I wouldn't mind Shepard's death if it served a purpose, but in ME3 it felt like the devs wanted to kill him, just to make sure the trilogy remains a trilogy.

@saywhat7063

Ай бұрын

This is true because the devs and Casey Hudson in particular were very defensive about the 3 color choice thing…

@briannichols3341

Ай бұрын

Bioware only wanted Shepard to be a trilogy

@tammykolu1242

Ай бұрын

But it did shepard sacrifised themselfes to save the galaxy

@djbare9

Ай бұрын

@@tammykolu1242 Why do people keep saying this when everyone knows in the perfect destroy ending Shepard likely survived, I would have agreed with you 100% if that scenario, the perfect ending had never existed, but it does.

@illizcit1

Ай бұрын

​@djbare9 Why do people say Shepard 'survived'? I saw a dying breath

I think the reason why the endings where Shepard dies feel unsatisfying is because they ultimately feel anticlimactic, arbitrary and forced. It feels less like a grand sacrifice made selflessly in order to save the galaxy and more like Shepard being railroaded into jumping into the green light or grabbing the electric blue thing to disintegrate themselves to power the space magic just because the Starchild said so. It removes agency from the player. It especially bites players who went through the whole trilogy and wanted to earn their happy ending through choices, quests and exploration. ME2 rewards players with the perfect ending if they made the right choices, dedicated time and effort to know and help their crew and did enough sidequests. ME3 says "best I can give you is a couple seconds cutscene of Shepard lying in the rubble and maybe alive, but only you chose the Destruction ending. Hope you didn't like EDI and the Geth too much".

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

ME2's final mission including a 'perfect ending' is a great point. Another promise that set up expectations into 3, but unfortunately, completing more of ME3's content didn't result in a 'happy' ending, but rather more choices for how to save the galaxy.

@Mrnumber

Ай бұрын

I felt like ME3 took away a lot of agency right from the get go. Like I'm the beginning when you're waiting for the Normandy. A lot of people who used only powers at the end were confused as to why they felt they were just fighting cannibals forever. It's like the game developers said "no I want you to use all your ammo so that the Normandy will show up at just the right time and nothing you do will change that". That works well and fine for just a cinematic linear game but completely goes against the whole RPG/ your choices matter game

I have an hypothesis about the "perfect" destroy ending, the one where Shepard is shown breathing in the end... During the third game, there were a few moments where Shepard had nightmares about the kid who dies at the beginning of the game, who then becomes the infamous "starkid"... Remember the aesthetics of the dreams? Everything was slow motion, things didn't make much sense, and Shepard is never capable of doing anything to save the kid... Now bear with me, during the final run to the beam, Shepard is hit by Harbinger and passes out for some time. When he wakes up, everything looks weird, he's moving somewhat in slow motion, he has only his handgun, Marauder Shields shows up... He then proceeds to the Citadel and somehow Anderson is already there?!? Not just that, the whole confrontation with the Illusive Man, and finally the kid... The one kid who's been haunting his nightmares... The kid then informs him that he can't save himself, the same way he couldn't save the kid on his nightmares... So, if you did absolutely everything right, if you saved every race, if you rallied the entire galaxy for the fight, you wake up and take a breath... But does that breath happen after you chose to destroy basically all the technology of the galaxy, even the Geth AND EDI? Or maybe... MAYBE... Was it just another nightmare you had with the starkid after being hit by Harbinger, and Shepard is still on Earth, near the beam to the Citadel??? I know my hypothesis sounds a bit like indoctrination theory, but instead of indoctrinated he's just having a nighmare. Even then, it's been over 12 years by now, I (almost) don't hold any hopes for this franchise anymore... But anyway, this is just a theory... A gam... Oh wait, wrong channel!

@brosky8744

Ай бұрын

I’ve always held the belief that after getting hit with the beam it’s the reapers trying to indoctrinate Shepard because he would be their best asset and why is it not a common held belief that the star child is lying lol everyone complains that the endings are all similar anyway so breaking the indoctrination attempt would be an awesome meta game mechanic that makes sense within the trilogy since so many other characters get indoctrinated throughout the trilogy without realizing it. Just my two cents and I know game theory already touched on this idea in a video years ago lol

@bubblybobabubbles

26 күн бұрын

I have my own little headcanon that uses the indoctrination theory, but is a little different. Shep DOES get up to the Citadel, but Anderson and TIM are hallucinations that they have while trying to get to the Crucible and activate it, a physical portrayal of the psychological warfare going on in their head. When the Star Child begins presenting choices as you activate the Crucible, he's trying to manipulate Shepard. Rather than a representation of her warring psyche, he's the ACTUAL Reaper in her head (made clear by Harbinger's voice when you refuse the choices), trying to convince Shepard to give in to indoctrination, into becoming one with the Reapers- synthesis. It's the only choice presented in a positive light and not a negative one. Control would probably be Shep dying and becoming a husk- completely controlled- since the blue kind of reminds me of that. But when Shep chooses destroy- something that Starchild tries to convince you will kill your friends, and even a whole race you JUST brokered peace with, which I think is a bald-faced lie to draw her away from that option- she overcomes the Reaper in her mind and sticks to her guns anyway, killing the Reapers. And as I mentioned, I think synthetic life still goes on. It would make sense if any Reaper upgrades were destroyed, such as the Geth software boosts or the Normandy's Reaper IFF, but not all technology and synthetic life ever. And the rubble Shep wakes up in after a Perfect Destroy isn't Earth, it's the Citadel. We've seen Shep survive explosions before, and maybe their fancy implants saved them one last time too. Like mentioned in the video: Shepard is a survivor.

I'm pretty sure the original version of the game had the "Perfect Destroy" ending where Shep survives

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

When I looked up the original endings I couldn't find the extra Shep breath scene anywhere except the extended cuts, but I don't own the original game so I can't confirm.

@MattRowland

Ай бұрын

​@paragonseven trust me, this existed prior to the extended ending patch. My Shepard took a breathe on March 10, 2012, four days after the game came out.

@Bethgael

Ай бұрын

@@MattRowland is correct. @paragonseven you even showed that "secret" document that had Shep as being alive in that ending in a previous video. IMPORTANT: The reward was that the option that required the MOST effort--importantly--the most effort ion the multiplayer part of the war assets--gave the player _their_ "best ending". The reward for all of that MP, which EA was pushing, was Shepard taking a breath. In context, this was the period in which EA was pushing for every SP game to have a MP component. This ties in with the suicide mission of ME2. The bit with the most effort kept everyone alive. We were trained in ME2 to make sure we gained the most war assets (ie, play the MP) in ME3.

@DiegoSilvadosSantos1

Ай бұрын

I can attest to that. It was even in the leaks that came a few days before ME3 was released. I even had a chance to talk to one of the devs about it, because they used to randomly drop into MP matches and become "friends" with the players on Origin. Just a few days after the game was released, before I even finished it, I sent him a message asking if the three color endings and the breathing scene was really all we would get. He asked me to not quote him on that because he was just a dev, and didn't have any decision power inside Bioware, but as far as he knew, there were no plans on anything beyond that... Sometime later, after all the backlash (I even donated some money for the RGB vanilla cupcakes), Bioware announced the Extended Ending DLC. 😅

@SpaceMarineAna

11 күн бұрын

@@Bethgael This is correct. I intentionally delayed finishing ME3 in the four days I took off of work to play it, in order to grind maximum galactic readiness to ensure I got the 'best' ending.

I find it interesting that mordin. Who said it himself. He only had maybe a couple years left of life left. And to me the biggest punch is when you get him to talk about sea shells.

here is my problem with shepard's death is that we did not get a lot of options in most cases shepard dies we even got the worst ending where everyone dies but we couldn't get an ending where shepard lives and with the crew. All we got was shepard taking a breath and if the franchises ended as a trilogy that would be it.

@elion4245

Ай бұрын

they decided not to commit for the ending cutscenes sequence like that, just to make it more "secretive" and "less obvious". In perfect destroy, assuming, Shepard did survive, he inevitably would meet up with a crew and everybody else. So, those scenes missing from the ending, in this case would've definitely had happened. But, on Mac Walters "script" for the ending, down the bottom, there clearly is a message they wanted "Lots of speculation from everyone". On the top there is "Shepard Alive. Sense of hope!". Adding that cutscenes sequence would clear any speculations as well as removing the ambiguity of Shepard's state, even in perfect destroy. And here we are, 12 years later, still talking about these endings. They were right, at least in "speculation" part.

@maskedman5657

Ай бұрын

I think the story fits the best when Shepard dies no matter what. His/Her story is over

@tammykolu1242

Ай бұрын

Not everything can be a happy ever after ending

@illizcit1

Ай бұрын

​@tammykolu1242 its really sad that this isn't evident

@willfanofmanyii3751

Ай бұрын

@@elion4245 Plus one of the writers even added a few years ago that Femshep gets pulled from the rubble by Garrus.

Nicely done! Though, there are several theories out there to why some ppl see reason in the fact that Shepard only survives in the 'perfect destroy ending' (and yes, it has been confirmed by a dev that Shepard not only survived but LIVED in that ending - if I remember correctly it was a statement on twitter way back cuz a lot of fans have been confused about Shepards fate and the team wanted to clarify): In every other ending the Reapers survive, i.e. they remain as a part of the universe, one way or the other. Only in 'Destroy' they and their code (which has been uploaded into the Geth in case Shepard managed to make peace between the Geth and Quarians) are being completely erased once and for all. Therefore, it appears to be the only ending with a definite solution to the Reaper problem. This is also stressed by Anderson, Hackett and Javik when they point out to Shepard several times that there is only one solution, namely DEAD Reapers. Especially Javik stresses that real victory always comes with a cost/sacrifice (--> could refer to the fact that all synthetic life must eliminated in 'Destroy', though it can be rebuilt). That being said, one could argue that the Catalyst is lying and trying to trick Shepard to choose 'Control' or 'Synthesis' to cement the Reapers existence and purpose for the upcoming future. If so, who is the 'Catalyst'? Well, it is definitely something that sides with the Reapers, unlike Shepard and his/her allies. But let's take a closer look to back this one up: When Shepard is confronted by TIM (who was sent by the Reapers) on the Citadel, TIM tries hard to convince Shepard that 'Control' is the PERFECT solution in terms of the Reaper problem (by using/demonstrating mind control abilities). Only when Shepard cannot be convinced of this idea, Shepard gets to meet the Catalyst (practically in the shape of the little boy that got killed on earth) who tells us that 'Control' is indeed a solution to the Reaper problem and only failed until now bc TIM was already controlled by the Reapers. This appears to be strange, I mean the Reapers obviously tricked TIM into thinking he could control them and now the Catalyst tries the same trick on Shepard again? Why would it be possible for Shepard all of the sudden to control and not be controlled? Especially given the fact that Shepard was not able to resist TIM's mind control (resulting in Andersons death)? In the 'Control' ending Shepard basically becomes a Reaper himself/herself, but who has ultimate control here regarding that Shepard dies and the Reapers survive? Lets continue, though: When Shepard is still not enticed by 'Control', the Catalyst suddenly comes up with the allegedly PERFECT 'Synthesis' solution and an overall explanation to why it is the ultimate goal. Regarding the Reaper threat this option seems even worse than 'Control' bc not only do the Reapers survive but also the Reaper Code is being uploaded into everything and everyone as well. And again, Shepard dies, the Reapers survive. [Also note that everytime Shepard voices doubts, the Catalyst's voice becomes somewhat saucy and in case Shepard refuses all those choices it even turns out to be Harbingers voice which is quite telling]. Now, having all these options at hand, Shepard has to pick one solution which comes down to picking a side as well: 1) Siding with the Catalyst/TIM/Cerberus = Siding with the Reapers by picking 'Control', 'Synthesis' or 'Refuse' or 2) Siding with the Alliance = Siding with Shepards (Organic) Allies by picking 'Destroy'. In THIS case the ending would be all about Shepard making the 'right' decision and getting the reward (= survival) for doing so. Vice versa, making the 'wrong' decision would result in Shepards death, the consequence for somehow not being able to withstand indoctrination, hence not ending the Reaper threat in the predetermined way. Only in THIS scenario ('right' and 'wrong' solution --> consequence), Shepards death would serve a real purpose, even if most ppl are not satisfied with its consequences. [But is this truly the writers exact intention from the very beginning of the trilogy? The 'solution' in ME1 and ME2 has been given to the player from the very start of each game, i.e. killing Saren, killing Sovereign, killing Collectors. So, in ME3 they expected us to simply kill (= choosing destroy) the Reapers, too? Kind of completing the logical trend? Well, it'd make sense but the concrete implementation then appears to be half-baked. Also, every player created his/her own headcanon by the time of ME3, so naturally, I believe most players don't wanna be restricted to a simple 'right' and 'wrong' system for their final decision. They wanna decide on their own if and how their Shepard goes out as a reward for playing through three games, collecting resources, allies and the sheer will to find a somewhat positive solution to the Reaper threat (for themselves, Shepard and his/her allies/friends). By introducing a 'right' and 'wrong' solution at the very end of the trilogy, however, this individual approach of the player would suddenly be up for debate. So, I am not completely convinced tbh. And yeah, it is not always the best idea to take the writer's intention into account when it comes to a proper interpretation of a story but since there are some inconsistencies in the story itself, it is only natural to look for answers outside it as well. But whatever the intention was, I guess the rushed release of ME3 is one of the reasons why there are some inconcistencies and why a lot of ppl feel unsatisfied at some point. Maybe they'll try to make more sense of the endings in the sequel. As an author you basically have all the freedoms to turn things into the way you want them to be anyways, ex post.] Nonetheless, I do see and agree with your point: Shepard is special, different from anyone else and that fact alone should/could serve as a reason to why they, no matter which ending is chosen, CAN/COULD/SHOULD survive. I think about Legion who says that Shepards code is 'superior' (not sure about the exact wording) or the godfather of Reapers themselves, Leviathan, who is triggered by Shepards uniqueness and therefore wants to keep them/ have them fight against the Reapers. Overall, using Leviathans words, Shepard simply is 'something more' in comparison to anyone or anything else within this universe (the words are out of context, I know, but it also applies to Shepard). So, naturally, I'd also expect Shepard to survive all the different events somehow (enough war assets provided, of course), so the consequences for each ending would then affect other areas. Edit: I understand why they wanted Shepard to be all by themselves in the final part of the game. In (classic) literature, the 'hero' is the one that has to be all by himself/herself in the final moments, that is why they are the hero --> nobody else would have been able to come this far (Catalyst confirms just that) and nobody else would have been able to make the final decision. It is absolutely necessary to point out their superiority. The hero experiences things that nobody else ever would or could. It shapes them into what they are and why they later can be considered a 'legend'. I think Kasumi tells Shepard in ME2 that he/she has some kind of aura, like they have seen things that nobody else has. It kinda explains it nicely. And sorry, I did not intent to write this much but once you get into topics like these, it becomes quite hard to put an end to it. I am sure some of you can relate ...

Thank you. For the past 12 years, something about the ME3 Ending always felt hollow to me, like it was missing a crucial piece in order to be a fitting/satisfying ending. Yes the choice-consequence promise was broken, yes the final choice royally sucked, yes we don't get to live/experience the consequences of that choice like we do throughout the series, and yes we have no say in Shepard's final fate, but I always felt that there was still a missing cause that I just could not place my finger on, and I believe you have voiced that lost piece here: plot resolution without character resolution. I could accept an option where we can choose to sacrifice ourself in the final decision and the sacrifice seems the honorable price to pay, but also there needs to be the opposite option where we choose live and the price is guilt, but they didn't go with this option either.

Thanks to the Happy Ending and Citadel Epilogue mod, the trilogy ending is fixed for me. But the damage was already done thanks to EA....

@DutchXFangirl

Күн бұрын

Same. Those mods are my One True Ending. The game's endings are banished from existence.

Part of is starting to agree that Shepard dying at the end of Mass Effect 3 wasn't completely satisfying but maybe in the new Mass Effect game maybe we finally can have a true ending to Shepard and the Normandy crew without ruining what came before.

@tammykolu1242

Ай бұрын

Its not meant to be a happy after ending though

@ViperPilot16

Ай бұрын

It will ruin what came before it if the reaction to Andromeda was anything to go by. And that wasn't even in the Milky Way.

A great video> I would argue that the "Actions have consequences" promise was a little broken in 3 too. I mean, the choices from 1 had impact in 2. So we expected the choices from 1 and 2 to build to 3, to give us multiple different, possible endings, What we actually got, was a meta war score that subverted what plot had been built in 1 and 2 (that there was a chance to fight and defeat the Reapers, that our actions mattered and that perfect choices and consequences could craft a perfect ending). Instead, we were essentially given 9 possible endings in the original... up to 10 and a loophole on one of them, in the extended version. The problem was, these endings, in most cases, were re-skins and just colour pallet changes. Its like seeing 27 different coloured ice creams or cupcakes, but they all taste the same. It was a lazy, cop out ending, that felt show-horned and rushed. It left a bitter taste and took away a lot of player choice and agency as well as "hope". The fact is, none of the endings were "good". - Control and become a tyrant policing the Galaxy - Merge, taking away everyone's free will and choice in the matter (that's a decision too big for one individual) - Destroy (the only one that really fulfils the promise that was made in the previous 2 games and their DLC;s), thus sacrificing choices made before and several characters/races we've grown to be fond of, and possibly going against other choices we made - And in the extended version, do nothing, and die. And doom everyone else to Death as well. But a future loop will defeat them due to the clues your friends are able to leave behind. None of those are satisfying... because, for a lot of people, none of them really feel like the choices of the Character we were playing and allowed to craft in the previous installments and first half of the game. It also felt like it left a lot of character threads hanging, unresolved and unsatisfying. And as previously alluded, also felt like a betrayal of the promises made in the previous two installments. Ultimately, it seemed like someone rushed the game to get it out, so gave us a rushed, unsatisfying ending that was not up to the caliber of the previous two installments.

@velourin

Ай бұрын

I personally disagree, I think ME3 does a fantastic job building up on previous choices and showing consequences. I really agree with you saying the ending is rushed and I think it's almost common knowledge that ME3 was rushed out by EA, but it's feels like that to me because ME3 before the last choice did a great job of feeling like it's the culmination of everything you did. The biggest example for me is how Mordin can survive in ME3 if only Wreav is the clan leader because in ME1 you killed/didn't recruit Wrex, and then in ME2 you didn't keep Maelon's data, it allows you to convince Mordin to not go ahead, whereas trying to stop him otherwise leads Shepard to shoot him. I also think ME3 did a good job wrapping up most character threads, everything with Wrex and Mordin, Tali and Legion, and Miranda and her father are things that have been developing over the course of the trilogy and now show results depending on your actions. I'd say the only unresolved returning character is Jacob (mainly because I feel sorry for anyone who romanced him, only for ME3 to spit in their faces lol). I think the ending overshadows just how much ME3 can change because of your choices, how you can only get the best outcomes from certain situations if you did this in ME1, then that in ME2, then finally this in ME3. Hell, you can go into ME3 with every squad member in ME2 dead, therefore locking yourself out of getting Garrus and Tali on your team. It's just a shame ME3 dropped the ball at the most pivotal moment, it didn't ruin my journey but I get why it's such a massive stain for others.

The worst thing about ME3, is that on replay you see it's just a reunion/retirement tour of the old gang.

I think the endings feel weird because the point of the whole trilogy was this idea of together we are stronger, i mean all the games start with Shepard collecting team members and friends from different species that are all their individual divers characters to complete the task at hand, or in the third game we need to unite the whole galaxy to even have a chance. So having experienced that throughout 3 games the ending will always feel strange because the whole endgame is just Shepard with the squad even evacuating and then 1 person deciding over the fate of the galaxy which is obviously no decision an individual should or can make by himself. Its just completely counterintuitive to what the games have been subconsciously "teaching" us

@JezaGaia

Ай бұрын

This is something I empathize with so strongly ! One of the more harrowing feelings was to be there alone without my team .

@tammykolu1242

Ай бұрын

Nsh the endings are realstic like javik said victory is not Einar without making difficult choices

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

Definitely felt this too. At the end, I wanted my squad by my side saving the galaxy. But I don't blame the devs for wanting it to just be Shepard. Especially with the context of needing to develop the whole game in only 2 years.

@JezaGaia

Ай бұрын

@@tammykolu1242 We did make a lot of difficult choices all along the journey, also this trilogy was all about choices, where is our choice for a happy enough ending when we are still alive for sure and didn't have to kill our allies and EDI for it ?

@restinpeperoni283

Ай бұрын

@@paragonseven yeah i agree the time constraint really was the reason for all that mess. Its just for me this together with the point you made in the video are the fundamental problems with the ending (at least thats what i think haha after all im a physicist and not a psychologist)

This is why they need to continue shepherd's story in Mass Effect 5. We need closure for our shepherd's story. And proper end.

I would love atleast a animated short of shepard getting up after the the perfect destroy ending ,knowing he/she did it and a small smile

Shepard's death would only make sense if he was a tragic character, but Shepard isn't, despite having difficult pasts, but Shepard is a fighter and got through difficulties). That's why I firmly have held the belief that the perfect destroy ending is the canon ending; while also adding in the fact that the Reapers were trying to indoctrinate Shepard while he is in a vulnerable state - being unconscious and/or injured by Harbinger's beam because that whole thing after Shepard wakes up felt like a dream (or a nightmarish hallucination). I'm a fan of some of the indoctrination theory, but not all of it. The whole scene where Shepard's with Anderson and The Illusive Man made me think Shepard was fighting against the Reapers, while Anderson was trying to help him regain control of his mind, while Harbinger was working through TIM. In the end, Shepard realizes he was shot in the stomach, and not Anderson. I think Anderson shot Shepard to get him to "wake up" to end the indoctrination attempt. I never trusted "Star Brat's" two choices - Control and Synthesis - since those two were what TIM and Saren wanted. I think those were other indoctrination attempts, because "Star Brat" REALLY didn't want Shepard to choose destroy, "You'll also destroy the Geth and AI like EDI." Yeaaaah, doubt it, you little lying shite!

This has ALWAYS been something that bothered me about Shepard's death. They are indomitable, the representation of hope, and hope never dies! And then the writers killed that hope. Ok but I also just saw a comment of someone mentioning the clone and that could be such a neat story line to untangle. Like a redemption ark for the broken and hurt and a transfer of the spark. But still, the clone isn't Shep, but could they become a true Shepard? (Given the eventuality of them also surviving the fall from the Normandy) I would find it entirely believable.

@elion4245

Ай бұрын

i disagree about the hope. Personally, while experiencing ME3, i almost didn't have a sense of hope at all. For me, the game is pretty dark. Especially the last mission on Earth. Most people you talk to, actively trying to provide, that sense of hope, but in the end they all say goodbye. Especially Garrus and the bar. So, honestly, since I was playing for the first time waaay after the release, hearing the perception of the endings (obv without specific spoilers) i was ready for a straight up defeat and that the crucible was a trap, a diversion, so, organics would spend their last resources in the hopeless unknown project, only to realize that it's worthless crap As for the clones, Shepard in a vacuum has very little traits, most are positive. The rest traits are made with player's choices. And yet, that's still not enough. Without relationships built over the three games, Shepard may as well be just an empty rpg shell filled with player's decisions. So, in my opinion, Shepard shouldn't exist without original crew and vice versa (a clone without experience is not Shepard to clarify). For a new game, it's either both or neither. Tho, personally, I definitely prefer both the crew and Shepard.

@lindsey-do-it

Ай бұрын

I still stand by Paragon Shepard representing hope, at least, that's how I always interpreted it, but that's just they joy of these games, it's player choice and how you think your character would act, and how you see their chosen one status etc. And I totally agree about Sheperd needing their crew and the crew needing Shephard. That's what the life at the end of the destroy ending always falls totally flat for me. It's life, but at extreme cost, which a renegade shep would absolutely go for, but a Paragon shep? I don't think so. But I don't think its write to cram a "righteous death/sacrifice" down players throats either. Like the control ending could have resulted in a body being built for Shephard . Their consciousness is alive (as far as I interpreted it) controlling the Reapers. Could they not build a body for themselves? But that still wouldn't be enough for me either. It wouldn't feel like Shepard unless it was Sheperd. But spirits, I hate that Shepard's life feels like it's stuck behind a paywall of death. I still think the clone story line would be interesting but not if it's the only choice players get. I do feel like players entering the next mass effect for the first time might resonate with it as they also won't have that connection to the crew but they're still tasked with upholding greatness so to speak. It definitely wouldn't be the start most longtime players would want. We generally want Shepard 😅.

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

To me, clone Shepard isn't really them because they don't have a past. They suddenly just sprang into existence, and only had the real Shepard as a connection to anything in the world, which is why they were so bitter. *spoilers for Horizon Zero Dawn* I really like the way Horizon Zero Dawn covered a clone-type story with Aloy because the whole point was her searching for meaning in her life because she didn't have a mother. If the clone does come back, I'd want their story to be more along those lines to add meaning to their existence.

I disagree a whole lot. You built the whole argument on this "Promise" of Shepard being invincible. Shepard surviving the end of ME1 doesn't promise anything. Saying that just because they survived one (or 3+) close calls still doesn't make it any sort of promise. I could just as easily say "They died in ME2, so that's a promise of Shepard dying in the future again." Also, had the writers actually promised us Shep's invincibility, the story would immediately lose a good amount of weight, because hey, i'm not going to die, so who cares what happens. Shepard's death is simply what the trilogy has been preparing us for this whole time - one last difficult decision. We sacrifice ourselves for one of the possibly better futures for the galaxy, or decide to hang on to the hope of survival, even if it means sacrificing every single synthetic instead, despite discovering that synthetic life is also life through the games. Making difficult decisions is absolutely a promise Bioware gave us in the beginning, unlike Shepard's survival. They've had so much plot armor over the trilogy, that it was about time for the luck to run out. I was a wreck for days after finishing ME3 for the first time, and I wouldn't have it any other way. Shepard's death (or lack of it) is on of the most (if not the most) impactful moments in Mass Effect, and a free "happily ever after" would just cheapen what we've been fighting for this whole time. You also say Shepard died for a choice that didn't feel significant to them - but, as you mentioned, we're Shepard. Just because you didn't care about that part, doesn't mean none of us did. I'm also quite sure that for example Joker cared about how the reapers are defeated. Saying nobody cared how the reapers go is simply a false assumption. As for Thane's death - he, an assassin, died protecting someone he didn't even know. Just like his wife was ready to when he first saw her. That's a beautifully written parallel and calling it shock value death unrelated to his ark is a disservice. All that being said, I enjoyed hearing your thoughts on Mass Effect as always, and hope you have a wonderful day!

I completely agree with Shepard's death being unnecessary and forced in terms of the thrust of the story--or at least, versions of the story the player could choose to tell through their narrative. Shepard's story in my game was always of triumph against impossible odds, achieving outcomes no one else could. I absolutely wanted her to live through the ending, because it felt correct. In the end, I even turned to the popular MEHEM mod to achieve this, and still think of it as the canon end to my Shepard's story.

Mass Effect wouldve been remembered way more fondly with an epilogue like BG3 😭

@Ollyiswild_04

Ай бұрын

How would that epilogue go?

@zegreatpablo7346

Ай бұрын

@@Ollyiswild_04 Depends on you of course 😭

@maskedman5657

Ай бұрын

Wym

@strangedime

Ай бұрын

That's when the happy ending mod/citadel epilogue mod become your besties 😎 Though it is great that with BG3's epilogue you get to know what everyone has been up to since you last saw them, and it would've been interesting to see the state of everyone/everything after the end of the reaper threat

The thing about Shepard being a survivor isn't inherently a strike against him dying. Borrowing your phrasing, they set up the promise in the first game and reinforced it in the second, and that could have made their death in the third game even more impactful. They established Shepard as a character that, seemingly, *always* survives, no matter how bad the odds are. A suicide mission where everybody is expected to die? Nope, mission accomplished and everybody made it through. Killing Shepard could have been a really poignant moment, something to make the players feel how desperate and bleak the situation was. Here's this character that *always* finds a way out, but this time even they couldn't squeak through. I guess my point is that just that Shepard's death is fine and could have been a super emotionally charged thing, really sent the series out with a memorable bang. Them dying doesn't break any promises or damage the story; everything else about the ending is the problem. The endings just don't measure up to Shepard's death, and the disparity makes it all that much more unsatisfying. Shepard dying doesn't break the promise of the character because the core promise of Shepard, regardless of how you play them, is that they're a hero. *The* thing that they do in every game is save the day, the fact that they usually also survive is almost ancillary. Dying while saving the day doesn't break the promise of the character, it reinforces the most pivotal aspect of the character. Shepard dying is fine, how they did it was poorly done.

I cannot see why you have so little subs. You earned one here, damn your vids are well made.

I'm sorry who's death? We all know Shepard gets perfect Destroy ending and survives if a little worse for wear and that's the only canon ending 😉😉 But seriously I don't understand why after all these years many people treat the Shepard lives ending like some kind of unproven wacky fan theory. I mean you can go into the files and the .bik file with the Shepard taking a breath is literally called Shepard_lives, just how more obvious you want it to be?

@cmdr.jabozerstorer3968

Ай бұрын

Wasn;t that ending part of the redone Epilogues though?

@mihan2d

Ай бұрын

@@cmdr.jabozerstorer3968 Pretty sure Shepard_lives clip was introduced straight away.

I feel like the next mass effect should be a epilogue for the og trilogy and a introduction to the news game after it. Give us 1 last game fixing the politics of the milky way ( paragon/renegade) with Shepard and mass effect 6 , 7 , 8 be a new protagonist.

Love that this conversation HAS to ignore how tonally dissonant ME2’s plot is

Shepard's death is unnecessary because he came to the Catalyst due to an ACCIDENT. He was miraculously lucky not to get hit by the Reaper's fire as they ran en masse towards the portal. This is all. Any person could have performed the actions that were done at the Catalyst.

Have to disagree, here. Shep always lived in the Perfect Destroy ending. The idea was: this was the "correct" ending. The rest were not. [discussion of that would take another video, and would involve breaking an NDA because Bioware are well known for "breaking story promises"; it's kind of their thing, in DA as well]. But really, it was that the devs didn't want to continue the story with Shepard, and killing them off was the only way to make sure there were not Shep-based sequels. Shep wasn't intended to be "the players character" but a multi-version Bioware character (like Hawke is in DA2), and many of the writers have gone on record (Gaider and Carp in particular) as saying that when it comes to their plans, player and multi-canon is taken into account, but their story matters more, so if there is a clash, they will discount multi-canon (which is one reason why all of the comics always have Bethany dead, and always have King Alistair; that is Biocanon). And, most importantly: their story will happen how they want it, and they will retcon to do it (see DAI and Leliana being alive in DA2/DAI even if she died in DAO. Also Zev, but that started with a bug, and they ran with it. Leliana's was a quite deliberate "eff you" to players that killed her. They also retconned ALL ofhte Cullen epilogue slides into "rumours" to bring back Cullen in DA2, and All of the Awakening slides to make sure Anders would be in DA2, so nothing the players did actually mattered. Oh, and Flemeth isn't really dead, either, ha ha, even if that dragon fight was one of the harder ones in DAO). It's why a Warden who is literally Alistair's Queen will spend all of Awakening taking orders from Amaranthine's captain of the guard. You know, the city whose Arl killed their parents, sister-in-law and nephew and massacred their entire castle. The city who are under the auspices of their own brother. Past the "1" games, none of the storytelling will make sense, and it is, importantly, Not Good Storytelling. Bioware do _not care_ about player choice or "keeping story promises". It's just marketing that serves the story they want to tell. They give the _illusion_ of choice. They write themselves into corners and then use, erhm, "Bioware magic" to write out of them. ME1 writers wrote an excellent story. DAO writers did, too. But after that? Their storytelling cheats (and so, btw, do Gaider's novels). Even in the Shepard lives ending, the implication is that everything that makes Shep "super Shep" (ie, the technology that has just been destroyed) is gone. Their story is stopped. The end. For Bioware's writers in the post DAO/ME1 period, character and player always, always serve the plot. Hence why MEA was so awful. And yes, Bioware will retcon that for the next game if they have to, because of MEA's failure and MELE's success. We may dislike the ending, but it was intentional.

Whatever writer was responsible for the endings must have read some Cyberpunk stories before writing them. Those guys are all like "wrong people, wrong city. everyone must die, can't get a single win".

Shepard surving would make the point of the character pointless. Shepard is a shepherd. You save the galaxy from the Reapers, leaving your mark on how the galaxy post reapers should function. The only ending that Shep even has a chance of surviving is destroy, and I doubt Bioware wants to cannonize an ending to ME3.

@simonbaribeau4853

14 күн бұрын

Sadly way too many people are incapable of letting Shepard go. For them Mass Effect = Shepard and nothing will change their mind. I've played the trilogy about 15 times , it's my favorite game series ever made , and i absolutely DONT want Shepard to come back. It would be such an incredible cop-out to bring back Shepard and would defeat the entire point of the trilogy imo.

I think killing Shepard was the right choice even if it hurts. But it brings a good close to the Reaper triology. And afterall Shepard defeated the Reapers, the biggest threat and most dangerous enemy the ME universe ever had. No matter what they do in the next game or who the villain will be but whatever won't come anywhere close the achievement she already accomplished. I will be a new story with new enemys so it's only fitting to have a new main character. Honestly I love the idea though that we play as Shepard and Liara's daughter. I absolutly love Asari and always dreamed of having a customisable Asari character. Given that Liara is the canon romance option for Shepard and they had a union in the end of ME 3 it is not just possible but also likely that Shepard and Liara have a child. Ps. Would absolutly love to see a complete playthrough series from you.

I think that Bioware had Shepard fatigue at the time and didn't expect fans to be outraged by Shep's death. A good example of this is when Core Design tried to kill off Lara Croft in Tomb Raider Last Revelation because they were just so sick of cranking out games... and the IP continued on despite that because the fans wanted answers. I think development crunch and EA are to blame for 3's rushed conclusion. When you have such an iconic character you can't just be like "They dead now, move on!" and I agree that The death served the plot and not the character arc. That's what outraged fans and what made them demand closure even more than if Sheperd would have survived. It feels like they were just cementing the fact that there won't be any more Shepard games rather than giving a proper send off. A major unintended error on Biowares part...

Before I get into this, I just want to say that I'm torn on the end of ME3 from both a storytelling and a player satisfaction perspective. This is more just my addition to your analysis and why, 12 years later, I'm on the fence whether I consider it a good or bad conclusion. When I first played it, I absolutely loved ME3...until the end. I just felt so cheated. However, time has allowed me to replay the trilogy (I don't want to consider counting how many times) and think about things from many levels of storytelling and different perspectives. Probably the hardest thing to consider is how these "fixed" plot points have to fit with all the many variations of storytelling. This is, more or less, the conclusion I've come to. I see and agree with both sides of the argument, but there's a character promise that Shepard's death does keep: Shepard will finish the mission, no matter what. It's a character promise that is hardly ever considered since that's generally a given in games, but it's brought to the forefront of the story in the ME2 prologue. After all, the end of ME1 established that Shephard will survive, yes? Did you consider that ME2 was establishing a separate promise along the lines of: everyone must face the Reaper? Sure, ME2 immediately circumvents it, but it did establish the groundwork of what it would take to kill Shepard: self sacrifice. ME3 brought the promise of finishing the mission, no matter what, to the forefront with the Citadel coup attempt and, more so, with the fall of Thessia. In the Citadel coup attempt, the cost (depending on your choices) would include: Thane (potentially your love interest), the Salarian councilor, Kaiden/Ashley (potentially your love interest), and the Human councilor (no love lost there, but this represents a massive loss/setback for humanity as a whole). For Thessia, it's finishing the mission in unmitigated failure. Here's what makes me think that the character plot isn't sacrificed for the story plot: those losses suffered reinforce and drive Shepard to finish the ultimate mission of ending the war, no matter what. Regardless of how I feel about the colour choice at the very end, the final action, which ends the war, is Shepard choosing to risk themself, as they always had, to finish the mission and, hopefully, to save others. Was Shepard's death a good one? Yes. Am I satisfied with it? No. Was it needed? Maybe.

This is why I play with Audemus' Happy Ending Mod for my ME3 playthroughs.

thank you. you finally put words on thoughts I had for several years now, without being able to formalise them into ideas and phrases. I also loved your trailer breakdown, it gives me hope on what ME4 would or could be.

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

It was very cathartic putting it into words. I actually struggled with recording it without emotion creeping into my voice during the last parts of the video. 😅 Shepard means so much to me, and even if they don't return, I feel like I finally understand why ME3's endings left me feeling empty.

Yo this video makes me feel that Shepard might have been depressed… especially with the line implying he was willingly taking on suicidal missions and impossible odds from the offset

Even the Shadow of Mordor series had a better conclusion to Talion's story than Mass Effect's Shepard.

I mean, personally, I thought that Mass Effect 2 was not creative in its writing from the beginning to the end. Just who thought the best idea was to kill off Shepard at the beginning of ME2? There's literally no way to bring back Shepard from one exploding ship, two falls from space onto a planet, then three going at an unknown speed, and then crashing from an unknown height and splattering into a million pieces. I mean, how is it possible to literally reconstruct a blob into a human? It doesn't make sense. Then don't get me started on why Shepard, a SPECTRE, is listening to the Alliance Navy when they don't have to. I thought the main goal was to find evidence of the Reapers' existence so that the entire galaxy could be better prepared for the coming invasion, but no, they throw the "chosen one" to search for basically nothing. Then throughout all of ME2 until the end, just utter nonsense... like why should Shepard care about Cerberus and The Illusive Man with their fight for "humanity" when Shepard is literally a SPECTRE? Shepard has the resources of the Council and/or Alliance Navy. Shepard doesn't need to be with Cerberus. It's just forcing the player to have to deal with it. Don't get me wrong, the companions are awesome, but I feel like they forgot about Legion and then threw him in last minute. Apparently, there was a lot of cut dialogue that's missing from him and the other companions. Then, while you, the player, were getting ship upgrades and exploring space ("kinda") and doing the boring planet scans for resources (dumbest idea ever), you were able to look at the beautiful scenery of the planets you could go to. But then, once you found out about the Collectors, it was cool but also lazy writing to just add an enemy because there were no Geth, plus Sovereign, so they threw in some useless bots, basically with no will of their own or anything. And I know the Geth are essentially just drones, but there's meaning behind them and why they exist. Then, finally, the end of it. Shepard just died. Why would he/she do that again without a guarantee of survival? But whatever, it's the writing that yet again forces the player to play it out because, too bad. But why would the Reapers even care about Shepard and humanity and make a human Reaper? Dumb. I mean, Sovereign said to the player that we are NOTHING but to be harvested, and that's it. I mean, I have more complaints about Mass Effect 2 & 3, but that'll take too long, and I'm done typing this out. But other than that, it's a great video, but I highly disagree with your position on the game. Is it fun? Of course, but I can't excuse the lazy writing in both ME 2 & 3. Personally, the first Mass Effect game was good enough; they didn't have to make any more of them, but like I said, it's personal choice.

@Bethgael

Ай бұрын

This is a perfect example of everything I said in my own post, thank you. :) Plot is everything; player choice does not matter. All roads lead to Rome.

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

You perfectly summed up why I hate ME2.

Couldn't agree more. You put into words how I felt about the trilogy, and I did not know why on a conscious level before (and I've been playing since OG ME 1 release back in 2007). You're right; Shep's death being a player choice would've had a total different meaning. I, too, badly want Shepard to return not because they're the only ones that can carry the torch, but rather because to me it feels like unresolved business and such a great character deserves better ending. Here is to hoping that Bioware brings us the chance of truly deciding how to retire the Shepard character in a way that feels right by the grandiosity of this character. Death can certainly be an option, and I hope they add more to the table of choices. And if the torch gets passed on to another character in the process, even better (compared to, say, a new beginning that is completely detached from the current lore and only shares the background of being "a Mass Effect universe story")!

Minor nit-pick, Mordin wasn't involved in the creation of the genophage, it was created hundreds of years earlier and Salarians are a short lived species, with an average lifespan around 30 years. He was part of the team that modified it though.

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

Appreciate it, I forgot it was released during the Krogan Rebellions. 👍

I really liked your idea of *a* Shepard returning from a parallel/alternate world, but I’m less keen on my own Shepard returning hundreds of years in the future when all their loved ones are dead. (We didn’t all romance Liara!) And I don’t think it’s too likely they’d bring back all the old squadmates as well… but i agree they should never have died in the first place, although I did choose destroy so mine didn’t, at least 😅

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

I don't think Shepard returning centuries later would make sense either. To me, it's Shepard and the Normandy squad together (somewhat) or move on to a new cast of characters. And since Gamble is in charge of the next title, and he's very aware of fan sentiment, I assume that if Shepard comes back, other previous squadmates will be back too.

@Ollyiswild_04

Ай бұрын

@@paragonseven I am optimistic that this next game could finally give us closure to ME3’s ending but there’s always that part of me that wants to see closure to all the romances. How would Garrus or Tali react to seeing Shepard alive again?

@Siliqueath

Ай бұрын

@@BeyondNormal. Right? I mean, Control means you have a Tyrant Robo-police state. And synthesis means all conflict is ended and everyone is merged. You're right, neither allow a continuation of the story or a setting where any truely interesting storytelling could happen (Well, I mean, you COULD be in an uprising against the Tyrant Control Reapers... Though that would sting and feel Dark, as that means you would be AGIANST Shepard) Destroy... allows a continuation. I mean, wiping out all AI life in the Galaxy is harsh... but, it can always be rebuilt and reactivated. And in the perfect ending, its also shown that, even this may not be as true as the Crucible tried to make out. It tried to point out Shepard was part Synthetic and would likely die in that choice. And Perfect shows a breath, showing that, maybe it wasn't right or as truthful as it claimed/thought. That leaves a lot more room for story telling.

Thank you for this video. I've never managed to put into words why the endings never sit much right with me, you're on point. The first time I experienced the ending, I chose synthesis and went a whole week in that contemplation period, first utterly disappointed, but later the ending grew on me, because my Shepard would sacrifice himself for the galaxy. However you captured perfectly what I felt in my heart and didn't know how to express

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

I did the exact same thing a week after I chose the Synthesis ending, but the ending never grew on me. Ngl, making this video was a cathartic way to understand why the endings made me feel so empty after finishing ME3.

I'm pretty sure that the purpose Shepherd's death, is to end the series. I don't believe Bioware had any intention of making continuing the series after the 3rd game.

Been watching some of your stuff and it gave me a few thoughts. One being the new threat. I know nothing about it, but what if it's the people that made the Angara, the Jardan(hope I spelled it right). What if when the initiative scouted potential areas in Andromeda they detected those. That might have gotten them curious to look at the Milky Way. Then after the crucible overloaded, they came to investigate. There first stop would likely be the Geth telescope that was looking at them to begin with. Then about who they are, Javick did mention a group of biological beings joining with there synthetic creations. Javick said they were quickly concord, but what if they were able to escape because they were biological/synthetic? Also as Javick said, all species that they concord were called Prothian, so the tech should be similar. That might also explain why some Angara are present in the Milky Way.

Hi Paragon7. I wanted to run a question by you. Do you think the Prothean scientists survived on the Citadel? If they were going into cryosleep to survive the Harvesting, then wouldn't they have supplies stored that could help them grow food, supplies of water. This would have to be an amount that could sustain hundreds of thousands of their people. Vigil said he believed the scientists starved to death but he doesn't know that for a fact. You've done a lot of research on this any hints or tid bits that could back up the scientists surviving on the Citadel?

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

To my current knowledge, there isn't any indication of the Prothean scientists surviving, so I personally think Vigil was right. I've seen theories that the Prothean scientists escaped to the Andromeda galaxy, but it's mainly 'no evidence, just vibes' theories at this point. :)

Another question. What are the Keepers hiding, they self-detonate when scanned by other means. What secrets are they hiding that Reapers didn't want anyone finding out. Could the keepers have given the Council races an early warning of the Reapers?

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

Probably not because the Council races refused to acknowledge the existence of Reapers when Shepard brought it up. The keepers are definitely still shrouded in mystery.

I think honestly the perfect destroy ending says that that was the correct decision and completes her arc as far as Bioware was concerned. Now My first play through ended in Synthesis, and I feel like given all the information at the time, that was the greatest good and end of threat. But I also believe that while Shepard was a survivor against the long odds, that doesn't necessarily follow that given a choice to end this today and bring in a new golden age for all species in the galaxy, that shepard would be selfish and say no, cause I want to live. Shepard makes the hard calls, and at the end of the day with Synthesis, She knew she could bring an end to the reapers, save, literally everybody, even maybe bring back the species destroyed by the reapers and bring in a new golden age. But only if she chose to merge with the catalyst energy. And she made the choice, because ultimately, saving the galaxy wasn't about her (There was no cult of shepard) she did what she thought was best and that, as they say is that. Now, did I want shepard to survive, heck yeah! And perfect destroy accomplishes that. Again, that's shepard fulfilling the promise to the galaxy, that she's leading the fight to take the reapers down, and in the end, she manages to make it. Long story short, in my mind, shepard made it. And for me either perfect destroy or synthesis were paragon shepard's satisfying endings. Great video :)

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

Appreciate your input! As a synthesis chooser, I personally didn't like that ending (or any of them) as the end of my Shepard's journey, but I'm glad you managed to get a satisfying ending for your Shepard. :)

Mordin doesn`T die in my playrhrough

I wanted Shepherd to settle down with his or her love interest that would have been a fitting end that's part of the reason why I want Shepherd to return if they're going to end Shepherd's story I want a happy ending

Mordin didn’t create the genophage he updated it

Great video again, though the Shepard Lives scene is present in the original release of the game - I have noticed it is a common misconception that it was added by the Extended Cut to satisfy fans. Frankly, it might have helped tone down the backlash somewhat if that was the standard Destroy ending because most of us, including myself, didn't meet the very high EMS requirements of the original release to unlock it on first playthrough, which also required investing into the multiplayer mode. The way I rationalise the ending these days is if the Commander has done their job well (High EMS) and the loyal Commander completes the mission to end the Reapers (Destroy), then surviving is the reward. It doesn't really need the rise out of the rubble scene again and a Star Wars fanfare, the hint of such itself is enough in closing a trilogy in which the Commander has overseen so many allies complete their character arcs. It has been a very slow acceptance process for me I will say. The harder process for me is that you have these great characters that are chucked straight into the deep end, the extinction level event is always looming above. This is the benefit that a Star Trek series gets, lots of smaller scale character driven stories. The Citadel DLC, post-mortem, has helped to counterbalance this - the Barbenheimer effect if you will.

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

Appreciate the Shep Lives tidbit, I assumed it was part of the extended cuts. Makes it even stranger that they locked Shepard's death behind putting EDI's name on the memorial wall. 😔 If I had played the originals, I'm pretty sure I'd be in the camp of slowly processing Shepard's death and coming to an acceptance that it was necessary. It's been a cool experience to see fans from a decade ago having processed Shepard's death differently than my own recent experience.

@TheCultOfShepard

Ай бұрын

Oh yes, one of the biggest gripes I have with the ending, is that you can unite the Geth and Quarians, provided all the right choices, in the same game, but you can't convince The Catalyst/Reapers its logic is disproven by that, assuming they are not as malicious as the demeanour of Sovereign and ME2 Harbinger had prior portrayed them as.

This is one of the many reasons why I pretend that the ending for my FemShep is that they chose destroy but the signal ONLY targets the Reapers (to this day it makes no sense that my Shep wouldn't think of this solution or force/convince the star child to make the arrangements😑). Shep barely escape with their life. Recovers, retire from service then the Citidel DLC is the final hurrah with the squad!🎉

To me the endings sound a bit like taken out of a magic hat, so to speak. The explosion of energy which... merges synthetics and biologics, making them understand each others perfectly well (so what? DNA and technology merge through a wave of energy?)... or a part of you, that is you enough to control the reapers, but is not you because you're dead, so your mind doesn't exist anymore while partly existing in a way, or is it some sort of copy done in an instant... even "destroy", that I usually choose because of that, sounds weird (what is destroyed? components? chips or means to store informations, that would explain the destruction of IAs, but how can you repair enough to make your starships or else work again like when they had all their control systems in order? "Bah, let's just finish the job..."). Maybe the Valars could do that, but a wave of energy from a technological device... That's what boggles me even before survival of Shepard or not. I played the mod for Skyrim called Enderal, and it shows me how a certain verisimilitude can make the difference for me. When we are to rationalize after the facts ("yes, but the tragic hero", all that), something is not so clear in the story, I think. Whatever, tastes and colors... despite the end, the trip was great anyway, right?

Mordin was integral to the creation of the modification of the Genophage not the creation of it. In that way he is the father of the modernized Genophage as seen in the game.

For me, the DLC Citadel was the most insulting part. If youre going to write a dark dark dark story and the only way to win is to die well, then a carnival dlc shoved in to pick up the players who are about to quit before the end of the game is just harmful to the first two games

Here's where I fundamentally disagree. 1) Thane was dying from the disease, but it was the disease that killed him insofar as the disease slowed him down enough to be killed. 2) Shepard's death served the plot in that he or she fought so long & hard to defeat the Reapers that when they WERE defeated, Shepard no longer had a reason to fight. It was a natural ending to his/her arc. Would I have liked to see the proverbial "happy ending," like Shepard raising kids with their love interest? Yes, but I'm satisfied with the end to Shepard's story, although not exactly the implementation of that ending.

@Siliqueath

Ай бұрын

See, that should have been another possible option. The survives, retires, happy ending. Not saying it should be the canon ending, or the only ending... as you said, Shepard's death is a satisfying and valid ending to the story too. But the fact is, there should have been a possibility.

@UnexpectedHistory

Ай бұрын

@Siliqueath To be honest, I think Shepard's death is really the only ending that makes narrative sense in the grand scheme of things. Shepard was the ONLY being that cared enough about the Reapers to put literally everything on the line for the galaxy all the way thru the 3 games. Even the entire crew checks out of the main story at one time or another. Even Garrus when he became Archangel. Shepard was the only one who would make the sacrifice play at the end. The only real question was how many people could Shepard save.

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

​@@UnexpectedHistory I 100% agree!

I don’t think that surviving is the way to be a “true hero“. I sympathize, because I would have liked to see Shepard survive; and I am speaking as someone who chooses perfect destroy every time. I really wouldn’t mind seeing Shepard in the next game. That said, I actually think Shepard’s death thematically serves the character very well. The rest of what I have to say is only under the presumption that Shepard is dead, so bear with me, here. In games like Fallout, your character is really just your avatar that you use to engage with the world. The character is a blank slate who has whatever personality you have. This isn’t a preestablished character. The character is you. Mass Effect is different. In Mass Effect, the character is not you. You are taking on the role of Commander Shepard. This is a fully fleshed out person with personality, and full voice acting, and interesting quirks and hobbies (Shepard loves collecting models, and loves fish, even if the player does not!) Now, as you pointed out, at the end of games 1 and 2, Shepard is placed in a position where death is a real possibility. The Sarren fight and the suicide mission both. But I think you’re putting emphasis on the wrong thing. Is it called the “suicide mission” because the writers wanted you to take away that Shepard defies death even on suicide missions? I propose to you that the writers called it “the suicide mission” because they wanted you to take away that Shepard is willing to die for the cause. That’s Shepard’s personality through and through. Shepard’s _survival_ in one and two is the thing that served the plot, because without survival, the trilogy wouldn’t continue. Still, willingness to die. That’s Shepard. That’s what the writers were conveying. In ME 3, though, Shepard’s survival is no longer a necessary thing, because the trilogy was at an end. Shepard can finally lean into that character trait of “willingness to die for the cause”, and actually go through with sacrificing themselves to stop the reapers. It is a character moment, and an integral one. If the player was given that choice to have Shepard survive, it would have undercut Shepard’s personality. Supplanted it. Think about it like this… Shepard’s death was always foreshadowed in each game, but it couldn’t happen yet because it wasn’t time. I know this was kind of a long read for a comment, but I hope it gave you an interesting perspective.

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

You absolutely nailed it!

Hi Paragon7. Do you think the Reapers held some of their forces back in Dark space or because of their superiority complex they just sent every Reaper in to battle against the Milkyway forces?

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

I don't think there's Reapers still in dark space, but there's always a chance. If they do return in the next game, I doubt the Reapers would come back as villains because they've already done that with the trilogy.

Awesome video. I agree with you 💯😊

Morten the Sheldon Cooper of the mass effect universe

I really wished Shepard I had combined synthetic and organic life to stop the Reapers without ending everything. I really want him back...

Game developers are leveraging their IP into movies and TV series. That is a hard sell when the main character dies. Even if the main character is not in that distribution the hope is there for their appearance if they are still around. It would make good business sense to bring Shepard back. Remember what happened when Luke showed up.

Have you ever watched the Mass Effect Stuff of the Lorerunner - his whole career as a streamer started thanks to it. Especially his ruminations are worth watching.

Mass Effect 3 was always a let down for me, especially coming after how much of an impact ME2 had on me. I felt it was very rushed. It's no surprise the studio as a whole went completely downhill after.

EA came and messed it up

Thank you for putting this into words.

Exactly. If the devs were tired of her, just let her retire. Run off with Liara to their far away star planet. Set up a bar for Garrus

I would say they couldn't finish the ending they really wanted so they needed something big to happen😂

Lol. I clicked because I thought "yes, finally someone gets that killing Shep at the beginning of 2 ruined the franchise!" Oh well, guess I'll just go back to yelling at clouds now...

@illizcit1

Ай бұрын

I find that, for me, that death was so unnecessary and unbelievable that they ruined any sort of possibility of a resurrection. It would just seem like very lazy writing...

@jasonGamesMaster

Ай бұрын

@@illizcit1 100%! All to force you to work for Cerberus, with no way to rebel or do something different. Instead, they could have had you proactively hunting down leads instead of undoing everything from the first game and basically ruining Liara's character in the process. I pretty much pretend like the 1st one is the only one (much like I do Dragon Age)....

@illizcit1

Ай бұрын

​@@jasonGamesMaster exactly. Idc I am not convinced Shepard as we play them (Renegade OR paragon) would have EVER worked with Cerberus. They were just continuously wedged into the story with no real reason for them or TIM to be there. For me, Cerberus ruined not just Shepards' story but their inclusion and focus in 2+ 3 took away the grandeur of an extinction rebellion that the arrival of the Reapers meant and reduced a galactic war into something akin to ....Iraq/Afghanistan War. That was the true trilogy killer. And to start me2 with Shepard being blown up in space, being exposed to the vacuum of space, suffocating, freezing in absolute zero, fall from the atmosphere of a planet to planet surface and the surface is a cold, hard ice surface.... too much hand wavey space magic. Me2 is fun to play, but it truly is the weakest of the trilogy, imo.

@jasonGamesMaster

Ай бұрын

@@illizcit1 lol. Definitely. My friends and I were so upset about it we ended up doing a tabletop version of events extrapolating from the ending of 1. Garrus became a spectre and got his own ship, the turian built sister ship to the Normandy, and they and Shepherd were tasked with following up on the leads they had on the Reapers. Shepherd, Kaiden, and Ashley did background missions (mostly riffs on existing missions from the games) while my players were under Garrus and did new missions. Tali went back to her people, and Wrex to his (we did follow their storylines, just a little earlier). Liara (and eventually Mordin) were the home base team doing all the science, etc. It was a blast. Had Kai Lang, Jacob, and Miranda showing up as recurring villains, met up and worked with Thane a few times, and rescued Grunt. Best of all, when the Reapers arrived, the galaxy was ready and we fought a real war and pushed them back and defeated them (their biggest advantage was surprise and crippling the citadel, after all).

I personally ascribe to the Shepherd Indoctrination theory

My head cannon is at the end of rannoc. You mom a reaper and save 2 races. After that is the end game content. From a game okay perspective that is

I was upset Shepard died but I was also happy at the same time. It felt very real. People can't always succeed and defy all odds time and time again. That creates characters that can never truely die, it mitigates the severity of the threat.

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

Exactly!

After all these years I still prefer the indoctrination fan theory over the weird endings.

Ok, ok, hear me out.... what if Shepard isn't the one taking a breath in the perfect destroy ending? If Shepherd is on the Persidum, then why are they surrounded by brick and mortar and not steal and glass? Could the person at the end be the clone. 😅

@bronwynecg

Ай бұрын

That’s EXACTLY what I was thinking … 🤔

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

Wild thought that I hadn't considered....but probably not. The Citadel DLC where the clone was revealed was released a little bit after the original Mass Effect 3 release. And since Shep took that breath during the rushed extended cuts which was also before the clone reveal, I assume it's not the clone. IMO, the strange discrepancies of "where the heck is Shepard" in that shot is simply because of a rushed effort to please fans that Shepard could've lived, so the writers or animators didn't know how to portray the shot.

@Ruzbe_r

Ай бұрын

And how Shep's body transferred to Alchera while citadel was right on top of Earth? It's wierred.

@Bethgael

Ай бұрын

It was speculation like this that led to the clone as the protagonist in the Citadel DLC, just so you know. :D I love it! But that was Bioware making fun of the theory. That's not to say they won't retcon it for ME5 though. If it serves their "vision", they will.

@Love2bda1

Ай бұрын

@Bethgael I don't know how a game is made. I assume the story is cut for time, and what is cut is used as DLC, to bring more lore. 🤔 but life be lifen.

My first ending on 3 was synthesis i will admit i was pretty durn upset because well i wanted her to live thats ending was i guess terrible to me. She was only in her 30's that is to young to me just saying. I'm pretty scared to do a second playthrough because im afraid i might choice another ending blindly of her dieing or the same ending.

Shepard is going to return just because EA thinks will make them more money.

There's nothing to do for the character after defeating The Reapers. This is why Halo tried (and failed) moving away from Master Chief after the Holy Covenant was broken and The Flood was eradicated. Why Star Trek moved away from Capt Kirk after The Federation and the Klingon Empire achieved peace. Why Star Wars (until disney bought it, and destroyed it) ended after Luke Skywalker brought Darth Vader back to the Light and defeated the Emperor. Etc etc.

@SelineSnape

Ай бұрын

While this is true, I'm not really a fan of throwing characters away once that specific story has been told. A protagonist should have a right to "exist" off-screen without the overused "the hero has to die a tragic death to be heroic" trope.

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

IMO, you can move on from a main character without killing them off, and still tell stories in that universe. Following other characters and perspectives is possible, and was an option with the end of Shepard's arc too, but the writers chose a different route.

@Blackreaper95

Ай бұрын

@aWraithsSoul well they could retire as well which was mentioned in ME3 if I remember correctly, other than that adding a new character is easy a new character would be on a completely different with a completely different crew and background they pretty much did a new crew in ME2 and 3 anyways. Shepard being alive at the same time wouldn't even matter really especially if it's after ME3.

Shepard, Shepard, Shepard... Sheepppparrrd!😂

No it fidnt thenentire theme of m3 was sacrifice if u didnt die it would destroyed the engire theme

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

This.

u can survive. and also the problem if main guy dies in war as a leader and sacrifce. kinda the point that war without sacrice is a lame story .so dont get it. none of the endings were happily ever After.

The point of the trilogy is making the hard decisions and sacrificing whatever is necessary to stop the Reapers. That's what Shepard did. Plus Shepard being tired isn't Shepard being sleepy or needing a quick mental rest. In each backstory option they either put their men through a meat grinder, had their entire squad killed with only them left alive (and apparently one other person), or did God know what in a gang in earth having no parents. Then they're an accomplished commander in the baby, meaning they've seen who knows what. Then they've had several close friends die only in the few years they knew about the Reapers. And, of yeah, THEY DIED ONCE TOO. Shepard is said to be the ultimate symbol of hope, but the series makes it clear especially toward the end of 3 that they're just a soldier. Shepard is human and can only take so much.

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

Exactly!

What I would have done: Synthesis ending, a lie and the Reapers win. Synthesis would be just a fancy word for harvesting. Control ending, Shep can take control to some extend and banish the Reapers for a few hundred (or thousand) years. Shep can survive if assets are high enough. Destroy ending, as is but the child lied and it only destroys the Reapers. Shep does not survive. Edit: Had a second thought about the destroy ending.

@elion4245

Ай бұрын

and the choices should've definetely been presented in a different form. Jump into a beam / grab some cabels / shoot some conduit thing. Conveniently waiting, billions of years, inside of a citadel. No wonder, indoctrination theory was made, with such a dumb way to interact with a crucible. This interface is really "anticlimactic". Just a plain simple console, like "citadel main control unit", with an additional option for a jump into a beam, if needed, would've been more believable

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

​@@elion4245 Yes, the whole thing makes no sense physically.

I think far too many people are obsessed with Shepard and refuse to let go. It was planned as a trilogy. I love the original trilogy, and Mass Effect is my favorite gaming franchise ever. Yes, the ending of ME3 has its flaws. It was rushed and changed over the development process. However, just because Shepard was a survivor in the first two games didn't mean that they would have to survive the third. Heroes often die in their stories. Especially when sacrificing themselves for the benefit and greater good of everyone else. I had always felt that the fate of Shepard and the Reapers were intertwined from pretty much the beginning. I wasn't shocked or mad that Shepard made the ultimate sacrifice in order to save the galaxy. In many ways, I felt like Shepard was always moving in that direction. A hero does what is necessary and will always put the life of others above their own. If BioWare is planning on bringing Shepard back in some capacity, it better make sense and be integral to the story that they are trying to tell. If it is just being done for fan service or brownie points so they can say "Hey look guys Shepard is back!" Then I feel that would be a mistake. The Mass Effect universe is amazing and full of so many storytelling opportunities. Shepard does not have to be included in order for it to be a Mass Effect game. I just want BioWare to take their time and craft an incredible story with compelling characters to get to know and interesting places to explore. They need to lean in the direction of a Baldur's Gate 3 and just make a great game. Don't be like the rest of the gaming industry and give us DEI created, politically driven, virtue signaling nonsense. Fingers crossed BioWare, don't screw this up.

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

I feel the same way! Thank you for writing this down! Now I don't have to.

@antonioblademaster

Ай бұрын

My thoughts exactily

Agreed!

It was ok they did it because of game dev stuff not because the story had to go that way but it also did not go against existing story or cannon it simply did not have to happen. They did it for exactly the reason you made this video they knew people would not want to let go of shep and let them move on to other stories or even further stories in sheps universe even, they just did not understand that people would simply be weird and refuse to move on. Review bombing and screaming for years. It is all very dramatic and exhausting. I do not want shep back. To get them back we have to re write the whole last game and all the story just so we can get what we want. I want fun and excitement and adventure and wonder not the same old character brought back from the dead over and over again like a 80s horror villain. Or a invincible undying protagonist that I never have to worry about as they will always win and never die that takes away all the stakes.

I hated their first death, to be honest. Also I'm glad Shepard died at the end of ME3. It makes sense. I felt the redone ending where Shepard could survive with a True Destroy ending was a cop out. So I hope Shepard doesn't return for ME5 but is "Mentioned in Dispatches" with voice logs.

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

Same.

I’l watch this later

My biggest issue with the ending of ME3 was the deus ex starchild appearing, presenting his sus history of the universe, and then giving us 3 bad endings to choose from. No pushback at all from Shepard being told to choose a flavor of genocide. No matter what you choose the starchild wins in the end because you were playing his game the whole time.

@DyaMetR

22 күн бұрын

With all the nitpicks and theories crafted to cope with this ending, people forget that THIS is the main issue. The extended cut does not fix anything as it just gives a proper epilogue to an already flawed ending.

IMHO...character promises are why we need to see Ryder in the next game....In Andromeda, Ryder takes over the torch of Pathfinder from their father, giving us the PROMISE that Ryder will grow into the Hero of the Andromeda Galaxy (and defender of the Angara)

@SelineSnape

Ай бұрын

I hope not, I really don't want to have to play a bratty teenager again. Growth is possible for sure, but this character was ruined for me from the get go and I - personally - don't want to waste anymore time with them after the bada**ery I got to experience with Shep.

@paragonseven

Ай бұрын

I agree that it'd be a letdown if Ryder isn't in the next game, only because the current Mass Effect team has hinted more than a few times that Andromeda will be in the next game somehow. And to me, Andromeda's involvement means Ryder's involvement.

@Dantes74302

Ай бұрын

@@SelineSnape Who says you'll have to play him as a bratty teenager ? That's why we have time-skips and cut-scenes. If there's time between the end of Andromeda and the start of Next, they'll probably have much more experience under their belt.

@SelineSnape

Ай бұрын

@@Dantes74302 As I've already said, even if Ryder had the chance to grow off-screen, the character is already ruined for me apart from the fact that off screen development for a protagonist is a cheap cop-out/retcon for mediocre writing issues in Andromeda. You don't have to agree with my view, but there's a reason why not many people want to play as Ryder again.

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

​@@Dantes74302 This! Yes please! Bring Ryder back!

They didn't really get the issue in it. It's always impactful to see a Hero die, but tbh having her get found in the wreckage and see that she goes onto help with rebuilding and end up happily enjoying the rest of her life with even a slide reel montage of some happy moments with their romantic partner and/or teammates would have actually been a far more effective way to end the story of Commander Shepard. The way they ended it is why I need more..after so much effort and so much work...with nobody but the team believing in Shepard..to have that end in death is just unfair. I've legit never gotten over that really. I still replay the trilogy to death once a year sometimes twice a year, but I need some closure lolol.

I completly disagree.. And coming from someone who has played the trilogy about 15 times , i'm gonna VERY disappointed if they bring back Shepard. Shep's arc is done , that's it.

it would be fine if there was no continuation. so if the entire story was done but ya it was pointless

Tbh I like the takes but to me Shepard death needs to happen even if you do everything right in the last 2 games Shepard stated that we are not ready I know a lot of people were mad at the endings and made the extended cut to make them feel better but let’s be honest Shepard had to survive the last 2 games because his promise is not to survive it’s to defeat the reapers no matter the cost illusive man said we can’t lose Shepard because they know about the reapers. Now they defeated the reaper their not needed the other point is to rebuild together in all endings even if they have bad endings but the moral of MASS EFFECT is to work together now you don’t have to choose that but that is how it is in all games us as Humans and aliens is to destroy the threat now Shepard as a character can be a nice person or a ruthless person your choice throughout the games you don’t have to stick with them but you need to be working together even if you do sabotage even if they death felt force it needed to happen so they could change the shape of the galaxy tbh instead of a brand new mass effect with shep we should have gotten a prequel first as to how he/her became an N7 and what they did like you start at the very beginning the mindor flash back or the akuze mission torfan it would make more sense to do that first and would be a hit sense they remastered the games you can now transfer data

Shepard surviving 3 after surviving 1 and 2 would be to good of sn ending victory is never won without difficult choices

this entire video is just subjective. There is no objective argument on what makes a good story as long as the story doesn’t have massive plot holes but I will admit the sacrifice stuff is one of the most annoying game designs because it’s like I just played a game trying to keep these characters alive and you decide nope at the last ending. All my work is for not they need to die frustrating so frustrating.

What did people expect bioware to make Shepard be unkillable and choices without consequences like Liara? Shepard died because bioware only wanted Shepard story to be a trilogy. There was no choice that Shepard chould of made to change that.

@JezaGaia

Ай бұрын

No exactly the opposite, having choices, meaning having some endings where Shepard gets to live and some where they die. If we have enough allies and assets we manage to bring the crucible to the citadel and fire it, if we had enough people to built it well enough (assets ingame) it works perfectly and we live without a doubt, if it's not perfectly finished there are damages and we are damaged to, the extent depending on completion and the worst cases meaning death for us. If we didn't unite enough people or have enough scientists we fail to bring it and/or it fails to fire and we are killed by the reapers. It''s a very rough idea abut something like that, no star brat and crazy crap choices.

@briannichols3341

Ай бұрын

​@JezaGaia Shepard Breath doesn't mean Shepard survives. I admit I want my Shepard back. The ending of 3 sucked. All that work for 3 games, and what was the payoff? Bioware lets you pick Shepards death scene!

@JezaGaia

Ай бұрын

@@briannichols3341 Well in the notes they took when making the ending they wrote that perfect destroy = Shepard alive but they wanted to keep us guessing that's why they gave us the breath, a small hope but no definitive answer. Agreed though the ending was crap.

@briannichols3341

Ай бұрын

​@@JezaGaiaSmall hopes are better than none. I am hoping the new lead writer is able to clean up the mess that was the ending of ME3

You can only use the death card once and Bioware wasted it with Mass Effect 2 Shepard should have lived in Mass Effect 3 period Bioware are such idiots when it comes with writing. Other than that a great video keep up the great work👍 And greetings from the Netherlands🇳🇱

@dorottyapapp

Ай бұрын

I would say: You can only use the resurrection card once, otherwise it becomes a joke. Life, death, sacrifice will become meaningless. Bioware please don't bring back Shepard! I think it was a big mistake killing off then resurrecting Shep in ME2. Yes, they wasted it.

Thank you. The explanation you've walked through here makes a lot of sense to me, and I only hope that you're right that Shepard will return, and therefore that "Shepard as Survivor" will be satisfied.

The Lord of the Rings shows how to write a trilogy with a satisfying ending and still sunset beloved characters. Shepard could have survived the defeat of the reapers, which uses the relays to propagate their destruction, then become humanity's councilor and led a united galactic effort to rebuild relays and added the quarian, the geth, and the krogan to the council and saved what they could of the batarian hegemony and made them a client race like the elcor and volus until they could recover their former capabilities. Guiding the batarians into a peaceful polity. It hits most of the salient points, keeps the council odd numbered to prevent voting lock, is a fitting mirror to david anderson's best arc, and is a pretty great cap to a paragon run. Or tweak the script and have First Councilor for life Shepard use his krogan shock troops to dominate and control the galaxy while keeping the citadel as his massive spaceborne fortress unassailable by any resistance efforts that survived the reapers.

In retrospective, even the original concepts of the ME3 endings were equally dissatisfying. There's an interview with Bioware devs that confirms this.

@Josian-ps7fb

Ай бұрын

I don't know the interview, but I agree with you about the endings, which all sound too "magical" to me.

Actually following your point: Shepard would never have chose control ending. The fact you decide to do it in the end as the only way to ensure a future for the next cycles makes it very interesting imo