This is just a reaction post to the uproar against the ending in Bioware's Mass Effect 3. Be forewarned this is an outside looking in kind of reaction as I've only played the ME3 demo and watched the first hour of game play of ME1. So I can not say I'm familiar with the whole story. However based on this spoilery video detailing the top ten plot holes, I can say I might understand the unhappy reaction of the masses. (I will try my best to avoid the obvious puns that I could use in a Catholic blog about mass.)
- Ending a Story
There are expectations for the end of a story that a consumer expects. The main thing is a resolution of all conflicts the story presents. This is something basic that is taught in creative writing. Resolutions need to follow logic in order for them to work. The resolution needs to fall back onto previously established story events. According to the linked video, that doesn't seem to be the case in this particular story since it was a co-authored story. But I'll get to that in the next sections.
You can have a bittersweet, hopeless, sad, or even cautionary ending. Such as the ending in Huxley's A Brave New World or Orwell's 1984.
- Ending a Game
The style of the game's narrative presentation will affect how the player accepts the ending(s). Delivering a narrative through a game is not the same as delivering through a book or film. There is a style of narrative delivery in which the game story is narrated or told directly to the player regardless of their in-game actions. This is called "Linear" in gaming. A linear game is something like the newer Legend of Zelda games or Final Fantasy. You play the game to be told a story.
The ending for a game like this can also be bittersweet, sad, etc.
Non-linear games such as sand box games or games with multiple endings are different in how they are perceived by the player. This is because the player becomes co-author of their experience and the storyline. They play not to be told a story but to in part direct the story.
In both cases reaching the end goal is a reward for in-game challenges. A resolution satisfies our narrative needs.
Ending Games Continued
Okay let me take a mostly linear game Odin Sphere by Vanillaware. This is a story based on an already established story...well...loosely. It's based on Wagner's Ring Cycle Opera. The game allows you to play the story at various points from the perspective of 5 characters. The various endings are affected only by which boss each of the characters decides to fight. There is ONE correct combination based on an in game prophecy which will tell you who should fight who.
In my first play through I mixed up a couple of the boss fights. Each character completed their arc in a satisfying way, however, the world was completely destroyed. I was surprised and a little saddened that despite the effort it took me to complete the game I got a "sad" ending. However, replaying the boss battles in the correct combination allowed me to see the happier ending. So I did not have to completely replay the whole game.
My reaction was still negative toward the sad ending but it was in a way the game "punishing" me the player for not really paying attention to that prophecy element of the story.
BUT this was a linear game. I did not feel "cheated" because I did not co-author any of the characters. I was just following their story, not directing it.
Trilogies
Trilogies are a way of telling a very large story in 3 Acts. Depending on how each ends will satisfy our following of this long journey.
For example let's look at Lord of the Rings. I will use the films as examples because it's been over a decade since I read the novels and I can not quite remember where each left off in the story.
The first film Fellowship of the Ring follows a story to a satisfying and hopeful end. We are introduced to the status quo, the characters, the conflict and the goal. The ending of the film while a little sad holds promise of more adventure. It's hopeful.
The second film continues on from the darker side of the first film and while it ends with a victorious battle there are still unresolved ends and a little less hope. It's harder to watch because we don't have that serene, happy beginning which is true of most "middle" sections of a trilogy.
The Return of the King starts dark but brings us to a happy resolution. All the ends are tied, the heroes win, we feel satisfied.
It is also heavily based on the Hero's Journey/Mono-myth story format which seems to satisfy some human desire within us. (It's all in the Bible too!)
- Reaction
According to the linked video, there are many plot-holes that upset players and seemed to betray story logic. The whole experience over 3 games seems disregarded which means the experience the player co-authored is disregarded.
It was not like the linear game experience where if you made "wrong" choices you get the bad ending.
Apparently there was also developer promises for endings that were not shoehorned in or allowed the player only flavors of the same ending. These promises were not kept.
Is the reaction appropriate? Campaigns demanding a better ending from the developer?
Personally I think that because the developer Bioware is very connected to fans that they have let down their customers. They probably could never satisfy all fans, but since a majority is so disenchanted then there is some incentive to comply with the desire for better endings.
From what I see in the ending I have a feeling I can guess what kind of ending they wanted to give. But it seems to try and fail to fit a player's experience into a singular ending. They wanted to give a sense of the gravity of sacrifice.
This was done a bit more elegantly in a previous Bioware title Dragon Age: Origins. However that was one game, not the finale of a trilogy.
Summary
Games like other mediums can offer lessons in sacrifice and offer a bittersweet ending. My Warden in Dragon Age died at the end of my first playthrough. Which upset me at first but then it really got me thinking that sacrifice IS hard and upsetting because there is no earthly reward. I could have let someone else die in my place or performed dark magic to save my character but I elected that based on everything that happened to my character in the story she would do the Jesus thing and die for everyone.
Since it is Lent and sacrifice is a big part of it, we like to see appropriate reward for it. Like Jesus dying for our sins reaps us everlasting life. Pretty awesome right? I think Mass Effect wanted an ending LIKE that, where the hero's sacrifice allows everyone to live. But did that fit with the rest of the set up? In a game where you can be a selfish jerk does it make sense to have a last minute change of heart? Feels forced right?
In any case, I can understand where the unhappiness comes from.I can understand an author's desire to really drill in the gravity of sacrifice with the death of the trilogy's hero.
But that's my take on it.
EDIT: There was a fairly well thought out vlog on the subject matter of changing the ending of release games and ART. It basically claimed that this outrage is part of games "growing up" as an art. As a work of interactive literature or art it is beneficial to developers to re-work it, such as films having a Director's Cut.
It was a well thought out vlog but I'm hesitant to post it here because it was also a bit crass.
