Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)

[Psyren]

But that's my point. You only get that scene (apologies for describing it wrongly btw) with 4,000 (or 5,000 if you don't persuade TIM) EMS. And you can't get that much without playing multiplayer (or iPhone).

To my mind, if you don't get that scene, Shepard isn't alive.

Ah, I understand now. Yes, I agree, they shouldn't have gated something that important behind a multiplayer wall.

The major themes of "never give up, never surrender" and "earn your happy ending" are, however, carried through in ME3 all the way to the finale, at which point they are dropped like a prothean joke.

I disagree, but then I suspect my definitions of "surrender" and "happy ending" probably differ significantly from yours based on previous posts.

[Anarion]

But that's my point. You only get that scene (apologies for describing it wrongly btw) with 4,000 (or 5,000 if you don't persuade TIM) EMS. And you can't get that much without playing multiplayer (or iPhone).

To my mind, if you don't get that scene, Shepard isn't alive. (Because, as I said, in an ending that's so sparse on detail, every detail counts.) Everything goes boom, the end. Reapers dead, Geth dead, Shepard dead, EDI maybe dead.

Some people are viewing it as 'this scene just shows you what's happening in every ending, as a treat', and that's fine. I totally appreciate that logic. But I can't make my mind work like that. Because the EMS is so important for other stuff, it just makes more sense to me that it decides whether Shep lives or dies, rather than just deciding whether you get to see another short scene of what's already happening regardless.

Hopefully they'll clarify that in the DLC. If it really turns out that Shephard living or dying is dependent on multiplayer, that would be extremely unfortunate and a violation of Bioware's promises. I'm with the crowd that thinks he lives no matter what (in the destroy ending), so I'm hoping this is more like the teasers you get for 100% completion in the Metroid Prime games.

I'm also a bit curious if people are still as angry in light of the whole DLC thing. I agree with a lot of the recent complaints, but I also don't think that an ending that is conceptually sound but lacks explanation that will be forthcoming in free DLC is worth returning a game over.

[Somebloke]

The major themes of "never give up, never surrender" and "earn your happy ending" are, however, carried through in ME3 all the way to the finale, at which point they are dropped like a prothean joke.



Well, they'd almost certainly want to redo the conversation with the kid, at least, and Meer and Hale are responsible for both sides of that dialogue. They say they want to clarify the ending without changing it, and that conversation is the focal point of confusion, so it's what needs to be clarified most.

interesting- will be intrigued.

I've really no longer got an issue with the ending prior to the catalyst being fired- the idea that Shepard 'retreated' or 'surrendered' makes no sense to me- once Shepard stops speaking to the catalyst she goes and does what she wants- two of the choices presented to her would have essentially remained the same whether or not the starchild turns up. Her lack of a detailed respose to the starchild's 'I surrender but @@@@ you anyway' speech was a definite missed moment of awesome, but really that's it- hardly a travesty. I'm glad we got some sort of explanation for the Reapers, even if it needed expanding on. And the series has time and time again- with Virmire, with the Krogans and Salarians, with the Earth fleet vs the council- shown us that sometimes there is no right answer, and you have to make a difficult choice. The ending stayed true to that.

What it sounds like we are getting with the DLC is:

-An expanded dialogue with the catalyst, including a response from Shepard and maybe some Q and A as to the catalyst's origins and logic.

- an explanation for Joker's jump.

- an ending 'statement' for each of the factions/characters.

- the 'endor holocaust' fridge logic explained away.

What we won't be seeing is a retcon, and I'm fine with this- the ending needed work, but for me can be salvaged into a suitable finale for the series.

[Zorg]

I'm still not sure I get this analogy, but if I'm reading it right I would say that Bioware promised you a hearty meal, not specifically steak. If you went in expecting steak, or steak cooked to your specifications, you could understandably leave disappointed. Or something.

They made some pretty specific promises:

Spoiler

Show

Official Mass Effect Website
http://masseffect.com/about/story/

“Experience the beginning, middle, and end of an emotional story unlike any
other, where the decisions you make completely shape your experience
and outcome.”


Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/02/28/ma...3-mac-walters/

“[The presence of the Rachni] has huge consequences in Mass
Effect 3. Even just in the final battle with the Reapers.”


Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://business.financialpost.com/20...all-audiences/

“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think
one of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are
optimal for different people “


Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.computerandvideogames.com...issing-in-me2/

“And, to be honest, you [the fans] are crafting your Mass Effect story as
much as we are anyway.”


Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.360magazine.co.uk/intervi...erent-endings/

“There are many different endings. We wouldn’t do it any other way. How
could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t
say any more than that…”


Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...e-people-angry

“Every decision you've made will impact how things go. The player's also the
architect of what happens."

“You'll get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless
of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide
some answers to these people.”

“Because a lot of these plot threads are concluding and because it's being
brought to a finale, since you were a part of architecting how they
got to how they were, you will definitely sense how they close was
because of the decisions you made and because of the decisions you
didn't make”


Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featur...-effect-3.aspx

“For people who are invested in these characters and the back-story of the
universe and everything, all of these things come to a resolution in
Mass Effect 3. And they are resolved in a way that's very different
based on what you would do in those situations.”


Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://venturebeat.com/2012/03/02/ca...ans-interview/

“Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get
some closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”

“Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the
lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,
being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an
end.”

Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”


Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featur...ostPageIndex=2

Interviewer: [Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2] “Is that
same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?”
Hudson: “Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to
build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about
eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is
coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot
more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many
decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that
stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings,
where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got
ending A, B, or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and
variety in them.”

“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.”


Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1027650...n_bioware.html

Mass Effect 3 will shake up the player's moral choices more than ever
before, even going so far as allowing the Reapers to win the battle
for Earth, according to BioWare's community representative Mike
Gamble.


In an inteview with NowGamer at Gamescom, we asked if BioWare was taking risks with Mass Effect 3's
plot, including a negative ending in which the Reapers win. Gamble simply said, "Yes". We asked him again to confirm what he had just said and he said, "Yes".


Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer.com/features/122...y_details.html


"Of course you don’t have to play multiplayer, you can choose to play
all the side-quests in single-player and do all that stuff you’ll
still get all the same endings and same information, it’s just a
totally different way of playing"


Casey Hudson (Director)
http://gamescatalyst.com/2012/03/cas...ctive-stories/

“The whole idea of Mass Effect3 is resolving all of the biggest questions, about the Protheons and
the Reapers, and being in the driver's seat to end the galaxy and all
of these big plot lines, to decide what civilizations are going to
live or die: All of these things are answered in Mass Effect 3.”


Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.computerandvideogames.com...y-good/?page=2

“There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And
even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to
some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending
where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things
- it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the
final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who
plays it.”


Ray Muzyka (Co-Founder of Bioware)
http://penny-arcade.com/report/edito...ng-a-trilogy-a

“I just finished an end to end playthrough, for me the ending was the
most satisfying of any game I’ve ever played….the decisions you make in
this game are epic,”

“The team has been planning
for this for years, since the beginning of the Mass Effect franchise.
Largely the same team, most of the same leads have worked on this for
years and years. They’ve thought about [the ending] for years and years.
It’s not something they’ve had to solve in a week or a month even, but
over the course of five or ten years.”

[ShinyRocks]

I'm also a bit curious if people are still as angry in light of the whole DLC thing. I agree with a lot of the recent complaints, but I also don't think that an ending that is conceptually sound but lacks explanation that will be forthcoming in free DLC is worth returning a game over.

I'm certainly a lot happier now that I know (well, 'know') that I'm going to get some resolution and detail to all the stuff my Shep did. I cured the Genophage. I set up Wrex and Eve as peaceful new leaders. I reconciled the Geth and the Quarians. Or, on a more basic level, I saved Miranda and her sister. I stayed loyal to Liara across all three games. I never expected to have like two hours of slideshows telling me the impact of everything, but to get nothing was a kick in the teeth.

I don't mind the three endings too much. I kind of wanted a blue babies ending, even if it's super hard to achieve, but I appreciate that they carried on with the idea of sacrifice and hard decisions.

My problem was that ALL the choices sucked and were awful. My Shepard just ended a three-century war. No way was she killing the Geth. Even if she hadn't managed it, she would have let the Quarians die; to then have to genocide the Geth anyway – awful. Nope. Not doing it.

Control, to my mind, was just Starkid saying 'Oh, you could totally control the Reapers. I mean, TIM thought he was doing that, but he wasn't as awesome as you. It didn't work for him, but it's totally, definitely going to work for you. This isn't just indoctrination. Promise.' Nothing that the Illusive Man thinks is a good idea is a good idea. My Shepard would never have done it.

Synthesis seemed the best option, and it was 'rewrite the very cellular structure of everyone in the galaxy against their will'. And that was the GOOD choice?

I like difficult choices, I like imperfect endings, I like bittersweet. I don't object to what they tried to do, but I'm unconvinced that what they did was the best solution, even in terms of 'stark choices' endings.

[Aeryr]

As Zorg has pointed out their statements were pretty damn specific even just a couple of weeks prior the release of the game.

For me some ending scenes of the ending don't need to be expanded nor explained they just need to go away. The Joker jump just.... just... hurts even if funnily in my (destroy) ending EDI survives (she gets out of the ship). And that is surely a bug. The starchild doesn't add anything to the game. Even if the A, B, C choice remains the same the starchild isn't necessary for the ending.

Throwing yourself into a beam that then fires another beam to turn everyone synthetic, blowing up something with your gun in order to fire a beam that only destroys the reapers, catching two glowing orbs to suicide and fire a beam that lets you control the reapers. You could replace all that, and starchild, with just activating a console so it fires a beam that either turns everyone into synthetic, controls or destroys the reapers.

[Dienekes]

Nothing that the Illusive Man thinks is a good idea is a good idea.

Well he did resurrect an unaltered Shepard.

[ShinyRocks]

Well he did resurrect an unaltered Shepard.

And look how that turned out for him.

[Morty]

On the subject of TIM, there's something I don't quite get - if Cerberus was indoctrinated, why did the Reapers attack the Sanctuary instead of simply telling them to stop their research?

[LordShotGun]

They made some pretty specific promises:

Spoiler

Show

Official Mass Effect Website
http://masseffect.com/about/story/

“Experience the beginning, middle, and end of an emotional story unlike any
other, where the decisions you make completely shape your experience
and outcome.”


Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/02/28/ma...3-mac-walters/

“[The presence of the Rachni] has huge consequences in Mass
Effect 3. Even just in the final battle with the Reapers.”


Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://business.financialpost.com/20...all-audiences/

“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think
one of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are
optimal for different people “


Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.computerandvideogames.com...issing-in-me2/

“And, to be honest, you [the fans] are crafting your Mass Effect story as
much as we are anyway.”


Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.360magazine.co.uk/intervi...erent-endings/

“There are many different endings. We wouldn’t do it any other way. How
could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t
say any more than that…”


Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...e-people-angry

“Every decision you've made will impact how things go. The player's also the
architect of what happens."

“You'll get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless
of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide
some answers to these people.”

“Because a lot of these plot threads are concluding and because it's being
brought to a finale, since you were a part of architecting how they
got to how they were, you will definitely sense how they close was
because of the decisions you made and because of the decisions you
didn't make”


Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featur...-effect-3.aspx

“For people who are invested in these characters and the back-story of the
universe and everything, all of these things come to a resolution in
Mass Effect 3. And they are resolved in a way that's very different
based on what you would do in those situations.”


Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://venturebeat.com/2012/03/02/ca...ans-interview/

“Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get
some closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”

“Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the
lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,
being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an
end.”

Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”


Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featur...ostPageIndex=2

Interviewer: [Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2] “Is that
same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?”
Hudson: “Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to
build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about
eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is
coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot
more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many
decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that
stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings,
where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got
ending A, B, or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and
variety in them.”

“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.”


Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1027650...n_bioware.html

Mass Effect 3 will shake up the player's moral choices more than ever
before, even going so far as allowing the Reapers to win the battle
for Earth, according to BioWare's community representative Mike
Gamble.


In an inteview with NowGamer at Gamescom, we asked if BioWare was taking risks with Mass Effect 3's
plot, including a negative ending in which the Reapers win. Gamble simply said, "Yes". We asked him again to confirm what he had just said and he said, "Yes".


Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer.com/features/122...y_details.html


"Of course you don’t have to play multiplayer, you can choose to play
all the side-quests in single-player and do all that stuff you’ll
still get all the same endings and same information, it’s just a
totally different way of playing"


Casey Hudson (Director)
http://gamescatalyst.com/2012/03/cas...ctive-stories/

“The whole idea of Mass Effect3 is resolving all of the biggest questions, about the Protheons and
the Reapers, and being in the driver's seat to end the galaxy and all
of these big plot lines, to decide what civilizations are going to
live or die: All of these things are answered in Mass Effect 3.”


Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.computerandvideogames.com...y-good/?page=2

“There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And
even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to
some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending
where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things
- it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the
final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who
plays it.”


Ray Muzyka (Co-Founder of Bioware)
http://penny-arcade.com/report/edito...ng-a-trilogy-a

“I just finished an end to end playthrough, for me the ending was the
most satisfying of any game I’ve ever played….the decisions you make in
this game are epic,”

“The team has been planning
for this for years, since the beginning of the Mass Effect franchise.
Largely the same team, most of the same leads have worked on this for
years and years. They’ve thought about [the ending] for years and years.
It’s not something they’ve had to solve in a week or a month even, but
over the course of five or ten years.”

I love you right now. This is the best summery of everything we have been promised and the best counter to people saying "oh you are just acting entitled".

Perhaps bioware bit off more then they could chew. Perhaps they pulled a peter molyneux and couldn't deliver on everything they promised. Either way would be fine with me IF THEY ACTUALLY CAME OUT AND SAID SO. I understand the need for PR but I think that withholding information and scoffing at consumer concerns was the wrong way to go.

[Calemyr]

I disagree, but then I suspect my definitions of "surrender" and "happy ending" probably differ significantly from yours based on previous posts.

Why do I get the feeling that I'm being misinterpreted again?

"Never surrender": Shep does not back down, no matter the odds. He should have been able to call the kid out on the troll logic. Of course, Shep has failed to do so before (Horizon), so maybe it's not that big a difference.

"Happy Ending": I am not one of those people who will only be happy with a bouncing blue babies ending. I like bittersweet just fine, thank you, but a major element of most of this series is that Shep has a talent for finding a third option. Even when it doesn't work, he's given the opportunity to try. Right up until the end. He never questions the kid, never so much as suggests none of these options are suitable (too high a cost in any save Control). Shep simply falls flat in the end and behaves nothing like he ever would have before.

[Zorg]

What's really bad is some of those date from this year - even up to a couple of weeks before release!

If they'd toned down the talk beforehand and indicated otherwise it would've been a lot better.

[Psyren]

Why do I get the feeling that I'm being misinterpreted again?

No, I understand you perfectly; I just disagree.

"Never surrender": Shep does not back down, no matter the odds. He should have been able to call the kid out on the troll logic. Of course, Shep has failed to do so before (Horizon), so maybe it's not that big a difference.

1) He also failed with TIM.
"You're hiding something. How do you know the Reapers are involved?"
"The patterns are there, buried in the data."
"Bull****. What patterns, and what data? Send me a copy or I walk."

2) The odds aren't the problem - time is the problem. Shepard is not going to waste time flapping his gums at a hologram while the army is being slaughtered just outside.

"Happy Ending": I am not one of those people who will only be happy with a bouncing blue babies ending. I like bittersweet just fine, thank you, but a major element of most of this series is that Shep has a talent for finding a third option. Even when it doesn't work, he's given the opportunity to try. Right up until the end. He never questions the kid, never so much as suggests none of these options are suitable (too high a cost in any save Control). Shep simply falls flat in the end and behaves nothing like he ever would have before.

I never said you wanted babies of any color, but you don't always get a third option. Extinguish the Rachni or unleash them on the galaxy again - no third option. Blow up the Heretics for what they believe in, or brainwash them en masse - well, you get a third option there of doing nothing and letting the true Geth get brainwashed instead, but that's not much of one. Cure the genophage completely and live with the consequences, or don't cure it at all - no third option. Sve Ashley or save Kaidan - no third option. Blow up the Alpha Relay - well, there you don't even get a second option, the alternative is genocide.

[Chen]

Some expansion on what happens to your crew and various races at the end of the game (which presumably is what the DLC will add) will make pretty much every one of those statements by Bioware at least mostly true. The real issue is that you DID make important decisions through the game that did take prior decisions into account. And they did end up affecting the state of the galaxy in the end of the game. The problem is they didn't show what the effect was.

Was saving the Quarians and the Geth good in the end? Did it end up resulting in one side actually eventually wiping out the other? Did the geth go on a homicidal rampage throughout the galaxy after reaching a technological singularity (or some such) and in fact prove the starchild right?

Similarly with Krogans and Salarians. Did the Krogan eventually start overpopulating their planet and end up killing themselves? Did they start to do more research and conquer other star systems instead? Maybe they find out about the Salarian's attempt to stop the genophage cure and go wipe them out.

This was the biggest failing in the game. You had plenty of decisions to make throughout the game, its just they didn't show what their impact was. There clearly was SOME impact of those decisions in the aftermath of your final choice on the crucible, its just that it wasn't looked into.

[GloatingSwine]

Nothing that the Illusive Man thinks is a good idea is a good idea. My Shepard would never have done it.

Cerberus as a whole is something of a problem in the Mass Effect series. Every game they get bigger, better, and more capable, yet every game we see 100% of everything they ever do either fail or backfire horribly.

[LordShotGun]

There clearly was SOME impact of those decisions in the aftermath of your final choice on the crucible, its just that it wasn't looked into.

This right here is probably the biggest thing that ruined the ending. Sure starkid is an abomination and the whole crucible three endings suck, but even when we are shoehorned into those decisions (not the first time this happens either as psyren pointed out) we get zero feedback on what happens.

ME1 we had the ashley/kaiden thing, the rachni, and the council as the biggest 2 part choices, but we were told to expected these to be addressed in the sequel, and they were.

ME2 we had the collector base and loyal/not loyal for big decisions, and were told to expect these to show up next game.

ME3 we have control, destroy, synthesis, but we have nothing to look forward too, that will explain these choices and the effects.

[Gamerlord]

On the subject of TIM, there's something I don't quite get - if Cerberus was indoctrinated, why did the Reapers attack the Sanctuary instead of simply telling them to stop their research?

TIM, Kai Leng,all his mooks, and presumably most of the rest of Cerberus were indoctrinated. The man in charge of that operation was not. Also, the risk of the Alliance or some other galactic power getting their hands on the data and using it against the Reapers.

[Calemyr]

No, I understand you perfectly; I just disagree.

Fair enough.

I do, however, feel I should point out that your examples are of choices given to you by circumstances, not laid out by someone who's already admitted to being your enemy. Making a snap decision is one thing, just taking what a known enemy says without questioning the logic or the outcomes is something else altogether. I don't mind him making the decision, I mind him not telling off the kid like he has every Reaper he's come across.

[Psyren]

On the subject of TIM, there's something I don't quite get - if Cerberus was indoctrinated, why did the Reapers attack the Sanctuary instead of simply telling them to stop their research?

If Saren is anything to go by, studying indoctrination is a legit use of your time while indoctrinated

Cerberus as a whole is something of a problem in the Mass Effect series. Every game they get bigger, better, and more capable, yet every game we see 100% of everything they ever do either fail or backfire horribly.

They do seem to be taking pages from the Umbrella playbook I could see TIM and Spencer/Wesker being golf-buddies at some snooty country club somewhere.

(Though Cerberus at leasts waits until its scientists finish what they're working on BEFORE getting them killed in spectacular ways, so progress I guess.)

[LordShotGun]

http://kotaku.com/5900991/the-better...ely-advertised


Huh. I really wasn't expecting this to happen. Not that I didn't want it to happen, but this is kinda like wishing that lighting would strike that yappy dog next door and then it actually happening.

[Luzahn]

Interesting. However, I've found it's best to never completely trust Kotaku.

[Avilan the Grey]

They made some pretty specific promises:

Spoiler

Show

Official Mass Effect Website
http://masseffect.com/about/story/

“Experience the beginning, middle, and end of an emotional story unlike any
other, where the decisions you make completely shape your experience
and outcome.”


Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/02/28/ma...3-mac-walters/

“[The presence of the Rachni] has huge consequences in Mass
Effect 3. Even just in the final battle with the Reapers.”


Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://business.financialpost.com/20...all-audiences/

“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think
one of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are
optimal for different people “


Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.computerandvideogames.com...issing-in-me2/

“And, to be honest, you [the fans] are crafting your Mass Effect story as
much as we are anyway.”


Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.360magazine.co.uk/intervi...erent-endings/

“There are many different endings. We wouldn’t do it any other way. How
could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t
say any more than that…”


Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...e-people-angry

“Every decision you've made will impact how things go. The player's also the
architect of what happens."

“You'll get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless
of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide
some answers to these people.”

“Because a lot of these plot threads are concluding and because it's being
brought to a finale, since you were a part of architecting how they
got to how they were, you will definitely sense how they close was
because of the decisions you made and because of the decisions you
didn't make”


Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featur...-effect-3.aspx

“For people who are invested in these characters and the back-story of the
universe and everything, all of these things come to a resolution in
Mass Effect 3. And they are resolved in a way that's very different
based on what you would do in those situations.”


Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://venturebeat.com/2012/03/02/ca...ans-interview/

“Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get
some closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”

“Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the
lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,
being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an
end.”

Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”


Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/featur...ostPageIndex=2

Interviewer: [Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2] “Is that
same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?”
Hudson: “Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to
build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about
eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is
coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot
more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many
decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that
stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings,
where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got
ending A, B, or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and
variety in them.”

“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.”


Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1027650...n_bioware.html

Mass Effect 3 will shake up the player's moral choices more than ever
before, even going so far as allowing the Reapers to win the battle
for Earth, according to BioWare's community representative Mike
Gamble.


In an inteview with NowGamer at Gamescom, we asked if BioWare was taking risks with Mass Effect 3's
plot, including a negative ending in which the Reapers win. Gamble simply said, "Yes". We asked him again to confirm what he had just said and he said, "Yes".


Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer.com/features/122...y_details.html


"Of course you don’t have to play multiplayer, you can choose to play
all the side-quests in single-player and do all that stuff you’ll
still get all the same endings and same information, it’s just a
totally different way of playing"


Casey Hudson (Director)
http://gamescatalyst.com/2012/03/cas...ctive-stories/

“The whole idea of Mass Effect3 is resolving all of the biggest questions, about the Protheons and
the Reapers, and being in the driver's seat to end the galaxy and all
of these big plot lines, to decide what civilizations are going to
live or die: All of these things are answered in Mass Effect 3.”


Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.computerandvideogames.com...y-good/?page=2

“There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And
even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to
some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending
where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things
- it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the
final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who
plays it.”


Ray Muzyka (Co-Founder of Bioware)
http://penny-arcade.com/report/edito...ng-a-trilogy-a

“I just finished an end to end playthrough, for me the ending was the
most satisfying of any game I’ve ever played….the decisions you make in
this game are epic,”

“The team has been planning
for this for years, since the beginning of the Mass Effect franchise.
Largely the same team, most of the same leads have worked on this for
years and years. They’ve thought about [the ending] for years and years.
It’s not something they’ve had to solve in a week or a month even, but
over the course of five or ten years.”

This is the main thing, really. For hardcore fans that have paid attention to every statement, twitter and interview, Bioware outright lied. Repeatedly.

[Derthric]

Theme and Tone shift

There are many reasons why so many, including myself, say that there is a shift in tone and theme. The biggest for me is that the Catalyst paints in such broad strokes, he argues synthetic v organic. Where the game presents us with complex individuals each of varying ideals and sensibilities. Who is right and wrong or moral and immoral is up to us to decide. Its why the previous choices have the weight they do. Because we set the moral frame work, and those around us form the points on the compass. In ME1 Garrus argued for the council while Ash(in my playthrough anyway) was saying think tactically. Which is right, duty or strategy? That's the call. Same with the collector base, TIM is there saying think of what we can do, how we can stop the reapers. And your squad points out the horrors. Which is right, Justice now or Survival later? That's what makes these decisions hard calls, but not forced. The final choice is "kill all synthetics, but it won't be lasting" "Seize control, just cuz" "Impose a new order of life on the galaxy, and ensure peace in a conflict you don't see as inevitable". Not a hard choice a forced one. I have no horse in that race. Because of the failure to establish the final grand conflict that needs resolution, Sythesis seems out of place and IMO abhorrent. Destroy and Control are simply there to be there, they feel out of place. Had they been framed as "Destroy the Reapers but with other consequences, relays etc" and "Control in the sense that TIM wanted, to exercise power" they would have fit better. But instead we are given these choices in the context of the creator v created, which was a theme in only one portion of the story and is broken down beyond simple synth v organic distinctions. Let alone that we could resolve it peacefully is ignored.

I want to stay on this point about the complexity of life. The conversations that Adams has with Chakwas and Donnelly, as well as your coaching of EDI shows that life can't be distilled down to simple definitions. But that is exactly what the Catalyst does. The ending is counter to the thinking the game presents, renegade or paragon, it challenged you to see the little pictures that make up the big picture. It was then your call which was more important. In the end the game dictates the big picture to you.

That ignores anything about origins of conflict or genocide. That these things come from individuality, wants and desires, pride, anger etc. But these are glossed over in favor of Synth v Organic. The ending is deep or resounding it is instead shallow. It is presented with a reverence and an awe that fundamental truth of life would deserve but its little more than one observation from an element that carries no positive story weight, which to this point was your antagonist. A mile wide and an inch deep, is the best way to describe the logic at the end.

Shepard's defiance or lack there of

I get where people come from on this. Its why I linked to the B5 video earlier about Sheridan yelling the Shadows and Vorlons out of the galaxy. Its moments like that where the main character sets the tone that carry resolution. For me its not just about shouting out the catalyst as it currently is, because the way it is currently is presented, you cannot. THAT is the problem. He appears with the answer, it doesn't matter if the answer is that he wants his teddy bear and will go away. Its that he has the answer to begin with.

I go into more detail in a post earlier about the lack of context or even the need for the catalyst.

Spoiler

Show

Context going in:
The stance of the Catalyst is very poorly established prior to its introduction. In fact there was no need for its introduction. At that point there was no great question that needed to be answered. Would we liked to have known why the reapers do what they do? Yes but it's not needed. We weren't charging the conduit to unlock the mysteries of the reapers but rather to stop them. Instead we are presented with addressing a problem that we were never presented with before. This is a failure of establishing the meaning and value of the ending.

The fact that the foundation for the finale was so weak exposes it to further flaws in the coming elements. This is their first mistake, it sets up the thematic shift because it does not having a supporting thread from the previous elements of the games.

I guess what I am saying is that I do not think the endings are conceptually sound.

[VanBuren]

http://kotaku.com/5900991/the-better...ely-advertised


Huh. I really wasn't expecting this to happen. Not that I didn't want it to happen, but this is kinda like wishing that lighting would strike that yappy dog next door and then it actually happening.

Of course the Better Business Bueareu isn't saying that BioWare lied per se, but that they made absolute statements where they shouldn't have, exactly.

The difference is small, but significant IMO.

[kamikasei]

Maybe. At the very least, that bar at the bottom was maxed out and green, as I recall. I don't remember what I had after beating the game the first time in terms of readiness, (~75%? Maybe?), but I've gotten it up to 80-something percent by now. That plus "total vs. effective" could account for my mistake.

Most likely. At 75% readiness your figure if taken as effective assets would work out to 7200-7400 total assets, which is in line with what most people seem to be seeing as the "best" result available. The bar maxes out at about 2800 but you can keep adding assets way pas the end.

[Psyren]

http://kotaku.com/5900991/the-better...ely-advertised


Huh. I really wasn't expecting this to happen. Not that I didn't want it to happen, but this is kinda like wishing that lighting would strike that yappy dog next door and then it actually happening.

All that tells me is you should avoid using words like "completely" in advertising. In other words, nothing new.

[Luzahn]

Most likely. At 75% readiness your figure if taken as effective assets would work out to 7200-7400 total assets, which is in line with what most people seem to be seeing as the "best" result available. The bar maxes out at about 2800 but you can keep adding assets way pas the end.

That's what threw me off the first time. I stopped doing the planet scans because the bar had maxxed.

[Chen]

http://kotaku.com/5900991/the-better...ely-advertised


Huh. I really wasn't expecting this to happen. Not that I didn't want it to happen, but this is kinda like wishing that lighting would strike that yappy dog next door and then it actually happening.

Here's a link to the actual blog post:

http://www.bbb.org/blog/2012/04/mass...tter-or-worse/

Her paragraph explain the "false advertising" is completely contradictory. She says originally it technically does and then later that the statement is open to interpretation. Kataku just pulled the "Technically yes they did" part whereas the rest of the blog post really just dances around the issue.

The two quotes they use:

“Experience the beginning, middle, and end of an emotional story unlike any other, where the decisions you make completely shape your experience and outcome”.

“Along the way, your choices drive powerful outcomes, including relationships with key characters, the fate of entire civilizations, and even radically different ending scenarios.”

Are in fact completely true. Everything you do in the game does effect the outcome. Me talking to person X and saying Y gets them to say Z. If I say A to them instead I get B as an answer.

And the endings are in fact radically different scenarios. The cutscenes are almost identical, but the results are completely different between destroy/synthesis/control.

Its posted on a blog by some random person at the BBB. The reason its not some official thing is because any lawyer (or anyone who can logically argue things reasonably well) would absolutely destroy her statement that those statements are false advertising.

Really the one Bioware statement where they talked about the "A,B,C" endings is the only one that really comes close to false advertising. Like I said before, the lack of knowing what happened to people in the end doesn't change the fact that the decisions did change things.

[Luzahn]

Interesting. However, I've found it's best to never completely trust Kotaku.

[Psyren]

Fantastic gaemz jurnalizm on their part as always...