Realism vs Satisfaction in Narrative/Storytelling?

[Kreekakon]

Very good posts from everyone!

After a small bit of digging around I'd like to present to all of you what I think could very well be one of the most extremely controversial examples in deciding which one of the two factors is more important:

Mass Effect 2's Ending

Yes Mass Effect 2's ending. Not three...TWO. Mass Effect 2's ending has throughout the years been constantly praised as one of the best endings in video game history being able to combine epicness, satisfaction, and chills all in one package. All the while these feelings were all amplified by our emotional attachments to our crew members.

However despite all of this praise there seems to be a group of people who have voiced criticisms as to how the core of the ending was handled overall. Their complainants mainly go back to the below points:

1. The whole game, with the ending being the particular standout, is god-complex galore. The critics say that if one deconstructs the overall ending, the suicide mission is actually rather un-suicidal. As long as Shepard isn't being stupid at all, then he can breeze through the mission without really coming close to losing people at all. They say the tension ends up being false tension when deconstructed.

2. Lack of actual meaningful choice. This is an extension of the first criticism in that the choices are not difficult at all as long as Shepard knows what he's doing. This is further amplified that there are no actual "consequential choices" which force the player to choose - there are only "right or wrong questions" which are easily answered without too much thought.

Fans who have voiced these criticisms noted that they still massively enjoyed the ending because it was still really exciting. They were mainly voicing their disappointment that the experience of Mass Effect 2 couldn't have been more tweaked to have been a deeper experience with more deeply impacting interactions instead of a "best ending where all the heroes end up happy".

---------------------------------

My personal response to these criticisms is that I believe that they are well grounded yes, but I feel that this is one of those cases where the work has "properly" taken satisfaction over a deeper experience.

I think from the start of writing the story was meant to be a story that was showcasing that if Shepard tried hard enough, and worked hard enough together with his crew then he could really make a triumphant ending.

It may be a god-complex showcase, but it's stemmed from Shepard's understanding of his crew, and how to properly prepare which allows everyone to go unscathed.

Of course there could be another version of the story in which it did end up as a deeper experience, and without having seen it I don't know how it would really turn out. But I do know that it would be vastly different from this upbeat and hopeful version that we all love so much right now.

What do you all think?