I liked the ending to Mass Effect 3

[bluesession]

I usualy just lurk. But i like to say something about the ending too. (though i don't think is fair for this forums to make yet another thread about ME3 ending)

I mostly agree with the op.

It sucked that everything you did up until that moment dind't matter at all. And yes there is that mayor plothole where joker is running away from battle (WHAT?)
I did like that the mass relays blowed up, i belive it was the only way to stop the reapers once and for all.

So it mostly sucked, but that doesn't really destroys the game for me. I really had fun those 30 hours before the end and that final run towards the light with the reaper shooting his shit towards everything (that wasn't you at first )... THAT was epic. And I definitly will remember it as a great game moment.
I guess the ENDING sucked but the PRE-ENDING was epic.

Anyways, that is why i don't belive it deserves so much nonsensical hate. It's true bioware totally drop the ball on the ending. But even with this terrible ending, I belive pretty much everyone (except who wrote the ending ) deserves an aplausse for the great game they made.

So.. No more hate! lets talk about how tali killed herself because I had to choose between her asshole people and the pretty much pacefull geth and, of course, I choose the geth.
Every one last quarian was obliterated beacause their best thought "hey, since we are at war with some giant machines who come to destroy everything... Why dont we get every quarian in the galaxy in a single fleet and throw it against another machines who:
a)they really dont want us dead and b) we have never defeated."

 

[endtherapture]

What was the paragon ending? Control? Definitely didn't seem the Paragon one, I thought destroy was the right option personally. Controlling the Reapers against their free will is something a paragon Shepard would definitely not do, in fact he's just agreeing with TIM so is a very renegade type character.

Because it was the Paragon option for the Geth in ME2.

Rewrite or destroy. Rewrite is paragon, Destroy is Renegade.

Control in ME3 doesn't kill the Geth or EDI. Also, since the Catalyst already controls them, you aren't taking away their free will - they never had free will to begin with. Actually, it sounded like Shepard was going to become the mind of the Reapers - so they would suddenly gain free will as Shepard's new body.

Besides, the Illusive Man wanted to control the Reapers to enslave the rest of the galaxy. Shepard is doing it to protect everyone.

Oh, and while this isn't explained, Control does less or no damage to Earth (depending on fleet size) whereas Destroy always does some damage to Earth (more or less depending on fleet size).

Suppose that's true, it's a stupid Paragon option though. Rewriting someone's personality and beliefs is a lot more evil than just killing them.

I went Destroy. It's the best option, Shepard can live, the Reapers are truly destroyed, Earth is pretty much unharmed too.

Felt way more Paragon than the "control the Reapers" ending which makes far less sense, Sovereign says Shepard can't even begin to comprehend the Reapers, so controlling them is just stupid.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Basically, why I don't like the endings boils down to this: **images cut**

Yes, but here's the thing - that was an impossible expectation.

With the constraints of modern game budgets and game design, a branching ending like that just wasn't physically possible.

Did people really expect this? Cause I didn't. I knew that, while it would have been awesome, it was never going to happen that way. The game was going to have one ending with variations, just like ME 1 and 2.

At most, I figured there would be a "you save earth" and "you destroy earth" endings - which there are. The fact that there are actually a rather large number of flavors of that (earth blown up, earth scorched, earth singed, or earth no worse than it was before you picked your ending) was actually more options that I expected.

See, this is why I wasn't upset with the ending - I had realistic expectations.

Now, if only Liara (or other final squadmates) could use her (their) magical teleporation powers to get you to the Citadel sooner, you wouldn't have to walk around the final scenes like a limping burn victim, and the members of Hammer wouldn't have gotten slaughtered.

 

[Aerosteam]

Debates and opinions can differ someone's belief especially if it's something based on a video game or matter that doesn't scale on their life's morals for say. But, to me even though I watched the Indoctrination video.. I still think it's utterly bad to have as the ending of Mass Effect.

Why?

Well.. why couldn't they of had it sooner or before the ending? Even if it actually is true, the theory doesn't explain the other events like the man telling the child a story or how Shepard's crew was on The Normandy crashing onto a tropical planet. Those pieces were random even for the theory itself to be included. Besides that, Casey Hudson and some other dude made the ending without anyone's feedback or opinion about it so that's why the ending feels very rushed, hollow, and literally defying what Mass Effect is all about - choice. 95% of all the endings are the same but color differs and a lot more stuff I feel about the ending. This video summarizes my feelings up perfectly including input on the theory everyone's coming up with as true.

I only choose to follow the Indoctrination Theory because I don't like the ending BioWare gave me. I could just go with it and accept the plot holes but I choose not to. The ending to Mass Effect 3 was not good, so I might as well make one up myself and accept that, then I saw the Indoctrination Theory and thought that it was a decent assumption, so I went with it. Now, I like the ending although it wasn't the one I was given or told that it was the real one or not.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Felt way more Paragon than the "control the Reapers" ending which makes far less sense, Sovereign says Shepard can't even begin to comprehend the Reapers, so controlling them is just stupid.

Um, except that the Reapers can build Mass Relays. Which means you can bypass that whole "no more relays" bit with the Paragon option.

Oh, and with Synthesis, everyone can just use FTL to get around. Sure it takes years and years to get anywhere, but who cares, everyone's immortal.

Destroy is Renegade because it takes out the Reapers, the Geth, EDI, and prevents easy reconstruction of the relays while also failing to remove their need (which synthesis may). It's victory at any cost, including one race, one friend, and the future of the galactic economy.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Suppose that's true, it's a stupid Paragon option though. Rewriting someone's personality and beliefs is a lot more evil than just killing them.

I went Destroy. It's the best option, Shepard can live, the Reapers are truly destroyed, Earth is pretty much unharmed too.

Felt way more Paragon than the "control the Reapers" ending which makes far less sense, Sovereign says Shepard can't even begin to comprehend the Reapers, so controlling them is just stupid.

...Not really. IF you take the Reaper King at face value (a poor idea, but let's work with it), "Destroy" will also kill the Geth and EDI, "Control" will result in EVERYONE living as Shepard can force the Reapers to stop their attack and use them to assist the races in rebuilding, and "Synthesis" doesn't actually rewrite anyone's personality or beliefs.

 

[Gigatoast]

Good for you, if they come out with a different set of endings for their other fans you wont have to download it. Don't really understand why someone who likes it would go out of their way to oppose the people who don't, we may disagree with you but we're not going to force you to accept new ones.

 

[endtherapture]

Suppose that's true, it's a stupid Paragon option though. Rewriting someone's personality and beliefs is a lot more evil than just killing them.

I went Destroy. It's the best option, Shepard can live, the Reapers are truly destroyed, Earth is pretty much unharmed too.

Felt way more Paragon than the "control the Reapers" ending which makes far less sense, Sovereign says Shepard can't even begin to comprehend the Reapers, so controlling them is just stupid.

...Not really. IF you take the Reaper King at face value (a poor idea, but let's work with it), "Destroy" will also kill the Geth and EDI, "Control" will result in EVERYONE living as Shepard can force the Reapers to stop their attack and use them to assist the races in rebuilding, and "Synthesis" doesn't actually rewrite anyone's personality or beliefs.

The two endings (aside from Destroy) are so poorly decribed.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Spoiler

Suppose that's true, it's a stupid Paragon option though. Rewriting someone's personality and beliefs is a lot more evil than just killing them.

I went Destroy. It's the best option, Shepard can live, the Reapers are truly destroyed, Earth is pretty much unharmed too.

Felt way more Paragon than the "control the Reapers" ending which makes far less sense, Sovereign says Shepard can't even begin to comprehend the Reapers, so controlling them is just stupid.

...Not really. IF you take the Reaper King at face value (a poor idea, but let's work with it), "Destroy" will also kill the Geth and EDI, "Control" will result in EVERYONE living as Shepard can force the Reapers to stop their attack and use them to assist the races in rebuilding, and "Synthesis" doesn't actually rewrite anyone's personality or beliefs.

The two endings (aside from Destroy) are so poorly decribed.

Consensus achieved. [/Legion]

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

I played and completed Mass Effect 3. I was pretty disappointed with the ending. But then I got on with my life.

 

[Major_Tom]

You went for paragon? Congratulations, you're now a husk!

I'm not even going to bother replying to you because of how stupid your post is... shit.

Ha!

But wait, didn't you say you liked the Indoctrination theory? Why is my post stupid then?

 

[RedDeadFred]

So you didn't mind that there was very little closure and that the entire reason for the Reaper's existence didn't make sense?

Or how about how Joker just randomly decides to flee the battle. Very uncharacteristic of him especially after what he did in the second game.

Also, how is it possible that Garrus, who I took with me on the final mission, somehow managed to come out of the crash landed Normandy?

It's not that it doesn't provide closure, is sad, or that your choices form the other games have little affect on it (I was perfectly fine with all that). It's that the ending actually doesn't make any logical sense.

And no the indoctrination theory doesn't work either because if your reputation score is too low at the end, you will only be given the option to kill the Reapers which means that they can't be setting up a trick if there can be a chance of only having the option to destroy them.

 

[Ninjat_126]

How?

Just... how?

You liked the glowing space child? You liked the killing-organics-to-prevent-them-being-killed explanation? You liked the vague and unjustified explanations of your final choices? You liked the near-identical endings regardless of choice? You liked the complete lack of closure regarding the characters and races?

How does one come to like these things?

The problems people are having aren't that the ending isn't "And then Shepard retired on Rannoch with Tali and drank beer with Garrus." Sure, there are people doing that, but there are people out there freaking out over Toy Story 3 because some of the characters didn't die in a fire.

The problem that 90% of the fanbase is having is that the ending has plot holes everywhere. Random space magic is possibly excusable, but having your main characters randomly teleport around the galaxy between cutscenes requires some form of explanation.

The other, major problem is the railroading. The ending is essentially you choosing the colour of the end screen, and you have no idea what happens to your squadmates, or allies, or the fleets you recruited to save Earth.


If you like the ending, I'm not going to flame you. But please tell us, what did you like about it?

 

[trooper6]

Let's see. I am actually paid to analyze things...so, analytical skills? Yep I have them.

And I should believe you because you say so? If that was the case you wouldn't say "payed to analyze things" you'd give an accurate job description. But now it's too late. You can now simply Google job descriptions that require analytical work. And you would probably do that if I haven't just said this. Now see, that's analysis. No stone left unturned.

There are hundreds of videos on YouTube about plot holes in Mass Effect 3. The biggest 2 being Reaper motivations and building the Crucible. Angry Joe made a video where he specifically explained 10 plot holes. But there are more, which you would know if you were able to analyze things, or if you were even remotely interested in such things.

Ah, I see...you don't actually have your own specific plot holes--you are just coasting off of Angry Joe's poorly put together video.

Angry Joe's top 10 are not actually 10 plot holes.

1&2 are basically the same one?with added kinds of hyperbole. The Normandy escape, which I already said didn't bother me. He also makes assumptions about seeing Joker flying away from an explosion means he is taking the cowards way out and they wouldn't leave Shepard. I disagree. If the Citadel explodes in a big explosion, you are going to fly away from the explosion. You'd plan on coming back...but you'd fly away.
3 is not a plothole, it is just a "There is going to be really bad fallout to the explosions of the mass effects relays--so that's dumb!"
4 is also not a plothole, it is a question of "I want to know what happens next"
5 is also not a plothole, just his desire fore a huge war cut scene?which wasn't the ultimate point of the war assets mechanic.
6 is also not a plothole, it is just a question of "I want to know what happens next."
7 is also not a plothole, it is just "I want a happy ending--and I want it all spelled out for me" I found my ending was a happy ending.
8 is also not a plothole, just "I hate the god child and I don't like his reasoning." Opinion, not plothole.
9 is also not a plothole, just a "I'm mad that I didn't have an Option where I could reject the whole thing." Whereas I found the synthesis ending to be exactly what my Shephard would have done.
10 is also not a plothole. Player choice does matter?it just matters throughout the whole game not just in the end.

Angry Joe has just lots and lots and lots of assumptions and opinions about what happens much of with is not supported--just him making stuff up. Which he has every right to do. But the video is not a video of plot holes. It is an video of things he doesn't like--mostly based on him just being a whiny person making up phantoms.

And as for not giving my specific job, I try to limit the personal information I give out in public forums.

 

[Joccaren]

This thread is not original or creative but I want people to know.

I liked the ending to Mass Effect 3.

Sure, the decisions in the 3 games meant more or less nothing where the ending is concerned but I liked the ending ITSELF. I chose the "paragon" ending and I think it really suited my Shepard well. It was a nice ending in my opinion.

Also, I think the hatred for Mass Effect 3 has gone too far, many are just jumping on the hatin' band wagon. When I was playing the last 20 minutes or so, I could see why some might be angry but not too the extent it has reached.

So, to add a bit of discussion value to this, who else liked the ending? All I've seen (on the Escapist anyway) is pure hatred but there must be someone else who liked it, right? RIGHT?

EDIT: Another thing, my brother got the perfect renegade ending and even though they are quite similar, I think that one is a good ending as well. If mass effect only had one ending I think the renegade one would do nicely, what with the hinting of Shepard still being alive at the end. I think there are slight continuity errors (why is my team on the Normandy?) but I think the perfect renegade ending where everyone including Shepard lives (except all synthetics of course) is a satisfying ending to the series. I would've, however, liked maybe a cut scene to explain the impact of my decisions and maybe individual cut scenes for crew members, but all in all I liked it.

First: I respect your decision, but I disagree
Second: A general trend I have noticed with those that support the ending, and those who don't, is that those who support the ending tend to like the broad idea of the ending, and feel like it fits their Shepard, whilst not caring so much about the details. Those who don't support the ending tend to look into the details, see that almost nothing fits, find that nothing suits their Shepard, and then go 'Well WTF am I meant to do?'.
Third: My experience with the endings.
I was pumped. I'd gathered every resource I could, I had every fleet in my hands. 7K+ EMS, and I was riding into battle to Save Anderson, Earth and stop the Reapers. The battle on Earth felt rushed, but the desperation of everything kinda fit in with that. I made it to the conduit, and it felt like a battle to get to TIM. I was liking it, not knowing what people's problems were. The boss fight with TIM was a let down. Nothing more than a 90% linear conversation, that the only way you could get that 10% non linearity was if you had completed previous objectives throughout the game (I.E: Used the Paragon/Renegade option every time you talked to him, not just in the final battle). I had my talk with Anderson, then I feinted as Hackett told me the Conduit was doing nothing. That was my climax. Everything went rapidly down hill from there. I was given three choices - not one of which suited my Shepard, reflected my actions and choices, or didn't involve space magic and destroying the relays and therefore galactic civilization too. Not one. I sat there for about 10 minutes thinking 'What do I do? Maybe there's an option to just wait and let the fleets fight the Reapers?'. No. Instead, I was shoehorned into the same endings as everyone else, that my Shepard had to just accept - no argument - and make a choice he really would never have made. Then I saw the endings on Youtube. Blatant copy paste if I had ever seen one. Literally 5 seconds of the whole ending sequence might have been different, excluding the different colours. Forgive me, but I'm used to Bioware at least making it look like my choices were important. Seeing the Council at the end of ME1, Seeing my upgraded Normandy kick Collector ass in ME2 - ME3 just fell flat on its face in this department. I can no longer play ME games. I played them as I felt like I was building towards something, fighting for something. I played as I thought my choices would make a difference. I went through the poor gameplay in 1 and 2 more times than I can count to get my choices ready, to do the best I could to save Earth. In the end, nothing mattered. That was crushing. Add to that plot holes, character inconsistencies, space magic, and numerous other grievances - its not hard to understand why many hate the endings.
Finally: I am happy for you if you liked the ending, but I have felt the full brunt of how bad they are for some people. I do not think Retake ME3, the FTC complaint, or anything is going to far. Retake ME3 was for a good cause, until that cause shut down the fundraiser as it didn't want to be associated with the movement. The FTC complaint is somewhat legitimate, and a serious issue. We were promised some specific things pre release - 1 example being no ending A, B or C - and they were not delivered. Should devs be allowed to so blatantly falsely advertise? Or is restricting them to 'We are planning on' statements too restricting on their freedom?

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

So you didn't mind that there was very little closure and that the entire reason for the Reaper's existence didn't make sense?

I had no problem with that part. The Reapers ARE the civilizations - they are Borg-like collectives controlled by the Catalyst. That was the AI-Logic solution - make all organics into synthetics when they get advanced enough.

Basically, all those colonists in ME2 weren't being killed - they were being "downloaded" into the Human Reaper. Somewhere out there was a Prothean Reaper and a Capital-size reaper for each Cycle (with the Destroyer class reapers being the other races). They were preserving the DNA of each race - as if the DNA was the most important part.

It was Machine Logic. Technically they were "saving" each race. But not in any way that the race would want to be saved.

Anyway, this was all previously implied. Harbinger said it all through ME2: "We are your salvation." "You are only hurting yourself." "You will become as We are."

THAT part was well foreshadowed and I thought paid off very well.

However...

Or how about how Joker just randomly decides to flee the battle. Very uncharacteristic of him especially after what he did in the second game.

Also, how is it possible that Garrus, who I took with me on the final mission, somehow managed to come out of the crash landed Normandy?

For me, it was Liara. Yeah. Particularly since the guy on the radio said that everyone in that charge (apart from Shepard and Anderson, I guess) died. So I was like "oh fuck, I just got Liara killed" - and then there she was, on the ship.

I think that was just bad programming. I think they assumed that you wouldn't bring your beloved into a war-zone... which was stupid, considering that Liara is one of the best anti-husk characters available (Stasis Bubble FTW).

The only thing I could think of was that, after the push failed Liara et al retreated, got picked up by the Normandy, and that they were attempting to board the Citadel from the Normandy when things went crazy. That MIGHT have just been FLT drive, not a Mass Effect jump. Maybe.

That's all I've got on that one. Sorry - that was the only part that really bothered me. It still didn't make me angry - just confused.

It's not that it doesn't provide closure, is sad, or that your choices form the other games have little affect on it (I was perfectly fine with all that). It's that the ending actually doesn't make any logical sense.

The squadmember teleportaion Joker joyriding bit, yeah. The Reaper plan makes perfect sense in screwed-up AI logic. The Lord Reaper obviously doesn't understand what being a "person" means - unlike EDI. It thinks that preserving the DNA is the same as preserving a civilization - which is why it's the bad guy.

 

[Savagezion]

Let's see. I am actually paid to analyze things...so, analytical skills? Yep I have them.

But since you are vague, why don't you list these 10 major plot holes that happen in the last 10 minutes. Specificity is a great thing!

What about the one where the child says "Humans and synthetics" can't co-exist?

Spoiler

Completely bi-passing the entire sequence in the story where Shepard resolves the conflict between the Quanari and the Geth and it turns out that the Quanari can easily be viewed as the aggressors. It could be resolved peacefully with the Geth actually joining into peaceful co-existance with not only the Quanari but galactic civilization.

So because they "can't co-exist", they made a bunch of synthetics that were programmed not to kill all synthetics to protect organics, but instead to wipe out organic lifeforms to protect organics from being destroyed by synthetics. The video above posted by Caramel Frappe also points out the reaper code that could have been used to shut them down.

That was a big fat 'cop out' bullshit dose of hack writing that is all in your face. How do you miss something like that?

 

[Joccaren]

1&2 are basically the same one?with added kinds of hyperbole. The Normandy escape, which I already said didn't bother me. He also makes assumptions about seeing Joker flying away from an explosion means he is taking the cowards way out and they wouldn't leave Shepard. I disagree. If the Citadel explodes in a big explosion, you are going to fly away from the explosion. You'd plan on coming back...but you'd fly away.

Only doing a brief skim of the other points, I'm seeing a few 'It worked for my Shepard' or 'but I didn't mind that'. Good for you. It didn't work for 91% of people on BSN, and almost everyone those 91% know IRL and on other Forums. Good to know that worked for you, but its no argument at all.

This point, however, gets me. Using in game lore there is no way Joker could have seen the Citadel exploding and made it to the Mass Relay in time without killing everyone on board due to excessive amounts of Chekhov Radiation. Not to mention the 'explosion' moves faster than his ship. Assuming he did all this after seeing the Citadel start its blowy uppy process, he would have had to get to Earth, pick up the squad, FTL to the Mass Relay, perform a slow drop out of FTL to stop the Chekhov Radiation from killing the crew, performed his approach to the Mass Relay and launched himself through it - all in the space of about 10 seconds. His trip to the relay would take 2. Him decelerating would take likely another 1 or 2, him approaching the relay and performing the jump we have seen takes about 3 - that gives him 3 seconds to get to Earth, get the crew onto the Normandy and leave Earth - all whilst outrunning a beam of energy faster than him. It doesn't add up. Space Magic.
A plot hole that, from reading your post, Angry Joe didn't mention (Which, BTW, I haven't watched his video):
The entire events of ME1 are made pointless by this. Remind me, why did Sovereign need to dock with the Citadel - or even send a signal to the Keepers - if the Catalyst controls the Citadel. A few things to note:
1. The Prothean Virus was never removed. If it had of been, the Reapers would have invaded at the end of ME1 through the relay. The patience of the Reapers also rules out the Catalyst slowly overriding it. It is established the Reapers prefer to go unnoticed, and take the slow, low risk route when setting their plans in motion. Attacking the Citadel is anything BUT a slow, low risk option.
2. The Catalyst does control the station. Without any input, as Shepard feints, the Citadels arms open wide. In addition, in the Control ending, the Citadel's arms are closed after Shepard becomes the new Catalyst - with no-one around to close them. These examples support the notion that the Catalyst does indeed control the Citadel.

 

[The_Waspman]

I've mentioned it on a few other threads and I'll say it again here. I liked the ending too. I found it very troubling, and I have been thinking about it a lot since I completed it.

Spoiler: As if no-one knows how this game ends already...

I know it esentially boils down to the endomatic 3000 with its choices, but everything I'd done in Mass Effect 2 and 3 (PS3 owner, don't hate me) caused me to seriously think about what choice to actually make.

And I don't buy this whole indoctrination theory. Yes, it brings up some good points that tie together and explain a lot of the (in my opinion, deliberately) abstract elements of the final ten minutes, however...

Spoiler: Some indoctrination stuff

I just don't buy the kid being nothing more than a hallucination created by Harbinger. Sure, Anderson doesn't see the kid in the vent, but its a *vent*, the kid could have crawled off. And no-one helped him onto the shuttle because, well, they were busy fighting off the Reaper army, y'know?

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

What about the one where the child says "Humans and synthetics" can't co-exist?"

Well, that's sort of the point - you've just proven that they can. Child AI is obviously stupid - in the way that computer programs are. Very fast idiots and all that.

It would have been nice if you could say: "Um, look outside - Quarian and Geth forces, fighting side by side."

Of course, the Starchild would probably have said "Beep, boop, does not compute. Organics and synthetics cannot coexist."

Although... I suppose it is fair to say that it is actually kind of hard to get the peace between Geth and Quarians. That issue rings a little more true if the Geth and Quarians just murdered one another until one was wiped out.

This point, however, gets me. Using in game lore there is no way Joker could have seen the Citadel exploding and made it to the Mass Relay in time without killing everyone on board due to excessive amounts of Chekhov Radiation. Not to mention the 'explosion' moves faster than his ship.

While I'm not very happy with the whole Joker bit either, I would like to point something out. Relay travel is nearly instantaneous. Joker was in normal FTL flight - like what you do around a star system. Whenever the ship is in flight around a solar system (or between solar systems using fuel) is glows blue like that. It DOESN'T during Relay jumps.

So the Normandy wasn't using the Relay in that scene.

Now... what exactly it WAS doing is very unclear. How Joker got your squad onboard when random soldier said they (and Shep) were killed is also unclear and makes little sense.

It also means one other thing - the Normandy crashes within FTL distance of Earth. If any of the rest of the fleet survive with intact ships, they can pick up the Normandy crew.