I liked the ending to Mass Effect 3

Recommended Videos

iLazy

New member
Aug 6, 2011
279
0
0
Honestly, I didn't mind the ending either.

I just want closure. Seriously, WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED??

Are the Geth dead? What about my team? What about Earth, and Thessia and Palaven? What the fuck happened??

I not happy with the ending because I don't know what has happened to everyone. I want to know if I have saved everyone, or basically fucked everyone over by picking the "Destroy the Reapers" option.
 

trooper6

New member
Jul 26, 2008
873
0
0
iLazy said:
Honestly, I didn't mind the ending either.

I just want closure. Seriously, WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED??

Are the Geth dead? What about my team? What about Earth, and Thessia and Palaven? What the fuck happened??

I not happy with the ending because I don't know what has happened to everyone. I want to know if I have saved everyone, or basically fucked everyone over by picking the "Destroy the Reapers" option.
You chose the Destroy option?
Then yes the Reapers are dead, as are all synthetic beings. This includes all Geth, EDI, and you.
The rest of your team? Up in the air. Some survive the battle, some don't.
Earth, Thessia, & Palaven? Decades of rebuilding.
 

Hyper-space

New member
Nov 25, 2008
1,361
0
0
I liked it, it stripped away any power that I had and left me only with the power of justification. Just because I got synthetics and organics to temporarily work together doesn't mean that it sets a universal precedent. Synthetics will rise again and try to kill organics no matter what I do.

Basically, most games revolve around the player's asshole, with your actions and personal morality being the ultimate authority on EVERYTHING. The whole world feels like a lump of clay that I can simply mold into my own image, instead of being a well-rounded world with characters who have their own dreams and ideas. The ending pretty much just put its foot down and said "No", I was not about to dictate the workings of the universe.

The ending left me asking questions, such as whether I did the right thing and what repercussion there would be for what I had done.
 

Lunar Templar

New member
Sep 20, 2009
8,221
0
0
Zhukov said:
How?
How does one come to like these things?
my guess?

not as invested as other players.
its not hard to not care about the inconsistency's and short comings and just go with it if you didn't really care to begin with. i actually have one friend that plays it, that beat it expecting to die anyway, so she was also ok with the ending.

though, dunno what the other two thought, and i think the one is just playing it for multi-player anyway ....
 

Vuljatar

New member
Sep 7, 2008
1,002
0
0
I strongly disagree.

In the end, your choices throughout the games have no impact on the endings. It's the definition of a shitty "multiple choice" ending--you're put in a room with option A, B, and C, and have to pick one of them. Nothing else has any impact.

I see the Control ending as the "bad" ending because a very important recurring theme in the series is that you cannot control the reapers and any attempt to do so is doomed to failure. Everything in the canon suggests that the Control ending will ultimately result in Shepard being controlled by the reapers, and not the other way around. It doesn't make any sense to me that it's the "blue/paragon" ending, because it's the exact same thing the Illusive Man has been trying to do.

The Synthesis ending is downright idiotic, because it comes out of nowhere with no explanation. It leaps headfirst into a hackneyed transhumanism theme that has until now been almost entirely absent from the series, and doesn't even offer the vaguest explanation as to how the magical instantaneous fusion of organic and synthetic life might take place, leaving the conclusion through deduction that it must simply be magic--which is out of place in an otherwise rather "hard" sci-fi series.

The Destroy ending seems to me to be the "good" ending, since it's the only one in which you actually stick to your mission as stated from game 1. However, the fact that you have to destroy all synthetic life in order to do so is directly conflicting with the game's previous messages about organic/synthetic cooperation, and renders the ability to make peace between the Quarians and Geth completely meaningless.

Of course, all the endings fail to explain how your squadmates magically teleport to the Normandy, and why the Normandy was obviously already fleeing the battle before the explosion. I also hate the fact that you are forced to play multiplayer in order to have Shepard survive (if you're going to dispute this, give me some proof that 8,000 military strength is obtainable).

EDIT: Also, the relay explosions. It's been established that the explosion from destroying a relay is enough to wipe out the entire solar system it's in. So it's implied that every system with a Mass Relay is totally destroyed, giving us not a bittersweet ending, but a Pyrrhic victory in which every major race in the galaxy is nearly wiped out.
 

twohundredpercent

New member
Dec 20, 2011
106
0
0
You know, I don't care if people liked the ending as long as they don't insult the intelligence of people who dislike it. If you say that I 'don't get it' and you explain your take and I understand what you're saying but still think it sucks donkey balls, then back off. Christ.
 
Apr 28, 2008
14,628
0
0
Can someone explain something to me?

Do all the relays get destroyed? Or just the primary ones? Or is it just the Reaper-made ones? What about The Conduit, you know, the two relays that link Ilos and the Citadel? For that matter, what about the Citadel itself? In the first game it's established that it's pretty much one big relay linking to another in Deep Space that the Reapers use to invade. Does that get destroyed as well? If so, wouldn't that mean Earth and everyone near it dies? Since it's so close, it blowing up would surely kill everything. If not, why not? How isn't it destroyed?

Also, what about the secondary relays? Do those explode as well? Primary relays link to just one, but can send you really far. Secondary relays can go ~300 light years to any other Secondary relay, provided you put in the right co-ordinates. This distinction is important, since it explains how both the Rachnai Wars started and why Saran needed the co-ordinates of the Mu Relay and how both can happen in the same universe. The Rachni were at the other end of a Primary relay, which can go any distance but only to one specific other relay regardless of whether or not you know where it is. Secondary relays can go ~300 light years to any other Secondary relay, provided you put in the right co-ordinates. It explains why Saren needed to know where the Mu relay was before he could get there via Mass Relay, and how the Rachni were "stumbled" upon.

Does the game even freaking remember that all these different types of relays exist?
 

Aerosteam

Get out while you still can
Sep 22, 2011
4,267
0
0
Major_Tom said:
Aerosteam 1908 said:
Major_Tom said:
Aerosteam 1908 said:
Major_Tom said:
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?
Paragon, means controlling the Reapers. The middle is synthesis, fusing both organics with synthetics, e.g. husks.
Both result in "indoctrination was successful", you are now a mindless slave controlled by the Harbinger, i.e. a husk.
A husk is formed when water and trace materials are replaced with cybernetics, to be controlled by Harbinger is to be indoctrinated, not becoming a husk.
 

Wadderz

New member
Aug 9, 2011
22
0
0
Personally, I think the available endings are generally okay, but very poorly written. I do take issue with some of the supposed plot-holes though.

In particular I'm a little confused as to why people think members of your ground team seem to have teleported onto the Normandy. There is quite a long period of time between the charge on Harbinger and Shepherd's final colour-calibrated choice at the Crucible. I don't really see why it's unnacceptable that Cortez (or anyone else) couldn't have picked up your ground team and got them back to the Normandy in that time. It certainly needs to be explained, as does their survival, but it doesn't seem like a necessary plot-hole to me.

Also, neither does Joker's faster-than-light escape from the Citadel explosion. It certainly doesn't look like he's in a Mass Effect jump, and the explosion that overtakes the ship doesn't look like one of the beams that are being projected by the relays. It really does seem like he's just trying to outrun the initial Citadel explosion near Earth. The planet that they crash on is clearly not Earth, but is most likely within faster-than-light distance of Earth.

Personally, I believe the ending needs more explanation than changes. I think certain things were assumed by the design team that are not at all obvious to the player. If there is one big change that needs to be in place though, it is the option to tell the Citadel AI to go fuck himself - that none of those choices is a valid option - and radio in to the Normandy to spend your last few moments with your crew and attempt to battle the Reapers using "conventional means". I know a number of players that would have been much happier sacrificing their Shepherd's life for an ideal that they actually believed in.

TLDR: The ending needs more options to accomodate the different personas of Shepherd that people have created. Some people like the ending because the options available fit with their version of Shepherd. There are plot-holes that need explaining.
 

phereck

New member
Aug 8, 2010
91
0
0
i didn't like the ending, but I'm not going to war about it
besides

http://www.vgcats.com/comics/images/120318.jpg
 

Mr. Self Destruct

New member
Feb 26, 2009
228
0
0
I didn't mind it, I was very, very caught up in the whole moment, my shep was all roughed up, the song was beautiful, and just the thought of her dieing was heart breaking, then I blew the shit out of those reapers and she rocked a wicked guitar solo.

The end
 

Frotality

New member
Oct 25, 2010
981
0
0
well, OP, your kind of like of crazy homeless person to me: i have no idea why you say the things you do, it seems to defy basic, sane, emotional development, but it is rather harmless and kind of amusing, so whatever.

i can see how the ending might not be that BAD for some, if you just didnt really give two shits about anyone or anything involved and just played the mass effect series to kill time. but to actually LIKE it is utterly beyond my understanding of the human mind, other than a stereotypical hipster saying he likes it just because its the unconventional opinion (but you dont come off as that, so dont worry).
 

Adam Jensen_v1legacy

I never asked for this
Sep 8, 2011
6,647
0
0
I am so fuckin' jealous of people who liked the ending. You have no idea how a huge Mass Effect fan feels after being disappointed like that. I'm honestly crushed. I'm just a shadow of a person I once was. I can no longer justify my own existence.
 

PonceyMcTosserFaic

New member
Jul 30, 2011
163
0
0
i though the ending was good. not what i would have picked, but then again it worked. people are only bitching about the ending because it's not the cliche "YOU SAVED THE GALAXY! THE REAPERS ARE DEFEATED! YAY!!!!" ending.

God forbid anyone actually have to think.
 

Major_Tom

Anticitizen
Jun 29, 2008
799
0
0
Aerosteam 1908 said:
A husk is formed when water and trace materials are replaced with cybernetics, to be controlled by Harbinger is to be indoctrinated, not becoming a husk.
OK fine, you are a thrall now. Happy? But you will become a husk eventually...
 

Vuljatar

New member
Sep 7, 2008
1,002
0
0
PonceyMcTosserFaic said:
i though the ending was good. not what i would have picked, but then again it worked. people are only bitching about the ending because it's not the cliche "YOU SAVED THE GALAXY! THE REAPERS ARE DEFEATED! YAY!!!!" ending.

God forbid anyone actually have to think.
You're exactly the kind of jackass twohundredpercent was talking about.

We hate the ending because it's fucking STUPID, not because it's sad.

Explain why my squadmates who were all on earth (and the two who were with me are implied to be killed/badly wounded) teleport to the Normandy.

Explain the Synthesis ending. Go ahead, I dare you, explain any damn thing about it. Why is there suddenly magic in an up-til-now hard sci-fi universe? Why is this awkward transhumanism theme shoehorned in at the end of a series that lacked it entirely?

Explain why the Destroy ending (the only one that actually accomplishes Shepard's mission) requires the destruction of all synthetic life, in direct contradiction to the series' major ongoing Aesop that synthetics and organics can and should get along?

And explain why every one of these endings render all previous decisions made in the series moot.

And off-topic, explain why the hell my captcha to post this is a goddamn Chevrolet ad. "The all-new Chevy Sonic." What the actual fuck.
 

winginson

New member
Mar 27, 2011
297
0
0
Alot of people seem to forget that both the previous endings had very little change. In ME2 you can last minute switch alignment to change the colour of the explosions, in ME the only difference is whether the council is alive to thank you.

I do agree there should have been a more in depth end and epilogue, but hell most of the whole damn game feels like an ending. Through out the game so many things you have already done are referenced, so many choices are not open to you unless you made a certain choice in ME(2), you can give hope or despair to so many.

The ending may be lacklustre but the game ties up so many ends in a beautiful way. I think this game has finally proved how mature and artful games can be.
 

luvd1

New member
Jan 25, 2010
736
0
0
I like the ending for its general idea. Just pissed that t was so poorly done. I can understand the reapers thinking they were guardians of all life in the galaxy like some sort of hellish brainiac. It makes machinical sense to a computer unable to think pass its program, it won't be able to see the paradox or question the premise. But none of that was properly explored or explained and the game itself and the player were forgotten about as the writer got too carried away with their own idea. To correct this they don't have to do much, it just needed tidying up by a calm mind. I don't want to see a new ending. That woud selling out. Just tweak it so it's not such a frustration inducing pile of stupidness it is. And show people what advantage getting all assets gave so there is a sense that they didn't waste their time fetching some morons car keys.