338 réponses à ce sujet

[Genera1Nemesis]

T-0pel wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

Szelenas wrote...

T-0pel wrote...

I am not really gonna talk about most of the issues because other people adressed them already. So with that out of the way here is my main problem:

The AI god thing states that reapers are his solution, not some kind of test. The crucible is not his way of testing organics, it is stated that it is a device that was designed by every galactic civilization and every cycle improved upon it. It is something the god AI did not forsee in all its "perfect and inevetable logic".
And the AI clearly states that you maikng it to the citadel and connecting the crucible changed somthing and it proves that his cycle wont work ANYMORE!
So how can you belive this premise synthetics versus organics without question? The AI clearly made a mistake, organics eventually found a way to overcome his cycle. Maybe we are also able to coexist with synthetics? Maybe Shepards intervention with the Geth forever changed everything in synthetics way of thinking? Dont we have the right to tell him that it might have taken milions of years but eventually we managed to overcome his premise?
Just think about it please...

finally,some can think logically

lol, the Geth are but ONE form of synthetic life; not the defining ONE. Cerberus was designing a bunch of different AI's throughout the games; just because the Geth were all 'hugs and kisses' doesn't mean another synthetic life form wouldn't come to the same conclusion that Catalyst based his logic on.

Keep in mind the Geth Heretics CHOSE to join Sovereign because he offered them technology to help build the Geth network hub near Rannoch. They CHOSE to kill organics in the name of technological advancement. Sovereign always kinda said he hated the Geth and the were but a means to an end (cannon-fodder to recapture Citadel) Just the fact alone that a few Geth would come to this conclusion that killing organics for advancement is a good idea proves Catalyst's position.

The fact that it was just a "few" of them is the reason why it doesnt prove anything.
And even if everything you say is true it is still just a speculation without any solid evidence one way or another.

The same can be said about Catalyst being wrong too. Think about it; Citadel space had a LAW against the creation of true AI because even they understood that a true AI who is determined enough would be pretty much unstoppable. They could potentially hack any CPU, shut down ships, build an army that can evolve at a much faster rate than organics ever could and wouldn't be tied down by morales and such. Cerberus was trying anyways; and the Illusive Man was shown to be fanatically devoted to building anything that would give him control. The threat was very real; and again; what if that AI was able to take control of the Reapers?

Soveriegn hid in the Perseus Veil leading up to when Saren discovered it. The galaxy had just reached the apex of synthetic life design and people like Cerberus would never stop trying to build one as a weapon (think Skynet)

Food for thought; since the Reapers were millions of years old do you think they were limited to just our galaxy? This is a big what if, but what if they tried other solutions in other galaxies and the Reapers were the first thing that worked, so they ran with it. Catlayst couldn't change this solution on it's own; which is somewhat of a hint that it was programmed in such a way that only an organic could decide the fate of his own galaxy.

[JerkyJohnny14]

So there aren't too many plot holes, right?

[Genera1Nemesis]

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

So there aren't too many plot holes, right?

Crew being on Normandy at the end is a plot hole. Other than that there are no other plot holes; just difference of opinion on sequence of events.

[Cobra's_back]

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

vertigo72 wrote...

Plaim wrote...

There are many, many posts explaining just why those problems aren't so "minor". But it's cool that you were happy with the way things turned out. I certainly wish I was.

I didn't see yet any very important plot hole. I can see now that Bioware had an idea and implemented it in 3 huge games. The thing is so huge that I think it's normal that we have some errors and some things was sacrified for some reason, like nice view on the Earth from space without helmet.

1. Relays destroyed- Systems perfectly fine. Alpha Relay destroyed- Batarian system Gone. Why is that? Space magic.
2. Team mates with you while harbinger attacks teleport to ship perfectly fine.. Why is that? Space magic.3. Normandy flees fight, leaves Shepard, crash lands on unknown jungle planet, everyone is fine. Why is that? Space magic4. The catalyst is alive???? Why is that? Space magic5. Shep is only allowed three crappy choices. Why is that? Space magic.6. Shaprd chooses detroy ending, with enough war assets, wakes up in a pile of rubble. Why is that? Space magic.7. Dark energy no longer a problem. Why is that? Space magic.8. no one ever notices child on earth except for shepard, same child haunts shepard's dreams, same child is catalyst. Why is that? Space magic.9. After the beam shep enters a perfeclty mirroed world, only found when one dreams. Why is that? Space magic.

Perfectly said

[JerkyJohnny14]

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

So there aren't too many plot holes, right?

Crew being on Normandy at the end is a plot hole. Other than that there are no other plot holes; just difference of opinion on sequence of events.

Earlier i posted my problems with the game. Some i believe are actua plot holes that need a real answer besides space magic.

[Genera1Nemesis]

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

So there aren't too many plot holes, right?

Crew being on Normandy at the end is a plot hole. Other than that there are no other plot holes; just difference of opinion on sequence of events.

Earlier i posted my problems with the game. Some i believe are actua plot holes that need a real answer besides space magic.

Space magic? Have you never watched any other sci-fi show or read any other sci fi books? There are a helluva lot more crazy things in sci-fi than what Catalyst does, believe me.

[The Night Mammoth]

Destroy makes sense. The Reapers are dead, the cycle ends, innocents are sacrificed for the benefit of the many. That's a Mass Effect ending.

Control makes sense. Shepard sacrifices himself to save everyone, at the risk that the Reapers could return and begin the cycle again.

The above two complement each other. If your other choices throughout the game affected how this final descison pans out, and if it weren't presented to you by some random illogical Reaper child thing, and if you were able to question the Walking Plot Hole about its motives and possibly choose to ignore its ultimatum in favor of fighting to the last, I'd be perfectly happy.

Synthesis is utterly stupid. It changes nothing. What form of life you are matters literally zero in this cycle. Geth fight Geth, Krogan fight Krogan, AI's fall in love with lovable cripples. Everyone suddenly becoming one form of life (how this happens isn't explained, another issue) doesn't erase millenia of confrontations, it doesn't suddenly make Krogan peace loving, or Quarian friendly with those they think tried to exterminate them. What happens to the Reaper? What happens to the child? Nothing is explained.

Don't even get me started on the Normandy's crash and how your teammates teleport onto it, or why they're fleeing or where they are.
There are so many plot holes, inconsistencies, contradictions, logical fallacies and missing explanations that it requires thousands of words to detail them all in full.

Like the endings if you want, but don't even try to explain them, it's doomed to failure.

[wombat_stalker]

Do I 'understand' the ending? Certainly. Four years of college-level literature courses aren't anything to sneeze at. In terms of the "whole picture" the only thing that's just not making sense is the suddenly-resurrected Normandy crewmembers.

So I can agree with the OP that there's very little actually *factually* wrong with the ending. Mass Relays gone: what's the name of the game? Mass Effect. Why were the relays there? So that the organic races would develop in a way that the Reapers want. To destroy the Reapers and come full circle, the Mass Relays have to go. Universe no longer has a safety net. Sensible. Logical. classical, even.

The problem actually *appears* the moment you stop analysing it logically and sensibly and get back to, "what does the ending feel like?" vs "what would I like the ending of a magnificent trilogy to feel like?". Most players went in expecting victory, preferably a spectacular one where we kick the Reapers out of the galaxy with the biggest nutkick ever delivered. We went in expecting adrenaline-rushes and a butt-from-chair elevating "YES!!!".

Didn't happen. Cue disappointment. It's not stupidity talking.

[T-0pel]

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

The same can be said about Catalyst being wrong too. Think about it; Citadel space had a LAW against the creation of true AI because even they understood that a true AI who is determined enough would be pretty much unstoppable. They could potentially hack any CPU, shut down ships, build an army that can evolve at a much faster rate than organics ever could and wouldn't be tied down by morales and such. Cerberus was trying anyways; and the Illusive Man was shown to be fanatically devoted to building anything that would give him control. The threat was very real; and again; what if that AI was able to take control of the Reapers?

Soveriegn hid in the Perseus Veil leading up to when Saren discovered it. The galaxy had just reached the apex of synthetic life design and people like Cerberus would never stop trying to build one as a weapon (think Skynet)

Food for thought; since the Reapers were millions of years old do you think they were limited to just our galaxy? This is a big what if, but what if they tried other solutions in other galaxies and the Reapers were the first thing that worked, so they ran with it. Catlayst couldn't change this solution on it's own; which is somewhat of a hint that it was programmed in such a way that only an organic could decide the fate of his own galaxy.

"Whether you're happy or angry at the ending,
know this: it is an ending. BioWare will not do a "Lost" and leave fans
with more questions than answers after finishing the game.."


This is what Mike Gamble said.

Now revise our conversation. Do you think that was delivered? Everything both of us have said has absolutely no evidnce, you use big what ifs to support your claims, me too. There is no conlusion, the point is that you are happy about it and I am not.

Modifié par T-0pel, 17 mars 2012 - 03:38 .

[Promchek]

once again, there is no picture, there is not much of anything in this game besides life like characters and their stories. Everything what happens from the moment Shepard lands on Eden Prime to running into the beam is a very simple and conventional Hero story, and no not a tragic one. It is a story about commander Shepard, Hero of The Citadel, First Human Spectre... and not Hamlet.

Yes it is the story to some point is about the sacrifice, but never the less it's all about heroic sacrifice to SAVE THE GALAXY. How any of last choices actually saves anything. It's just like a copy of the failty Space Casper logic: I destroy the galaxy to save the galaxy. There is nothing heroic about it.

And the biggest theme of this game was tolerance and hope. And everything of it is thrown out of the window in the last scene. And literally everything what comes in this scene goes against the all 3 games, every single word.

[Genera1Nemesis]

wombat_stalker wrote...

Do I 'understand' the ending? Certainly. Four years of college-level literature courses aren't anything to sneeze at. In terms of the "whole picture" the only thing that's just not making sense is the suddenly-resurrected Normandy crewmembers.

So I can agree with the OP that there's very little actually *factually* wrong with the ending. Mass Relays gone: what's the name of the game? Mass Effect. Why were the relays there? So that the organic races would develop in a way that the Reapers want. To destroy the Reapers and come full circle, the Mass Relays have to go. Universe no longer has a safety net. Sensible. Logical. classical, even.

The problem actually *appears* the moment you stop analysing it logically and sensibly and get back to, "what does the ending feel like?" vs "what would I like the ending of a magnificent trilogy to feel like?". Most players went in expecting victory, preferably a spectacular one where we kick the Reapers out of the galaxy with the biggest nutkick ever delivered. We went in expecting adrenaline-rushes and a butt-from-chair elevating "YES!!!".

Didn't happen. Cue disappointment. It's not stupidity talking.

Agree with you 100%.

[GuilleCuba]

I just think that the ending we got is not appropiate to the story we got, a story based on choice and how can a man or woman shape his or her own destiny

[Promchek]

T-0pel wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

The same can be said about Catalyst being wrong too. Think about it; Citadel space had a LAW against the creation of true AI because even they understood that a true AI who is determined enough would be pretty much unstoppable. They could potentially hack any CPU, shut down ships, build an army that can evolve at a much faster rate than organics ever could and wouldn't be tied down by morales and such. Cerberus was trying anyways; and the Illusive Man was shown to be fanatically devoted to building anything that would give him control. The threat was very real; and again; what if that AI was able to take control of the Reapers?

Soveriegn hid in the Perseus Veil leading up to when Saren discovered it. The galaxy had just reached the apex of synthetic life design and people like Cerberus would never stop trying to build one as a weapon (think Skynet)

Food for thought; since the Reapers were millions of years old do you think they were limited to just our galaxy? This is a big what if, but what if they tried other solutions in other galaxies and the Reapers were the first thing that worked, so they ran with it. Catlayst couldn't change this solution on it's own; which is somewhat of a hint that it was programmed in such a way that only an organic could decide the fate of his own galaxy.

"Whether you're happy or angry at the ending,
know this: it is an ending. BioWare will not do a "Lost" and leave fans
with more questions than answers after finishing the game.."


This is what Mike Gamble said.

Now revise our conversation. Do you think that was delivered? Everything both of us have said has absolutely no evidnce, you use big what ifs to support your claims, me too. There is no conlusion, the point is that you are happy about it and I am not.

think about it: more crap you defend, more crap you will get.

[Genera1Nemesis]

T-0pel wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

The same can be said about Catalyst being wrong too. Think about it; Citadel space had a LAW against the creation of true AI because even they understood that a true AI who is determined enough would be pretty much unstoppable. They could potentially hack any CPU, shut down ships, build an army that can evolve at a much faster rate than organics ever could and wouldn't be tied down by morales and such. Cerberus was trying anyways; and the Illusive Man was shown to be fanatically devoted to building anything that would give him control. The threat was very real; and again; what if that AI was able to take control of the Reapers?

Soveriegn hid in the Perseus Veil leading up to when Saren discovered it. The galaxy had just reached the apex of synthetic life design and people like Cerberus would never stop trying to build one as a weapon (think Skynet)

Food for thought; since the Reapers were millions of years old do you think they were limited to just our galaxy? This is a big what if, but what if they tried other solutions in other galaxies and the Reapers were the first thing that worked, so they ran with it. Catlayst couldn't change this solution on it's own; which is somewhat of a hint that it was programmed in such a way that only an organic could decide the fate of his own galaxy.

"Whether you're happy or angry at the ending,
know this: it is an ending. BioWare will not do a "Lost" and leave fans
with more questions than answers after finishing the game.."


This is what Mike Gamble said.

Now revise our conversation. Do you think that was delivered? Everything both of us have said has absolutely no evidnce, you use big what ifs to support your claims, me too. There is no conlusion, the point is that you are happy about it and I am not.

As a fledgling writer myself I understand that one should never deliver any promises on a work in progress...too many variables can change based on how the story evolves the more you write it. To say; mid-way through production, that they weren't going to pull a "Lost" was just the direction they had at that time; the story may have evolved away from that as they moved forward.

[The Night Mammoth]

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

So there aren't too many plot holes, right?

Crew being on Normandy at the end is a plot hole. Other than that there are no other plot holes; just difference of opinion on sequence of events.

Why Joker is fleeing is a plot hole. How Joker manages to reach a Relay is a plot hole. How he somehow crashes on a random habitable planet is a plot hole. How anyone of the ship is supposed to suvive is a plot hole. That the Relays don't instantly vaporise everyone in their respective systems in a giant supernova is a plot hole. That the Star Child needs Sovereign to activate the Citadel is a plot hole. That the Star Child apparently controls the Reapers despite their insistence that they're all individual is a plot hole. 

Do you want me to continue? 

[JerkyJohnny14]

Yes, I have seen sci-fi movies and have read sci-fi books. But this is not a book or movie. it is a game, a game where the player helps write his or her plot and ending. With a movie its "Oh i didnt like that ending, oh well got my moneys worth". This game is supposed to reflect what we want as an ending. So with a movie or book space magic is always valid because its always up to the author or producer. With a game that allows choice space magic is never the answer.

[T-0pel]

wombat_stalker wrote...

Do I 'understand' the ending? Certainly. Four years of college-level literature courses aren't anything to sneeze at. In terms of the "whole picture" the only thing that's just not making sense is the suddenly-resurrected Normandy crewmembers.

So I can agree with the OP that there's very little actually *factually* wrong with the ending. Mass Relays gone: what's the name of the game? Mass Effect. Why were the relays there? So that the organic races would develop in a way that the Reapers want. To destroy the Reapers and come full circle, the Mass Relays have to go. Universe no longer has a safety net. Sensible. Logical. classical, even.

The problem actually *appears* the moment you stop analysing it logically and sensibly and get back to, "what does the ending feel like?" vs "what would I like the ending of a magnificent trilogy to feel like?". Most players went in expecting victory, preferably a spectacular one where we kick the Reapers out of the galaxy with the biggest nutkick ever delivered. We went in expecting adrenaline-rushes and a butt-from-chair elevating "YES!!!".

Didn't happen. Cue disappointment. It's not stupidity talking.

This is not logical. classical maybe, but not sensible or logical. It is just a technology. Technology is not evil in itself. It is just a tool. For the Reapers it was a tool to make us evolve in a certain time period in a way they wanted. But for us it was the whole backbone of our very civilization. We use it to transport, comunicate. Not for some evil deeds, it did not damage us in any way, it did not indoctrinate us. If anything we might find a way to even improve it, it just does not have to be destroyed.
And by your logic every mass effect technology would have to be destroyed and from numerous codex entries you can see that almost everything organics were using was based upon this technology.

[Genera1Nemesis]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

So there aren't too many plot holes, right?

Crew being on Normandy at the end is a plot hole. Other than that there are no other plot holes; just difference of opinion on sequence of events.

Why Joker is fleeing is a plot hole. How Joker manages to reach a Relay is a plot hole. How he somehow crashes on a random habitable planet is a plot hole. How anyone of the ship is supposed to suvive is a plot hole. That the Relays don't instantly vaporise everyone in their respective systems in a giant supernova is a plot hole. That the Star Child needs Sovereign to activate the Citadel is a plot hole. That the Star Child apparently controls the Reapers despite their insistence that they're all individual is a plot hole. 

Do you want me to continue? 

Joker leaving is not a plot-hole; it was poorly edited though. If you watch the end, when Crucible is 'building up' it's energy it is sucking all the nearby ships towards it like a black-hole; ripping them apart. At that point I'm sure Joker had to run or die just like all those other ships that Crucible was ripping apart.

As I've said in many other threads the ending is by no means perfect. There are editing mistakes throughout; it's far too short etc. That said; the Normandy was the fastest ship ever built and arguably had the best Alliance pilot at the helm. He had a good five to ten seconds to hit FTL and thuse hit the relay before it went boom. I don't see it as a plot-hole, just a poorly edited sequence of events.

[AzaZeLgaming]

... for the millionth time, it doesn't matter which ending you pick IF the Mass Relays are destroyed, since the "Arrival" DLC logic dictates, that the destruction of a Mass Relay creates a supernova like explosion. The cannon doesn't explain why we should think that the destruction is any different than what we have seen in the "Arrival" DLC. Read the Lore ppl.

[mpgeist]

And people thought Star Wars was utter crap until they edited it better. Editing is important.

[novaseeker]

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

So there aren't too many plot holes, right?

Crew being on Normandy at the end is a plot hole. Other than that there are no other plot holes; just difference of opinion on sequence of events.

Why Joker is fleeing is a plot hole. How Joker manages to reach a Relay is a plot hole. How he somehow crashes on a random habitable planet is a plot hole. How anyone of the ship is supposed to suvive is a plot hole. That the Relays don't instantly vaporise everyone in their respective systems in a giant supernova is a plot hole. That the Star Child needs Sovereign to activate the Citadel is a plot hole. That the Star Child apparently controls the Reapers despite their insistence that they're all individual is a plot hole. 

Do you want me to continue? 

Joker leaving is not a plot-hole; it was poorly edited though. If you watch the end, when Crucible is 'building up' it's energy it is sucking all the nearby ships towards it like a black-hole; ripping them apart. At that point I'm sure Joker had to run or die just like all those other ships that Crucible was ripping apart.

As I've said in many other threads the ending is by no means perfect. There are editing mistakes throughout; it's far too short etc. That said; the Normandy was the fastest ship ever built and arguably had the best Alliance pilot at the helm. He had a good five to ten seconds to hit FTL and thuse hit the relay before it went boom. I don't see it as a plot-hole, just a poorly edited sequence of events.

I take it you would agree that having Shepard's squadmates emerge from the Normandy at the end is a plot hole?

[T-0pel]

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

T-0pel wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

The same can be said about Catalyst being wrong too. Think about it; Citadel space had a LAW against the creation of true AI because even they understood that a true AI who is determined enough would be pretty much unstoppable. They could potentially hack any CPU, shut down ships, build an army that can evolve at a much faster rate than organics ever could and wouldn't be tied down by morales and such. Cerberus was trying anyways; and the Illusive Man was shown to be fanatically devoted to building anything that would give him control. The threat was very real; and again; what if that AI was able to take control of the Reapers?

Soveriegn hid in the Perseus Veil leading up to when Saren discovered it. The galaxy had just reached the apex of synthetic life design and people like Cerberus would never stop trying to build one as a weapon (think Skynet)

Food for thought; since the Reapers were millions of years old do you think they were limited to just our galaxy? This is a big what if, but what if they tried other solutions in other galaxies and the Reapers were the first thing that worked, so they ran with it. Catlayst couldn't change this solution on it's own; which is somewhat of a hint that it was programmed in such a way that only an organic could decide the fate of his own galaxy.

"Whether you're happy or angry at the ending,
know this: it is an ending. BioWare will not do a "Lost" and leave fans
with more questions than answers after finishing the game.."


This is what Mike Gamble said.

Now revise our conversation. Do you think that was delivered? Everything both of us have said has absolutely no evidnce, you use big what ifs to support your claims, me too. There is no conlusion, the point is that you are happy about it and I am not.

As a fledgling writer myself I understand that one should never deliver any promises on a work in progress...too many variables can change based on how the story evolves the more you write it. To say; mid-way through production, that they weren't going to pull a "Lost" was just the direction they had at that time; the story may have evolved away from that as they moved forward.

http://www.eurogamer...me-people-angry

It's from February...

[Genera1Nemesis]

JerkyJohnny14 wrote...

Yes, I have seen sci-fi movies and have read sci-fi books. But this is not a book or movie. it is a game, a game where the player helps write his or her plot and ending. With a movie its "Oh i didnt like that ending, oh well got my moneys worth". This game is supposed to reflect what we want as an ending. So with a movie or book space magic is always valid because its always up to the author or producer. With a game that allows choice space magic is never the answer.

We never got to write our own plot. Did I have the choice to quit Cerberus? DId I have the choice to rejoin Alliance? No, because in order to write a story you have to have predetermined sequences of events otherwise there is no plot. What we were given was a set of rules and thus were allowed to change things within those guidelines.

[Genera1Nemesis]

T-0pel wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

T-0pel wrote...

Genera1Nemesis wrote...

The same can be said about Catalyst being wrong too. Think about it; Citadel space had a LAW against the creation of true AI because even they understood that a true AI who is determined enough would be pretty much unstoppable. They could potentially hack any CPU, shut down ships, build an army that can evolve at a much faster rate than organics ever could and wouldn't be tied down by morales and such. Cerberus was trying anyways; and the Illusive Man was shown to be fanatically devoted to building anything that would give him control. The threat was very real; and again; what if that AI was able to take control of the Reapers?

Soveriegn hid in the Perseus Veil leading up to when Saren discovered it. The galaxy had just reached the apex of synthetic life design and people like Cerberus would never stop trying to build one as a weapon (think Skynet)

Food for thought; since the Reapers were millions of years old do you think they were limited to just our galaxy? This is a big what if, but what if they tried other solutions in other galaxies and the Reapers were the first thing that worked, so they ran with it. Catlayst couldn't change this solution on it's own; which is somewhat of a hint that it was programmed in such a way that only an organic could decide the fate of his own galaxy.

"Whether you're happy or angry at the ending,
know this: it is an ending. BioWare will not do a "Lost" and leave fans
with more questions than answers after finishing the game.."


This is what Mike Gamble said.

Now revise our conversation. Do you think that was delivered? Everything both of us have said has absolutely no evidnce, you use big what ifs to support your claims, me too. There is no conlusion, the point is that you are happy about it and I am not.

As a fledgling writer myself I understand that one should never deliver any promises on a work in progress...too many variables can change based on how the story evolves the more you write it. To say; mid-way through production, that they weren't going to pull a "Lost" was just the direction they had at that time; the story may have evolved away from that as they moved forward.

http://www.eurogamer...me-people-angry

It's from February...

I understand that; I've readthe article. The big issue I have with the 'change the ending' crowd is that Bioware was already forced to change it back in November when some 'fans' decided to read the leaked script. So they changed it once already, fans aren't happy, and are demanding another change? I don't like where this is going, and it sets a terrible precendent for any future game designer that wants to do anything risky.

[The Night Mammoth]

wombat_stalker wrote...

Do I 'understand' the ending? Certainly. Four years of college-level literature courses aren't anything to sneeze at. In terms of the "whole picture" the only thing that's just not making sense is the suddenly-resurrected Normandy crewmembers.

Or why the Normandy is fleeing. Or how it manages to reach a Relay. Or how the teammates appear on the Normandy. Or why Shepard doesn't question the Catalyst. Or the Catalyst's logic full stop. Or how Anderson reaches the Citadel's control panel first. Or how Synthesis actualyl solves any problems. Or how anyone you're supposed to have just saved is going to survive. Or how the Relays don't instantly kill everyone in system wide supernovas. Or how any of the conflict you resolve actually matter since the Relays are gone.

So I can agree with the OP that there's very little actually *factually* wrong with the ending. Mass Relays gone: what's the name of the game? Mass Effect. Why were the relays there? So that the organic races would develop in a way that the Reapers want. To destroy the Reapers and come full circle, the Mass Relays have to go. Universe no longer has a safety net. Sensible. Logical. classical, even.

Perhaps. That they are destroyed now creates half a hundred other questions. The fact that it has to happen every time is strange. The Reapers are gone, their control over us is extinguished, so the Relays don't really need to go once their creators have. 

The problem actually *appears* the moment you stop analysing it logically and sensibly and get back to, "what does the ending feel like?" vs "what would I like the ending of a magnificent trilogy to feel like?". Most players went in expecting victory, preferably a spectacular one where we kick the Reapers out of the galaxy with the biggest nutkick ever delivered. We went in expecting adrenaline-rushes and a butt-from-chair elevating "YES!!!".

Didn't happen. Cue disappointment. It's not stupidity talking.

Most people went in with the expectation that there would be more than one ending, ranging from saving everyone and living happily ever after, to the Reapers actually winning. 

That didn't happen.