People often overlook the fact that the word 'fan' is a modified version of fanatic, and let's face it - fanatics are a little scary. If you need proof of concept jump over to Bioware's fan forums for Mass Effect 3 - the company's latest release. Or you could check out the comments on any Bioware-related facebook site or twitter account. Or you could google Mass Effect 3 and see what you come across. It's not pretty. Fans are...upset.
Considering that game critics seem to unilaterally agree that Mass Effect 3 was all kinds of great, the negative fan reaction seems to be a little out of place. Some people will continue to argue that the negative comments are 'trolls' or the opinions of a very small, but very angry contingent and they might be right. But I doubt it - because I played the game. I even managed a second playthrough of ME3. I was desperate to find an alternative to that ending.
After devoting a frankly unhealthy number of hours to exploring all that the series has to offer and gleefully looking forward to the progression of the Mass Effect story, I am unlikely to play through ME3 again. Or ME1 and 2 for that matter. I won't be recommending ME3 or the series at large to anyone, and the upcoming movie is a write off for me. Admittedly this is an overly dramatic reation to 20 minutes of story/gaming tacked onto the end of a series, but keep in mind - I'm a fanatic. I'm entitled to my share of crazy.
The fact that the ending seemed to be 'tacked' on is part of my problem with the game. If ME3 ended (roughly) 20 minutes earlier I wouldn't be upset at all. I'd be sad. And a bit miffed about the lack of choice or variety in the endings - but it would have been a great ending to a fantastic story. Not all stories need happy endings. And frankly, since life doesn't have a lot of those, tragedy can lend realism to a narrative when handled well. Unfortunately in the end Mass Effect 3 does not handle any of these elemtnts well; not the tragedy, not the choice and especially not the crafting of narrative.
David Gaider, a senior writer at Bioware recently posted some advice for aspiring writers in Bioware's very own blog - a list of do and don'ts to keep in mind when crafting a compelling narrative. He said, "Sometimes it was frustrating. More than once, after finishing a story, I was tempted to immediately email the entrant and tell them “You were doing so well, it was brilliant, and then you…”.
After a few days of reflection and no small amount of rage, the best way I can find to express my dissatisfaction is to reflect Gaider's position back at the company he works for. Because that's how I feel. I feel like the ME3 devs were doing so well. It was brilliant. And then they....well they did a lot of things I'm not thrilled with.
What should be an exciting conclusion feels incredibly disconnected from the rest of the series. The attempt at creating atmosphere by slowing time felt forced and broke immersion instead of intensifying it.
They added a new character and labelled him the big bad, without sufficient characterization, motivation or relevant prior referencing to make the character or his role believable. The existance of this character also felt like it rendered the ME1 storyline moot.
In interacting with this new character Shepard's reputation for pushing the envelope, investigating options and seeking alternatives is completely thrown out the window. There are no arguments, no persuasive dialogue options, not even the ability to ask the new character to repeat himself if you missed something. So both the basic characterization of the game protagonist and a major game mechanic are abandoned for the entire conclusion.
There is a distinct lack of closure for the game and the series at large. Shepard dies... or not - one choice allows an injured, unarmored Shepard to somehow survive an explosion that sent the Normandy into early retirement. The Mass Relays are destroyed, the Normandy's crew (or some of her crew, particularly the ones who, as part of your ground team should be dead on earth) are stranded on some planet in some far off star system and the Reapers' cycle is ended, or maybe paused or... something. But what really happens? In the end we don't have enough solid information to know. Too much is left unexplained and unexplored for the gamer to really make an educated guess.What did Shepard gain with all of the struggle? With his/her death?
In what feels like the final insult to fans who have eagerly followed the series, no matter what your Shepard has accomplished, no matter what choices you have made or how many allies or resources you acquire, you seem to be rewarded with one of three possible cut scenes. I know, I know....they say there are 16 endings. But really those endings boil down to a choice between three options. Three cutscenes. Ok, one cutscene with a bit of color editing. Do you want your explosion to be fire orange, biotic blue or slime green?
The results of each choice may be very different, but it doesn't feel that way. Not as things stand. Considering the perceived promises made to fans around choice and closure for the series, ME3 fails to deliver a satisfying ending.
I also have issues that don't revolve around the ending. But they can wait.
A final word for those who are baffled that the ending of one game has so tainted the entire series for some: Imagine someone is telling a joke. The set up and delivery are great. You're completely drawn in. But in the end they fumble the punchline. Then the great set up is pretty irrelevant, right? The conclusion, the punchline is what makes everything else make sense. It's the reason you sit through the set up and it validates the journey. I don't feel validated. And apparently, I'm not alone.
