BioWare "Considering" Calls for New Mass Effect 3 Ending

[DustyDrB]

I'm still a firm believer of the indoctrination theory.

If Bioware manage to pull off what I think they're pulling off, it will be awesome.

I'm more in line with the Make It Up Yourself theory, in which Shepard is given his own planet. He builds a house that forms a ring around the entire planet, and is transported by a sled made out of a gutted Mako and pulled by those little space monkeys from that one side quest planet in the first game. The Turian ambassador is made into Shepards butler (free of charge, of course. We have dismissed claims of a salary). Garrus runs the bar/nightclub. Aria runs a deli.

 

[ResonanceSD]

Nothing will ever get changed for the better if people are silent about the quality of the games they play, especially if it's the negative bit that's being silent.

Or consumers could stop buying crap and actually punish a company rather than saying "I'LL START NOT BUYING THEIR GAMES AFTER I FINISH THIS ONE. AND IT'S DLC". Whichever works.

2 problems: Bioware had a good track record ... who would have guessed this kind of shit ending was coming?

Anyone who played Dragon Age 2, for a start.

It's very shameless and a cheap tactic for marketing purposes. Not to mention how hurt and betrayed I feel personally. Yeah it's a video game, but should we really put up with what companies do these days?

5 years of gaming history, ruined.

Or is it? JKs! Pay us some more and we'll release an ending which doesn't make people set fire to the internet! Because we love you!

 

[Joccaren]

This is getting out of control. Ive not even been able to play the thing yet and ive tried to avoid doing so until may when I will have the time to dedicate to it. But Bioware dont you dare cave to this pressure. It does not matter if the ending is truly the worst ending of any game anywhere, its what you created. Stand behind it, or else the court of public opinion will ruin every game we play and make the narrative in gaming as bland and regurgitated as everything on television for the last half century.

I'm with this one.

I haven't played it yet, but frankly, I don't care if it's so bad it literally causes shit to spray out of the screen into your face, because at the end of the day games do not exist merely to service their fans' vanity. If Bioware didn't have the creative vision to pull this off, so be it (and I don't see how a new ending in which they try desperately to pander to your every whim is likely to be significantly better), but somewhere, sometime, someone will have that creative vision.

If we live in a culture where an entitled majority who see games merely as a toy to gratify them in whatever way they wish can get whatever changes they want by bleating loudly enough, then there's no room for artistic integrity. Whether Bioware as a company has any artistic integrity is another matter, but sometimes, it's a sacrifice. If we want people to make genuinely intelligent or daring games, or games which push storytelling boundaries, we need to accept that people can make unpopular choices, even outright tacky or shitty choices, without having to change them later at the whim of the majority of the fanbase.

I've read plenty of novels where I didn't like the ending. I didn't write to the author demanding he or she change it or give me my money back, I recognized that I only cared because I had enjoyed the book so much, and, regardless I had the imagination to make up my own ending and leave it at that.

Suck it up. Accept that it didn't work out this time and move on. If you act like children, all you're going to get from the games industry is children's toys.

EDIT: Of course, if Bioware were to openly admit that they ran out of time or money and that they knew they had done a half-arsed job but simply had to release or die, that would be cool. I'd appreciate that honesty, and a new ending in that scenario could even be nice. Kind of like a directors cut (in the old sense, before the word just became meaningless). But changing an ending which was written and approved simply because the fans didn't like just strikes me as pathetic, and probably wouldn't end well either. Feeding people's sense of entitlement doesn't make them happy, it just makes them more entitled.

To both of you:
Video games as art is all well and good so long as I'm not promised something, then asked to pay good money for it. There are numerous free games that I don't like parts of, but I won't tell their creators to change things as they did it for themselves and for the art. I have no investment in it, I don't like it I can leave.
Things Like Minecraft I am more merciful towards as well. I am not promised anything, I am merely shown the game, then asked if I want to buy it. I will complain to Notch to change things if I don't like them, but I won't go all up like I am for ME3.
Things like ME3 I will go all out on, because even though it can be considered art, it is also a product, and certain things must be delivered on all products. We were promised many things of the ending, a lot of which were not delivered at all - hence the entire False Advertising law suit - and we were convinced to pay good money for the game believing that that is what we would get. When instead we get something completely different, and really utter crap - we have a right and responsibility to stand up for our rights as consumers and tell the businesses what they've done wrong.
Imagine CoD MW4 or whatever is advertised as the fastest paced FPS ever, with 12 playable maps and more weapons and perk combos than in any other CoD, with faster play and more excitement. After everyone has bought it and starts playing it, it turns out that the game is a turn based tactical shooter taking place on one large map - similar to Jagged Alliance in a way. That is ME3 ending syndrome.
We spent money on something we were told would have largely varied endings where 'You can't say you got ending A, B or C', where all choices were taken into account and many other things. We spent money believing this is what we were going to get, and what we got was completely different.
It is our right and responsibility as consumers to tell Bioware what they've done wrong, and how they can fix it. The day you let businesses do what they want without any head for what you want is the day you get nothing you want any more, and a million cheap and nasty products that they know will sell because 'Its wrong to tell game makers they've done something wrong'. That is not the way of the future.

As stated near the start, I'm all for videogames as art if they're made for that. If Bioware made this completely on their own funding without any money or resources from EA, then fine. Instead, they took that from EA and made the game, promising EA it would please fans and earn them sales. It hasn't pleased fans, and if sales drop because of this - they haven't kept their promise.
Bioware is in the wrong here. They need to fulfil their promises to us, and show EA that it was completely worth their investment in Bioware. If that means changing the ending, it is a perfectly fine thing to ask for.

You know, isn't not being happy with how the canon story works out what fan-fiction is for?

Usually. Bioware promises us that there is no canon Shepard though, and that our choices define our Shepard, and that we will get individual endings different from each other reflecting our Shepards' differences. As such, if they provide one ending with a different lightshow and call it canon, they've just broken their promises to us.


Honestly, this isn't OK, and people like you Escapist reporters need to stop painting Bioware in such a positive light. Also, no 'Well at least they're communicating'. We have a PR person on BSN telling us what is going on in Bioware ATM with their 'Damage Control'. Them telling us they're thinking about things is meant to calm us down and stop us complaining. Once that happens, EA does nothing. Instead, until you get 100% confirmation that an ending DLC is being released, keep pushing EA and Bioware. Don't go screaming and yelling like 10 year olds - that gets the press against you, and everyone else, and thus Bioware appears the victim - like is already happening in my top two quotes. Keep pushing for the ending you want, but be civil about it. You push on for long enough, EA will cave as they want your dosh. Give up or calm down because Bioware said they're listening to feedback, and you've already lost.

 

[viranimus]

Snip

Ok, please keep in mind that when I ask this, I am asking as someone who has yet to play the game and despite this controversy trying like hell to avoid spoilers. (asshats already ruined Tali for me)

Im trying to understand this whole thing without spoiling the whole game, and I am not one to completely dismiss one point of view or another (despite what others might assume) But let me understand this. Are you saying that the end of ME3 was supposed to have multiple endings, or are you saying that there ARE multiple endings, or are you saying there are multiple endings but with only minor esthetic differences between them?

 

[Ridgemo]

*spoilers*

I thought, nay prayed the ending wasn't as terrible as I heard it was.

Unfortunatly, it was. Instead of feeling triumphant, I was instead wondering what the fuck Bioware had been smoking, and how they could miss this bad.

I'm not demanding Shepard be on the beach with Liara in bikini's (though god knows that would be awesome!) but even if it was just Reapers/Shepard dead, but now civilizations can rebuild for the future would have been good.

Spoiler

Not some bullshit God-child pulled straight out their fucking arses.

What do you mean

Spoiler

godchild? It's a projection of an advanced AI, the projection is based on images from Shepards brain. And the Reapers can't be defeated conventionally. How were you to spread that kind of signal through the entire galaxy, if not through the mass relays? And civilization CAN rebuild for the future. As for space travel, finding a replacement for the mass relays will take a lot of time, but keep in mind, there is probably debris left that can, to some degree, be reverse engineered

Spoiler

Whilst it's not a "god-child", it still had no lead up to it, no indication that all of a sudden we're speaking to this little twat who basically will ruin 3 games worth of story for me

Yes, I may be a hack, but whats wrong with having a happy ending? The bitter would have been the sheer sacrifice from all species who went to war. The sweet would have been Shepard and co, victorious, with maybe something to let me know what happens to them all.

Spoiler

In my ending, I chose synthesis (only because green is my fav colour), and I got that singular breath to (the "good" ending).

I just found it so unsatisfying after what had been an amazing journey. I'm sorry though, the end can ruin the journey for me, and in this case it did unfortunatly.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

You make no sense to me what so ever. I respect your opinion, and it was very nicely said. But why put all this reality in an escapist fantasy game? It's a game. A realistic situation is not why I'm playing it.

A story, even a fantasy, relies on coherence. It must maintain its internal logic. Video games are not immune from this; when a game violates such a rule, the result is a loss of immersion.

If you want a crazy happy, totally unrealistic ending, I think you should be able to get it.

A story that ends happily without earning it is the worst sort of contrivance. If you want a happy ending, play a game set in a less dire place.

It's not like there isn't a precedent set for that, with the total team survival possible in Mass Effect 2.

Surviving the suicide mission is easily possible. But the odds far less steep. The collectors relied on secrecy isolation and surprise. Their ship was but a cruiser. They had a single stronghold. The presumed suicide was because you were to go take a path no one had ever returned from. But the odds were easily evened. The external defenders were bested by technological innovation. The Normandy was a frigate with the defenses and armament of a cruiser and strategic and tactical surprise at this revelation was sufficient to turn the tide. The base itself was not designed to repel assault and thus the small team that breached made it deeper than they would have otherwise.

The internal logic of the universe is consistent in this case.

Replace one cruiser with hundreds if not thousands of dreadnoughts with the power to turn armies to their side by their mere presence - ships that are capable of devastating entire squadrons of vessels even when cornered. A force that had harvested advanced life time and again. The very definition of an unstoppable force; inevitability made corporeal. All the preparation in the galaxy presented a fleet that is outnumbered in dreadnoughts, outgunned and utterly doomed to fail. Anything but annihilation is a happy ending beyond hoping for. And, yet, in the end, it was possible to stop the unstoppable. At the cost of hundreds of thousands of soldiers, a reliable system of galactic transportation and a variable number of beloved friends.

 

[Vuljatar]

Well, that's as good as a change confirmation IMO.

I can't imagine them saying "it's possible" and then later simply deciding not to.

 

[Fox242]

I don't think that I've ever seen anything like this. I didn't think that the uproar over an ending would get so loud that the developer would consider changing it. I mean I didn't like Resistance 3's ending, but I didn't rage at Insomniac and demand they change it. Then again, the Mass Effect series must have been important enough to warrant a response such as this, but I haven't played the games so I wouldn't know.

 

[idarkphoenixi]

I don't see whats so crazy about filing an FTC claim.

They promised dozens of vastly different endings, that every single choice you made throughout the 3 games would impact it in ways you never thought possible. You get ONE ending in a choice of 3 different colours. That is lying, it is false advertising and yes, false advertising is illegal.

People shouldn't give them a pass just because it's a game. If a car dealer promised you would get heated seats, a mini tv and free beverage dispenser in your brand new Ford and instead you got a sticky plastic chair with a spike in the middle...well you see where I'm going with this.

As for the "indoctrination" theory...It's just stupid. Even if it is true, that makes the game even worse! Instead of a shitty regular ending you get NO ending at all and instead need to wait for it to come out as DLC. How can you defend that? I don't care if they make the DLC free or not, the game needs to come with a freaking ending attatched to it. It's literally the least they could do.

 

[Joccaren]

Snip

Ok, please keep in mind that when I ask this, I am asking as someone who has yet to play the game and despite this controversy trying like hell to avoid spoilers. (asshats already ruined Tali for me)

Im trying to understand this whole thing without spoiling the whole game, and I am not one to completely dismiss one point of view or another (despite what others might assume) But let me understand this. Are you saying that the end of ME3 was supposed to have multiple endings, or are you saying that there ARE multiple endings, or are you saying there are multiple endings but with only minor esthetic differences between them?

A mix of the three.
We were promised:
-?There are many different endings. We wouldn?t do it any other way. How
could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can?t
say any more than that??
-?Every decision you've made will impact how things go. The player's also the
architect of what happens."
-?You'll get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless
of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide
some answers to these people.?
-?Because a lot of these plot threads are concluding and because it's being
brought to a finale, since you were a part of architecting how they
got to how they were, you will definitely sense how they close was
because of the decisions you made and because of the decisions you
didn't make?
-?For people who are invested in these characters and the back-story of the
universe and everything, all of these things come to a resolution in
Mass Effect 3. And they are resolved in a way that's very different
based on what you would do in those situations.?
-?Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get
some closure, a great ending. I think they?re going to get that.?
-?Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the
lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,
being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an
end.?
-?Yeah, and I?d say much more so, because we have the ability to
build the endings out in a way that we don?t have to worry about
eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is
coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot
more different. At this point we?re taking into account so many
decisions that you?ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that
stuff. It?s not even in any way like the traditional game endings,
where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got
ending A, B, or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and
variety in them.?
-?We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.?
-"Mass Effect 3 will shake up the player's moral choices more than ever
before, even going so far as allowing the Reapers to win the battle
for Earth, according to BioWare's community representative Mike
Gamble."
-?There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to
some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending
where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things
- it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the
final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who
plays it.?


All basically lies. You are given a DX:HR style ending where one of three buttons you shoot/hold/jump into decides what ending you get. Yes, literally Ending A, Ending B, Ending C. In none of these can the Reaper's win. Your previous decisions have no impact on the endings [They affect your EMS rating, which decides what you are allowed to choose from, and for Ending A whether you survive or not {Very vague scene on that though}], but nothing else.
In addition to that, no matter which ending you choose, you are shown the same montage of clips, but with different coloured energy beams and 'Explosions'.


So, we were promised a lot of varied endings, we were given 3 extremely similar endings labelled Red, Green and Blue by fans, and most of Bioware's pre release promises have not been kept.

 

[idarkphoenixi]

Well, that's as good as a change confirmation IMO.

I can't imagine them saying "it's possible" and then later simply deciding not to.

Oh, I wish I could have your optimism...This is pretty much by-the-book levels of PR. It's a way of getting the community to shut up without actually doing anything. They want people to calm down so they can rush out all the other DLC they have sitting in the office.

 

[Joccaren]

Well, that's as good as a change confirmation IMO.

I can't imagine them saying "it's possible" and then later simply deciding not to.

On BSN we have a PR person reading into the Bioware Press Releases for us to tell us how they're trying to make us react. This is not a confirmation in the slightest. Nowhere does he actually say they will change anything.
"We would like to clarify that we are actively and seriously taking all player feedback into consideration and have ruled nothing out. At this time we are still collecting and considering your feedback and have not made a decision regarding requests to change the ending"
Aka: They know we are complaining, and if we keep complaining we will get an ending.
The PR guy has said that it is an achievement to actually be recognised by their PR team, but we've got to keep pushing. Until they 100% confirm that DLC for the ending is in the works, they are merely trying to calm everyone down so that people stop complaining and start praising the game, and EA doesn't have to put any money into making a new ending. By the time the fans realise, we will be more disorganised that we are now, and all complaints will come across as either hypocritical, over the top, or just not worth the effort.
If we want a new ending, we have to keep pushing until we actually get that new ending.

BTW, here's the thread with all the PR guy quotes:
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10084349
Hold the line brother.

 

[viranimus]

Ok thank you.

I tried to read selectively because some elements started getting to be a little TMI for me. THank you for keeping it as spoiler free as possible.

Now I have to know, when or where did EA or Bioware make a direct confirmable promise to
A: End the series
B: Dictate that choices would be relevant all the way from beginning to the end of the game
C: Get every answer to everything.

I mean I may simply be ignorant on this, because I am unaware of the definitive promises being made to the community before the release of the game as I am not one to read biowares forums or other bioware related reading cause my liking for them is only slightly above passing. So a citation circa pre march would be quite beneficial to facilitate my understanding on how this is a slight against gamers.

 

[Gnoekeos]

Seems to me that every time George Lucas tries to do this sort of thing people lose their mind.

 

[irishda]

Nothing will ever get changed for the better if people are silent about the quality of the games they play, especially if it's the negative bit that's being silent.

Or consumers could stop buying crap and actually punish a company rather than saying "I'LL START NOT BUYING THEIR GAMES AFTER I FINISH THIS ONE. AND IT'S DLC". Whichever works.

2 problems: Bioware had a good track record so far so who would have guessed this kind of shit ending was coming? And just not buying a product does jack shiite for the company to understand what they did wrong.

TELLING THEM is a valid and necessary measure in capitalism.

Don't go and rail on people because they pursue both their rights and their role as customer.
You need to get pissed and vocal at things that go wrong when buying stuff, otherwise the company will not learn what went wrong, and do the same shit again.


Kind of like lead poisoned toys. You need to get vocal about it, otherwise you will continue to get lead poisoned toys.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA! *ahem* Sorry. I was just laughing at the idea that a lack of cash inflow from a product line WOULDN'T make a company pursue the reasons why the product didn't succeed, or at least make as few similarities between it and future projects as possible, in a capitalist society anyways. Companies only listen to one thing, what's making money. If they make a truckload of money off releasing a "true ending" DLC, you bet your ass they'll smile and nod about how they're listening to you as they take your money, then they'll just turn around and do it again. Why wouldn't they? You all gave them more than enough incentive to do so. You all cried and whined, but at the end of the day you still bought it. You still rewarded them with money.

Companies don't learn lessons until you stop giving them the reward. Just like dogs don't learn unless you reward them when they DO something right.

I really do hope this is a false ending. I really do hope they release the REAL ending at 5 bucks or 5 euros or whatever. Because every single person complaining about this will buy it. It will make a small fortune for Bioware and EA. And then the next game will come along and it too will have a weird ending, and the whole goddamn cycle will continue anew. Huh, just like the reapers in fa- CREEEEEEEEEEEDD!!

 

[Nikolaz72]

So... now Retake ME3 Child's Play charity is "absolutely fantastic", yet few days ago it was, quoting Jim Sterling, used to "offset the public bitching by raising some money (...) which fans are now cynically using to deflect criticism."

My guess is they're finally noticing something they should've noticed over the past 2 years - endings and the whole setup make absolutely no sense. Inconsistent, lackluster, anticlimactic.

I'm down with the idea of open and productive communication with fans [although runaway incivility rarely seems far behind] but I still think the idea of demanding a new and "better" ending is ludicrous.

Please, explain why? As a customer it's Your duty to demand that the product You buy is of as good quality as it's advertised. If You pay for a 60$, so called "tripple A" title why should You be satisfied with something that doesn't meet Your expectations? When You buy a fancy TV that cost several thousand $ and find out that you can't change channels with a remote are You just accepting it is a "innovative, artistic expression"?
The game lacks an epilogue, an integral part of storytelling and writing. As customers we aren't slaves to companies and frankly if a company does something wrong we should yell about it, so next time they will think twice before making same mistake.

If you go see a movie, and don't like the ending, do they change the ending? Do they give you your money back? What if you buy a Blu-Ray? No. They don't. Feel free not to be satisfied, but that doesn't mean the company should change it for you. It's nothing like a non-functional remote - the game works just fine, and there are a lot of people who played it and aren't up in arms about the end.

Yes, I liked the ending. I thought it was appropriate. I also think people are clueless about how integrated the galaxy was - it would be insanely inefficient to use the mass relays to ship food back and forth. That's leaving aside the fact that FTL still exists - luxury goods will be more expensive, but they're not going to vanish. Do people seriously think that Earth will starve without the mass relays? The reapers harvested people - there have still got to be massive areas of Canada and Russia left untouched, as well as the oceans.

Roleplaying games, where you are bombarded with CHOICES MATTER, THINK WISE AND MAKE GOOD DECISIONS, need promises delivered.

And you are really clueless about the ending.

1. No closure - what happens to geth and quarians, krogans and turians, all the colonies?
2. FTL still means years to travel, assuming no fuel problems.
3. If you think a devastated, bombarded Earth can sustain a whole Galactic Fleet of Krogans, Asari, Turians, Quarians (those two will die because of different biology), Geth, Batarians AND humans will survive more than a year before everyone begins eating everything and everyone else?
4. Space Magic makes 0 sense.

1. That depends on whether you killed off the Geth or synthesized them. If you didn't kill them, they continue to work together with the Quarians to develop Rannoch. They already have agricultural facilities set up before the final battle, so they're good.
2. Yes, and? Travel is not a requirement for life. This does likely mean that some mining facilities will not survive, which sucks, but is hardly world-shattering.
3. Turians and Quarians on Earth will die if there are no facilities for manufacturing dextro food. Their races on the home planets, however, will live. Levo folks will be fine - the reapers weren't razing the entire planet, primarily the cities would have been hit. They went where the highest concentrations of people were. There will be some hard times, but hardly an insurmountable problem - definitely not so bad that they all have to eat each other.
4. Huh?

I mean, come on, clueless? It's not like I haven't thought it through. I'm not clueless because I disagree with your take on the ending. It's ridiculous the number of posts/articles/etc. that have decided that anyone who doesn't hate the ending is some sort of moron. I've got well over 300 hours invested in these games - it's not a question of me liking the ending because I don't know enough about the universe or am some casual game player.

300 hours invested and you are satisfied with "Yo dawg, I herd you don't like being killed by synthetics, so we made some synthetics to kill you every 50k years so you won't get killed by other synthetics"?

I think its more like this. Reapers 'figured' out that if the races lived too long, they would create a Synthetic race that would destroy 'all' organic life 'all of it' somehow. To prevent that the Reapers destroy all advanced organic life before they can develope suffeciently advanced synthetic races to destroy themself. And let the non-advanced organic life live on. They give them enough time (50K years) To both develope and have a taste of intergalactic diplomacy and warfare and shit, before they come and harvest them and their technology and preserve the 'best' race of the cycle by making it into a reaper. The rest become reaperslaves.

 

[irishda]

Well, that's as good as a change confirmation IMO.

I can't imagine them saying "it's possible" and then later simply deciding not to.

On BSN we have a PR person reading into the Bioware Press Releases for us to tell us how they're trying to make us react. This is not a confirmation in the slightest. Nowhere does he actually say they will change anything.
"We would like to clarify that we are actively and seriously taking all player feedback into consideration and have ruled nothing out. At this time we are still collecting and considering your feedback and have not made a decision regarding requests to change the ending"
Aka: They know we are complaining, and if we keep complaining we will get an ending.
The PR guy has said that it is an achievement to actually be recognised by their PR team, but we've got to keep pushing. Until they 100% confirm that DLC for the ending is in the works, they are merely trying to calm everyone down so that people stop complaining and start praising the game, and EA doesn't have to put any money into making a new ending. By the time the fans realise, we will be more disorganised that we are now, and all complaints will come across as either hypocritical, over the top, or just not worth the effort.
If we want a new ending, we have to keep pushing until we actually get that new ending.

BTW, here's the thread with all the PR guy quotes:
http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10084349
Hold the line brother.

Well you better hurry up then because Diablo 3 comes out in May, so there goes all the pro-change crowd. Of course the anti-change crowd will also be playing Diablo 3 but that's besides the point.

 

[A Weakgeek]

Maybe you'll get purple explosions this time.

 

[Joccaren]

Ok thank you.

I tried to read selectively because some elements started getting to be a little TMI for me. THank you for keeping it as spoiler free as possible.

Now I have to know, when or where did EA or Bioware make a direct confirmable promise to
A: End the series
B: Dictate that choices would be relevant all the way from beginning to the end of the game
C: Get every answer to everything.

I mean I may simply be ignorant on this, because I am unaware of the definitive promises being made to the community before the release of the game as I am not one to read biowares forums or other bioware related reading cause my liking for them is only slightly above passing. So a citation circa pre march would be quite beneficial to facilitate my understanding on how this is a slight against gamers.

A lot of these can probably be found in Escapist articles on interviews and such, however there is a neat collection of all quotes on BSN with links to sources. Didn't post that link as the thread contains some spoilers. Anyway...
A: Technically never said they'd end the series. Its not what most people are angry about either. They've said they're thinking about an ME4, but ME3 is the end of Shepard's story arc. I'll see if I can find that quote...
B & C: The above quotes I mentioned should suffice, but source articles can be found in list after this. All pre release, so shouldn't be to many spoilers.
As for the 'Every answer to Everything' - its not what we're asking for. We're asking for ANY answer to ANYTHING. As is, Bioware's plans for the ending were 'lots of speculation for everyone!', by telling you nothing about what happens to anyone. There is a short clip of what happens to the Normandy, but it is so vague that almost anything could have happened. Otherwise, no explanation for anything.
Source articles (Quotes Used may not be at top, so scan through whole article):
http://www.360magazine.co.uk/interview/mass-effect-3-has-many-different-endings/
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-02-02-bioware-mass-effect-3-ending-will-make-some-people-angry
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2011/04/28/casey-hudson-interview-mass-effect-3.aspx
http://www.gameinformer.com/b/features/archive/2012/01/10/mass1525-effect-3-cas5ey-fdsafdhudson-interviewae.aspx?PostPageIndex=2
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1027650/mass_effect_3_reapers_can_win_bioware.html
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/336331/interviews/mass-effect-3-we-cant-go-on-holiday-our-dlc-is-really-good/?page=2

And maybe a few more.
If you choose to brave minor spoilers, and check out more quotes and sources, here is the list of them on BSN: http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10056886

 

[SosaAddie30]

my co-worker's mother earned $21538 last week. she is working on the computer and moved in a $584500 condo. All she did was get blessed and work up the advice made clear on this website CashHuge.com