96 réponses à ce sujet

[Sanguine]

Can you tell me why? I'm just wondering. There's so much here about how "I hate the ending and this is why" and... some of them are well thought out, have examples, reasoning, and seem to have been meditated on. But every thing I've seen from those who like it are almost all like "well i liked it. You clearly just dont get it because its over your head and not all rainbows and sunshine"

So, like, without insulting anyones inteligence or anything, can you explain to me why you like the endings?

[Femmefatality07]

I'm not entirely on the fence about it. I was "ok" with it. More confused how the squadmates I took with me ended up back on the Normandy. I mean, that's cool and all. I love my Turian Bro (Garrus) and lover (Kaidan), but how in the sam hell?

Coming from someone who went into the game with the thought "I'm sure my ass is so dead in the end. It'll be like how Samurai Champloo should have ended or a Norrington/Snape comparison.", I made my peace. But...too many questions left unanswered. @_@

I'm here to read the opinions as well.

[SilencedScream]

The defenses that I've seen so far:
1.) "It's too mature for most of this audience."
2.) "It's fitting of the theme of Mass Effect."
3.) "You should've seen it coming."
4.) "Not everything in life is butterflies and unicorns."

None of which I find to be reasonable responses; all of these broke down into insults as they tried to defend their points.

[Biotic Sage]

I like the ending because I felt the final imagery and sounds perfectly captured the tone of the series.

I liked the ending because the final decision was a TRULY difficult decision, a decision that isn't black and white, paragon or renegade, or good or evil. They all had their merits, but they all required sacrifice (an important theme in the series).

I liked the ending because ending a cycle that has run the galaxy for what seems like since time began should come at a cost. The Mass Relays needed to be destroyed because they were a part of the Reaper's system of control, part of the framework of the cycle. The paradigm shifting ending was appropriate to the heaviness of the Reaper story.

I liked the ending because there is hope for the future regardless of which choice you pick. The Normandy's planet we see something happen directly from that, and on Earth we see men and women cheering as the nightmare ends.

I liked the ending because it explained the Reapers' ultimate motivation, and it was a motivation that was consistent with the rest of the trilogy.  I also liked that the Catalyst is left ambiguous; they don't say it's a "deity" (much like the Hanar do when they encounter a race more advanced beyond their comprehension) like in Battlestar Galactica, if you want to think of it that way you can, but you could also just think of it as an advanced form of life beyond synthetic/organic outside of the cycle.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 10 mars 2012 - 03:13 .

[picodeath123]

I'm all good for my guy dying to save the universe and all that, but I would've liked to maybe have it foreshadowed bit and have more answers than questions done in a way that makes sense.

Modifié par picodeath123, 10 mars 2012 - 03:13 .

[Jayaa]

I like the debate it created and the "deep thinking" that's involved. I am fine with the endings and the consequences, but they need to clean it up lots to make a touch more sense.

My friend left this message for me this morning. He just finished the game early this morning. At first he was peeved, but then I get this:

(LONG, but so damned worth the read...)

"Ok so as I dwell on this, I have come to some conclusions. The Catalyst says it is in the nature of the created to always destroy their creators. Basically that Synthetics will always end up trying to kill Organics. So they harvest the advanced civilizations after they have had their "reign" at the top, and allow the newer species to become advanced. However, each cycle of organics always creates an AI that will try to kill them off in the end, so if the reapers dont intervene, synthetics would eventually wipe out Organics. So basically organics were here first, we create synthetics, and eventually synthetics are all thats left, and organics cease to exist for eternity. So in fact, the reapers are not the bad guys. Sure, their methods are horrific and they slaughter trillions of organics per 50k years, but they are in fact preserving organic life as a whole by keeping them from creating something that will eventually wipe them all our for good.

So yeah, the destruction way would be the worst. Sure, you save organics for the time being, but you slaughter all the Geth, and wipe all high advanced technology from the galaxy. Eventually the cycle will lead to synthetics taking over and wiping organics from the galaxy. You live, but you won't ever see your friends again, and eventually everyone will be killed in the long run. No bueno.

Control, I find is somewhat good because you take the reapers away and end the war, but you still have the possible threat of Geth or another type of AI starting the cycle and causing the synthetic takeover that will wipe organics. However, it does not specify if Shepard can control ALL of synthetics, or just the reapers, and it does not specify how LONG he would be able to control them. It says he will die, and be able to control them, but it doesnt specify for how long or what his extent of AI he can control. So I don't think I like the thought of Sheperd being consumed and stuck being in control of the reapers for eternity. He would never truly "die," and so therefore I wouldnt like it, because I happen to believe in heaven and like the thought of him meeting up with all of his friends in heaven someday instead of being in charge of reapers forever. It gives me that idea of pirates of the carribean when Will has to take over for Davy Jones, so he never gets to die, so therefore he would never get to be with his woman because he would never die. No bueno again. I dont like the thought of that. However if he is in charge of the reapers forever, he may be able to use them to reconstruct the mass effect relays, and get everything back together again. The question would be does Catalyst still exist, and does he have the knowledge to build them, or is he just a synthetic being that was created by a cycle that grew aware of the innevitable wars between synthetics and organics every cycle, and wanted to start his plan to stop it.

Then of course there is the Synthesis ending, which I honestly think I will prefer as my choice of ending in the long run. It says that if people merge as organic and synthesis, there would be peace. Both AI and Organics are always trying to evolve to become perfect. However, if the two merge, the need for evolution is gone, and everything can live in peace because there is no organic or synthetic anymore. Everything in the galaxy would be both. And the benefits would probably be extremely rewarding to be both, so the fact that organics and synthetics dont have a say in the matter doesnt seem to be extremely bad. Joker could probably walk normally, diseases would see like they would be nonexistant, etc. Not to mention they may be able to someday rebuild the relays way down the road and reunite all the galaxy again. And Sheperd would be completely dead, so therefor he would be in heaven waiting and watching over his friends until they could all meet up again in heaven.

Of course in all endings, your friends will mourn you, and your romance will be heartbroken, but that seems to be innevitable. Taking comfort in the fact that they could all be reunited after death is my only slight comfort in the matter.

And the more I think about it, I can see why they would strand your closest friends on another world. It shows they can still flourish and survive in the new place, and start another civilization from scratch. Not to mention pretty much glorify Shepard into a sort of godlike, legendary hero. And if you think about it, it kinda puts an interesting spin on mythology and lore. We usually think of mythology as being ancient. Certain beings doing things in the far, ancient past, that result in our world today, however we usually think of past like ancient egypt or ancient greece, and we usually associate those beings as being on ancient earth.

However, this puts the speculation that what if these myths are true people, but from extremely long ago, from a more advanced time than what we are today. Such as in mass effect. It is obviously in the future, however, the planet the crew is on will start from scratch, so naturally the myth of Sheperd would be thought of as being a ancient person from that planet in a less advanced time then what they are. Such as how we think of mythology on earth as taking place back in less advanced times, such as ancient greece.

But what if the myths WE hear on earth were really of actual persons from a LONG LONG time ago, but they came from a more advanced civilization that lived on a different planet, that did something extrordinary, and afterwards civilization deteriorated, and planets were cut off, so people on earth made the myths about them, and through time, they were turned into ancient legends rather than actual people.

Example would be what if humans were extremely more advanced 4000+ years ago, living on multiple planets throughout the galaxy, being advanced, just as mass effect was. However something happened, and some humans found and landed on Earth, and uninhabited planet, and had to start from scratch, which their decendants would have been what we know of as the ancient egyptians other beginning sources of humanity on earth. Doesnt mean the rest of the galaxy isnt still advanced. Just means we had to start over here on Earth, and the myths and legends we talk about on earth may have been popular people that did amazing things on other planets. Who knows, maybe God was just a person that did something amazing like Sheperd, and after a while he was glorified so much in our legends, that he started being regarded as a divine entity to people on earth.

Just kind of an intersting perspective on the whole thing, and if you look at it at that perspective when you see how mass effect ends with the crew being stranded on a new planet, having to start from scratch, it makes it seem a slight bit possible that maybe earth was the same way and we just dont know it. I wish I could kinda explain more clearly my way of thinking, but I dont think I would be able to do that."

So, I enjoy the thought process. Personally, I can't wait to read fan fiction that comes of this.

[GBGriffin]

SilencedScream wrote...

The defenses that I've seen so far:
1.) "It's too mature for most of this audience."
2.) "It's fitting of the theme of Mass Effect."
3.) "You should've seen it coming."
4.) "Not everything in life is butterflies and unicorns."

None of which I find to be reasonable responses; all of these broke down into insults as they tried to defend their points.

That sums up what I've seen as well.

Well, those and people who either get off on schadenfreude, or who just can't understand or concede why people are upset because they themselves don't understand the concept of having a passion.

Modifié par GBGriffin, 10 mars 2012 - 03:14 .

[Reiella]

Two of the endings showcased the opposing iconic approaches of Anderson and TIM.  Both were potentially equally legitimate.

And it offered a third ending, a compromise to the premise that synthetic and organics can't coexist.  Yes, there are plenty of good arguments for other compromises that would have been more satisfactory to a given person.  But, I liked it all the same.

And all three endings had the same element of hope for the galaxy.

[Biotic Sage]

Jayaa wrote...

*snip*

Great post Jayaa!  Any video game that can make me cry and think this much is amazing in my book.

My friend and I debated/discussed the entire trilogy for 4 hours today.  And we still feel like we haven't begun to scratch the surface of its depth.

[Jayaa]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Jayaa wrote...

*snip*

Great post Jayaa!  Any video game that can make me cry and think this much is amazing in my book.

My friend and I debated/discussed the entire trilogy for 4 hours today.  And we still feel like we haven't begun to scratch the surface of its depth.

Thanks!  There was much more of his thoughts he wrote me with, but I'll save you guys from the rest of the spam.   This was actually one of those weird times where I finished the game before him (... two two days off to play. :S!) so I had to stay quiet about the endings.  We spoke about it for a long while early this morning.  Right now I think we're both trying to make peace with the end.  Do I want something with more closure?  Absolutely, but doing so would also erradicate this intense thought process.  

Admitadely it's a touch too hard right now to find what everything takes of the endings, as in these early days its mostly talk about how upset people are about the finale.

My debate is that it encourages deep thinking.  Like it or hate it, the game still evoked some emotions from us.  That's a sign of good writing.

[Paparob]

I'm not sure I can say I liked it, I'm OK with it but thats probably the best you're going to get around here. With the Control ending I could rationalize it somewhat that Shepard could and probably would eventually use the Reapers to clean up the damage from the war. That and Shepard standing for time immemorial as guardian of the galaxy is kinda cool.

[Primalrose]

Biotic Sage wrote...

I like the ending because I felt the final imagery and sounds perfectly captured the tone of the series.

I liked the ending because the final decision was a TRULY difficult decision, a decision that isn't black and white, paragon or renegade, or good or evil. They all had their merits, but they all required sacrifice (an important theme in the series).

I liked the ending because ending a cycle that has run the galaxy for what seems like since time began should come at a cost. The Mass Relays needed to be destroyed because they were a part of the Reaper's system of control, part of the framework of the cycle. The paradigm shifting ending was appropriate to the heaviness of the Reaper story.

I liked the ending because there is hope for the future regardless of which choice you pick. The Normandy's planet we see something happen directly from that, and on Earth we see men and women cheering as the nightmare ends.

I liked the ending because it explained the Reapers' ultimate motivation, and it was a motivation that was consistent with the rest of the trilogy.  I also liked that the Catalyst is left ambiguous; they don't say it's a "deity" (much like the Hanar do when they encounter a race more advanced beyond their comprehension) like in Battlestar Galactica, if you want to think of it that way you can, but you could also just think of it as an advanced form of life beyond synthetic/organic outside of the cycle.

Could not have said it better myself. I have actually not finished the game, but couldn't help spoil some of the endings for myself. I guess the only gripe I can understand is the lack of conclusion for alot of your teammates. It can be hard to accept that you've build these relationships with them for 3 games and then...no payoff. To put it bluntly, makes you wonder if this is how they're going to milk people with upcoming DLCs. 

[SupidSeep]

I was raging at the ending at first.

After a while, I realised that my Paragon femshep would have limped on and faced her end (the Synthesis Ending), not without tears or bitterness, but her conviction would drive her onward into the beam.

(In my playthrough, Mordin died without nervously singing his song, but with a final statement of hope. I guess that helped)

[Biotic Sage]

Primalrose wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

I like the ending because I felt the final imagery and sounds perfectly captured the tone of the series.

I liked the ending because the final decision was a TRULY difficult decision, a decision that isn't black and white, paragon or renegade, or good or evil. They all had their merits, but they all required sacrifice (an important theme in the series).

I liked the ending because ending a cycle that has run the galaxy for what seems like since time began should come at a cost. The Mass Relays needed to be destroyed because they were a part of the Reaper's system of control, part of the framework of the cycle. The paradigm shifting ending was appropriate to the heaviness of the Reaper story.

I liked the ending because there is hope for the future regardless of which choice you pick. The Normandy's planet we see something happen directly from that, and on Earth we see men and women cheering as the nightmare ends.

I liked the ending because it explained the Reapers' ultimate motivation, and it was a motivation that was consistent with the rest of the trilogy.  I also liked that the Catalyst is left ambiguous; they don't say it's a "deity" (much like the Hanar do when they encounter a race more advanced beyond their comprehension) like in Battlestar Galactica, if you want to think of it that way you can, but you could also just think of it as an advanced form of life beyond synthetic/organic outside of the cycle.

Could not have said it better myself. I have actually not finished the game, but couldn't help spoil some of the endings for myself. I guess the only gripe I can understand is the lack of conclusion for alot of your teammates. It can be hard to accept that you've build these relationships with them for 3 games and then...no payoff. To put it bluntly, makes you wonder if this is how they're going to milk people with upcoming DLCs. 

SPOILERS***

No payoff?  I would agree if we didn't have that amazing calm before the storm in London where you walked through the rubble of the city and said your goodbyes to the people you cared about.  I was already happy with Shepard's final love scene with Liara, but then they added in the truly final goodbye, and it was so bittersweet I cried.  I even teared up talking to some of my squadmates that I was indifferent towards, like James or Jack.

I know you haven't gotten there yet, but there is emotional payoff.  There is payoff with your relationships.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 10 mars 2012 - 03:34 .

[Tartilus]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Jayaa wrote...

*snip*

Great post Jayaa!  Any video game that can make me cry and think this much is amazing in my book.

My friend and I debated/discussed the entire trilogy for 4 hours today.  And we still feel like we haven't begun to scratch the surface of its depth.

It sounds like you're just fundamentally looking for something different out of the ending than we (I'll presume to use 'we' in the context of these forums, because it's probably not unreasonable to suggest that the majority of us disliked the ending) were. You feel like some bold statement has been made regarding the nature of conflict and the true cost of ending a cycle of near-peerless destruction, and that satisfies you. Which is great! A lot of us, on the other hand, see plotholes and unresolved questions which lead us to the sort of conversation which doesn't seem to me to be indicative of a good ending. In other words, I don't so much have a problem with the suggestion that the ending was bad (though its mechanics and applicability to this game, with the themes it had previously espoused and the main characters general attitude is, I feel, questionable) as incomplete. As I mentioned elsewhere, this sort of ending to a trilogy would never make it past the editor's desk; it represents an absolute lack of closure, and while that can be intellectually stimulating, most of us were on the lookout for an ending rather than mental masturbatory material. 

[vasametropolis]

Well, apart from the Normandy being FTL at the end which I only just now really started to question somehow... it's really great for some simple reasons for me:

1) It really is a fitting conclusion for the series

It's a conclusion to Mass Effect, not YOUR Mass Effect. They could have never come up with anything that had nearly as much impact as this ending by just "doing what was expected." I could have lived, I could have continued my relationship, everyone could be alive, but how is that a compelling or thought provoking ending? I respect them for trying to deliver something better (and actually delivering something better, albeit imperfect).

2) My choices and squad didn't matter!

Of course they mattered! Choice is what shaped your experience up until the conclusion, from Garrus' hilarious calibrations to choosing loyalties in ME2 (if you had to), or switching off romances. It all represents things a real person would have done or experienced. Just because this is how Mass Effect ends does not make the rest of the experience any lesser. The ending is a PERFECT example of the saying that it's not about the destination, but the journey. In real life you choose things along the way, but nobody chooses their end and nothing works out as planned. It's a near perfect reflection of real life.

3) The balls to actually end it

This comes from number 1. Regardless of some of the details, we not only got an end to the storyline, we got an end to the entire series. That my friends is called an ending, not a to be continued. They had enough balls to say "you know what, guys? we're done. and we mean done. here is how it ENDS, literally." In an industry that cops out to milk a franchise and always leaves open endings, this was an amazing breath of fresh air, and nearly masterful execution. (This third point is assuming there isn't going to be a lame DLC ending).

Modifié par xCaptainAmazing, 10 mars 2012 - 03:38 .

[Lexagg]

Biotic Sage wrote...

I like the ending because I felt the final imagery and sounds perfectly captured the tone of the series.

I liked the ending because the final decision was a TRULY difficult decision, a decision that isn't black and white, paragon or renegade, or good or evil. They all had their merits, but they all required sacrifice (an important theme in the series).

I liked the ending because ending a cycle that has run the galaxy for what seems like since time began should come at a cost. The Mass Relays needed to be destroyed because they were a part of the Reaper's system of control, part of the framework of the cycle. The paradigm shifting ending was appropriate to the heaviness of the Reaper story.

I liked the ending because there is hope for the future regardless of which choice you pick. The Normandy's planet we see something happen directly from that, and on Earth we see men and women cheering as the nightmare ends.

I liked the ending because it explained the Reapers' ultimate motivation, and it was a motivation that was consistent with the rest of the trilogy.  I also liked that the Catalyst is left ambiguous; they don't say it's a "deity" (much like the Hanar do when they encounter a race more advanced beyond their comprehension) like in Battlestar Galactica, if you want to think of it that way you can, but you could also just think of it as an advanced form of life beyond synthetic/organic outside of the cycle.

All valid points. The problem I have is the lack of any alternatives. The other problem I have is that the whole "difficult choice" is completely disconnected from the rest of the series. It's something brought up from nowhere in the last possible moment. EDIT: I don't think it is consistent with the rest of the series. The rest of the series were NEVER about organics vs. synthetics, it was about self-determination. Organics vs. synthetics is a false problem, especially considering that I've already proven MULTIPLE TIMES that organics and synthetics can coexist.

Modifié par Lexagg, 10 mars 2012 - 03:39 .

[Biotic Sage]

Tartilus wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

Jayaa wrote...

*snip*

Great post Jayaa!  Any video game that can make me cry and think this much is amazing in my book.

My friend and I debated/discussed the entire trilogy for 4 hours today.  And we still feel like we haven't begun to scratch the surface of its depth.

It sounds like you're just fundamentally looking for something different out of the ending than we (I'll presume to use 'we' in the context of these forums, because it's probably not unreasonable to suggest that the majority of us disliked the ending) were. You feel like some bold statement has been made regarding the nature of conflict and the true cost of ending a cycle of near-peerless destruction, and that satisfies you. Which is great! A lot of us, on the other hand, see plotholes and unresolved questions which lead us to the sort of conversation which doesn't seem to me to be indicative of a good ending. In other words, I don't so much have a problem with the suggestion that the ending was bad (though its mechanics and applicability to this game, with the themes it had previously espoused and the main characters general attitude is, I feel, questionable) as incomplete. As I mentioned elsewhere, this sort of ending to a trilogy would never make it past the editor's desk; it represents an absolute lack of closure, and while that can be intellectually stimulating, most of us were on the lookout for an ending rather than mental masturbatory material. 

I was looking for resolution as well, and I found it.  I disagree with people when they say there are glaring plotholes, although I do find some of the editing at the very final scenes to be a bit questionable; we see no context for how the Normandy ended up blazing through space with all the squadmates on board.  The content, however, I am perfectly fine with.  Editing, could have been a bit better.

Disagree on the mental masturbation point.  I was both intellectually stimulated and emotionally moved.  That's a rare feat for a work to accomplish.

[Biotic Sage]

Lexagg wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

I like the ending because I felt the final imagery and sounds perfectly captured the tone of the series.

I liked the ending because the final decision was a TRULY difficult decision, a decision that isn't black and white, paragon or renegade, or good or evil. They all had their merits, but they all required sacrifice (an important theme in the series).

I liked the ending because ending a cycle that has run the galaxy for what seems like since time began should come at a cost. The Mass Relays needed to be destroyed because they were a part of the Reaper's system of control, part of the framework of the cycle. The paradigm shifting ending was appropriate to the heaviness of the Reaper story.

I liked the ending because there is hope for the future regardless of which choice you pick. The Normandy's planet we see something happen directly from that, and on Earth we see men and women cheering as the nightmare ends.

I liked the ending because it explained the Reapers' ultimate motivation, and it was a motivation that was consistent with the rest of the trilogy.  I also liked that the Catalyst is left ambiguous; they don't say it's a "deity" (much like the Hanar do when they encounter a race more advanced beyond their comprehension) like in Battlestar Galactica, if you want to think of it that way you can, but you could also just think of it as an advanced form of life beyond synthetic/organic outside of the cycle.

All valid points. The problem I have is the lack of any alternatives. The other problem I have is that the whole "difficult choice" is completely disconnected from the rest of the series. It's something brought up from nowhere in the last possible moment.

ME1: Rogue AI, Geth, Reapers, side quests involving AI.  Also technology in general: the genophage is biological warfare.

All of these plot threads have been around since the very beginning and have only been expanded upon and continued to be emphasized in the other 2 games.  Giving an explanation for the ultimate motivation of the Reapers doesn't seem like something "out of nowhere" to me, but I guess if you were expecting something completely different than I can understand the perception.

[Jayaa]

Tartilus wrote...

It sounds like you're just fundamentally looking for something different out of the ending than we (I'll presume to use 'we' in the context of these forums, because it's probably not unreasonable to suggest that the majority of us disliked the ending) were. You feel like some bold statement has been made regarding the nature of conflict and the true cost of ending a cycle of near-peerless destruction, and that satisfies you. Which is great! A lot of us, on the other hand, see plotholes and unresolved questions which lead us to the sort of conversation which doesn't seem to me to be indicative of a good ending. In other words, I don't so much have a problem with the suggestion that the ending was bad (though its mechanics and applicability to this game, with the themes it had previously espoused and the main characters general attitude is, I feel, questionable) as incomplete. As I mentioned elsewhere, this sort of ending to a trilogy would never make it past the editor's desk; it represents an absolute lack of closure, and while that can be intellectually stimulating, most of us were on the lookout for an ending rather than mental masturbatory material. 

I mentioned previously that I believe Bioware has some more 'splaining to do.   They do need to clean it up, and yes, there are enough plotholes to tick people off.  I'm in that boat too.

I mentioned in another thread that I believe Bioware was attempting to make the ending an ongoing thinking process that uses our own imagination.  However, I also feel they couldn't put that across properly and we got something that seriously needs cleaning up.

As stated, I am fine with the ending and consequences, but I would prefer to have more closure and explaination.  I am not, however, asking for a complete redo, just a brush up.  

In its INTENDED state, I am enjoying the deep thinking and imagination involved from the people willing to bite and talk seriously about these endings.

Someone mentioned in this thread about the choices not being black or white.  I like how our own moral compasses decide which is agreeable.

Modifié par Jayaa, 10 mars 2012 - 03:50 .

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

The endings kicked ass. Who Shepard was as a person dictated what form the future of the galaxy and life itself would take. Would the endless conflict continue to an inevitable conclusion? Would the black and the white be merged, not blended into grey, but merged into an entirely new and nameless color? Or would one organic merge with the machine and in doing so, channel the machinery of the cycle into something new? However your Shepard was as a person, that's the choose you make.

Most people who hate the ending are sad because there's no giggles and puppies endings. Too bad! In a setting full of god-machines bent on destroying civilizations, there could never be any happy endings.

Great game, great story, great endings.

[QuirkyGroundhog]

I don't think I have anything to add that hasn't been said in this thread yet. It's a fitting conclusion. The three paths were a nice kind of meta reference to the dialogue wheel we've come to love or hate, the ending was thematically appropriate. Do you think the cycle will always continue? Do you think it will be different this time? Every major part of the game, and really, the franchise has led up to that question. Why would there be some sort of Hollywood happy ending? You're fighting machines that have literally obliterated all life in the galaxy multiple times, I don't know what people were expecting.


But honestly, the sheer vitriol on these forums disgusts me. You can not like the ending, there are many fair criticism of the ending, but the way a lot of the people here are acting comes across and entitled and juvenile. I hope no one from Bioware is reading these forums, because it's probably crushing to know that despite all of the joy this franchise they've worked on for a decade has brought the people here, because they didn't like the ending they're willing to demonize everyone involved.

[Storenumber9]

They've already stated that there will be more games based in the Mass Effect universe.

These are some...better defenses for the ending, but I don't think they excuse the sloppy writing and overall poor execution.

[QuirkyGroundhog]

Lexagg wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

I like the ending because I felt the final imagery and sounds perfectly captured the tone of the series.

I liked the ending because the final decision was a TRULY difficult decision, a decision that isn't black and white, paragon or renegade, or good or evil. They all had their merits, but they all required sacrifice (an important theme in the series).

I liked the ending because ending a cycle that has run the galaxy for what seems like since time began should come at a cost. The Mass Relays needed to be destroyed because they were a part of the Reaper's system of control, part of the framework of the cycle. The paradigm shifting ending was appropriate to the heaviness of the Reaper story.

I liked the ending because there is hope for the future regardless of which choice you pick. The Normandy's planet we see something happen directly from that, and on Earth we see men and women cheering as the nightmare ends.

I liked the ending because it explained the Reapers' ultimate motivation, and it was a motivation that was consistent with the rest of the trilogy.  I also liked that the Catalyst is left ambiguous; they don't say it's a "deity" (much like the Hanar do when they encounter a race more advanced beyond their comprehension) like in Battlestar Galactica, if you want to think of it that way you can, but you could also just think of it as an advanced form of life beyond synthetic/organic outside of the cycle.

All valid points. The problem I have is the lack of any alternatives. The other problem I have is that the whole "difficult choice" is completely disconnected from the rest of the series. It's something brought up from nowhere in the last possible moment. EDIT: I don't think it is consistent with the rest of the series. The rest of the series were NEVER about organics vs. synthetics, it was about self-determination. Organics vs. synthetics is a false problem, especially considering that I've already proven MULTIPLE TIMES that organics and synthetics can coexist.

The whole series isn't about synthetics vs organics per say as it is about inevitable conclusions and cycles. The Krogan genophage question, for instance. "No, we can't cure them, because war will be inevitable. They can't change." That and the Geth plot threads were the most consistant in the series. A question of inevitability and a question of synthetic vs organics.

As to whether they can co exist, a lot of people say "Well, I've proven they can." And you're right! That's kind of the point. How Shepard has played the game SHOULD influence how he sees the ending. Because not all Shepards proved it. The ones who did get to the end and say, "I believe change is possible. I cured the Genophage. I had Geth and Quarian unite."

But not every player did. Other players get to the end and their Shepard would agree. Conflict is inevitable. And so they give you the two options. Tell the Reapers to leave and have organics and synthetics co exist, because YOUR Shepard thinks it is possible. But for those Shepards who do not, they have the destroy synthetics option.

And then the middle option which is meant to be the generic 'happy/neutral' option, though there is clearly some flawed execution there.

[QuirkyGroundhog]

Primalrose wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

I like the ending because I felt the final imagery and sounds perfectly captured the tone of the series.

I liked the ending because the final decision was a TRULY difficult decision, a decision that isn't black and white, paragon or renegade, or good or evil. They all had their merits, but they all required sacrifice (an important theme in the series).

I liked the ending because ending a cycle that has run the galaxy for what seems like since time began should come at a cost. The Mass Relays needed to be destroyed because they were a part of the Reaper's system of control, part of the framework of the cycle. The paradigm shifting ending was appropriate to the heaviness of the Reaper story.

I liked the ending because there is hope for the future regardless of which choice you pick. The Normandy's planet we see something happen directly from that, and on Earth we see men and women cheering as the nightmare ends.

I liked the ending because it explained the Reapers' ultimate motivation, and it was a motivation that was consistent with the rest of the trilogy.  I also liked that the Catalyst is left ambiguous; they don't say it's a "deity" (much like the Hanar do when they encounter a race more advanced beyond their comprehension) like in Battlestar Galactica, if you want to think of it that way you can, but you could also just think of it as an advanced form of life beyond synthetic/organic outside of the cycle.

Could not have said it better myself. I have actually not finished the game, but couldn't help spoil some of the endings for myself. I guess the only gripe I can understand is the lack of conclusion for alot of your teammates. It can be hard to accept that you've build these relationships with them for 3 games and then...no payoff. To put it bluntly, makes you wonder if this is how they're going to milk people with upcoming DLCs. 

Your sacrifice gave them a future. Is it necessary to know what that future is? It is for some, clearly, as this forum has shown. But it's enough for at least my 'Shepard' to know that he saved his 'family'.