Switch Lights

The lights are on

What's Happening

Why Changing The Mass Effect 3 Ending Is A Mistake

Response to the end of Mass Effect 3 has been volatile to say the least. As with all games, players are free to love or hate the ending for whatever reasons they see fit – but the demand from angry fans for a new ending is unprecedented. BioWare complying with these demands, in some form or another, is also unprecedented, and is a goodwill tactic I believe will likely backfire. Not just in the sense that BioWare may compromise its artistic integrity to appease a disgruntled section of its fan base. I think it will blow up in the face of gamers.

Warning: There are major Mass Effect 3 spoilers ahead.

The initial shock and anger that erupted on the Internet in the days following the release of Mass Effect 3 has given way to more thoughtful discussions of the trilogy's finale. In addition to innumerous critical dissections from fans and detractors alike, we've also seen gamers interpret the endings in many different ways. These different interpretations are possible because the endings are fundamentally ambiguous. The final minutes task you with making a choice that will potentially affect the Mass Effect universe for thousands of years to come. Rather than trying to summarize the ramifications of your choice like the ending of a Choose Your Own Adventure novel ("You destroyed all sentient life in the galaxy, but your offspring will continue the cycle. Better luck next time."), BioWare left each of the three final sequences open-ended, while still conveying the basics: The Reapers leave, transform, or explode, your beloved crew survives, and Shepard goes down in a blaze of glory (or doesn't?). The rest remains unwritten, and is left for you to ponder, dissect, and discuss.

As we have already seen, this ambiguity has given birth to some radically different interpretations. The most popular alternate take on Mass Effect 3's ending is the indoctrination theory, which suggests that the entire final sequence takes place in Shepard's mind as he or she fights against the influence of the Reapers. While I don't believe this is the "true" ending, I do believe those final moments are open-ended enough to make it a possibility, and that the details BioWare included intentionally or otherwise make it a theory worth considering. In that sense, it's not a matter of whether it's the "true" ending – it's simply not my ending. The people who believe the indoctrination theory are 100-percent convinced of their beliefs and are just as satisfied with their choice as I am of mine.

Now, thanks to the backlash of fans, that could change. If BioWare manipulates or further adds to the endings, the company runs the risk of negating the analyses and conclusions that gamers have already come to. What if the new downloadable content disproves the indoctrination theory? Those who see a deeper meaning in the minutiae of Shepard's final stand will be let down. What if the new content supports the theory even further? Fans who believed they already understood the ending and had accepted it will feel cheated.

Whether or not the final sequence takes place in Shepard's mind isn't the only issue that's at stake. Players made their fateful final decision based on the evidence they had at the time, and the conclusions – no matter how sparse or recycled their variations may be – also carefully support a variety of interpretations.

At the end of the game I chose the "green" option, synthesizing all organic and synthetic life based on the rationale that it was the one true way to end the cycle of violence. My fellow editor Jeff Cork opposed the green ending on the grounds that merging organics and synthetics is essentially the process that created the husks. Instead, he chose the red option: To wipe out all synthetic life from the galaxy. Who was right?

According to the endings as they are now, both of us. You can call that a copout on the part of BioWare, but based on what I saw, my ending is a happy one. For Cork, the red ending is still the right choice.

But what if BioWare adds something to the green ending to bolster Cork's view, and it turns out I really did subject all life in the Universe to some sort of synthetic enslavement? Conversely, what if the extra content reinforces my decision, and Cork wiped out the entire geth species for nothing? Either way, BioWare would be alienating players who thought they were making the right decisions – as well as avoiding the wrong decisions – only to be told otherwise by new content that wasn't originally meant to be canon. If, on the other hand, the new scenes don't alter the final decision in any significant way, it will only further enrage the players who were demanding a new ending. Even something seemingly innocuous like explaining how your crew ended up back on the Normandy could disillusion some players, as proponents of the indoctrination theory point to it as evidence of the finale's dreamlike state.

To reiterate: I don't blame anyone who didn't like the ending of Mass Effect 3. People can no more control their emotional response to something than they can control someone else's reaction to the same event. Players who hated the ending have a right to be upset. They don't, however, have the right to demand a new ending. By potentially changing the ending – even if that just means answering questions BioWare originally intended to leave unanswered – the developer stands to upset the gamers who are already happy with how their multi-year adventure played out.

And those players do exist. The comments section in our Spoiled! episode for Mass Effect 3 contains a significant amount of players who support and are pleased with the game's ending (even if they are in the minority). Whether they see hints of a larger conspiracy, are content with the sacrifices they made, or have their own ideas of what their actions mean for the Mass Effect universe, BioWare's pledge to "answer the questions" and provide more clarity for the final sequence may contain answers those players don't want to hear. Moviegoers crucified George Lucas for changing elements of the Star Wars trilogy that clashed with the established story fans already knew. Will BioWare make the same mistake? We'll find out when the developer provides further information on its "content initiatives" this April.

Email the author , or follow on , , and .

Comments
  • Mod
    I addressed this in a few of my earlier blogs! Check them out! Great read though.

    Oh and this didn't occur to me until just now but...FIRST!!! BAM!!!
  • "Players who hated the ending have a right to be upset."

    Glad someone who could attract more attention said it. There are different kinds of "haters" on the ME3 ending, there are those who take it too far and those who simply dislike it.

    We're gonna have to get used to buying our endings since gamers feel as if they have no right to complain or not buy DLC because they think DLC is a normal process in video games.

    Don't believe me? Asura's Wrath is releasing 5 DLC "True ending" episodes and its probably gonna sell well and Mass Effect is gonna do the same damn thing and use the Indoctrination theory.

    The ending sucked but I don't want to change it because I know Bioware is gonna charge us for and I THINK it may have been planned.
  • Couldn't agree more, but haters gona hate. ( the ending reminded me of all the great sli-fi films I love)
  • Great. Absolutely phenomenal article.
  • From what I've heard, since I'm not sure of any official comment, is that the head writer locked himself into a room and wrote the last scenes and moments of this game with no input from the other writers. Maybe he had a vision, but with so many people who can't understand what the game is trying to convey at the end, to it being a "did that really just happen?", the ambiguity doesn't fit well as an end to one of the greatest gaming trilogies in history. As others have pointed out, they also discarded their design philosophy of how the end was going to play out. Fans aren't happy and feel lied to, rightly so.
  • It's a great choice on their part.
  • Thank you, Mr. Marchiafava. I didn't particularly love the ending, but changing it permanently guarantees that the game (and the franchise) will be remembered not for its unprecedented and phenomenal storytelling, but instead for this absurd "controversy." Unfortunately, a vocal minority has squandered the legacy of something that could have been remembered as truly great.
  • If Bioware wants to please there fans with what they promised I'm fine with it. No one is pointing a gun at there heads and telling them to do it.
  • If the ending of a book, or a play, or a movie, etc... can be rewritten due to the fact that it has not been received well by the audience, then I say a game can too.
  • WOW can Game informer get someone who's not on BioWare pay roll to talk about this stuff. The game has no ending!!! BioWare is gunna DLC the ending its the only logical answer to the "ending" and people like this are hurting the game not helping. Please look into the ending's before reviewing the game. GREEN=HUSK PEOPLE, BLUE=SHEPARD REAPER, RED=NO REAPERS/GETH. Stop acting like the green ending is awesome its just gunna give you husk people and the god child's logic if so dumb.
  • I agree. The endings should stay the same. I loved my ending (i picked the blue one). It was everything I wanted, Shepherd going out in a blaze of glory!! But hey I loved the ending of LOST too.
  • I think people just spent a ton of time getting to know these characters and wants to see what their future is like. I don't think the indoctrination theory makes any sense because if it takes place all in Shepard's mind, how do the endings get done? Everyone sees that the Reapers go away or explode.
  • I don't think we can call Bioware potentially changing the ending a mistake until we see the results. It might turn out to be a mistake, it might turn out to be a success. Did I like the ending? No, I was more disappointed with it than angry. Would I like a better one? Sure, I love Mass Effect. How do I feel about a potentially new ending with more answers? I'll hold my judgement until I play through it.
  • bioware SHOULD fix the ending. normally it wouldn't bother me that the ending was subpar, but the fact that bioware outright LIED to its loyal fanbase is horrible. read up on a few quotes made about the ending by bioware. I for one, am dissapointed in them as a company. I would be equily happy if they changed the ending to fullfill their promises, or apologised for these lies.
  • this was great
  • Eh your right, but I really can't help but hope that they do build on the ending (note build not change), because the parts leading to the end felt exactly like some kind of unclear dream, I didn't hate it but I was just unsatisfied. They don't have to change the ending but as they can pull a Fallout 3 and simply continue the story from there in DLC besides if you are content with your ending simply don't pick up the DLC (should they make it).

  • He has a point

  • I'm sorry, but the sentence "BioWare may compromise its artistic integrity" just killed the article for me. I understand that games are an art form; what I do not understand is how they can claim that three almost-identical endings to an amazing series that have always been about player choice can be excused as "artistic integrity". That's what canons are for. Take GTA IV as an example: it is not canon that Roman dies, yet Rockstar gives us the option to see him be killed.

    Edit: Just to clarify: I really don't care whether the endings are meant to be ambiguous or not. What bothered me was how lazy the endings looked. They were almost exactly the same scenes with a different color scheme. If they bothered to actually make three different cutscenes with the same amount of "wtf just happened?", then I wouldn't have minded, but they opted to just recolor some of the elements of the same scene and call it a day.
  • thing is your decisions don't matter the finale decision basically creates a situation where the next game in the franchise will include reapers and geth or won't. basically creating two separate games due to the fact if the reapers and geth live and they don't play a big role in the plot. people will be disappointed. and on the other hand if the choice to destroy is ignored and reapers and geth play a big role that's a slap in the face for these fans. honestly to go with a prequel I could not see it selling entirely well because it ignores the history in the past parts of the franchise. if we had more endings at least we could understand why not all of them are cannon.
  • The majority of complaints I've been hearing isn't to change the ending but to explain what the hell happened, and I'm for that. Prince of Persia (2008)had an epilogue that helped further explained it's ending, and I don't see anything wrong with Bioware doing something similar with that, maybe in a way where all three endings can still be valid. I don't want the "Happy Ending", but all the money I dropped on Mass Effect games, DLC, books and comics, I think a little clarity is in order.
1 2 3 4 5 Next ... Last