Life is Strange: Why the ending was so bad (MAJOR SPOILERS)

"...we can care deeply, selflessly for people we know, but our empathy rarely extends beyond our line of sight." - Dr. Mann (Matt Damon), Interstellar

In 2015, a little known French game developer called DontNod Entertainment released an episodic adventure game called Life is Strange. Set against the backdrop of the (seemingly) idyllic town of Arcadia Bay, the game puts players in the shoes of Max Caulfield, an 18 year old aspiring photography student. You live out five days of her high school life in the game.

Yeah I know, at first glance this kind of material is anything but exciting. But oh boy, I was in for one of the biggest surprises in all my years of gaming. Long story short, I experienced a game that overall earned its place as being one of the best games of the decade, and proved to me why it's so highly rated on Steam and the Xbox Store, ranking alongside esteemed titles such as The Arkham Trilogy and The Witcher 3.

Is the game perfect? Sadly no. There are a couple of hiccups along the way. But I'll focus on the biggest shortcoming. That ending. When Honest Trailers declared that Life is Strange's ending was as bad as Mass Effect 3, they weren't exaggerating. Ever since that final episode literally "Polarized" gamers who stuck all the way to the end, there have been countless discussions on why the ending was terrible or what was the right ending; the unofficial term for this debate is "Bae vs Bay." With Life is Strange 2 already out, I wanted to get my personal thoughts on the ending out of my system. After reading numerous threads, comments, essays on the matter, here are my two cents on why the ending of Life is Strange didn't work.

Reason 1: The product didn't function as advertised

Every time you start a new episode of Life is Strange, this screen will pop up before the first cutscene:

And when playing the actual game, there are times when a notification pops up stating "This action will have consequences." In case you haven't noticed yet, the game emphasizes that this ain't a linear story like that of a Naughty Dog game. There are multiple outcomes to certain scenarios because of your actions in game.



SPOILERS INBOUND FROM THIS POINT



With that being said, the game's ending literally breaks its own rule of "your choices impacting the story." It became a binary decision at the end.

And it's a decision that doesn't even take into consideration (at the very least) the significant choices you've made. For example, you can be a mediocre friend to Chloe and yet still save her at the eleventh hour. Alternatively, you can try to ignore the other friendly characters in the story and focus virtually on Chloe, but still choose to sacrifice her in the end. Your choices prior to the very end won't matter in game when that final binary choice crashes in. And on top of all that, one of the game features being advertised on Steam is none other than:

When a game where "choice matters" has an ending that is not as dynamic as Call of f*cking Duty: Black Ops 2's endings, something is horribly wrong. The tagline for the 2009 young adult novel If I Stay perfectly describes the problem: "Imagine if all your choices were gone. Except one. And it's the only one that truly matters."

Now the game negating all the decisions you've chosen is the easiest reason to point out why the ending didn't work. But there are other factors to consider.

Reason 2: Defining a character

One of the strong points of Life is Strange are the major characters. And Max herself is a good character in her own right. Unlike your typical RPG protagonist, Max is not a blank slate that the player can completely project his/her own beliefs. If you've been paying attention while playing, she has her own thoughts and reactions throughout the events of the game. Her journal chronicles some of her inner feelings on what transpires in the story. In my opinion, the fact Max is not a blank slate is a huge factor why the ending didn't pan out.

If Life is Strange was a normal choice driven game, you would have the freedom to play light side/paragon or dark side/renegade. Hate a certain character? You can go full on renegade. Have a soft spot for your companion? Be a paragon. With this in mind, Life is Strange doesn't allow you that freedom, with very few exceptions. For me, the major choices that feel renegade on the top of my head are: Make fun of Victoria, Try to shoot Frank, and Steal the Money.

So why did I bring up the whole paragon/renegade system? Because in Life is Strange, Max goes (intentionally) renegade on people who she herself feels is worth giving the middle finger. Not you, the player... but Max herself. Her feelings are the final arbiter to give you the option to go dark side. For example, when Warren asks Max to go out to the movies, there is no real renegade option to tell him to literally f*ck off; she'll only politely decline his offer. Why? Because she considers Warren as her friend. On the flip side, when Max is being held captive by Mr. Jefferson, there's a dialogue choice where you can only select either "Fuck you" or "Eat shit and die", with no other option to perhaps stay silent or say something that ain't renegade. Why? Because Mr. Jefferson by that point deserves all that hate and no sympathy. If you meet up with Frank in the Two Whales Diner in Episode 5, Max will say she's sorry for Frank loosing Rachel - even if you tried to shoot him. Why? Because Max knows deep down, Frank is a good person who is a victim of bad circumstances. Since Max doesn't give players the luxury go full on paragon or renegade by virtue of her not being a blank slate, this is especially problematic for what the ending represents.

Sacrificing Arcadia Bay makes sense if you were a paragon only towards Chloe, and no one else. Sacrificing Chloe becomes less painful if Max really showed what a worthless friend she became. But no, Max will have neither of that. Her actions, voice overs and the thoughts in her journal shows that she leans heavily on the paragon side. Max is too compassionate and emphatic. If she was not, she wouldn't be distraught at the thought of letting either Chloe die or allowing the town to be destroyed. Had Max been a blank slate, her reaction at the final decision in game should have been a reflection on how she treated Chloe and the rest of the characters. Since Max is not, it's really jarring that she is forced to choose when she would have wanted (in all likelihood) to save everyone.

Reason 3: Putting a square peg in a round hole

But how did we get to this ending in the first place? According to a couple of interviews with the game developers:

"...[the ending] choice is really a metaphor for growing older....The whole game is about how in real life you do make sacrifices and cannot go back and make the other option. When you are an adult you sometimes have to make difficult decisions."

"...you have to face consequences. That's the message of the game...We're really happy with those endings, because it really conveys for us that main message. You cannot try to cheat everything...Either you have to accept grief, to accept the death of a loved one or the other choice is to take the decision to sacrifice everything else you know for the person you love - you have to choose to accept that pain....I don't think we'd change anything."

"You make a sacrifice to accept your life as it is, to stop trying to have a perfect life, changing everything, and to stop looking to the past. This is the metaphor and the theme of the game. Somehow, you need to accept grief, you need to accept the past, you need to stop trying to make everything perfect, and then think about the future. To make a compromise, and then go for a while and try to make the best of your future, not by changing the past."

With these quotes in mind, it becomes clear that DontNod wanted an ending that revolved around the theme of "you can't make everything perfect." But it's tempting to speculate they wanted this at the cost of an ending that had coherence with the notion that "choices matter." They had good intentions, but judging how players have reacted, the execution backfired. The intent behind the ending also runs contradictory to Episode 2's launch trailer, where the tagline asked "What if a great power was bestowed for a greater purpose?". How can there be a greater purpose in the grand scheme of things if the point of the ending hinged solely on teaching players the lesson that there are times in life when you'll be forced to make a sacrifice?

The ending could have been a way of judging whether or not Max was worthy of having her powers. By allowing society to die in the Bae ending, Max surrenders her responsibility to society, thus proving her unworthy. On the other hand, in the Bay ending, Max shows that she's willing to accept great responsibility - even at a high price to her personal desires - thus retaining her powers. But the game itself leaves it to your imagination when it came to answering the question if Max keeps her powers or not by the end.

Speaking of themes, one of the best video reviews on the game interpreted the ending as a choice between "sacrificing for the greater good" or "learning to live with your mistakes", but notes how incompatible they are and "that a sizable portion of the game will be rendered meaningless." As the video points out, those two ideas aren't something that we get to choose separately, and that "maturity means doing both."

Hell, I even tried to come up with an interpretation based on the idea that Life is Strange is a superhero origin story. In that context, I imagined that the final decision was a statement on what kind of superhero Max wants to be, i.e. her ideology. Sacrificing Arcadia Bay means going down the path of individualism or ethical egoism, "pursuing your own best interest and protecting the ones you love, because in turn they bring you happiness." Sacrificing Chloe stands for collectivism or selfless heroism. But even in this context, the whole individualism vs. collectivism conflict falls apart when we consider the fact Max is not a blank slate. As discussed earlier, Max is more on the paragon side of things. She helps out others because its the right thing to do, and not for her own betterment. Nowhere in the whole rooftop scene in Episode 2 did it feel that Max was trying to save Kate for the sake of being recognized as a hero. You can't be a pure ethical egoist since Max doesn't give you the luxury of being one. She truly earns the nickname of Super Max (cue the John Williams or Hans Zimmer Superman themes in the background).

Honestly, it's very difficult to come up off hand with a good ending that was coherent with the game's promise of "choices matter" but simultaneously satisfied the condition of teaching players the lesson that your actions will have negative consequences.

Part II: Softening the blow

With all that being said, let's talk about fixing the ending. For the sake of time, we'll only talk about improving the current material instead of creating wildly different endings.

If I was given the task of improving the current endings, I would definitely first work on the Sacrifice Arcadia Bay one. Inspired by Mass Effect 2's ending, we get to see who lived or died in the storm depending on Max's actions. Did you show zero affection for Warren? He dies. Did you help out Alyssa all the way? She lives. Did you make fun of Victoria? She dies. Did you talk to Taylor about her mom? She lives. And so on. Even this principle would apply to the Sacrifice Chloe ending, albeit in more subtle ways. Did you romance Warren? If yes, Max should lean on him or hold his hand during the funeral. Did you comfort Victoria? If yes, then it provides a rationale why she shows up. Were you a good friend to Kate? If no, then she doesn't appear in the funeral.

Also, they could have thrown in this ending should the player make the wrong decisions:

Do these fix everything? Of course not. It doesn't fix the thematic or ideological issue with the ending, something that Wisecrack would point out if they were to do a "What Went Wrong" special on Life is Strange. But at least it would give a better sense of closure knowing that your choices weren't rendered totally meaningless in-game.

Part III: Dreams vs. reality

Before concluding this essay, there's one more thing I want to discuss. Since the release of Episode 5, one of the more interesting ideas floated around by various fans is the theory that the events in the game were all in Max's head. One comment I found neatly summarizes this theory:

"Life is Strange is...the story of a girl trying to cope with the death of her childhood best friend. It's the mind tricks that everyone plays when something terrible happens in their life. It's the "what if...?" question that haunts us all. The game wasn't about time travel, or super powers...it was all taking place in Max's head...at Chloe's funeral. None of her super powers were able to tell the future, just come up with what could have happened if she chose a different path. The last decision is to see if you as the player understood the meaning of the game. They had hints the entire time, and were trying to lead you down the path of acceptance. There were five episodes, there are five stages of grief. It all lines up."

When I read about this alternate take on the game, I was intrigued. Honestly, I love the idea. It neatly ties up the final decision. Sacrificing Arcadia Bay means that Max stays with Chloe in the world of the dream... forever. Sacrificing Chloe means a harsh return to reality. Sadly, when reexamining the game, it doesn't go beyond as a theory. Why? Lack of evidence. If the game really was all a fantasy that Max conjured up to cope with Chloe's death, there is nothing definitive to indicate that this was the case. Now I love films like Fight Club, Memento, and Shutter Island, where we have the protagonist as an unreliable narrator. But comparing them with Life is Strange, there's no indication that Max had insomnia like the Narrator in Fight Club or that she has a disorder like Leonard in Memento. She doesn't even experience hallucinations like Clay Jensen in 13 Reasons Why. The closest thing in the game to hint at this is her student file, which says she's in a Individualized Education Program, "a program usually reserved for students with some sort of developmental disability." (Based on what we get from the game, the worst kind of disorder that would affect Max is some form of social anxiety. And thanks to the events that transpire along with her rewind powers, she eventually overcomes this hindrance.) Problem is that the developers said that they "never considered to affirm either BPD or depression, to not stigmatize anyone and to focus on other topics." They didn't want to "start a conversation" when it came to the notion that Max actually had mental problems. If they even they decided to entertain the idea, unlike Fight Club et al, they broke an unspoken rule of those stories: the protagonist gets exposed as unreliable within the course of the story. There's no foreshadowing, or totem sequence from Inception to guide the audience if the story was real or not. Within the game, a good place to drop this bombshell would have been the Nightmare sequence where Max confronts her nightmare self. Her "subconscious" could have told her, and the player by extension, that Chloe did die in the bathroom and she just contrived a fantasy where she got the time powers to save her best friend. But such a reveal never happens, regardless of the options you choose. Nonetheless, the idea can make an interesting twist if someone were to adapt the game into a film.

Part IV: Conclusion

Whew, now we've reached the end. So to sum things up, the ending didn't work for at least 3 reasons. One, was that your choices were rendered pointless in the end. Two, the characterization of Max didn't fit with the choices given. And three, the intent or theme behind the ending crashed and burned when it came to the execution.

What makes things worse is when asked if they would have done differently in hindsight, the game's co-director said:

"I think we are really happy with the final product. It's really close to the story we had in mind and the story that was written in pre-production. We've been, of course, looking and listening to the players' reactions. I see that some players feel there should have been more endings or more variations on endings based on your choice, but still, for us, I don't think we'd change the way it is, because it was really important that those two endings, like we said before, offer definitive choice."

After reading this (and a couple of other interviews where virtually the same thing is said), I couldn't help but feel indignant that the developers seemed to care more about defending their "artistic integrity" when it came to the ending. There was not even a hint that could have said something along the lines of "maybe we made a mistake somewhere or went too far in some places." Was it because the fanbase didn't complain loud enough, that there was no "Retake Life is Strange" movement? In that regard, Life is Strange does have a worse ending than Mass Effect 3, because Bioware at least acknowledged they made mistakes and gave us the Extended Cut DLC ending for free. And as a final bonus, Mass Effect fans can get the Citadel DLC, one of the greatest pieces of DLC ever made and a fitting farewell to such great characters. Life is Strange never got anything like those. DontNod seemed more than eager to high tail and run once the first game was over and do a soft reboot of the franchise in the form of Life is Strange 2 with new characters. It was, and still is, up to passionate fans to give what they felt would have been a better end to Max's story arc in the form of various fan fics.

Max (and the player by extension) was pushed into a literal no win scenario, a true Kobayashi Maru situation. Unlike Captain Kirk, Max was not able to find a way to beat this no win scenario. Regardless of what outcome was chosen, I think we can all agree that this experience would leave her scarred for life. To what extent will that negatively affect her would vary, depending on whom you ask. Going back to the interpretation of Life is Strange as a superhero origin story, the ending can be viewed Max's defining moment, one that would determine what kind of superhero she wants to be. In that context, she joins characters like Batman (dead parents) and Spiderman (dead uncle), whose existence for being a superhero was defined by the desire to not allow such tragedy (in Max's case, dead best friend or destroyed hometown) to befall on anyone else again.

There are fans out there that will defend the ending they've chosen tooth and nail, pointing to various parts of the game for evidence. In a nutshell, die hard Bae fans will cite how Chloe is "the only thing that matters to Max" ("Chloe über alles in der Welt", literally) while ignoring the fact you can't act in a manner to truly drive the point home that Max didn't gave a damn about Arcadia Bay when you have other wonderful characters like Kate, Warren, Joyce, Victoria, et al. If the town was full of Mark Jefferson wannabes and nothing else, sure. But since it ain't, Max simply can't dismiss the rest of the cast who are not Chloe to "eat shit and die". Conversely, die hard Bay fans will pretend Chloe is a horrible friend all the way, with zero merits whatsoever and that she deserved to die. I'm not going to pass judgement on anyone who claims their chosen ending is the only valid one (or pretend that there is only one ending), but I feel that both choices were so screwed up. Going through numerous arguments on both sides, I've arrived at the conclusion that there is no right or wrong ending. Had DontNod perhaps had more time and resources, Max would have at least tried to find a third way out...

Oh, speaking of that... in case you aren't aware yet... here are two intriguing pieces of concept art that emerged after the game's release:

Fans have found various bits in the game files that hint Nathan and his family knew more about the upcoming storm. And going by this article from Hardcore Gamer, it seemed that they were planning for more things that didn't made it to the final cut of the game. Personally, I'd like to think that due to budget and time constraints, an ending that really acknowledged player choices was scrapped and replaced with what we got in the end. Unless someone at DontNod will backtrack the notion that they were happy with how the ending turned out, this is only speculation however.

So with this talk of why I felt the endings were bad, you may be wondering what's my opinion on the endings themselves. Something tells me that DontNod really had to make a choice in allocating resources when it came to the endings. How the Sacrifice Arcadia Bay ending turned out seems to solidify such a notion. That sequence has the word "rushed" written all over it. The intent behind this ending could probably be best described by a verse from the song Stand By Me (by Ben E. King):

If the sky that we look upon 

Should tumble and fall 

And the mountains should crumble to the sea 

I won't cry, I won't cry, no I won't shed a tear 

Just as long as you stand, stand by me

Sadly, the execution didn't properly convey the intended message. What really broke my immersion in that ending is the fact that Max and Chloe simply get away from the town without even bothering to search for survivors, most especially friends and family. I could have sworn a few minutes ago Chloe herself said that her mom "deserves to be saved rather to be killed in a storm in a fucking diner!" This ending unintentionally turns Max and Chloe into selfish @ssholes who didn't gave a damn about anyone else but themselves. Such a thought really rubs me the wrong way. The scene should have cut to black with Max and Chloe watching the town being destroyed as a pure homage to Fight Club. Meanwhile, the Sacrifice Chloe ending was better executed. Simply put, saving Arcadia Bay gave a better sense of closure. In Superman: The Movie, Lois Lane gets killed but Superman turns back time to save her. Life is Strange offers a cruel twist to that trope. Using time travel at the end of the game does not result in the happy resolution the Richard Donner film offers. What struck me is that Warren, Kate, Dana, Justin, Trevor and even Victoria attend the funeral no matter what. Among the group, it was only Justin who was friends with Chloe. The way I see it, the other students were in attendance not because they personally knew Chloe but rather to show their support for Max. My headcannon as to how they end up attending the funeral is that Max used all that she learned about her schoolmates in the past week to put together this band of misfits. It was a horrific end for Chloe, but, to quote one fan, "it is an absolute Shakespearean tragedy level masterpiece."

On the eve of Life is Strange 2's release, the results of a fan survey on Reddit were revealed. When asked to point out the one thing that made fans fall in love with the game the most, 60% of the respondents said it was the characters.

And I agree with them. Against all preconceived notions, Max and Chloe (and by proxy, virtually all the other major characters too) ended up being among my favorite video game characters of all time, alongside Revan, the Hero of Ferelden, Master Chief, Commander Shepard, Lara Croft, and Clementine from Telltale Games' The Walking Dead. If you hold these characters in such high regard, don't you think they deserved better?

Life is Strange's ending should be a cautionary tale for anyone who wants to make choice driven games. Oh, and if you make characters this good, try to avoid falling into a trap where you'll have to make entirely separate stories should fans beg for a sequel.

Meanwhile, in some Alternate Universe... I'll let you guess who's who.