starcraft said:
It was not a bad game, it was a brilliant game. I liked it better than Mass Effect 2.
In my opinion, people who feel the ending was inappropriate have never thought things through. *MAJOR SPOILERS FOR REST OF POST*
The whole series the Reaper threat was slated as being unassailable and overwhelming. It should have surprised no one that the vast majority of endings were negative. It should have surprised no one that the actions we took leading to these endings were, by-and-large, futile. Hell, the whole second game was devoted to something called a suicide mission.
Something that certain gamers have decried as an error of narrative – namely that a series about choice wound up having broadly similar (and devastating) endings – was in fact a masterpiece. Ultimately, the game delivered what the franchise had always promised – significant limitations on the ability of humans and other species to impact change on the universe around them. It made complete sense, and was not a departure from the existing narrative at all. People are just so used to Hollywood endings in their video games (excepting the obligatory sad death of one or two characters 20 minutes before the ending, or to spur a revenge plot) that they couldn’t fathom that a franchise would actually end the way it had been implying it would end all along.
|
jweinconn beat me to it: we radically disagree with what the narrative was saying until literally the final minute of a 200 hour story. We saw a lone person - a shepherd, if you will - guide an entire galaxy through danger, stop the bad guys, bring the good guys together, and just generally shape the galaxy as he/she saw fit. Shepher continuously encounters a string of "well that's just impossible to overcome" situations, and then overcomes them a few hours later.
I seriously can't think of a single thing your character sets out to do in which he/she fails. The traitorous SPECTRE is made a fugitive, the surprise assault on the Citadel is repulsed, the "suicide mission" ends with exactly zero casualties, not one but two old galactic threats are rehabilitated and brought back into the fold, the space gypsies get to go back home, and alien species who hated each other since long before humans left their caves now gather around campfires and sing kumbayah. You literally take down a sentient space cruiser that's older than any known species in the galaxy, by yourself, on foot. If your character had a catchphrase and a training montage the whole thing would fit right in with every 80's Hollywood action out there.
Then a six year old in a hoodie tells you you can't win, and you just say "okay" and (literally) die. At least they were kind enough to add in the fourth ending afterwards where you can tell the kid to go to hell, even if the developers decide not playing ball means all your toys get taken away until someone else comes along who will stick to the script, thank you very much. It is no joke or exagerration to say that the endings were originally color-coded versions of each other: youtube videos of all three endings playing simultaneously attest to that. The lead developer swears up and down that the choices made by players over the past three games would matter, and that the endings would not be "A, B, or C." That, clearly, never came to fruition.
To bring this back to the original topic, it's not a bad game. In fact, I really, genuinely enjoyed it. I'd say it's quite a good game, especially if you've played the previous games in the series and imported your save file. But it definitely failed to stick the landing, which naturally left a sour taste in a lot of mouths. Add to that how the developers misled folks into thinking things would wrap in a manner which they definitively did not, and that's where much of the hate comes from.