    Posted: April 6, 2012 9:23 AM
  • Jfury09

    is this interview or whatever before or after any of them have heard of the Indoctrination Theory? chick sounding really silly like everyone else that has not heard of the theory that to me makes more sense then anything and just about makes me feel Bioware does not have to explain anything to us... if anything they now have to explain stuff to us cuz people are too lazy to use there brains for anything

    Posted: April 6, 2012 8:58 AM
  • vinion2000

    Most game writers in the industry have compared Mass Effect to a "choose your adventure" book. i like this comparison. The player participates in a story with some influence but of which outcome is fixed. The writer,the tour guide the story weaves you through a scripted path but gives you the illusion of freedom and choice. This sadly leads to the probability of disappointment.

    Here are some of my problems with this conversation

    A Game Publisher does what its name says it publishes games. Its job is to sell games and developers make the games that publishers sell. sure developers are the middlemen of the chain but the consumer is the end. My money decides if the developer gets rewarded. SO why do i always get a guilt trip from game reviewers when it comes to the poor poor developers. Im sorry but if you hire someone to build you a house and its being done poorly are you going to reconsider firing them because they have mortgage/rent/children/child support to pay. hell the fact is WE ALL HAVE STUFF TO PAY! so must i hear violins every time we talk about them. Just another example that critics are too close to the industry. Its sad but if they make good games we will by them and if they do crap we will berate them. I will not be made to feel guilty and silenced when you give me something mediocre.

    So Stephen Johnson your talking about being all for the trust/agreement between the writer and audience but when Nickole talks about the promise of multiple endings beyond the A,B,C approach you back peddle with a "so". What crock is that. Once again you prove my point about those who like the ending because THEY GOT THE ENDING THEY WANTED. So in reality its more selfishness than anything else. its "we go what we wanted" and "we like it so" which means a giant "middle finger" to you. Funny enough this could have been the critics other side and then we would have had another Fallout Broken Steel. which is very hypocritical and self centered. just shows how disconnected reviewers are from their audience.

    Finally for the whole ART argument. If you have never played "Good vs Evil","Fahrenheit/Indigo Prophecy", "Psychonauts", or "Xenogears", (and a few others that have sadly escaped my mind} then you need to sit you butt down. we all talk art but do we play the games with "the weird game play" NO. Lets be frank for a game that went from being a solid RPG to a game with "RPG elements" taking risks is the last thing on its list of priorities. its going for mass appeal. So why not the ending too. this was the conclusion i came to and it fits the concept that EA/Bioware are looking at this game from the perspective of someone playing ME for the first time. the entire game is structured that way. from the reduction in character interaction, to lack of exploration, to the lack of conversation Bioware stripped this game bare as to not intimidate new comers and being a fan you would have subconsciously rationalize all that was missing to the plot where its war and you don't have time. So this leads to the cookie cutter ending and as Stephen proved then ending is meant for single play. he got his ending and move on but like nikole most mass effect players don't play the game only ONCE we love mixing things up. we want to read the choose your adventure book over from the beginning and try new choices. the ending of mass effect 3 is so disappointing that you will probably never play those games over because it would serve no real point when you reach the end.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 5:41 AM
  • TrainerBrandon

    The episodes are getting shorter. This saddens me :(

    Posted: April 6, 2012 5:28 AM
  • Voitan

    The people in Bioware are always losing their jobs. Check the credits for each game. They're very different, each time.

    As for why we got, what we got, is because they were being rushed. Nearing the deadline, content was getting cut out, corners were taken, and ideas were limited.

    You can find the cut extended dialogue of Shepard and Anderson, and it's absolutely wonderful. Just mind boggling to take it out considering how powerful it is. Originally they was going to be a boss fight at the end with the Illusive Man. Taking it out would obviously save time, Bioware's stated reason being "it was too video gamey"... What the hell are we buying!? IT'S A VIDEOGAME!

    Posted: April 6, 2012 4:47 AM
  • ganemede1981

    I still don't get it. Steven is right, the ending to the series is the one that made sense. It gave the most closure and capped all of the important themes of the series. As much as I respect the opinions of Nikole and others who feel like they were gypped by the ending of the franchise, I think they're missing a fundamental point. Your choices did matter, TO YOU... Everything you did led you to the point of, in one way or another, getting rid of the Reapers. The crux if the series was your journey getting to that point; the creators at BioWare had a particular story they wanted to tell. The ending reflected that. Yes, at the end of the story left the galactic fleets stranded in the Sol system. Yes, FTL travel across the galaxy was all but eliminated. But so what? These questions don't need to be answered to complete this story, because this story was about Shepard stopping the reapers. You did that. The only two glaring plot holes are 1) why was the Normandy in the middle of a jump, and 2) why didn't the mass effect relays destroy their home systems?

    Was the Ghost Child a cheesy bit and maybe a bit of Deus Ex Machina? Maybe, but it's a common sci fi trope that is more often than not forgiven for the sake of story. I translated it as akin to the end of the film Contact in which the alien presence presents itself as someone familiar to the protagonist in order to make it easily understandable.

    Once again, I'm with Steven on the "what video games should try to accomplish." Yes the consumers should matter inso far as what they expect in terms of gameplay, but when it come to story, I think the developers and story writers should be left alone to give us challenging stories that don't always resolve in ways the public would expect. Otherwise we end up with Hollywood post 1976 - afraid to give us anything that isn't focused grouped and peer tested to death. That is no way for a creative enterprise to be run. I'll take an ambiguous story and ending over a nice neat ending any day so long as it's challenging and intellectually stimulating (eg. The Matrix vs. its sequels).

    I think the furor over the ending of ME3 illuminated the gamer world as being almost as vapid as the general public which they very much love to denigrate - so long as there's an easy to undertand ending, gamers will be happy.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 2:41 AM
  • onecodeslinger

    I am a game developer. Regarding whether game devs look at user scores on metacritic and elsewhere: in my experience and amongst my colleagues and others I know in the industry, no. We all understand how user scores are highly subjective, with 0 accountability.

    Posted: April 6, 2012 2:22 AM