I can never, ever get over Hudson and Walters writing the ending in isolation from the rest of the team, I can't get over how egotistical that is. At the end of the day, whilst you absolutely need a lead writer to make the final choice/push the story direction of a game, but working in isolation without deferring or getting input from anyone else is a recipe for disaster in a case like this, not even taking to account that ME3's ending was the finale of a behemoth beloved trilogy.
(It also brings me joy that if Mass Effect was run like the Navy, Dragon Age was run like a pirate ship, lol. Amazing.)
Whilst ME3 is my least favorite of the trilogy, the gameplay is great, and there are so many memorable missions that I still really enjoy replaying, along with the Leviathan and Citadel DLCs. For the base game, I loved: Mars with Liara/Virmire Survivor, Citadel with Thane, Grissom Academy with Jack, everything with Tuchanka, the trippy mission to disable the Geth Fighter Squadrons, everything with Rannoch, storming Cerberus Headquarters, plus the final assault on Earth. Whilst going through a destroyed Citadel was memorably creepy, the game completely came apart at the seams with the last minute Catalyst twist that upends the entire trilogy and is actively contradictory. Also,
'hey, it turns out our main thematic exploration all along was organics vs. synthetics, didn't you realize? Duh!' annoyed the hell out of me. Uh, since when? It was a part of the Geth/Quarian story thread, but the xenophobia between different races and learning to work together for the greater good was the primary focus of all three games. I don't want to romanticize an ending that doesn't exist, but I would have taken the hypothetical Dark Energy plot for the ending, because there had at least been some set up in previous games and there was some logic for it, instead of a twist from nowhere in the last few minutes of the damn game.
I also have no problem with my both my Shepards being canonically dead (I love a bittersweet ending), but everything to do with the Catalyst... blargh. The only way I can make some sense of the Catalyst is to go with the Indoctrination Theory, which absolutely isn't canon, but ironically gives the ending some logic, lol.
End of the day I would say it was a case where keeping it simple and straightforward was the best option. That holds true for how the Reapers were defeated, their origins and their motivations. Trying to be clever and shocking is not the way to go in the final minutes of your giant 3 part space epic. Doesn't mean you need a feel good ending, but they could have had one single ending that had minor variances depending on our choices up to that point. Nothing fancy, no big reveal, just this is how it ends and some people appear or don't appear based on what you did leading up. Thanks for saving the galaxy.
Original ending was like swallowing broken glass, EC was just a nice sugar coating that made it far less painful but all the prickly bits and cutting edges were still there.
Excellently put, especially the bolded.
The thing about the ending that always gets me is that they thought the fans needed a big decision right at the very end. I don't think anyone would be upset if the game could end only two ways: you either destroy the Reapers or they destroy you. It was far more important to people that their decisions played out like the Suicide Mission during Priority: Earth.
They tried to pull off a last-minute twist with some philosophical questioning and made that such a big deal, and most people were not here for it.
Also very true.
Control and Synthesis are dumb. They're the Illusive Man's and Saren's goals and both admit to you that they're really indoctrinated before shooting themselves in the head. Pure idiocy.
This!
Say what people will about, "Endings are hard" or, "It was an impossible task to wrap everything up", etc; the greatest sin of ME3 is that the writing doesn't respect its own fiction.
Control, the theoretical "paragon" ending is represented by a character the writers wanted you to hate. A monster in a literal and figurative sense. ME 1 and 2 spent countless hours telling you that no one can control the Reapers and everyone stupid enough to think they're different ends up under their control. BUT THIS TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE SPACE MAGIC. Yeah, ok. Blue good, so I guess that's the heroic thing to do? Makes no sense at all. Ignores the well-laid fiction.
Destroy, the renegade choice is represented my a character who has proven trustworthy the whole game. A friend and confidant who would gladly die for you. Certainly seems like the more trustworthy person to follow. Your choice will destroy the whole system of galactic civilization, but let's remember, that was a system set in place to support the Reapers. And it really should be the only option, right? The Reapers are so advanced that we can barely scratch them with our strongest weapons! Well, that's what ME1 and 2 led you to believe anyway. Apparently we're fight a war, and even winning sometimes, against these unkillable enemies now. Even giant terrestrial space worms can kill them. So apparently it isn't really our only option. There's a Galactic Readiness bar that suggests it isn't in fact futile? But you know, fuck it. The Reapers have got to go as they will literally kill everyone. Honestly, this is a "hard decision" but at least in the context of ME1 and 2, it seems like a logical decision.
Mergers and acquisitions, whatever the hell, green is second dumbest of the options. Organic and Synthetic life cannot coexist! It's been proven! *Side eyes the whole Quarian-Geth conflict you've finally resolved after a 3 game arc.* Finally! Peace forever! Apparently the Reapers are going to be totally fine with this arrangement, or maybe they have organic empathetic hearts now. Or maybe they die? Who knows! We've got glowy circuits on our skin now! Why would we ever have conflicts ever again? It's not like history, or culture, or anything could ever create enormous rifts that will lead to war again between formerly organic and synthetic lifeforms again. Also, hope you're cool with the change because I didn't ask! There is no scaffolding anywhere in the universe to support a decision like this, "But it's something different!" you cry, and yet, that does not make it better or more logical.
Walk away, a highly respective choice in my opinion, at least gives the player autonomy over their decisions. It's a nice way of saying, "None of this makes sense and I hope someday some better writers will play the first two games and sort it out."
The only thing I can imagine to this day about the ending of ME3 is that it was largely written in a vacuum by people who had not played the first two games extensively. They just exist in totally different worlds of logic. I could have been fine with an ending that I didn't like, but what we got were endings that mostly didn't make any sense, and that's unforgivable for the series.
So true. I go with Destroy, even though you pointed out the very valid contradictory plot holes with it.
Its not uncommon for writers to not exactly know where things will end when they start. Thats perfectly fine tbh. This is especially common in television -- Twin Peaks and Breaking Bad come to mind in particular for shows I love.
Breaking Bad writers rather famously set up some flash forwards of the final episode without having a clue what the ending would be and how they would get there. They were very upfront about going with the flow, with the exception of Season 2 which was more planned beat by beat (and IMO, the weakest and most contrived due to this). Lynch never even intended to solve the central mystery of Twin Peaks, there was not even an idea of an ending, this was irrelevant at conception. Network execs forced them to solve it, Lynch got bored and left, and the last half of season 2 was mess. Season 3 was an triumph, but thats another story.
This style of writing typically follows the characters and tries to give them natural beats flowing from one thing to next. When you don't know where you are going, and you don't understand your characters, then you run into trouble
Also an great point -- you don't always know the ending when you start writing something. I always think it isn't ideal (hi, Star Wars sequels), but it can work very well in the right hands, like with
Breaking Bad and
Better Call Saul. Following on from what you said, this kind of writing works brilliantly when it supported by a writer or a team that know the characters very well, and are letting the characters drive the plot, as opposed to the reverse (hi, ending of Game of Thrones!).
