**SPOILERS** So I finally finished ME3 and...

  • 79 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!SPOILERS !!!


... I didn't mind the ending as much as others. Am I missing something? Why all the hate? I think I got the really bad ending where Shepard destroys the Reapers but also kills the soldiers as well. Then I see the Normandy crash but the door opening (so they survived) and it cuts to credits. Then at the end we see the man and child talking about the Shepard Legend. So basically he stopped the Reapers, stopped the cycle but in the process had to destroy the Mass Relays, putting everyone back centuries in technology since now they can't travel from Galaxy to Galaxy.

I don't understand why so much hate for this ending. I loved how it left things unanswered for either sequels or for the imagination. (For example I loved the ending of Blair Witch Project.)

I then went online and looked at the other endings. How do you get the OTHER endings?


Lots of complaints about the colour endings:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPelM2hwhJA

What's so wrong about this? It just depended on how you played I guess?


Also the doctrination theory is pretty pausible:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ue8z3UL4mmk


No flaming please. I just want to know why the reaction towards the ending since I didn't mind it.

Avatar image for Baranga
Baranga

14217

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#2 Baranga
Member since 2005 • 14217 Posts

A Logical Breakdown of Why the Mass Effect 3 Ending Makes No Sense

ME3's ending is almost as bad as Gamespot's forum software.

Avatar image for Daweed1990
Daweed1990

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Daweed1990
Member since 2012 • 37 Posts

because it has so many plotholes like how joker and the crew just left shepard on earth, the team would never do such a thing the ending felt like a cliffhanger from a tv series to many questions

Avatar image for XaosII
XaosII

16705

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 XaosII
Member since 2003 • 16705 Posts

Because for a game that's been all about choice and decisions, the ending was completely non-reflective of it.

It doesnt matter what you did in ME 1, ME 2, ME 3, Paragon or Renegade, you only get the option between 3 very similar endings that has no impact on anything you did beforehand.

Avatar image for topsemag55
topsemag55

19063

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 16

User Lists: 0

#5 topsemag55
Member since 2007 • 19063 Posts
Better get approval from the mods for a spoiler thread, they had to do that for ME3 in System Wars. Then when you get approval, edit your title & OP to show approval. The game's only been on the shelves for a little more than a month.
Avatar image for kris9031998
kris9031998

7554

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

#6 kris9031998
Member since 2008 • 7554 Posts
A few things. 1. In the Arrival ME2 dlc, it was said that the destruction of the mass relays would destroy the entire galaxy pretty much. So each ending screwed everyone. 2. What were all the ships going to do when the mass relays were destroyed? They can't get back to their own planets, so they are stuck there 3. Why did Joker retreat? He would be one to attempt to save shepard. 4. How did your team mates automatically get into the ship? Tali and garrus was with me for the final mission and they came out of the ship on that planet. 5. The endings are virtually the same, just different colors etc. etc.
Avatar image for Gooeykat
Gooeykat

3412

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#7 Gooeykat
Member since 2006 • 3412 Posts
The biggest problem, it was that choice and consequences didn't have any impact. There didn't seem to be any impact on the ending based on decisions you made prior. At the end game, you talk to space boy and get three different options for the ending. Plus, I thought action sequences weren't nearly as good as the ones prior to the ending. The Krogan/Turian and Quarian/Geth in particular...these questlines, stories and scripted battles were far more enjoyable.
Avatar image for Rusteater
Rusteater

4080

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#8 Rusteater
Member since 2004 • 4080 Posts

There was no purple ending!!!

:evil:

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

A Logical Breakdown of Why the Mass Effect 3 Ending Makes No Sense

ME3's ending is almost as bad as Gamespot's forum software.

Baranga
That article points towards the INDOCTRINATION Theory. Shepard doesn't make it to the beam, everything after that is a DREAM/ILLUSION made by the Reapers. I think that's an awesome ending.
Avatar image for m25105
m25105

3135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 m25105
Member since 2010 • 3135 Posts
Casper the ghost. A, B, C path. Coloured explosions. Normandy crashes, leaving questions to why Joker flew away? Seeing squad mates jump out of the Normandy that were with you on Earth, leaving you wondering how did they get up there. Destruction of Mass Relays, dooming many species. Zero difference in the ending. You can have your Shepard be an evil dick or an angelic paragon, and the ending is still the same. Bioware lying even less than one month before the game was released about the ending. Bioware silence and later their snide remarks about people calling their ending crappy. Mainstream media attention notices huge fan backlash, reports on it. Suddenly Bioware announces clarification of the ending as a free DLC. Still backlash, since people want the ending changed not explained. Basically it's like this, you go to a restaurant and you order a steak. They bring you a piece of spam instead. Instead of taking the spam back and get it right and get you, your steak, the restaurant instead tries to explain why they gave you spam and why you should eat that, rather than the steak you ordered.
Avatar image for m25105
m25105

3135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#11 m25105
Member since 2010 • 3135 Posts
Oh and Indoctrination theory sucks. "It was all a dream" is not better than introducing that genocidal space kid. It's just as worst. The ending should be retconned plain and simple with no space ghost brat.
Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts
[QUOTE="m25105"]Casper the ghost. A, B, C path. Coloured explosions. Normandy crashes, leaving questions to why Joker flew away? Seeing squad mates jump out of the Normandy that were with you on Earth, leaving you wondering how did they get up there. Destruction of Mass Relays, dooming many species. Zero difference in the ending. You can have your Shepard be an evil dick or an angelic paragon, and the ending is still the same. Bioware lying even less than one month before the game was released about the ending. Bioware silence and later their snide remarks about people calling their ending crappy. Mainstream media attention notices huge fan backlash, reports on it. Suddenly Bioware announces clarification of the ending as a free DLC. Still backlash, since people want the ending changed not explained. Basically it's like this, you go to a restaurant and you order a steak. They bring you a piece of spam instead. Instead of taking the spam back and get it right and get you, your steak, the restaurant instead tries to explain why they gave you spam and why you should eat that, rather than the steak you ordered.

The endings are the same? I saw that apart from the colours, the endings are different in some parts (ie, the Reapers get destroyed or The Reapers leave or The Soldiers Die etc, check the video). Also, could you expand on BioWare lying? [QUOTE="m25105"]Oh and Indoctrination theory sucks. "It was all a dream" is not better than introducing that genocidal space kid. It's just as worst. The ending should be retconned plain and simple with no space ghost brat.

I don't believe so. Since ME1 the Reapers haven't been able to STOP Shepard by any means (collectors, geth etc). So at the end they accept Shepard and try to convince him through dreams and the "boy experience". Sounds reasonable to me for such an advanced race.
Avatar image for m25105
m25105

3135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 m25105
Member since 2010 • 3135 Posts
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="m25105"]Casper the ghost. A, B, C path. Coloured explosions. Normandy crashes, leaving questions to why Joker flew away? Seeing squad mates jump out of the Normandy that were with you on Earth, leaving you wondering how did they get up there. Destruction of Mass Relays, dooming many species. Zero difference in the ending. You can have your Shepard be an evil dick or an angelic paragon, and the ending is still the same. Bioware lying even less than one month before the game was released about the ending. Bioware silence and later their snide remarks about people calling their ending crappy. Mainstream media attention notices huge fan backlash, reports on it. Suddenly Bioware announces clarification of the ending as a free DLC. Still backlash, since people want the ending changed not explained. Basically it's like this, you go to a restaurant and you order a steak. They bring you a piece of spam instead. Instead of taking the spam back and get it right and get you, your steak, the restaurant instead tries to explain why they gave you spam and why you should eat that, rather than the steak you ordered.

The endings are the same? I saw that apart from the colours, the endings are different in some parts (ie, the Reapers get destroyed or The Reapers leave or The Soldiers Die etc, check the video). Also, could you expand on BioWare lying? [QUOTE="m25105"]Oh and Indoctrination theory sucks. "It was all a dream" is not better than introducing that genocidal space kid. It's just as worst. The ending should be retconned plain and simple with no space ghost brat.

I don't believe so. Since ME1 the Reapers haven't been able to STOP Shepard by any means (collectors, geth etc). So at the end they accept Shepard and try to convince him through dreams and the "boy experience". Sounds reasonable to me for such an advanced race.

The end cut scenes are extremely minor in their difference, everything is nearly identical save for a few things. Red, you see the reapers get destroyed, blue you see them pull out, green same as blue. There's an entire list of quotes that Bioware promises that they didn't keep. The indoctrination theory fails as does the ending itself, purely by the fact that Harbinger doesn't kill Shepard, but flies off leaving him to enter the citadel. "Shepard. Harbinger speaks of you" when a reaper says that, you can be pretty much be assured that Shepard is considered a MAJOR pest and their biggest enemy so far. So Harbinger flying off without even checking to see if Shepard is dead, kills the theory and the dumb ending it self. Hell the idiotic kid, could've let Shepard bled to death instead of lifting him up, if he wanted to keep his solution.
Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#14 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts
"Shepard is considered a MAJOR pest and their biggest enemy so far. So Harbinger flying off without even checking to see if Shepard is dead, kills the theory and the dumb ending it self. Hell the idiotic kid, could've let Shepard bled to death instead of lifting him up, if he wanted to keep his solution." This exactly why I think the Reapers tried the DREAM instead of just leaving him there. The reapers have killed him before (or he died before) and he came back, so what's the point of leaving him there for someone just to clone him again.
Avatar image for m25105
m25105

3135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#15 m25105
Member since 2010 • 3135 Posts
[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]"Shepard is considered a MAJOR pest and their biggest enemy so far. So Harbinger flying off without even checking to see if Shepard is dead, kills the theory and the dumb ending it self. Hell the idiotic kid, could've let Shepard bled to death instead of lifting him up, if he wanted to keep his solution." This exactly why I think the Reapers tried the DREAM instead of just leaving him there. The reapers have killed him before (or he died before) and he came back, so what's the point of leaving him there for someone just to clone him again.

No. It doesn't make sense. Harbinger could've without any problems, literally vaporized Shepard. He knows Shepard and what he's capable of so why risk him getting to the citadel, when Shepard through the series have shown great will power. There's no good reason why Harbinger flew off without checking to see if Shepard was dead or at least incinerate his body. It was the collectors that killed Shepard, and Shepard's body was intact. Harbinger wouldn't have left it intact. And it took years and tremendous amounts of resources to get Shepard back among the living. The dumb kid ending also spits on the ending of Mass Effect 1. Why would Sovereign need Saren to open the Citadel, if the kid controls the reapers and the citadel itself, he could've just opened it for him.
Avatar image for m25105
m25105

3135

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 m25105
Member since 2010 • 3135 Posts
Going to sleep.
Avatar image for spiderman120988
spiderman120988

1421

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 103

User Lists: 0

#17 spiderman120988
Member since 2005 • 1421 Posts

Dude, did you really have to open this can of worms? I highly advise you not to post your opinion on the BioWare forums. Thankfully, everyone here is not flaming you but your opinion of not minding the ending will be jumped upon by all those who hate it and they will outright say you are wrong, which is impossible since it is an opinion. For the record, I don't mind the ending either but there are plot holes which I hope the extended cut DLC will fix. Other than that, my feelings are mixed but I don't think its the disaster everyone makes it out to be...but I keep my opinions to myself for the most part.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

Dude, did you really have to open this can of worms? I highly advise you not to post your opinion on the BioWare forums. Thankfully, everyone here is not flaming you but your opinion of not minding the ending will be jumped upon by all those who hate it and they will outright say you are wrong, which is impossible since it is an opinion. For the record, I don't mind the ending either but there are plot holes which I hope the extended cut DLC will fix. Other than that, my feelings are mixed but I don't think its the disaster everyone makes it out to be...but I keep my opinions to myself for the most part.

spiderman120988
I just wanted to know why so many hated it. I didn't mind the ending, but I'm not saying that my opinion is correct and everyone else is wrong. I just wanted some feedback because I just finished the game.
Avatar image for charmingcharlie
charmingcharlie

1244

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 charmingcharlie
Member since 2006 • 1244 Posts

I don't believe so. Since ME1 the Reapers haven't been able to STOP Shepard by any means (collectors, geth etc). So at the end they accept Shepard and try to convince him through dreams and the "boy experience". Sounds reasonable to me for such an advanced race.FelipeInside

The end is NOT a dream and it is NOT indoctrination theory. Those two ideas originated from the fans who couldn't cope with how crappy the ending is. THe ending is exactly what you saw on the screen. Now if you are happy with an ending full of plotholes, nonsensical rubbish and clear statements that crap all over Mass Effect lore then more power to you. However there are a lot of people that care about the series and the universe as a whole and they feel the ending certainly is not a fitting one to the Mass Effect universe.

Avatar image for Krelian-co
Krelian-co

13274

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#20 Krelian-co
Member since 2006 • 13274 Posts

now thats shocking

have you ever disliked anything bioware / ea does?

if there was a single user in this forum that qualifies to be the "paid" forum user by ea bioware i would point you fyi.

origin sux! answer: no no origin da best

dragon age 2 sux: no no, it was great just had a few problems

the old republic is a generic mmo: no no, its da best mmo ever.

nothing personal, its just i saw this thread comming

anyway for the sake of argument i will leave this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MlatxLP-xs

i support the indoctrination theory would be awesome but bioware already stated they are not gonna change it just explain the ending, like we are too dumb to understand it and not just because the ending was terrible.

Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#21 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts
I am trying to come to what a good "ending" looked like.. Because I can't think of many to end a series.. Even games like Baldur's Gate 2 blew as a ending wise in really providing little to no explainations or real differences outside of a tidbit on yoru choices.. Especially with the expansion.. I am trying to figure out where this golden standard of endings for rpgs is being used.. Because it seems to be either every one is happy and lives long, the main character lives to figh tanother day and walks intot eh sun set etc etc .. The only thing I would argue is if it focused more on your romance and friends at your death with some narration.. In all honesty I prefered this ending over the stereotypical ending that people seemed to be hoping for.. I just wish it was fleshed out alittle more with what happened.. And the indoctrination ending is a extremely interesting theory..
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#22 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]I don't believe so. Since ME1 the Reapers haven't been able to STOP Shepard by any means (collectors, geth etc). So at the end they accept Shepard and try to convince him through dreams and the "boy experience". Sounds reasonable to me for such an advanced race.charmingcharlie

The end is NOT a dream and it is NOT indoctrination theory. Those two ideas originated from the fans who couldn't cope with how crappy the ending is. THe ending is exactly what you saw on the screen. Now if you are happy with an ending full of plotholes, nonsensical rubbish and clear statements that crap all over Mass Effect lore then more power to you. However there are a lot of people that care about the series and the universe as a whole and they feel the ending certainly is not a fitting one to the Mass Effect universe.

.. And how the hell do you know this? The ending had numerous unanswered questions.. Nonsensical parts to it, "mistakes" that couldn't be just chalked off to bad design.. And it was just unique to THIS specific scene.. The entire game was not filled with it.. And you may want to reword your responses next time because your sounding like a pompus fool that thinks they know all and is butt hurt by this.
Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

now thats shocking

have you ever disliked anything bioware / ea does?

if there was a single user in this forum that qualifies to be the "paid" forum user by ea bioware i would point you fyi.

origin sux! answer: no no origin da best

dragon age 2 sux: no no, it was great just had a few problems

the old republic is a generic mmo: no no, its da best mmo ever.

nothing personal, its just i saw this thread comming

anyway for the sake of argument i will leave this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MlatxLP-xs

i support the indoctrination theory would be awesome but bioware already stated they are not gonna change it just explain the ending, like we are too dumb to understand it and not just because the ending was terrible.

Krelian-co

I was waiting for you to TROLL my thread yet again.

Of course you always call me a fanboy cause you ONLY see when I am praising BioWare and ARE BLIND when I say bad things about them.

This of course helps your argument against my posts.

I'll give you a brief summary of my past posts, although really I shouldn't bother:

......

origin sux! answer: no no origin da best

I have said various times that it still needs work but for a BETA version it's pretty darn stable and does what it's supposed to do. I never said Origina da best, only you talk like that. I've said this various times but of course you ignore those posts.

.......

dragon age 2 sux: no no, it was great just had a few problems

Yes, the problems were rushed, copy and paste and worked more like a side quest/expansion than a sequel. Take these things away and the game is a good RPG in it's own right, just didn't live up to the Dragon Age name. I've said this various times but of course you ignore those posts.

......

the old republic is a generic mmo: no no, its da best mmo ever.

It's not the best MMO ever, stop putting words in my mouth. I have fun with it but have also said it's pretty similar to WoW and copies stuff off it. But other stuff it does better. I've said this various times but of course you ignore those posts.

......

ONCE AGAIN: NEXT TIME BEFORE POSTING, CONSIDER BOTH MY POSITIVE POSTS AND NEGATIVE ONES. DONT JUST TAKE THE ONES THAT SUIT UR ARGUMENT.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]I don't believe so. Since ME1 the Reapers haven't been able to STOP Shepard by any means (collectors, geth etc). So at the end they accept Shepard and try to convince him through dreams and the "boy experience". Sounds reasonable to me for such an advanced race.charmingcharlie

The end is NOT a dream and it is NOT indoctrination theory. Those two ideas originated from the fans who couldn't cope with how crappy the ending is. THe ending is exactly what you saw on the screen. Now if you are happy with an ending full of plotholes, nonsensical rubbish and clear statements that crap all over Mass Effect lore then more power to you. However there are a lot of people that care about the series and the universe as a whole and they feel the ending certainly is not a fitting one to the Mass Effect universe.

How do you know FOR CERTAIN 100%. The way things changed (Shepard's Attitude for example) AFTER he tried to reach the beam points towards everything after that an illusion. Anyway, it's just a theory and a good one at that. I personally believe the best endings are the ones which don't explain everything, they leave it for the imagination.
Avatar image for shakmaster13
shakmaster13

7138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#25 shakmaster13
Member since 2007 • 7138 Posts
I am trying to come to what a good "ending" looked like.. Because I can't think of many to end a series.. Even games like Baldur's Gate 2 blew as a ending wise in really providing little to no explainations or real differences outside of a tidbit on yoru choices.. Especially with the expansion.. I am trying to figure out where this golden standard of endings for rpgs is being used.. Because it seems to be either every one is happy and lives long, the main character lives to figh tanother day and walks intot eh sun set etc etc .. The only thing I would argue is if it focused more on your romance and friends at your death with some narration.. In all honesty I prefered this ending over the stereotypical ending that people seemed to be hoping for.. I just wish it was fleshed out alittle more with what happened.. And the indoctrination ending is a extremely interesting theory.. sSubZerOo
At the very least the ending could have been similar to Fallout games were they tell you what happens to certain groups of people. In this game it was: lawl lets kill everyone no matter what so no decision you made except for the one you're about to make will have any impact.
Avatar image for Krelian-co
Krelian-co

13274

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#26 Krelian-co
Member since 2006 • 13274 Posts

[QUOTE="charmingcharlie"]

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]I don't believe so. Since ME1 the Reapers haven't been able to STOP Shepard by any means (collectors, geth etc). So at the end they accept Shepard and try to convince him through dreams and the "boy experience". Sounds reasonable to me for such an advanced race.FelipeInside

The end is NOT a dream and it is NOT indoctrination theory. Those two ideas originated from the fans who couldn't cope with how crappy the ending is. THe ending is exactly what you saw on the screen. Now if you are happy with an ending full of plotholes, nonsensical rubbish and clear statements that crap all over Mass Effect lore then more power to you. However there are a lot of people that care about the series and the universe as a whole and they feel the ending certainly is not a fitting one to the Mass Effect universe.

How do you know FOR CERTAIN 100%. The way things changed (Shepard's Attitude for example) AFTER he tried to reach the beam points towards everything after that an illusion. Anyway, it's just a theory and a good one at that. I personally believe the best endings are the ones which don't explain everything, they leave it for the imagination.

so basically you are saying the ending is not bad because you think they re really going to do the indoctrination ending? i doubt it after the past interviews, you are just supporting the people who say the ending is bad, everything after the beam makes no sense.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="charmingcharlie"]

The end is NOT a dream and it is NOT indoctrination theory. Those two ideas originated from the fans who couldn't cope with how crappy the ending is. THe ending is exactly what you saw on the screen. Now if you are happy with an ending full of plotholes, nonsensical rubbish and clear statements that crap all over Mass Effect lore then more power to you. However there are a lot of people that care about the series and the universe as a whole and they feel the ending certainly is not a fitting one to the Mass Effect universe.

Krelian-co

How do you know FOR CERTAIN 100%. The way things changed (Shepard's Attitude for example) AFTER he tried to reach the beam points towards everything after that an illusion. Anyway, it's just a theory and a good one at that. I personally believe the best endings are the ones which don't explain everything, they leave it for the imagination.

so basically you are saying the ending is not bad because you think they re really going to do the indoctrination ending? i doubt it after the past interviews, you are just supporting the people who say the ending is bad, everything after the beam makes no sense.

There you go again putting words in my mouth, you are so GOOD at it. I said that I didn't mind the ending and that the indoctrination theory would make it awesome. You say "everything after the beam makes no sense", wouldn't that support the theory even more?
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#28 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]I am trying to come to what a good "ending" looked like.. Because I can't think of many to end a series.. Even games like Baldur's Gate 2 blew as a ending wise in really providing little to no explainations or real differences outside of a tidbit on yoru choices.. Especially with the expansion.. I am trying to figure out where this golden standard of endings for rpgs is being used.. Because it seems to be either every one is happy and lives long, the main character lives to figh tanother day and walks intot eh sun set etc etc .. The only thing I would argue is if it focused more on your romance and friends at your death with some narration.. In all honesty I prefered this ending over the stereotypical ending that people seemed to be hoping for.. I just wish it was fleshed out alittle more with what happened.. And the indoctrination ending is a extremely interesting theory.. shakmaster13
At the very least the ending could have been similar to Fallout games were they tell you what happens to certain groups of people. In this game it was: lawl lets kill everyone no matter what so no decision you made except for the one you're about to make will have any impact.

I would have liked to see a 10 minute ending after Shepards decision (with out shepard) focusing on certain characters and what became of them.. Outside of that people are blinded by nostalagia... I am still trying to find that "mythical" game that you could choose your ending where it actually made a diffences.. Outside of this I am glad they didn't go about with the cliche ending.
Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts
[QUOTE="shakmaster13"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]I am trying to come to what a good "ending" looked like.. Because I can't think of many to end a series.. Even games like Baldur's Gate 2 blew as a ending wise in really providing little to no explainations or real differences outside of a tidbit on yoru choices.. Especially with the expansion.. I am trying to figure out where this golden standard of endings for rpgs is being used.. Because it seems to be either every one is happy and lives long, the main character lives to figh tanother day and walks intot eh sun set etc etc .. The only thing I would argue is if it focused more on your romance and friends at your death with some narration.. In all honesty I prefered this ending over the stereotypical ending that people seemed to be hoping for.. I just wish it was fleshed out alittle more with what happened.. And the indoctrination ending is a extremely interesting theory.. sSubZerOo
At the very least the ending could have been similar to Fallout games were they tell you what happens to certain groups of people. In this game it was: lawl lets kill everyone no matter what so no decision you made except for the one you're about to make will have any impact.

I would have liked to see a 10 minute ending after Shepards decision (with out shepard) focusing on certain characters and what became of them.. Outside of that people are blinded by nostalagia... I am still trying to find that "mythical" game that you could choose your ending where it actually made a diffences.. Outside of this I am glad they didn't go about with the cliche ending.

Yeah I would have liked that too....to see what happened to each one. But I agree with ur last line, at least they didn't go with the cliche ending that the Repears are destroyed and everyone is happy. This ending at least made everyone think.
Avatar image for deactivated-59d151f079814
deactivated-59d151f079814

47239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#30 deactivated-59d151f079814
Member since 2003 • 47239 Posts
My main problem of the game is it did too much.. The first game had you going after Saren and a single ship you only learn later on is much bigger.. It was a epic storyline in the since of scope at the end, but it wasn't too much the goal was always Saren.. The story didn't deviate too much from that.. Second one was more the same it had you going after the collectors.. The third one though.. Really felt like it should have been at least two games.. The curing of the genophage and the war between Quarians and the Geth were just too huge in scope to the point htat it was more or less as big as going after the Collectors (if not bigger).. They literally could have broken this up into three different games based on the scope.. Going after Cerberus, after TIM.. Curing genophage and allying with Turians/krogans.. And Quarian Geth war.. It felt too crammed to be honest.
Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts
My main problem of the game is it did too much.. The first game had you going after Saren and a single ship you only learn later on is much bigger.. It was a epic storyline in the since of scope at the end, but it wasn't too much the goal was always Saren.. The story didn't deviate too much from that.. Second one was more the same it had you going after the collectors.. The third one though.. Really felt like it should have been at least two games.. The curing of the genophage and the war between Quarians and the Geth were just too huge in scope to the point htat it was more or less as big as going after the Collectors (if not bigger).. They literally could have broken this up into three different games based on the scope.. Going after Cerberus, after TIM.. Curing genophage and allying with Turians/krogans.. And Quarian Geth war.. It felt too crammed to be honest.sSubZerOo
Totally agree. When I cured the Genophage if felt like a walk in the park and rushed.
Avatar image for charmingcharlie
charmingcharlie

1244

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#32 charmingcharlie
Member since 2006 • 1244 Posts

And how the hell do you know this? The ending had numerous unanswered questions.. Nonsensical parts to it, "mistakes" that couldn't be just chalked off to bad design.. And it was just unique to THIS specific scene.. The entire game was not filled with it.. And you may want to reword your responses next time because your sounding like a pompus fool that thinks they know all and is butt hurt by this.sSubZerOo

How about because they DROPPED IT, if you had read the "Mass Effect : final hours" app you would have seen that Bioware had intended for Shepard to be indoctrinated but they dropped it for technical reasons. Then there was this comment from Micheal Gamble :-

it illustrates how committed the fanbase is.Micheal Gamble

In other words the indoctrination theory is a FAN BASED theory the end of ME 3 is not indoctrination it is just what you said a bunch of unanswered questions, nonsensical parts and mistakes due to tight release dates. You want to know why it had a bunch of unanswered questions and nonsensical parts ? I will tell you, the whole ending (which was done between Mac Walters and Casey Hudson) was designed specifically with "speculation for everyone" in mind. That is they never intended to answer anything with the ending and left it wide open so people would speculate which kinda blew up in their face really.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts
^^ If true that's sad, cause the Indoctrination theory was a great one. As for the ending, why does everyone these days ALWAYS want to know EVERYTHING that happens???
Avatar image for charmingcharlie
charmingcharlie

1244

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 charmingcharlie
Member since 2006 • 1244 Posts

^^ If true that's sad, cause the Indoctrination theory was a great one. As for the ending, why does everyone these days ALWAYS want to know EVERYTHING that happens???FelipeInside

Again no one wants to know EVERYTHING that happens, but right in the last 5 minutes of the game the entire Universe is significantly changed for ever. Look at it this way, you cured the Genophage right ? well it is pretty obvious what would happen in the future after the Reapers were defeated wasn't it ? I mean Wrex survives goes home and makes lots of babies with that Female Krogan ...... Ohhhhhh wait no that doesn't happen now because the Mass Relay's blew which means Wrex is cut off from his home world leaving the Krogans leaderless. That is naturally assuming destruction of the relays doesn't wipe out all the systems with a relay (as was shown in the Arrival DLC).

You see the thing is the whole of ME 3 was an ending but the problem is the last 5 minutes completely wipe out any closure fans got throughout the entire game. If we assume for a second that the relays did not wipe out the systems they were in, it still leaves the fact that interstellar transport is now screwed because in ME 1 we were specifically told that "without the Mass Relays interstellar transport would be impossible".

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]^^ If true that's sad, cause the Indoctrination theory was a great one. As for the ending, why does everyone these days ALWAYS want to know EVERYTHING that happens???charmingcharlie

Again no one wants to know EVERYTHING that happens, but right in the last 5 minutes of the game the entire Universe is significantly changed for ever. Look at it this way, you cured the Genophage right ? well it is pretty obvious what would happen in the future after the Reapers were defeated wasn't it ? I mean Wrex survives goes home and makes lots of babies with that Female Krogan ...... Ohhhhhh wait no that doesn't happen now because the Mass Relay's blew which means Wrex is cut off from his home world leaving the Krogans leaderless. That is naturally assuming destruction of the relays doesn't wipe out all the systems with a relay (as was shown in the Arrival DLC).

You see the thing is the whole of ME 3 was an ending but the problem is the last 5 minutes completely wipe out any closure fans got throughout the entire game. If we assume for a second that the relays did not wipe out the systems they were in, it still leaves the fact that interstellar transport is now screwed because in ME 1 we were specifically told that "without the Mass Relays interstellar transport would be impossible".

Yes I agree, Interstellar Transport isn't possible anymore (as the old man explains to the boy at the final scene).

What's the big problem?

Shepard and his crew (+ the Universe) fought and fought through the three parts (Years?) against the Reapers. Only at the end, it was futile, the Repears still won cause they started a new cycle.

It really is a sad ending if you think about it.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#36 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="charmingcharlie"]

The end is NOT a dream and it is NOT indoctrination theory. Those two ideas originated from the fans who couldn't cope with how crappy the ending is. THe ending is exactly what you saw on the screen. Now if you are happy with an ending full of plotholes, nonsensical rubbish and clear statements that crap all over Mass Effect lore then more power to you. However there are a lot of people that care about the series and the universe as a whole and they feel the ending certainly is not a fitting one to the Mass Effect universe.

Krelian-co

How do you know FOR CERTAIN 100%. The way things changed (Shepard's Attitude for example) AFTER he tried to reach the beam points towards everything after that an illusion. Anyway, it's just a theory and a good one at that. I personally believe the best endings are the ones which don't explain everything, they leave it for the imagination.

so basically you are saying the ending is not bad because you think they re really going to do the indoctrination ending? i doubt it after the past interviews, you are just supporting the people who say the ending is bad, everything after the beam makes no sense.

A good bet is the indoctrination is going to be used or at least if you take this article it seems Bioware have either a whole bunch of DLC planned or they had planned to do something with the ending the whole time http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2012/03/17/casey-hudson-responds-to-mass-effect-ending-protests-this-is-not-the-last-youll-hear-of-commander-shepard/
Avatar image for charmingcharlie
charmingcharlie

1244

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 charmingcharlie
Member since 2006 • 1244 Posts

Yes I agree, Interstellar Transport isn't possible anymore (as the old man explains to the boy at the final scene).

What's the big problem?

Shepard and his crew (+ the Universe) fought and fought through the three parts (Years?) against the Reapers. Only at the end, it was futile, the Repears still won cause they started a new cycle.

It really is a sad ending if you think about it.

FelipeInside

Then what was the point of ever bothering to play the game ? people play games to "win" this is a no win scenario. Now whilst you might enjoy that kind of thing plenty of others don't enjoy spending hundreds of pounds and hundreds of hours on a game only to be told 5 minutes before the end "HA HA you can't win" (oh and don't give me that rubbish about the "journey is important not the destination").

You obviously like "sad" endings and that is up to you I am not going to criticise that or call you out on it. I don't like "sad" endings, I fully expected Shepard to die, I fully expected to lose most of my crew, hell I was even fully expecting to lose most of earth. What I was not expecting was for Bioware to completely and utterly destory the Mass Effect universe totally and basically say to me "ha you lose you couldn't win".

Whilst I remember it also looks like Bioware are now saying the ME universe has not been destroyed, they have said that interstellar travel is perfectly feasible even with the relay's destroyed (oh look more Mass Effect lore crapped on). Apparently the relay's will get rebuilt (despite the fact no one other than the Protheans ever managed to build one). The ending is a complete and utter mess one way or another.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#38 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts
My main problem of the game is it did too much.. The first game had you going after Saren and a single ship you only learn later on is much bigger.. It was a epic storyline in the since of scope at the end, but it wasn't too much the goal was always Saren.. The story didn't deviate too much from that.. Second one was more the same it had you going after the collectors.. The third one though.. Really felt like it should have been at least two games.. The curing of the genophage and the war between Quarians and the Geth were just too huge in scope to the point htat it was more or less as big as going after the Collectors (if not bigger).. They literally could have broken this up into three different games based on the scope.. Going after Cerberus, after TIM.. Curing genophage and allying with Turians/krogans.. And Quarian Geth war.. It felt too crammed to be honest.sSubZerOo
I have to agree here. If you think about it you really did a lot in the last game, also think of the gametime its a WHOLE lot in one game. Sheppard cured the genophage, solved a war that have been a ongoing conflict between a race and its created AI for genereations, you beat Cerebus, and you destroy not one but 3 reapers and then all the other small sidemissions which doesnt really do anything. It seems the scope of the game is why we might have been getting a crappy ending, there was to many loose ends they needed to tie up together with the whole main plot line defeating the reapers.
Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#39 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]Yes I agree, Interstellar Transport isn't possible anymore (as the old man explains to the boy at the final scene).

What's the big problem?

Shepard and his crew (+ the Universe) fought and fought through the three parts (Years?) against the Reapers. Only at the end, it was futile, the Repears still won cause they started a new cycle.

It really is a sad ending if you think about it.

charmingcharlie

Then what was the point of ever bothering to play the game ? people play games to "win" this is a no win scenario. Now whilst you might enjoy that kind of thing plenty of others don't enjoy spending hundreds of pounds and hundreds of hours on a game only to be told 5 minutes before the end "HA HA you can't win" (oh and don't give me that rubbish about the "journey is important not the destination").

You obviously like "sad" endings and that is your up to you I am not going to criticise that or call you out on it. I don't like "sad" endings, I fully expected Shepard to die, I fully expected to lose most of my crew, hell I was even fully expecting to lose most of earth. What I was not expecting was for Bioware to completely and utterly destory the Mass Effect universe totally and basically say to me "ha you lose you couldn't win".

I don't like "sad" endings, but not every story finishes on a good note. Take for example I AM LEGEND. Awesome book with awesome ending, then the movie....it was great but they replaced the ending with a "Hollywood Feel Good Ending" that ruined the whole concept. What I'm saying is that some fights just can't be won. Have you ever won EVERY single fight or discussion or debate or whatever? Of course not. People don't just play games to win...they play games to have fun, to experience something different, something they could never experience in their normal life. The journey IS as important as the destination. They didn't destroy the Universe, they just cut Galaxies off each other which basically restarted the cycle but this time, they didn't kill everyone. So now the races have to make their own way and forge peace as Shepard said.
Avatar image for charmingcharlie
charmingcharlie

1244

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 charmingcharlie
Member since 2006 • 1244 Posts

What I'm saying is that some fights just can't be won. Have you ever won EVERY single fight or discussion or debate or whatever? Of course not.FelipeInside

Yet throughout Mass Effect Shepard has done exactly that, he/she has defied the odds if you want something mirroring "real life" then in all honesty Shepard should've died round about mission 2 of Mass Effect 1 really.

People don't just play games to win...they play games to have fun, to experience something different, something they could never experience in their normal life. The journey IS as important as the destination. They didn't destroy the Universe, they just cut Galaxies off each other which basically restarted the cycle but this time, they didn't kill everyone. So now the races have to make their own way and forge peace as Shepard said.FelipeInside

I play games for fun and part of the fun is beating them. Now if you play games to "experience a no win scenario" then that is up to you when I play a game I do not expect the entire game to be loaded so much against me that no matter what I do I cannot win. Yes the journey is EQUALLY as important as the destination, but if you are going to a crap destination that will sour the journey and likewise if you have a bad journey you tend to not enjoy the destination as much.

As for them destroying the universe that is debatable, if you go by established lore destroying the Mass Effect relay's destroys the system that relay is in. So at the very least you have wiped out most of your allies, the Krogan are dead, the Turians are dead, the Quarians are dead, the Asari are dead, the humans are dead, the Volus are dead, the Salarians are dead etc etc. Then to top it off you destroyed the only means of transport around the galaxy which means any up and coming races will be restricted to their home system and that means they will easily run out of resources/destroy their worlds because they can no longer use the Mass Effect relays as was established in ME 2 with relation to the Drell system.

There should've been a fourth option at the end of ME 3 where Shepard just blows his brains out, because he actually left the universe in a far worse state than he would've if he just let the Reapers get on with things.

Avatar image for Cwagmire21
Cwagmire21

5896

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 Cwagmire21
Member since 2007 • 5896 Posts

A Logical Breakdown of Why the Mass Effect 3 Ending Makes No Sense

ME3's ending is almost as bad as Gamespot's forum software.

Baranga

I haven't played ME3, but there's no way the ending is that bad. :P

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

20281

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#42 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 20281 Posts

[QUOTE="charmingcharlie"]

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]Yes I agree, Interstellar Transport isn't possible anymore (as the old man explains to the boy at the final scene).

What's the big problem?

Shepard and his crew (+ the Universe) fought and fought through the three parts (Years?) against the Reapers. Only at the end, it was futile, the Repears still won cause they started a new cycle.

It really is a sad ending if you think about it.

FelipeInside

Then what was the point of ever bothering to play the game ? people play games to "win" this is a no win scenario. Now whilst you might enjoy that kind of thing plenty of others don't enjoy spending hundreds of pounds and hundreds of hours on a game only to be told 5 minutes before the end "HA HA you can't win" (oh and don't give me that rubbish about the "journey is important not the destination").

You obviously like "sad" endings and that is your up to you I am not going to criticise that or call you out on it. I don't like "sad" endings, I fully expected Shepard to die, I fully expected to lose most of my crew, hell I was even fully expecting to lose most of earth. What I was not expecting was for Bioware to completely and utterly destory the Mass Effect universe totally and basically say to me "ha you lose you couldn't win".

I don't like "sad" endings, but not every story finishes on a good note. Take for example I AM LEGEND. Awesome book with awesome ending, then the movie....it was great but they replaced the ending with a "Hollywood Feel Good Ending" that ruined the whole concept. What I'm saying is that some fights just can't be won. Have you ever won EVERY single fight or discussion or debate or whatever? Of course not. People don't just play games to win...they play games to have fun, to experience something different, something they could never experience in their normal life. The journey IS as important as the destination. They didn't destroy the Universe, they just cut Galaxies off each other which basically restarted the cycle but this time, they didn't kill everyone. So now the races have to make their own way and forge peace as Shepard said.

That one is not completly accurate. Why do you think that 90% of movies, books, tv-shows, games have a ending where despite some being open for interpretation, end with the good guys winning and the bad guys loosing.

People play games or watch movies to have fun but a lot also do it to escape the real life for at least 1 hour and 30min or 10-40+ hours most games have, a real life where the bad guys usally win and the good guy usally end up last.

Its the same with Mass Effect and if you think about the time spent with the game, its not suprising that a lot of people are pissed about the ending, you spent 100+ hours over 3 games and all you get is a "Sheppard is now legend now go spend more cash on DLC" and almost no answer to any questions and plotholes the size of America x 5

But with that said i could accept the ending if it had ended with Shep and Anderson sitting like they did and watching the reapers be destroyed and seeing earth saved and then take the last few breath with the knowledge that they saved the whole galaxy. That ending would have been decent and most people would never have complained, but no they have to give us the extra 10min where some god child comes and gives you even bigger plot holes and gives you some crap about him being the creator and controller of the reapers and making you do a old A-B-C color coded ending.

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts
I don't think the Planets are destroyed cause we see the crew of the Normandy land on one, we see the Earth say there even if the Citadel is destroyed and then we see the old man and kid on a planet with other planets visible. As for the no win scenario, you are missing my point. The choice Shepard made was for the ONLY win scenario there was. He actually saved the Universe from total annihilation. The Reapers would have destroyed Planets and killed everyone, what Shepard did was destroy the Relays but at least save a portion of the Galaxy. That's how I see it anyway. The ending is a sad one cause of so much death leading up to it, to result in destruction of interstellar transport (which they will find a way I'm sure in the future, check what the old man says) but at least SAVED the last remaining lives.
Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"][QUOTE="charmingcharlie"]

Then what was the point of ever bothering to play the game ? people play games to "win" this is a no win scenario. Now whilst you might enjoy that kind of thing plenty of others don't enjoy spending hundreds of pounds and hundreds of hours on a game only to be told 5 minutes before the end "HA HA you can't win" (oh and don't give me that rubbish about the "journey is important not the destination").

You obviously like "sad" endings and that is your up to you I am not going to criticise that or call you out on it. I don't like "sad" endings, I fully expected Shepard to die, I fully expected to lose most of my crew, hell I was even fully expecting to lose most of earth. What I was not expecting was for Bioware to completely and utterly destory the Mass Effect universe totally and basically say to me "ha you lose you couldn't win".

Jacanuk

I don't like "sad" endings, but not every story finishes on a good note. Take for example I AM LEGEND. Awesome book with awesome ending, then the movie....it was great but they replaced the ending with a "Hollywood Feel Good Ending" that ruined the whole concept. What I'm saying is that some fights just can't be won. Have you ever won EVERY single fight or discussion or debate or whatever? Of course not. People don't just play games to win...they play games to have fun, to experience something different, something they could never experience in their normal life. The journey IS as important as the destination. They didn't destroy the Universe, they just cut Galaxies off each other which basically restarted the cycle but this time, they didn't kill everyone. So now the races have to make their own way and forge peace as Shepard said.

But with that said i could accept the ending if it had ended with Shep and Anderson sitting like they did and watching the reapers be destroyed and seeing earth saved and then take the last few breath with the knowledge that they saved the whole galaxy.

No, that's because everyone likes a HAPPY ending wrapped in a box with a pink ribbon on top.

That's what Hollywood Blockbusters has done with our brains, the good guys always win.

Take Romeo+Juliet story, one of the most acclaimed....how did it end?

Take The Notebook Movie, one of the best love stories ever written.... how did it end?

I'm not against good happy endings, but it's not always the case.

Avatar image for charmingcharlie
charmingcharlie

1244

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45 charmingcharlie
Member since 2006 • 1244 Posts

I don't think the Planets are destroyed cause we see the crew of the Normandy land on one, we see the Earth say there even if the Citadel is destroyed and then we see the old man and kid on a planet with other planets visible.FelipeInside

The Normandy was in mid-transport via a Mass Relay when it was knocked OUT OF the stream so it exited in a system without a Mass Effect relay. In other words the Normandy crashes on a planet in a system that does not have a Mass Effect Relay so it is not destroyed when the relay's blow. You do not see Earth again once the relay's blow. You get a cut scene of the Relay being destroyed, you see a huge blast wave eminate from the relay then it goes to a cut scene of the galaxy map and then a cut scene of the Normandy being hit and crashing. The planet at the end is obviously the one the Normandy crashed on and they are the "descendants" of the Normandy crew (and don't even get me started on that, no way could a crew of 30 be enough to do a viable population).

As for the no win scenario, you are missing my point. The choice Shepard made was for the ONLY win scenario there was. He actually saved the Universe from total annihilation. The Reapers would have destroyed Planets and killed everyone, what Shepard did was destroy the Relays but at least save a portion of the Galaxy. That's how I see it anyway. The ending is a sad one cause of so much death leading up to it, to result in destruction of interstellar transport (which they will find a way I'm sure in the future, check what the old man says) but at least SAVED the last remaining lives.FelipeInside

I am not missing your point you are missing mine. The three options are NO WIN scenario's no matter which one you choose you destroy the relay's and devastate the universe. Now sure you remove the Reaper threat but you leave the galaxy in a much worse state than the Reapers ever would and potentially create a situation that could lead to all life in that galaxy heading towards extinction.

You also seem to be missing some key points to the lore here. Firstly the Reapers DO NOT wipe out all organic life. The Reapers only wipe out advanced life forms and they leave less advanced life forms to develop till the next cycle. That is why humans were left alone in the previous cycle when the Reapers wiped out the Protheans. However what Shepard has done is doom the entire galaxy by destroying the relay's. Any developing races that were not destroyed by the relay's will undoubtedly run out of resources before they can acquire the technology to move out of their system. As for the old git talking at the end all he says is "someday" they will travel to the stars, well that is supposedly set 10,000 years after the end of ME 3 and there is still no sign of them leaving they have to be pretty close to running out of resources on that planet.

Now from your posts I can tell you aren't really that "invested" in the Mass Effect series and that could probably explain why the endings do not bother you. However for those that are invested in the series the ending was plain trolling by Bioware and that is before you get into all the inconsistencies, plot holes and downright gibberish that the ending contains.

Avatar image for TerryBradshaw
TerryBradshaw

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 TerryBradshaw
Member since 2011 • 25 Posts

Dude, I lurk on these forums 99% of the time, and the moment after I read your thread topic and saw your sith sig (forming the connections...) I immediately scrolled down and clicked "new message" to formally accuse you of your highly suspicious pattern for creating fawning bioware threads....ONLY TO SEE SOMEONE ALREADY HAD ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE THREAD. LOL.

Sure, maybe you throw a smidge of rationality or leveled criticism at the game....but a man has to keep up his front, no?

Avatar image for Gooeykat
Gooeykat

3412

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#47 Gooeykat
Member since 2006 • 3412 Posts
[QUOTE="charmingcharlie"]

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]Yes I agree, Interstellar Transport isn't possible anymore (as the old man explains to the boy at the final scene).

What's the big problem?

Shepard and his crew (+ the Universe) fought and fought through the three parts (Years?) against the Reapers. Only at the end, it was futile, the Repears still won cause they started a new cycle.

It really is a sad ending if you think about it.

FelipeInside

Then what was the point of ever bothering to play the game ? people play games to "win" this is a no win scenario. Now whilst you might enjoy that kind of thing plenty of others don't enjoy spending hundreds of pounds and hundreds of hours on a game only to be told 5 minutes before the end "HA HA you can't win" (oh and don't give me that rubbish about the "journey is important not the destination").

You obviously like "sad" endings and that is your up to you I am not going to criticise that or call you out on it. I don't like "sad" endings, I fully expected Shepard to die, I fully expected to lose most of my crew, hell I was even fully expecting to lose most of earth. What I was not expecting was for Bioware to completely and utterly destory the Mass Effect universe totally and basically say to me "ha you lose you couldn't win".

I don't like "sad" endings, but not every story finishes on a good note. Take for example I AM LEGEND. Awesome book with awesome ending, then the movie....it was great but they replaced the ending with a "Hollywood Feel Good Ending" that ruined the whole concept. What I'm saying is that some fights just can't be won. Have you ever won EVERY single fight or discussion or debate or whatever? Of course not. People don't just play games to win...they play games to have fun, to experience something different, something they could never experience in their normal life. The journey IS as important as the destination. They didn't destroy the Universe, they just cut Galaxies off each other which basically restarted the cycle but this time, they didn't kill everyone. So now the races have to make their own way and forge peace as Shepard said.

But the problem is that it's supposed to be an RPG with choices and consequences. All the endings were too similar, they should have had more variation and it should have shown impact of the choices that you made. You make some huge decisions in this final chapter and really none of it matters.
Avatar image for lpjazzman220
lpjazzman220

2249

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#48 lpjazzman220
Member since 2008 • 2249 Posts

[QUOTE="shakmaster13"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]I am trying to come to what a good "ending" looked like.. Because I can't think of many to end a series.. Even games like Baldur's Gate 2 blew as a ending wise in really providing little to no explainations or real differences outside of a tidbit on yoru choices.. Especially with the expansion.. I am trying to figure out where this golden standard of endings for rpgs is being used.. Because it seems to be either every one is happy and lives long, the main character lives to figh tanother day and walks intot eh sun set etc etc .. The only thing I would argue is if it focused more on your romance and friends at your death with some narration.. In all honesty I prefered this ending over the stereotypical ending that people seemed to be hoping for.. I just wish it was fleshed out alittle more with what happened.. And the indoctrination ending is a extremely interesting theory.. sSubZerOo
At the very least the ending could have been similar to Fallout games were they tell you what happens to certain groups of people. In this game it was: lawl lets kill everyone no matter what so no decision you made except for the one you're about to make will have any impact.

I would have liked to see a 10 minute ending after Shepards decision (with out shepard) focusing on certain characters and what became of them.. Outside of that people are blinded by nostalagia... I am still trying to find that "mythical" game that you could choose your ending where it actually made a diffences.. Outside of this I am glad they didn't go about with the cliche ending.

the end of kotor1...while it was kinda cliched...u go light side and destroy the star forge=hero to the galaxy and the huge parade/party thing

go dark side...keep the star forge and get the chick and end up training and army on korriban...again while cliched it worked as an ending to a star wars game

then came kotor2 where revan just up and disappeared after kotor1 and how u played revan in the first game had no impact on the game whatsoever...i can kinda deal with that as it was needed to forward the story for kotor2...but at the end of kotor2 YOU ARE THE LAST JEDI and u die on malachor...the force ends with u...all force users in the galaxy are supposedly dead...the jedi council on corousant split up and kreia killed them all...or u did...and u end up killing kreia and sion at the end and then malachor explodes...the end of the force...

then comes the old republic and everyone and their brother pretty much are force users...

the point im trying to make...we were okay with it when it came to star wars...and bioware has been removing the significance from our choices for years...why is it suddenly amazing when it happens in mass effect...while i hate that there are soooo many damn plot holes in mass effect 3...and i think that shepherd should have died next to anderson before the whole space child thing and the reapers should have succeeded(would have made a hell of a lot more sense dont you think?)...i mean if all life in the galaxy is gonna be wiped out either because of the reapers or the relays exploding...at least let them fight for it...cause then it would have opened up room for more games where u could play...say garrus or someone like that...but thats beyond the point...

bioware has NEVER dealt with the endings of the their games well and we all the sudden expect them to with mass effect...is it just because the game is more popular than all the rest that they have created? i mean heck i hate to see shepherd die and all life wiped out...but it makes sense with the lore...the point is...the ending sucked...and there would have been no perfect ending...and as much as i would have loved to save the galaxy and build that house with tali on her planet...i knew it was never gonna happen and i realized that shep was probably gonna die...but the treatment they gave it and hte ending movie did p*** me off...but why is everyone so upset about it...kotor2 had a fairly bad ending as far as endings go and i dont remember people raging and demanding a new ending...were all supposed to be adults here(get it...cause its rated M for mature) so why are we being a bunch of fusy children who need a nap...and im not defending them...but there are so many other games out there that we shouldnt be hung up on one

Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#49 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

Dude, I lurk on these forums 99% of the time, and the moment after I read your thread topic and saw your sith sig (forming the connections...) I immediately scrolled down and clicked "new message" to formally accuse you of your highly suspicious pattern for creating fawning bioware threads....ONLY TO SEE SOMEONE ALREADY HAD ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THE THREAD. LOL.

Sure, maybe you throw a smidge of rationality or leveled criticism at the game....but a man has to keep up his front, no?

TerryBradshaw
You really wasted time to post that? Something totally useless? Thanks for contributing to the topic, you fail. As for the post someone else had, read my response. He always mentions when I say good things about BioWare, but somehow misses to see when I criticize them, which is EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING AS WELL. It's nice to be able to use only what helps your argument and not what contradicts it.
Avatar image for FelipeInside
FelipeInside

28548

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#50 FelipeInside
Member since 2003 • 28548 Posts

[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]I don't think the Planets are destroyed cause we see the crew of the Normandy land on one, we see the Earth say there even if the Citadel is destroyed and then we see the old man and kid on a planet with other planets visible.charmingcharlie

The Normandy was in mid-transport via a Mass Relay when it was knocked OUT OF the stream so it exited in a system without a Mass Effect relay. In other words the Normandy crashes on a planet in a system that does not have a Mass Effect Relay so it is not destroyed when the relay's blow. You do not see Earth again once the relay's blow. You get a cut scene of the Relay being destroyed, you see a huge blast wave eminate from the relay then it goes to a cut scene of the galaxy map and then a cut scene of the Normandy being hit and crashing. The planet at the end is obviously the one the Normandy crashed on and they are the "descendants" of the Normandy crew (and don't even get me started on that, no way could a crew of 30 be enough to do a viable population).

As for the no win scenario, you are missing my point. The choice Shepard made was for the ONLY win scenario there was. He actually saved the Universe from total annihilation. The Reapers would have destroyed Planets and killed everyone, what Shepard did was destroy the Relays but at least save a portion of the Galaxy. That's how I see it anyway. The ending is a sad one cause of so much death leading up to it, to result in destruction of interstellar transport (which they will find a way I'm sure in the future, check what the old man says) but at least SAVED the last remaining lives.FelipeInside

I am not missing your point you are missing mine. The three options are NO WIN scenario's no matter which one you choose you destroy the relay's and devastate the universe. Now sure you remove the Reaper threat but you leave the galaxy in a much worse state than the Reapers ever would and potentially create a situation that could lead to all life in that galaxy heading towards extinction.

You also seem to be missing some key points to the lore here. Firstly the Reapers DO NOT wipe out all organic life. The Reapers only wipe out advanced life forms and they leave less advanced life forms to develop till the next cycle. That is why humans were left alone in the previous cycle when the Reapers wiped out the Protheans. However what Shepard has done is doom the entire galaxy by destroying the relay's. Any developing races that were not destroyed by the relay's will undoubtedly run out of resources before they can acquire the technology to move out of their system. As for the old git talking at the end all he says is "someday" they will travel to the stars, well that is supposedly set 10,000 years after the end of ME 3 and there is still no sign of them leaving they have to be pretty close to running out of resources on that planet.

Now from your posts I can tell you aren't really that "invested" in the Mass Effect series and that could probably explain why the endings do not bother you. However for those that are invested in the series the ending was plain trolling by Bioware and that is before you get into all the inconsistencies, plot holes and downright gibberish that the ending contains.

Very good explanation thanks.

I'm starting to see why people would be upset.

Maybe like you say I don't pay as much attention to detail as other gamers, and that's why the ending didn't bother me.

I also understand that the 3 endings are very similar.

Guess we'll just wait and see what the DLC expands on.

I still don't think the Relays also destroyed the Solar Systems cause then they couldn't continue the Mass Effect Universe (something BioWare said they would do but without Shepard)