Yesterday, I discussed how Bioware’s actions may have set the industry back a decade as an art form. Today, I address a topic that could make it even worse.
If you didn’t read yesterday’s article, here’s Part One.
So, the future looks bleak for gamers who believed and defended their past time as an art form. Bioware has apparently caved to the fans, given up its artistry, and decided that video games are merely a product that’s vision rests solely on the market for which it is created.
“BUT WAIT!” cry the hopeful Mass Effect fans. “This may have been the plan all along. Please listen to my thirty page thesis on the indoctrination theory and you’ll understand that this wasn’t poor writing. Our most sacred Bioware has not let us down! There is a plan, I say. A PLAN!” This is about the time when they try to lure you into a dark alley to join their ‘club’ where they wear identical robes and prepare for the day Shepard calls on them to save the galaxy from the Reaper invasion.
(I kid, I kid…Mostly)
Despite the slightly uncomfortable zealousness that these fans tend to have when defending Bioware’s actions with this theory, there’s actually a lot of evidence that these fans are right! I know it’s easy to put up one’s skepticism shield and say that such a convoluted method by which to deliver the plot seems impossible, but… the evidence is there. Really. Check out this video by Angry Joe. He sums up the entire theory really well, and honestly, I can’t deny that it holds a lot of weight. Sure, it doesn’t explain everything, and it raises questions about why the ending is framed the way that it is, but it makes a lot of sense.
For those of you that for whatever reason don’t enjoy videos, I’ll try to summarize briefly. The indoctrination theory is based on the idea that overexposure to certain Reaper technology can cause for someone’s mind to be controlled. If this is true, the entire ending was actually a hallucination brought on by the Reapers in Shepard’s head. It explains the out of character moments, the massive plot holes, and even some of the smaller points that otherwise wouldn’t make much sense.
(For the finer points, I really do ask that you watch the video. It’s incredibly interesting, and he’s able to cover a lot far more quickly than I can by writing it all out)
Perhaps the biggest reason to believe in this theory comes from Bioware themselves. First, this is Bioware, developers of some of the greatest RPGs of all time. It’s really hard to believe they would drop the ball that badly with the ending, especially given how well they write characters and avoid plot holes. The indoctrination theory would be right up their alley in terms of storytelling quality, albeit a misguided effort (getting there). One should also take into account the developer’s twitter accounts, where they kept telling people that they were going to do “something big” and that they should “keep their saves” because there’s “more to come with Shepard”. Clearly, they had something planned.
So, this should be great! Bioware didn’t sell out; they’re just going ahead with the ending they had all along. The DLC that gives a far more proper and definitive ending will arrive soon, Bioware will have defended themselves as artists, and all will be right in the world!
…Right?
Sadly, this has officially become a far bigger issue, and what happens next if this theory is true could be even worse for the industry, at least on the consumer’s side.
Let’s assume for the sake of discussion that the Indoctrination Theory is true. The ending of Mass Effect 3 has been nothing but a hallucination, which explains all the plot holes and feels wrong to the player because it is wrong. Soon, players will be able to buy the ending to their game as DLC.
Read that last sentence again. If this is the case, Bioware has officially enacted the sleaziest strategy in the history of video gaming. They have gotten players invested with a series over three games only to deny them the proper, canonical ending unless they pay for it. I’m sorry, but that’s just bullshit. They are essentially holding their fan base at gunpoint saying that the $60 (or $80 if you bought the collector’s edition) wasn’t enough, and unless you’re willing to fork over another $15, you don’t get a proper ending to the series.
How is this okay? Since when is it acceptable for anyone to withhold essential portions of a story unless you pay even more money for it? Think of the extension of this logic. This would be like paying $15 to see Star Wars Episode V in theaters, only for the movie to end abruptly right before the showdown between Luke and Darth Vader, but for another $5, you can see the rest of the movie in a separate theater across the street. That would be like buying Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and then finding out the scene in which Harry finally confronts Voldemort has to be bought separately as a supplement. Both of these are ridiculous…but that’s exactly what Bioware seems to be doing.
The worst part is that it will probably work. Let’s face it, there’s a reason the Mass Effect series keeps getting really high reviews. Bioware’s great at making deeply immersive RPGs, and if the diehard fans (who loved everything about the game until the ending) have a chance to have more of the series they love while resolving their issues about the ending…they’ll take it. EmTrack2 (who you met in this video) said it best last night. “I’ll keep giving them my money. I mean, I’ll hate myself for it, but I can’t help it. I love these games.”
She’s not alone. Remember, people on the internet have been asking for this. This is supposedly the best case scenario at this point. Bioware has put into place the most devious and manipulative sales strategy the gaming industry has ever seen, unprecedented in any popular media, and it’s probably going to work. That makes me feel sick to my stomach.
(Some of you are going to try to blame EA for this if this turns out to be true. Trust me, I want to as well. EA is known for making stupid, shortsighted, and downright insulting decisions…But we can’t blame them for this one. Unless you’re going to argue that stupidity and contemptibility is contagious, EA’s just the publisher, and developers have far more say in how DLC is spaced out and structured since they get a higher percentage of profit from it. This one’s squarely on Bioware’s shoulders. Sorry)
What will this mean for the industry? Well, now there’s a precedent of withholding the ending of a series and saving it for DLC to ensure a higher profit margin for the developer, and since Bioware is easily one of the three most influential developers in the world right now, others are sure to follow in their footsteps. Don’t be surprised if, in order to fight what many developers believe are slights in the piracy and used games market, DLC becomes much less optional if you want a complete narrative experience. If just enough people are invested in the game and thus buy the DLC, companies will be able to take the PR hit while lining their pockets with money they bullied out of you instead of earning.
And it doesn’t solve the games as art problem I mentioned in Part One. While Bioware is still in charge of its artistic vision in this scenario, they’re far from delivering art if they aren’t shipping a completed product (and if the indoctrination theory is true, it’s impossible to argue that the game is complete because the ending hasn’t happened yet!). This would make games as manipulative as the children’s toy market, and they’d most assuredly be products if their purpose was to manipulate the maximum amount of money from the consumer for each game. That’s simply not how art works.
But let’s suppose a third option, the least dangerous option in the long run. What if the DLC is given to players for free? One could argue that Bioware was still being manipulative by stirring controversy about the ending by not including it in the game, but it’s far less manipulative than forcing people to pay money for the privilege of getting what they paid for in the first place.
If that’s true, this whole thing is short sighted. Bioware will have stirred up publicity with its ending controversy, but they didn’t need to do that! This is BIOWARE we’re talking about. The creators of Baldur’s Gate, Jade Empire, and Knights of the Old Republic. They’re arguably the most popular developer in the world, and Mass Effect 3 was one of the most anticipated games I’ve ever seen. Why risk alienating a significant portion of your fan base if they don’t wait for you to give them a proper ending for a little publicity when you’re already the biggest and most popular developer out there? What did they have to gain from all this?
I mean, really, it makes no logical sense. There is no universe that exists in which Bioware (Bioware!) needs to pull a stunt like this. Did they really not expect this to go over poorly? If the indoctrination theory is true, they knew this wasn’t a proper ending, and they shipped it anyway, expecting people to be happy and loyal to them despite not getting what they paid for. That reasoning just doesn’t make any sense to me. Especially since RPGs are kind of Bioware’s thing, and they’ve now all but eliminated a significant portion of their fan base’s trust. Players spent over 90 hours over three games to be given an incomplete ending until Bioware decided they could have it. You don’t think these players will take that into consideration the next time Bioware asks them to hop on board with their next series of games? I mean, Bioware’s a great developer, but people have limits. Eventually you push people too far, and I have to believe a considerable number of players have been pushed to their breaking point by this.
So to recap, Bioware’s promise that there will be a modified ending through DLC has assured us of one of three options:
1. Bioware has given in to fan’s demands, thereby proving all skeptics correct when they argue that games are not an art form.
2. Bioware had this plan all along and are using their fan’s devotion to the series against them to make more money out of the deal, setting a dangerous precedent that will haunt the industry for years to come.
3. Bioware is full of idiots (who thought this was a good idea) or incompetents (who couldn’t finish the real ending in time, and decided to ship the game as is instead of delaying to wait for it), and a precedent is set that developers can get away with it.
I don’t believe in option 3 (though I wouldn’t be surprised if Bioware does decide to give players the ending DLC for free as a PR move) because Bioware’s simply too good at their job for this to happen, which means that, at least in intentions, either option 1 or option 2 is true. Only time will tell which is the case, but regardless, the video game industry will never be the same.
The Red Shirt Crew Blog and Podcast Network 
You make some good points. But I feel like regardless of whether the ending was planned or not, Bioware isn't really sacrificing their “artistic vision,” as you say. At least in my opinion. They've been very clear that they are not going to be taking away from the endings, merely adding more to it. Even if Indoctrination Theory isn't the case (Which I find unlikely, given the evidence. Have you seen the video that Angry Joe cites? That's what first started to convince me), they're not going to be like “Oh, nevermind, the ending didn't really happen at all.” I will admit that I'll be upset if they charge for the DLC, but as you've pointed out, it won't stop me from buying it. 😛 And in all honesty, I think Bioware is the only one that COULD pull something like this off. If it is Indoctrination, they'll have succeeded in not only indoctrinating Shepard, but the majority of the fanbase. Maybe I'm strange, but I think that's kind of epic. Just my opinion, though. And yes, I realize I'm extremely biased in this case. 😛
The article was a very interesting read though. 🙂 I've been researching this since I beat the game nearly a week ago. I enjoy seeing new perspectives on it. 😀
If they knowingly shipped a game without a finished ending (which is most assuredly the case if the Indoctrination theory is true), then they sacrificed SOMETHING. You don't have to call it artistic vision. I call it artistic integrity. That they would send out an incomplete game knowingly takes away from everything they've accomplished as a company and destroys any respect I had for them from a business perspective. I recognize they'll get away with it because the product is so good, but that HAS to create negative PR at the very least with the numbers of fans who had to suffer through this whole debacle. I mean, how will anyone trust Bioware the next time they make promises like this? I don't see how they can, and I think Bioware will be regretting their decision.
It's interesting that you find this as epic. Maybe if the DLC was released promptly before criticism could arise, or required a code only unlocked upon completion of the game, but they didn't. It won't be out for months, and in the mean time, fans are left suffering through speculation that cannot possibly live up to the expectations that will be rebuilt in the coming months. Either way, that they would put their fan base in this position tells me everything I need to know, and personally, if they do charge for DLC, Bioware will go into the “unforgivable” category for me.
And that's a perfectly valid opinion. I can see where you're coming from, certainly. I think it's a little harsh, but I guess my perspective is just different on the situation. I mean, I've gone through so many stages of emotion throughout the past week since finishing the game: from utter grief to confusion to anger… And yet, I still can't help but marvel at what they've accomplished, and continue to love the universe they've created. The feeling when I was looking through the evidence for Indoctrination and all the pieces started to fall into place? Indescribable. And I'll be looking forward to whatever they have in store for us. Even if I turn out to be wrong. Again, it's just my (incredibly biased) opinion.
“This would make games as manipulative as the children's toy market, and they'd most assuredly be products if their purpose was to manipulate the maximum amount of money from the consumer for each game. That's simply not how art works.”
Off-topic, but I'm not sure you know how art works. This is more or less how it works- artists need to pay the bills somehow.
Joanna: Fair enough. I guess my only fear is that because Bioware got away with it, others will soon believe they can too, and the effects of that could be devastating for the consumers.
Anonymous: I understand that artists have to pay the bills. But like I said, this is Bioware; they don't need to resort to something like this to accomplish that. The game was already destined to be one of the top selling games of all time. This had nothing to do with “paying the bills”. If they WERE aware of what they were doing, and they had this plan in mind from the beginning, then they're not trying to pay the bills. They're trying to maximize profit. They're trying to wring every cent out of the consumer because they can.
I'm all for paying artists for great work. I was planning on buying ME3 soon so that Bioware could have my money, even with the poor ending and despite the fact that I wouldn't be able to play it for a while. This is different; they purposefully didn't finish the product (assuming the indoctrination theory is true; the other theory is still equally viable) and are getting away with that. You couldn't do that in literature. You couldn't do that in theatre. No one can do that in any true form of art, because that's not what art is about.
Trying to make sure your bills get paid is done by offering negligible DLC for other games that promote people buying other products (like the Blood Dragon Armor from Dragon Age Origins that unlocked a similar item in ME2). This is holding your own fan base for ransom, and it sets a dangerous precedent if (and likely when, considering how faithful the fan base continues to be despite all of this) this occurs.
Throwing this into the ring: by your argument, Great Expectations cannot be considered 'art' as its ending was revised due to fan feedback. I just worry a bit over this notion that art is unchangeable, as, well, that isn't the case. The points of 'sending out an unrefined product' are much more valid to me than 'by agreeing to change the ending if that is the case here Bioware is undoing all arguments for video games as an art form' as art is fluid and the message is still there. Regarding the argument of 'art isn't about not finishing a product', weeeelll. I'm certain I could find a literary or traditional art example of this. I'm certain there were instances where Dickens (since I've started with him) was just shunting out word vomit to fill his quota for the newspapers he initially published in. I'm certain a commissioned portrait artist has rushed an unrefined work to meet a deadline, just as I'm certain some movies have been mucked about with to make it to their release date. I feel like Blade Runner could be a good example here, as that film was altered from its intended form for mass release and mass appeal via the Harrison Ford exposition voice-over added to make the movie more accessible. Art isn't always JUST for art's sake, sometimes it is about meeting a deadline or pleasing the target audience, even if one is established already in their industries.
If I were Bioware, my rationale behind not sending out a complete ending would be this: if the Indoctrination Theory is correct, the player would have to believe the ending for the 'true' ending to be powerful. Since it is all about the player feeling like they ARE Shepherd, when they first hit that ending, well, they'd have to believe the mind-control to be properly outraged about it. If it's done right, I could see it as a VERY clever immersion tool, and it clearly demonstrates that the fans are invested in the characters enough to come back; something has resonated with the players of these games, and that resonance is what I think art is all about. (I do agree, however, that making people pay for the 'real' ending is just obnoxious. )
Furthermore, the meaning of art can be a very personal, subjective thing; even if the creator has their own intent for what the piece of art SHOULD mean, that doesn't stop someone else from interpreting it a different way. That doesn't invalidate it as an art form (in fact, it could be argued that it makes it an even BETTER example of art), it merely shows that the work in question has enough depth to stir up thought. If we're going off of art as a vector in which to inspire thought, well, ME3 has CERTAINLY proven itself to be that. A more general definition is art exists to deliver a message. That's where I think you're coming with with your argument of 'changing the ending invalidates it as art' as the message has changed, thus the 'artist' is compromising his artistic integrity for popular appeal. However, there's STILL a message there. It might be a weaker art form, but it's still art because, as I said before, art is fluid and the message CAN change. Returning to a literature example: although the work itself wasn't altered, MANY authors are terrible about defining what, exactly, the message of their work is (I'm thinking specifically of Heinlein and I THINK Vonnegut). This implies that a set-in-stone message isn't necessary for something to be art.
I think a question of artistic integrity would indeed be more apt here, but I also think that you can't generalize the actions of one (Bioware) to the entire industry; Bioware making a misstep does not invalidate the beauty of Braid, for example, or Baten Kaitos (one of my favorite games, woefully underrated in my opinion).
Red Headed Paramedic: You make some interesting points, and I'd since I know you personally, I'd rather explain my argument in person or over Facebook. If anyone else is interested in the same point, please comment here; I read these every day, and I WILL respond, if not here, then in a podcast.
For those of you interested in supplemental material, I just got into a massive forum debate over at Escapist Magazine here:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.355624-MovieBobs-thoughts-on-the-ME3-ending-controversy?page=4 .
I'm Falcon123 on Escapist, and I respond pretty frequently in this forum starting on page four (which the link should take you directly to. If you want to understand more of what I mean when I discuss the loss of artistic integrity, or just want more insight into the minds of the players of this game, I encourage you to check it out. It's a good read.
I agree with the Indoctrination theory but disagree with the Dream Theory. I’ve done some extensive research using the Mass Effect Wiki and have proved that Shepard has been indoctrinated with that info. I also work toward debunking the “Dream theory” as presented by Acavyos on Youtube. Check out the last of my four post series here at http://www.thedaybyday-tahj.blogspot.com, or just read about how I proved that the Commander has been indoctrinated.