Noncommittal Kaidan is noncommittal
So last year I really got into Mass Effect. I finished the first game and made it through a bunch of the second before being distracted by novel brainstorming and my related marathon of The Wire. With the third game impending, I kept meaning to pick it back up. I was psyched to finish the story of Kira Shepard and her red beehive of mostly paragon
( Read more... )
Bab 5 seemed to handle this type of story pretty damn well. Lots of losses, lots of sacrifices, and in the end the accomplishment was making sure the cycle didn't necessarily end, but was properly set in good favor. The series ended for me once the big bosses left.
I've been more contentious with EA/Bioware's business tactics, but concerning the ending, what gets me is the defense of "renewal" over the sacrifice agenda. We all knew from the beginning Shepard was going to sacrifice themselves in some way-- during ME1's release a shoop of Kamen Rider was posted around showing Shepard doing this with Tali making remarks of "Thats Shepard. Thats the savior of the galaxy".
But the concept of Adam and Eve stepping into Eden with J/EDI? What the hell. Mass Effect isn't grimdark. It isn't desolate, hopeless and in a stage that needs this sort of deus ex reset. ( most certainly you give much more of a damn about your squadmates ultimately over everyone else). You don't want this place to be redone, or set back, or quietly put away. You love the setting and you want to preserve that setting and delve further into it, not ultimately leave it.
I really think that's a miss step on the writer's part. A sad ending can still be satisfying. I would have been fine with Shepard dying if consequently the galaxy could unite over one soldier's sacrifice rather than be separated because MACHINESANDTECHNOLOGY IS BAD.
Reply
Leave a comment