Let’s Talk About This: In Defense of Mass Effect 3’s Ending (?)
- Ben Stembridge
- Mar 30, 2017
- 5 min read
With the world’s return to the universe of Mass Effect with BioWare’s new Mass Effect: Andromeda, a tidal wave of emotions, ideas, and memories have poured over the gaming community. The Mass Effect Trilogy brought genuine fun, exquisite design, and lovable characters to the players of the world. The exciting science-fiction series was impeccably detailed and is considered one of the most intricate examples of open world games that let the player build the outcome of the game with their actions. 2012’s conclusive Mass Effect 3 was beloved and well-received on every account except for one - the ending.
Be aware, eager young Pathfinders, this installment of "Let’s Talk About This" will be an in-depth analysis of the Mass Effect series and the reception of Mass Effect 3’s contentious finale. It will literally be wrought with spoilers. Seeing as Andromeda has drawn much deserved new attention to the masterpiece series, many of you may not have played through it so we recommend that you skedaddle. Go on now, get! You gone? Okay, let’s begin.
I recently played Mass Effect 3 for the very first time. I know! I hadn’t played it upon release, and was very slow to complete the whole series. I went all out with my play-through, and have taken the time to appreciate and analyze my own reaction to the ending. To explain, let’s go through a quick summary of Mass Effect. The series follows the trials of Commander Shepard, a commando in the Human Systems Alliance, a spacefaring military and government force of the future Milky Way Galaxy which is populated by a number of other different but mostly peaceful advanced species. The main antagonists of Mass Effect are the Reapers, ancient synthetic-organic beings who visit the Milky Way Galaxy every 50,000 years to “harvest” all advanced organic beings. Mass Effect 3 follows the final arrival of the Reapers and their war against all life.
For those who have played Mass Effect 3, you know that Commander Shepard leads a massive force of each race in a final battle against the Reapers who have conquered Earth. The ending, which has multiple variants, ultimately explains the nature of the Reapers as well as their origins, in a conclusion that is emotional no matter which of the many endings you initiate. When the game was first released, each of the endings concluded with a cutscene that is a very open, very unsatisfying, very frustrating scene that gives little to no information about the outcome of Shepard’s decisions. An Extended Cut DLC fixed that, but players were still furious over having to say goodbye to so many of their favorite video game companions with no insight into their lives after the war. I’d like to talk about the distinction between the design of the ending, and the nature of the narrative ending.
By that I mean, how the game’s ending is built versus what the game’s narrative ending is. They are different. The ending is built as a farewell, and a hard-stop to the series. On the other side, the narrative of the ending is an answer, a fulfilling relief to the conflict that has been fast-approaching for years. Without, and arguably even with the Extended Cut, the physical endings wrap up in a cold way. But, the writing of the endings, and the narrative points they imply are gorgeous (even the ones that are . . . a little out there). The experiences that players go through and the dialogue that they take part in just before the final cutscene are almost perfect. Yet, the final cutscene ruined the game for many. While my playthrough included the Extended Cut, and I achieved a “good ending” (Shepard lives), I still couldn’t put myself in the shoes of the scores of frustrated players. I felt selfishly fulfilled.
Think about it - the final sequence that players experience leads them to the most emotional, revealing, and enjoyable interaction yet: a conversation with the ancient artificial intelligence that controls the Reapers. How perfect can you get? Many players didn’t even know that they wanted that. It’s a fascinating discussion of the origin of the Reapers, who are revealed to be products of the Intelligence who was designed to solve the inevitable conflicts between organic and synthetic life. The Reapers are the Intelligence’s way of preserving life but also stopping all chances of the destructive conflicts between them every 50,000 years. What?! Amazing, outstanding, and well worth the ride to be a part of such a metaphysical and philosophical discussion, and ultimately the final decision. Players can take control, destroy, or peacefully combine synthetic and organic life forms on a molecular level. Or they can ignore it and let the harvest continue.
I won’t go into too meticulous detail about the endings, as many of you likely know them, and there is not enough time in the day. Let’s get to my main point - many gamers recklessly let their disappointment in the unextended endings overpower the pure wonder of Mass Effect 3’s narrative ending. The average gamer may not have even had enough time to fully process the meaning behind the interaction between Shepard and the Intelligence, because they were hit by the sidewinder that is the hard-stop ending. Shepard influences the emotionless mind behind the cycles of Reaper harvests through his or her actions and sheer will power. The Intelligence even says it: “you have changed the variables.” What a meaningful compliment that is! That’s the writers and designers celebrating your achievements of making it through the massive series, and to Shepard for changing the fate of everything. They’re honoring you, and providing you with a narrative plot point that boggles the mind and makes sense. Many publications argue that the unextended finale disrespects the player with a lack of return on their investment; this I agree with. However, I argue that the real return comes during your experience with the Intelligence, the "Catalyst" of whichever intense outcome you choose (the Extended Cut doesn't hurt either).
In my opinion, players often let their strong feelings for the vagueness of Mass Effect 3’s unextended ending squander the incredible narrative feat of the final experiences of the game. To be fair, I played this game years after its initial splash, and I had easy access to all the endings and their many variations. I embraced the beauty of the Milky Way’s final chapter of the conflict with the Reapers, a conflict that was revealed to be far more complicated and nuanced than first realized so many years ago. While I in no way believe that players’ anger is unfounded, I firmly submit that they have slightly misplaced their frustrations. While many still don't like the narrative choice of the final conversation, I couldn't help but be enthralled and satisfied with the end of my three-game journey.
Even five years later, are players wrongly placing their anger on the game itself, consuming the well-received and fulfilling narrative ending, ruining the experience for themselves? Are they completely in the right, and did even the narrative ending ring empty for those who experienced it? Do you believe that the whimsy of the final sequences and choices in Mass Effect 3 outshine the often fractured final cutscene? Mass Effect is such a staple to the modern gamer, that I would not be surprised if this discussion continues for years to come.
Ben Stembridge, Editor-in-chief
Ben leads the reviews and news coverage for Game Chop. He also offers opinions on games and the industry, covering a wide range of genres and platforms. Ben especially enjoys discussions on game narratives, design styles, and independent titles.
Comments