Time for another rewrite! This time, we’re taking a break from movies to dive into the world of video game storytelling. Let’s see if I can fix one of the most disappointing endings in video game history, Mass Effect 3.
As always, I’m using Rule #20 of Pixar’s 22 Rules of Storytelling as a guide for this exercise. If you want to know more about that, you can check it out here. Recently, I reworked the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy using this method, so please check that out if you haven’t already!
Story Ground Rules
Pixar suggests that, when doing this story fix exercise, you use the building blocks of the existing story—don’t throw out the baby with the bath water, so to speak. So, that’s what I’ll do in this rewrite. It won’t all be the same, but I’ll repurpose what I can.
The Mass Effect
To people of a certain age, the original Mass Effect Trilogy was one of most impactful and influential video games series of all time. The series was created by BioWare, a game development company that had established themselves as one of the best storytelling studios in the video game industry. Prior to developing Mass Effect, the studio had established a strong reputation through well-received, story-rich role-playing games (RPGs) such as Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic and Jade Empire.
BioWare helped popularize several storytelling staples of the modern games industry, such as branching story paths and a moral choice system. In a time where storytelling in video games was often hit-or-miss, BioWare stood above the competition with their focus on plot, three-dimensional characters, and player agency.
In 2007, all of the studio’s cachet led to Mass Effect, an original science fiction RPG packed to the gills with impressive storytelling and cinematic design. Despite the original game’s combat being a little bit wonky (IMO) and the Mako sections being a bit of a chore (IYKYK), it was an incredible experience. The story was immersive and excellent, the ensemble cast of characters were fully fleshed out, and the ability to “play your way” by choosing different, branching paths gave a unique flavor to each playthrough.
The game received universal acclaim and set up huge expectations for a sequel. When Mass Effect 2 arrived in 2010, it somehow exceeded the lofty standards established by its predecessor. It provided improved gameplay and mechanics while telling another exciting sci-fi adventure that expanded its universe, established more memorable characters (Mordin, anyone?), and gave the player some incredible, impactful choices to make throughout the game. And that’s to say nothing of the final mission, which is one of the most captivating sequences in video game history—seamlessly weaving all the decisions you’ve made up to that point into the story for an epic showdown.
The Final Chapter
Needless to say, the already sky-high expectations for the series had ascended to the stratosphere after Mass Effect 2. The series had it all: critical acclaim and commercial popularity—in fact, before the release of the third game, the series had already sold north of 7 million copies. Countless gamers (myself included) were champing at the bit for Mass Effect 3 to be released.
If you aren’t familiar with Mass Effect 3, you might be thinking you know what comes next—that the third and final game in the trilogy was released and it just wasn’t good. Or that it was fine but was doomed by the unbearable weight of impossible expectations. It’s something that we’ve seen in many popular entertainment franchises over the years. Sometimes, things just run out of steam by the end.
But that’s not what happened. Mass Effect 3 was released, and it was as good as we could have hoped for. Better, even. It seemed to launch directly off the high point that was Mass Effect 2 and maintain its incredible altitude, almost effortlessly. Stakes were raised. Beloved characters were given poignant send-offs. The plot was full of brilliant twists and turns while never robbing the player of their choice and agency. Even an odd, forced multiplayer mechanic—in which you had to play the multiplayer for a certain amount of time if you hoped to achieve the “best” ending—couldn’t hold back Mass Effect 3 (it did help that the multiplayer mode was fun).
The game was on its way to greatness. Until…
15 Minutes of Shame
Fifteen minutes changed everything.
Specifically, the final fifteen minutes of Mass Effect 3. You’ve heard the phrase “finish strong”? There’s a reason people say that. How you finish something can leave a lasting and outsized impression on the quality of your work. You can probably think of a movie or show that either ended really well and increased its standing in your mind, or ended poorly and diminished the whole experience. Ending well is important—there’s a reason this meme exists.
So, what happened? If you want, you can read a summary here. But I’ll try to put it in simple terms: the game’s denouement is reached—the conclusion of Commander Shepard’s (the protagonist and customizable stand-in for the player) climactic struggle versus the Reapers (the synthetic, squid-like, world-ending antagonists). As the players, we’d made every decision, every sacrifice with this final confrontation in mind. Hours of immersive, unique, and choice-driven gameplay lead up to these final minutes. The fate of the galaxy is in our hands.
And then, suddenly, it wasn’t.
It was torn from us at the last moment and replaced by a bizarre color-coded, multiple-choice illusion of player agency. Throughout the Mass Effect series, we were given the chance to make all the important decisions except for the last, most important one.
The game ended in anticlimactic fashion. It was made all the worse by the realization that every ending “choice” was delivered in essentially the same way, with not much more than a color palette swap (red, blue, or green—choose your favorite flavor!) to differentiate between your selection.
Mass Fallout
It was a deflating end to what had been a tremendous gaming experience. The backlash to these faux-choice endings was almost as passionate as the adulation that had accompanied the series prior. In only a few weeks, fans had organized an online petition called “Retake Mass Effect” to demand a better ending. A complaint was made to the Federal Trade Commission. A Better Business Bureau employee claimed that BioWare had engaged in false advertising based on the company’s claims of player choice.
A conspiracy theory even developed that the ending of Mass Effect 3 was actually a hallucination caused by the game’s antagonists. When fans wish that the ending of your story “was all a dream,” you know you’ve dropped the ball.
Now, it must be said that crafting a satisfying ending to anything is hard, especially with the twin forces of expectation and speculation weighing against you. BioWare didn’t intend to write a disappointing ending to their popular franchise. I’m sure every person who worked on the game hoped that it would be met with the same satisfaction and acclaim that preceded it. But it just goes to show how important an ending can be. It’s the difference between capturing cultural immortality or seeing it slip through your fingers.
Both the journey and the destination are important. Each serves the other. And while BioWare did eventually release “extended cut” DLC that fleshed out the game’s endings, it was too little, too late for many fans.
As I’ve thought about it in the years since, I think my disappointment stemmed from the feeling of a promise unfulfilled. Everything that the Mass Effect series communicated a galaxy of depth and choice, where I could help craft the story that was being told. Video games are an interactive medium, after all. Player input is a necessary component.
There were limits to that agency, of course—the game developers had to make a significant amount of choices for players in order to have a sensible plot and a functioning game. But the first two games walked that line beautifully, delivering a sense of mutual cooperation, an open-handedness that endeared players to the experience. It’s what helped make them so popular in the first place.
But the ending of Mass Effect 3 felt like the end of that cooperative spirit. The ending was the ending, and nothing that you did in advance of it mattered. There was no benefit to the effort put in or the decisions agonized over. The story’s ending was subversive, but not satisfying. And certainly not in keeping with the promise the series had made to its players, both directly and indirectly.
A Potential Fix
Now that I’ve waxed poetic about a video game that came out a decade ago, let’s get into some potential fixes that could have preserved player agency and satisfied fans. In the original ending, there were three options, (achieved by a different colored wave of energy that sweeps across the universe):
Destroy – This option eliminated the Reapers, the game’s primary antagonists and the force you’ve been fighting against for the duration of the Mass Effect series. Sounds great, right? But this option destroys all synthetic life, including characters and races that are friends and allies.
Control – This option transfers the consciousness of Shepard, the main character, into an AI that controls the Reapers and puts an end to their destruction.
Synthesis – This option merges all organic and synthetic life together (somehow), allowing both to coexist peacefully but at the cost of personal autonomy.
Evidently, the developers intentionally made it so that no ending was completely satisfying. No choice was perfectly moral or correct. But that ignored what the games had given us up to that point—autonomy to choose the story that felt right to us. In the previous games, if you wanted to put in the work and achieve a more classic “happy ending” for your characters, you could. If you wanted to be an antihero, treating those around you as expendable and caring little about their ultimate fate, you could do that, too. And many options in between. The point is it was up to you, the player, to choose what fit your playthrough best.
So then, it’s not that the three original options were bad, per se (though they all suffered from a severe lack of differentiation), but it was bad that they were the only options. I think the disappointing ending could’ve been solved by adding permutations to these options based on what the player had done prior to the final battle—essentially, like Mass Effect 2, if the player had prepared enough, they could achieve a wider variety of endings, including a happier, more resolved conclusion. Again, the key here is that there are more options, and the player can work toward a “better” ending if he/she chooses.
Here’s how I would break down the Fixed Endings—and for simplicity’s sake, I’ll keep the original three choices as categories from which the other options will sprout from. I’ve also noted levels from one to three (three being the “best” or “most prepared for the final battle”) to indicate the amount of effort the player would have to contribute to achieve that ending option.
1. Destroy
(Level 1) Much like the original “Destroy” ending. All synthetic lifeforms, including enemies and allies, are destroyed. The mass relays (which allow faster-than-light travel between galaxies) are also destroyed, stranding many alien races on Earth. Victory is achieved but the future is uncertain.
(Level 2) All synthetic lifeforms, including enemies and allies, are destroyed. However, Shepard is able to save the mass relays, preserving intergalactic infrastructure. Victory is achieved and all organic life has a clear path to rebuild and flourish.
(Level 3) The Reapers are destroyed. However, Shepard now has the ability to choose which (if any) additional synthetic races are destroyed. A virtuous player might spare all allies while an “evil” playthrough might involve choosing which races are destroyed. The mass relays are preserved. Victory is achieved and all surviving races have a clear path to rebuild and flourish.
2. Control
(Level 1) Much like the original “Control” ending. Shepard’s consciousness is copied into an AI and takes control of the Reapers, but he/she does not survive the process. The Reapers retreat from the galaxy, leaving the surviving races in peace, but with massive destruction in their wake. Victory is achieved, but many fear that the Reapers will return and destroy them, resulting in military buildup and a more totalitarian galactic society.
(Level 2) Shepard survives the transfer of his/her consciousness but can only command the Reapers to leave the galaxy. Victory is achieved and there is certainty that the Reaper threat is no more, allowing the galaxies to exist in peace.
(Level 3) Shepard survives the transfer of his/her consciousness and assumes full control of the Reapers. Victory is achieved and Reaper technology is used to rebuild and improve the galaxy. With the Reaper army at their command, the player may choose if they want to take control of the galaxy or facilitate more benevolent ends.
3. Synthesize
(Level 1) Much like the original “Synthesize” ending. Shepard forces the galaxies’ organic and synthetic denizens to merge consciousness and promote unity. The Reapers are neutralized. Victory is achieved, but the process is imperfect and many rebel against this violation of bodily autonomy.
(Level 2) Shepard forces the galaxies’ organic and synthetic denizens to merge consciousness and promote unity. The Reapers are neutralized. Victory is achieved, but the process strips away all individuality, resulting in a singular, shared consciousness throughout the galaxy.
(Level 3) Shepard allows the galaxies’ organic and synthetic denizens to choose if they wish to join their consciousness. Some do and some don’t. The Reapers are neutralized. Victory is achieved and peace is made possible through individual choice rather than a forced synthesis.
Conclusion
That’s the baseline of choices I would recommend. Are they perfect? No, and you could add plenty of other permutations to what I’ve outlined here. But the key is fulfilling the promise of the Mass Effect series: player choice. For a game series like this, you have to make the player feel like they have some real influence on the story’s end.
After all, they’re part of it.
So, what do you think? What would you have added or done differently? Let me know in the comments below!
Comments