on the end of Mass Effect and shifting fandom perspectives

[xparrot]

I've been thinking more about the end of the Mass Effect trilogy, and by the fan reactions to it that I've encountered online as I look up vids and fanart. (Among other things, I found these essays, from a fan who uncompromisingly loved the original endings even pre-extended cut, a fascinating read. This post isn't anywhere near as thought-out or high-concept, and the way I fan is quite different, but it does echo some of the ideas mentioned in those.) My reaction was somewhat different than most of my friends, for a couple reasons. For one, I played the extended cut ending first off, which definitely, as my brother says, reduces the sting. I also had the benefit of knowing the ending was widely panned, and was braced for it to be awful. So it actually wasn't as bad as I expected it to be from the first.

And the more I consider it, the more I think I don't actually dislike it at all. I'm still not sure I like it; I'm probably always going to engage with it with a bit of denial. And I think there were ways they could've made it more palatable, without completely compromising the story's integrity.

On the other hand, this is one of those cases in which there was no way to satisfy the entire fanbase. That's always true with any story like this - when your audience is this big, and this emotionally engaged in a story, it's categorically impossible to make an ending which will satisfy everyone. And Mass Effect, thanks to its medium, is an even greater challenge than usual, because it's not just a question of coming up with one appropriate ending, but with multiple endings, that all are appropriate to the story.

Ironically, this seems to be the biggest problem some players had with the ending - that there wasn't a single ending, or at least, that there wasn't a single 'right' ending. And a lot of fans seem to really want there to be. Which for me...I'm really torn. On the one hand, a single super-happy everybody-lives ending would've been fun - I loved all these characters and their universe by the end; of course I wanted to see them go on! And it would've allowed for a sequel, easily enough.

On the other hand, one of the most interesting aspects of Mass Effect is how the story changes depending on your decisions - and there are very few 'right' or 'wrong' decisions in the game. There are actions you can take which or more or less ethically defensible, but for most of the bigger questions, the ethics are incredibly complicated, without clear right answers. And the game supports this by not punishing you for the decisions you make - while at the same time, those decisions will change your game. Depending on whether you let Ashley or Kaidan die, you get completely different stories and romance options. If you kill Wrex on Virmire, you are deprived his company for the rest of the games - but it's also the only way Mordin can survive ME3. On the other hand, if Mordin dies on you in ME2, you can still save the krogan (and get some interesting dialogue about krogan from Mordin's replacement.) If you don't romance Garrus in ME2 then you can't romance him in ME3, which...well, that one is just a tragedy however you look at it :P

This interactive, adaptive storytelling is one of the highlights of the ME games - that I could decide based on what I felt was the best thing for my Shepard to do under the circumstances, confident that my choice wouldn't ruin the story, even if it changed it. And having a single 'right' ending would've spoiled that however it was done. Either it would've been a last-minute decision - in which case you could just reload and try again until you got the 'right' answer. Or it would've been a difficult-to-achieve possibility, something in which you had to get a whole number of variables correct throughout the game or games - which would've guided all the rest of your gameplay, would've constrained your decision-making to a specific 'correct' track, and punished you for screwing it up.

The games actually do something like this; certain options are only available to you if you fulfill certain requirements. The most major of these is probably the quarian-geth conflict. I resolved that one peacefully, with both the quarian and geth surviving - I didn't find out until after I finished the games that this option isn't available to everyone, but depends on decisions made in ME2 and ME3. Otherwise you have to chose one or the other, at the cost of a teammate either way. (Well, even in the peace-making, you sort of lose Legion; but their essence is preserved in the other geth.) But even then, that's not an absolutely right-or-wrong; the story continues on regardless, and you'll get scenes you wouldn't otherwise, depending on what happens.

And that's maybe the biggest challenge of any ending of Mass Effect - because it is the ending. When the entire storytelling mechanism is predicated on the player's decisions and seeing what happens afterwards - the ending is going to be a let-down no matter what, because no matter what it does, sooner or later you reach the last decision, the last time the player actually interacts with the game. Past that point, the adaptive story becomes linear. A cinematic cut-scene, however epic, is going to be a letdown after the emotional engagement of the interactive game.

For me it would've been an even bigger let-down, to go through the end, watch the final scenes to close the story, and then find out that I made the wrong decision - that I should just reload and try again, to see the better ending, the 'right' ending. After the freedom of decisions in the rest of the games, it would've been obnoxious to have your very last decision be ruled this way.

So the designers made a different decision - to offer the player multiple endings, but have none of those endings be clearly 'right' or 'wrong'; each have positive and negative aspects. Their execution of this concept is arguable. One of the frustrations a lot of players had is that the original version of the ending, there is very little obvious difference - the brother's major complaint was that, even though plot-wise the endings are drastically different, in terms of what you actually saw, the main thing that changed was the color of light. The extended cut mitigates this somewhat, by showing a few different scenes from different perspectives (of which I find the most effective the battlefield scene, in which what happens with the husks is strikingly different for all three options, and I think appropriate for all) and having the different narrators. At the same time if you watch all three endings together, the reuse of a lot of shots between them still leaves them feeling a bit too similar. (In some ways I might prefer Synthesis just because the shots are noticeably altered from the other two.)

I also think there's an issue with how the endings are presented - to have the Catalyst/starchild brat just tell you what your options are, and all Shepard can do is say 'yes' or 'no', is really frustrating and also OOC for Shepard, who is usually so good at pulling crazy solutions out of their ass. It would've been mechanically identical but more satisfying if Shepard had been the one to challenge the Catalyst, to say, "I'm going to do this!" and have the Catalyst counter with the ramifications and maybe try to stop you.

But the concept itself, of having multiple endings with a blend of positive and negative outcomes, I think is absolutely appropriate to the games, and the only way they really could have ended.

So it interests me that a lot of fans get into passionate arguments, not over the quality of the endings in general or which ending they personally preferred, but about which ending is the 'right' one. In particular there are a number of debates online about how the Destroy ending is the only right ending, and that anyone who picked another ending is morally bankrupt and possibly brain-damaged (direct quotes! Ahh, internet debates. I haven't seen yet the one explaining how Synthesis is what Hitler would've done, but I'm sure it's out there somewhere...) My favorite of these arguments was the commenter insisting that Destroy is obviously right because EDI and the geth "are only robots in the end", and aren't real or alive. Which, as someone else pointed out, really made me wonder what the heck game they were playing...

There was also the Indoctrination Theory which went around before the extended cut DLC was released - the basic idea being that the Reapers were gradually attempting to indoctrinate Shepard throughout the games, and that the end of the game, from when Shepard enters the beam to the Citadel, is all in Shepard's head, as the Reapers' final ploy to complete indoctrination. According to the theory, the right answer was either not to choose at all (which is apparently why they made the Refuse ending, to counter this) or else Destroy. Supposedly the other two options were both representative of indoctrination - Control is how the Illusive Man was indoctrinated, and Synthesis is somehow related to Saren's indoctrination (I don't get this one, Saren was getting borg-i-fied, but he thought the endgame was obedience, not merging?) It's a fascinating re-interpretation of canon, but it doesn't make much sense (why would the Reapers actually allow you to go through with Destroy?) and its adherents often use it to justify Destroy as, again, the right answer.

I find this especially intriguing because to me, when I encountered it, Destroy seemed like the worst ending of all those offered. Partly because my Shepard was team first above all, so any solution that killed EDI and Legion's legacy in the geth, I couldn't imagine my Shepard taking. And part of it was because, while it seems like for a lot of players the main objective was to destroy the Reapers - I never thought of it like that; I always thought my goal was saving the galaxy. And after saving the rachni queen, and making peace between the geth and the quarians, not to mention the turians and krogan - Garrus jokes at one point that after that, all Shepard has to do is make peace with the Reapers and they'll be nominated for sainthood - and that's seriously what I wanted to do!

There's also the whole matter that the Reapers are in fact reaping - they're preserving, albeit in some esoteric unexplained way, the civilizations they end. So if you destroy them, you're destroying some of the last remnants of countless peoples going back millions or billions of years.

But all of these arguments don't invalidate the Destroy ending, or make it wrong. It is the most assured way to end the Reaper threat, and preserves the galaxy in closest to its original form. Including Shepard - and I think was it very deliberately chosen as the ending that Shepard survives, but I don't think that was to show it was the right ending, but rather was intended to balance it. Especially with the extended cut, the other two endings both seem more positive than Destroy, for the rest of the galaxy if not for Shepard.

And conversely, while I chose the Synthesis ending myself, it seems like generally speaking it's the least favorite ending, and a lot of fans actively hate it, for being deus ex machina, or because they think it's brainwashing everyone/turning the whole galaxy into a geth-like collective, or for just not making sense. I don't buy the first two arguments (it's no more deus-ex than the other two; and even in the original non-extended ending Joker and EDI's interaction is pretty obviously between individuals.) As for not making sense, as a fanficcer I enjoy the open-ended-ness of it. There's also an argument that it's altering the DNA of everyone in the galaxy without their consent, which is an entirely valid point - especially because you're given no clue what the extent or effect of the modification will be. If Shepard is being used as the model - Shepard was resurrected by Cerberus as partially synthetic, and yet seems to be fundamentally the same person. But it's not clear whether it'll work like that or not - and for that matter, we only see Shepard live, what, a year or so after their resurrection, so long-term consequences wouldn't have shown up. And the implications of EDI's voiceover is that Synthesis is bringing about, or at least accelerating, the technological singularity - after which life as we know it ceases and what replaces it is unimaginable. Synthesis is terrifying in that whatever it means, it's the biggest change of any of the endings (and has the glowing-green still shots to prove it!) - and frustrating in that those changes are so vague.

Ironically, Control is probably the 'happiest' ending, or at least has the possibility to be. All the synthetics live, the Reapers' reapings are preserved, and Shepard survives in a manner of speaking - it's the only extended cut end in which Shepard gets the voice-over. Or, well, Reaper!Shepard, but Reaper!Shepard sounds awesome, and also, if that much of Shepard is still around - it's Shepard. My money's on them, over the Reapers! And yet Control is the ending that gets the least discussion. Maybe because I think it's the hardest to justify with most Shepards - because it's pretty much agreeing with the Illusive Man, and while some Shepards probably do, I suspect the majority don't. My Shepard definitely didn't have the ego to try it. It's a shame, though, I'd rather like to see more fanworks done with it (all right, I just want the fic that Shepard ASSUMES DIRECT CONTROL to make out with their love interest :P) Or this fan comic XDXDXD

I do think the ending is flawed, that there were other ways they could have gone - more options that Shepard survives, for one; after playing a character for so long, it's pretty brutal to lose them. Especially since they kill Anderson, too, which is really gratuitous - the death of the mentor is pretty classic, but usually they die so the hero lives. Or else the hero can sacrifice to save them. Having both die is just piling it on and I really don't get the dramatic necessity - maybe so you think Shepard might make it out?

And I found the conversation with the Catalyst disappointing - no more than I expected, it's a limit of storytelling, but one that always frustrates. It's common to have all-powerful beings talk about how they and their motives are so beyond mortal ken that it's useless to try to talk or explain anything to you - and invariably when the explanation does finally come out, it's something so simple it would have taken all of ten seconds to explain. Reapers cull organic life before organic life can create synthetic life that will destroy it - it's not that difficult to say, guys! (The writer of ME2 talks here about some of the ideas for the Reapers' motives they were tossing around when they were writing the second game - he left before writing ME3, and the idea was vague and maybe wouldn't have worked, but it had to do with dark energy - that organics using biotics caused dark energy reactions that were hastening the end of the universe, so the Reapers were meant to stop organic civilizations from progressing that far. I would've really liked that twist, that the Reapers were actually trying to save the universe...!)

For me, the ending I could've wished for would've come in multiples, but would've had more engagement from Shepard, and more chance for Shepard to survive. The ultimate Paragon and Renegade choices - Renegade would've Kirk'ed the shit out of the Reapers, convinced them their whole purpose was flawed as they're the ones provoking organics to kill synthetics and made them self-destruct; and Paragon would've shown them that there could never be peace if they never give organics time to adapt to living with synthetics, and convince them to take this cycle off, see where we end up in another fifty thousand years.

But while I would have preferred something different, I find myself accepting how it actually did end. And a lot of it is from seeing the fan reaction. I think that for all its flaws, having ends that are this controversial, with people arguing over what the 'best' or 'right' ending is, is a sign that they did something right. It's complicated - and whatever else they got wrong, that's definitely what Mass Effect's ending should be.

I also do agree with what everyone else says - no matter how annoying or frustrating the end might be, the games are still totally worth playing. Which is one of the highest praises a story can get - that the journey is absolutely worth the destination.

Comments

[sheliana.livejournal.com]

I have so many thoughts and feelings regarding the endings that I will not even start, but I have a theory that the fandom's negative reaction to Synthesis is very similar to Liara-hate (which is also pretty common in fandom). Liara as a character is perceived as Creators' Pet (she gets more content than any other romantic interest, a DLC all to herself, etc), which annoys many fans, especially those who feel that their favorites were neglected in favor of Liara. Likewise, Synthesis is perceived as the 'perfect' ending where nobody dies (except for Shepard), everyone is happy, enlightened, and friends with the Reapers (despite the devastation the Reapers had unleashed), and basically 'the scar did not hurt anymore, and all was well.:)) Given how hostile the fandom was to Bioware after the the whole endings debacle, it's not susprising fans became prone to aggressively rejecting the options that the developers 'pushed' at them as the perfect ones. (Whether the developers really pushed anything is debatable, but that's what the fandom felt at the time.)
There's also the fact that in some pre-ME3 interviews the devs *promised* multiple endings that would take into account the various choices players had made in the course of the three games. What the fans got (in the original pre-EC endings) was the complete opposite of what they had been promised, hence the extreme hostility and tendency to reject everything that Bioware supposedly hinted at as being the 'correct' choice. (Again, a matter of opinion, but a *lot* of fans felt this way, and to this day many expect if there ever is a canon ending, it's going to be Synthesis.) I think there was also an interview where one of the devs said that Synthesis was inevitable even if you chose Destroy/Control, it would just take a little longer for the galaxy to get there, which also led to fans feeling deceived because ultimately their choices did not matter.

Also, in many fans' view, Synthesis became symbolic of the flaws of all the endings put together - Synthesis brings about the most massive change to the galaxy that one could imagine, but Shepard does not think to question the Starchild further, or demand more explanation, or ask about the consequences, etc. Shepard just blindly goes along with it. The same is true of the other endings, but it's Synthesis that's the most...extreme, the most unexpected and shocking one. So Shepard not grilling the Starchild on the subject of Synthesis seems insane, yet that's what happens in the original endings.
Anyway, this is where I think the extreme dislike of Synthesis/devotion to Destroy comes from. It was very much an 'us vs them' mentality in the fandom (with "them" being Bioware, of course), and picking Destroy was the only way fandom felt it could challenge the devs (if Refusal led to a more positive outcome, I'm 100%sure most of the fandom would have chosen it without second thought). I think the reaction to Synthesis is still colored by that hostility, regardless of the flaws/merits this ending has.
Similarly, ME3 as a whole is picked apart and criticised much more than the previous games in the series - it's the same Synthesis/Liara syndrome. Fandom... it's like a petulant child sometimes. (That's not to say that there are no perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike Synthesis/prefer Destroy. I'm only talking about those fans who are determined to make everyone who doesn't choose Destroy feel bad.)

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Oh, yeah, my feelings on the ending are decidedly mixed, and very much colored by how I approached it, as well as the fandom reaction to it. I think if I'd played the games as they came out, and got the non-extended ending without any spoilers or being told it was disappointing, I would have reacted quite differently to it. As it is, reading the fandom's initial negative reactions has made me more defensive about it than I would be otherwise...

The fandom backlash against Synthesis because they believed Synthesis was the writers' preference - that makes a lot of sense! Very much like the SGA fandom's reaction against Keller and McKay/Keller, which had a number of causes, but Keller being perceived as the writers' darling definitely didn't help her case. And I was on the other side of that one, so yeah, I can see where it comes from.

It is odd to me that people saw picking the Destroy ending as sticking it to the writers, when by video-game logic Destroy-with-Shepard-living is the best ending, since it's the hardest to attain, score-wise. I also find it ironic that the die-hard Destroy supporters think of it as the ending that denies indoctrination and defies the Reapers, when to me it felt like the ending that most gives in to them - committing a smaller-scale genocide to prevent a larger-scale genocide is the exact logic the Reapers were operating under...

But at the same time, yeah, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to dislike Synthesis (and fwiw I actually think ethically speaking, Control is the best choice, it's just really dangerous...!) And Destroy is the easiest way to preserve status quo - it doesn't surprise me that it's the most-ficced ending (at least on AO3) and purely from the character/team/shipper-fan standpoint, it's good that there's at least one ending that Shepard canonically survives. And it does seem like the fandom has cooled down - at least in the comments in my posts, people have been talking about the ending they chose without getting militant about it.

Sigh, though, that ME3 is the most picked-apart game, when for me despite its flaws it was easily the best game in the series (oh well, I'm getting the feeling I should avoid ME fandom in general and just stick to the sane people here on lj. ^^; Though really if I were going to be getting into arguments I'd probably be most prone to defending the Mako, anyone who doesn't love that crazy moonbuggy is just wrong! :P)

[sheliana.livejournal.com]

I admit I'm a Destroyer, and I have my reasons for picking that ending (some of those are even articulated in your post!), but to be honest, I think all three endings are equally unethical (for different reasons) and demand Shepard to do things that should be completely unacceptable, so... Basically, I agree with you that the Destroy supporters are not in any position to throw stones! Besides, having recently joined a fandom in which my favorite pairing is widely disliked, I really sympathize with fans who don't march in lockstep with the prevailing opinions.:) Also, I was very tempted to pick Synthesis just for its cut-scenes/music - they're the best! (EDI's "I'm alive, and I am not alone" always makes me tear up!)

As far as I'm concerned, there is no right or wrong ending. I'm pretty sure that if the endings had originally been as they are now (with the Extended Cut), the reaction to them would have been much more balanced. People were pissed about the pre-EC endings for such a long time, and the shitstorm was probably the biggest I' d ever seen in any fandom.

I agree with you on ME3! It's definitely my favorite in the series, for its focus on character development/bonding alone! Shepard is also so much more human in this game, showing genuine weakness and desperation for the first time, and it makes her so appealing and easy to relate to.

You're right that the ME fadnom has cooled down, and I'm not sure you should avoid it... Most of the ME people on Tumblr seem pretty sane, and I haven't seen a single wank for a very long time. (Now the Dragon Age fandom is a different mater entirely. It's honestly horrible!)

[doctorskuld.livejournal.com]

As someone who played the original ending and felt incredibly annoyed at it, and yeah, I felt that it was because in the end all the choices and story decisions that I made were completely nullified. One of the original Reaper arguments was that the organics would never be able to co-exist with the synthetics, and I was pretty peeved that after all that effort I made to get the Geth on my side and make sure that Quarians made peace with them...yeah, it felt pretty pointless.

Also, the original ending has the all the Mass Relays being destroyed, which we felt was really problematic for galactic society as a whole.

The fact that you've had a really good reaction to the new ending is really heartening for me, maybe Naye won't hate it either and I'll get over the bitterness that I felt when I finished. D:

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Ahahah 'Destroyer' cracks me up. Especially since Controller and Synthesizer are proper words, too, so the 'party names' are just right there!

Owww, I sympathize with fanning on a disliked pairing, I've been there, it's never fun. (except sometimes in how fans of that pairing will stick together, if you can find the right group it can be nice!) I'm pleased that even if I'm on the wrong side of the fandom in terms of the ending, Shep/Garrus is popular. :D

I admit, I'm curious if Destroy would still be the most popular ending choice (--I could be wrong but it seems like it is? are there any actual stats on these things?) if it didn't include the possibility of Shepard living - I don't think that's the only factor in peoples' decisions, but I'm sure it is one. At least for me, it's the only reason I'd consider Destroy. And I'm sure that one of the reasons most of the post-game fic I've seen is post-Destroy is because it's the easiest way to get a happy ending for your Shepard pairing.

I am glad I missed the Ending Wars, and am only viewing them historically now...and ME3, yesssss, Shepard's character gets so much more developed, her vulnerability which makes her all the stronger - because she's not doing things with no doubts, but doing them despite it, because someone has to. Everyone gets more developed - getting to see your team really interact, so it's not just about how they all love Shepard but how they also care about each other, waaaah love it! And also the galaxy coming together, I am a sucker for that plot and it's done so well.

Aww, yeah, I've heard terrible things about DA fandom, sorry you're caught up in that (after being in Welcome to Night Vale fandom, I sympathize!) I'm rather glad ME is closed-canon and out for long enough that the fervor has died down (...at least for now, wonder what ME4's release will do...)

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

I am soooo curious what Naye is going to think! Since my reaction to the end was very colored by being told it was awful and I would hate it - so when I actually reached it, my main thought was, huh, that wasn't nearly as bad as I was expecting. I still wouldn't say I actually liked it, I do feel it's a letdown compared to the rest of the game - and some of that is the rest of ME3 is SO GOOD, you get so caught up in it that you're not ready for it to end. And even with the extended cut, it's missing the catharsis of a dramatic tense battle and victory. Which I think was intentional, that they didn't want it to end like you expect a video game to end, but I'm torn over how I feel about that as a player, even if I kind of admire the storytelling.

Destroying the Mass Relays is a big change, too, yeah - it's the only thing the EC actually alters, rather than just explaining/doubling down on the original ending. It was what most annoyed the brother about the original end, and while I see why they did it thematically (you're supposed to be ending the Reaper threat, whether by destruction, repurposing, or transformation; and the Mass Relays are part of the Reaper threat) it just makes the outlook so bleak...I'm glad they changed it.

And then, part of my reaction was pure fangirl-denial - with all the endings, I was like, y'know, it's really not that difficult to bring Shepard back...! Because I have this problem wherein I can appreciate stories that end on more tragic or sad notes; but in my head I'm always secretly writing the super-happy ending. And ME's end is open-ended enough to make that easier than most...

[sheliana.livejournal.com]

The worst thing about fanning on something unpopular is that there's not much fic to be found (and what can be found is usually...not good) So I really sympathize with regards to Synthesis not being as popular as Destroy.:(

Originally it was next to impossible to get the Shepard lives ending if you did not play the ME3 multiplayer. This one *another* reason people were angry (as if there weren't enough reasons already!) But now getting Shepard to live is very easy, and I'm sure it's a factor for many people. Not for me, though. I'm so used to unfriendly canons that I would have no problem pretending that Shepard survived, I don't really need to see it canonically!:) There are ME stats(http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/122880-See-How-Your-Mass-Effect-Choices-Compare-to-Everyone-Elses) on the popularity of various decisions, buas far as I know, there's no data on the endings. I think there was a poll on the Bioware Social Network forums that showed Destroy was the most popular one, but it was a long time ago, and I have no idea if things have changed.

I think you'd enjoy the Dragon Age games (if not the fandom) - there's a lot more interaction between your party members, and the relationships between them are even more developed and complex than what you see in ME3. Characters banter with each other *all the time*, and form bonds with each other independently from the player. Dragon Age: Inquisition is particularly good in this respect: it's like a massive Citadel DLC set in fantasy-land!

[sheliana.livejournal.com]

As per ME own lore, destroying a Mass Relay means destroying the entire star system it is located in. The original endings, all three of them, led to the destruction of most life in the galaxy.:) So... I'm also glad they changed it!

[sheliana.livejournal.com]

This is unrelated to the conversation, but I've just remembered that Patrick Weekes, the writer of Tali and Mordin's characters and the Tuchanka/Rannoch story arcs, used to write fanfiction for Highlander, Stargate and Farscape, by his own admission! It's no wonder Tali turned out to be a fangirl.:)

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Hee, that's awesome - and yeah, makes sense! That bit with Tali on the Citadel felt like it was written by a fan - the way she recites factoids, and also that she's going back to a favorite childhood show for comfort, and to share it with a friend, that's such a fan thing to do, in the best of ways. :)

[xparrot.livejournal.com]

Ahhh maybe they forgot that? Or else if the Mass Relays got destroyed by the Crucible, with their energies being directed, it wouldn't have that same effect? Because I can't imagine that the original ending meant for Earth, Palaven, etc, to all be destroyed! ^^;;;

(also, I should have more fic for you by the end of the weekend, this one bit is being a pain but I'm hopefully working through it! :P)