274 réponses à ce sujet

[Adanu]

Manton-X2 wrote...

I'm not sure why people are spending their time, on either side, trying to convince the other side that they are wrong. Each person feels strongly, and rightly so, about their reaction to the ending. And each person is right, for themselves.

My question for the Pro-Ending people has nothing to do with content or how they feel, etc. What I want to know is this. If, by your admission, you just so happened to get the perfect ending for you - the ending that you love and enjoyed - why are you so opposed to the rest of us getting an ending that we can love and find perfect?

You are able to ignore the things that the rest of find so grating (plot holes, lack of choices that effect the game in any meaningful way, lazy writing, poor logic, etc.) and I'm happy for you. You're not sitting there with a game you thought you'd love and play over and over again that you really don't want to play through again.

Why are you so opposed to the rest of us having that closure and sense of amazement that we know could be there? How would it ruin it for you? How would a patch that you'd have to choose to download that would add what we consider real endings ruin the game for you? That's what I don't understand.

If bioware gives a 'brighter' ending in some fashion to appease the dislikers, I'm all for it so long as the overall theme isn't changed.

The dark energy bit always felt like it should be a sub plot. This ending about keeping organic civilization from destroying itself with a technological singularity with AI is plausible. The Reapers being an extreme solution to that idea makes perfect sense. Just need to give more closure and more explanation for the people who don't get it.

[Erethrian]

Jaysh wrote...

The people who "love" the endings are those who have only played ME3 or those who like depressing endings.

Depressing endings. Well, I don't liked the endings and I don't feel that we "need" a happy one. I just want the closure they promised. I want to see how our choices through ME3 matter at the "end run". I want to know what's next (epilogue or whatever) and why there're plot holes and unexplained things in the current endings.

Adanu wrote...

If bioware gives a 'brighter' ending in
some fashion to appease the dislikers, I'm all for it so long as the
overall theme isn't changed.

The dark energy bit always felt like
it should be a sub plot. This ending about keeping organic civilization
from destroying itself with a technological singularity with AI is
plausible. The Reapers being an extreme solution to that idea makes
perfect sense. Just need to give more closure and more explanation for
the people who don't get it.

I agree, and personally I
believe in the indoctrination theory because of that. It doesn't need
to "change the endings", but can add a lot to them.

Modifié par Erethrian, 20 mars 2012 - 09:33 .

[Erethrian]

Sry, double post. -^

Modifié par Erethrian, 20 mars 2012 - 09:34 .

[Aetius5]

Some people will just always accept what's given to them - whether its crap or good is up to interpetation. We can all argue what makes for good/bad until our fingers go numb, but it shouldn't be argued that a deus ex machina ending makes for good story telling

[Leonia]

Faridarsabra wrote...

 -The three choices through Shepard’s eyes.
Another thing I would like to say, is that throughout the series, the player has been Shepard, our choices have been his choices, but we have been able to meta-game; We know for a fact that the upper right dialogue choice will be Paragon, and the lower choices will be Renegade, we have been told by developers that decisions in previous games will affect the last game, we have been able to go on websites to find out what the best course of action is in dialogues etc. We can use guides! But Shepard (as a person) did not have this ability.

I interpret the last 15 minutes as Shepard’s choices, not ours. Why? Because the choices we are given are not clear on whether they are good or bad, we have no red or blue color that will tell us what will be the good or bad, even the choices themselves don’t have their right color (destroy is red, control is blue). We are seeing the choices through Shepards eyes, he have never known what the “right/Paragon” answer is. Throughout the series, the player is the one that have seen what choice is paragon/renegade, not Shepard.

He had three bad and ****ty choices to choose from, we as players are clear on what we want to choose (even if we do not like the choices we are given), but for Shepard, they are all grey answers, there are no right or wrong  for him, he can’t go on youtube and see how the three endings play out, and then go back to the Citadel and say “oh well I will survive if I take the red choice so I’ll just go with that”, but as players, we can do this if we want to. Shepard can’t meta-game, so what is he supposed to ask a million years old AI, at the end of his own life?

I take the ending for what it is, we get to see Shepard do the single most important decision in the history of this Cycle; And we get to see him do it at his utter worst.

And that is exactly why choices matter, not OUR choices but Shepard's. It is the Shepard Trilogy after all, thanks for reminding us all of this. 

Aetius5 wrote...

Some people will just always accept
what's given to them - whether its crap or good is up to interpetation.
We can all argue what makes for good/bad until our fingers go numb, but
it shouldn't be argued that a deus ex machina ending makes for good
story telling

Why not? Seeing as good and bad are subjective (as you yourself just said), then why can't we argue about it?

Modifié par leonia42, 20 mars 2012 - 09:43 .

[Well]

Anuvis13 wrote...

HenchxNarf wrote...

Why would I feel misled? I got exactly what Bioware offered me with this game. I feel I got exactly what they told us we would get. I never expected a happy ending, like some people. And I'm glad it ended the way it did. It's the end of Shepard's story. There is hope for the galaxy, but in the end, a true hero like Shepard would give his life to save them all. Why would I want to spoil that with a fairytale ending?

It's not about a fairytale or happy ending. With the destruction of the Mass Relays everyone who came to the fight on Earth will starve to death and all those alliances you created don't matter because the different systems can't interact with each otther anymore.

Add to that the great number of plot holes, contradictions and inconsistencies and you should see why people want a change.

That was excellant.Well done.

[Mitra]

No justice for Shepard and for Us.
I hate lies.
I'll fight against them. Forever.
Hate useless depression. Pure optimist here. Hope they will fix this crazy state of emptiness.
If they don't, runaway train, here I come!

[Lugaidster]

Adanu wrote...

If bioware gives a 'brighter' ending in some fashion to appease the dislikers, I'm all for it so long as the overall theme isn't changed.

The dark energy bit always felt like it should be a sub plot. This ending about keeping organic civilization from destroying itself with a technological singularity with AI is plausible. The Reapers being an extreme solution to that idea makes perfect sense. Just need to give more closure and more explanation for the people who don't get it.

Ugh... I could agree with the overall message you are trying to transmit, but the tone is condescending at best. You're assuming we (the ones that didn't like the endings) want a "brighter" ending (false) and that we didn't get it (again, false). 

Technological singularity might seem plausible to you but it's arguable at best, especially given the context. You could argue that it's okay that every choice had their own nuances, eliminating the possibility of a perfect choice but that's just a cop-out for saying that they did it this way so that a bittersweet ending was possible. Happy for the sake of happy is as pointless as bittersweet for the sake of bittersweet. It has nothing to do with getting it or not getting it.

The game didn't revolve around inevitability or futility, all three options given at the end accept the premise of the reapers as given, just because he's virtually a god. I don't accept that, and it has nothing to do with wanting a happier ending or a brighter future. Couldn't care if everyone died fighting and lost for their future on their own terms. Deus Ex Machina is not what I expected as an end to the trilogy.

What's more, the whole issue on resolution or closure has nothing to do with not getting the ending. There's no getting the ending past the cut-scenes. It's just speculation and I'd say that's the biggest issue and why everyone has so many complaints. An epilogue DLC that didn't affect the choices but provided closure while still leaving the endings open to interpretation would probably go a long way to please many fans, like me. Explain the people and let the galaxy state open. But I will still regard the ending as a poor attempt to close the trilogy, though better executed than what we have.

Modifié par Lugaidster, 20 mars 2012 - 09:56 .

[Manton-X2]

Adanu wrote...
If bioware gives a 'brighter' ending in some fashion to appease the dislikers, I'm all for it so long as the overall theme isn't changed.

The dark energy bit always felt like it should be a sub plot. This ending about keeping organic civilization from destroying itself with a technological singularity with AI is plausible. The Reapers being an extreme solution to that idea makes perfect sense. Just need to give more closure and more explanation for the people who don't get it.

I know there are others who want the "brighter" ending and I can understand that and wouldn't be opposed to that being one of the possibile outcomes. But for me, I want it all to make some kind of logical sense instead, it feels rushed and thrown together.  I can take dark endings .. one of my favorite movies as a kid was "The Killer" with Chow Yun Fat.  If you've seen it, that definitely isn't a hallmark moment at the end and I loved/love it.

Aside from that, you know the thing that iritates me to no end?  That from the very beginning, you can not possibly lose.  Absolutely impossible to lose.   The endgame is set in stone.

In ME2's ending, you ran the gamut from "hero man" (everyone lives, you got all the toys, you kicked the Illusive Man in the daddysacks and told him where to go, etc.) to screwing the pooch so bad every squadmate and you die.  Here,  you -will- defeat the Reapers.  No doubt .. no matter how badly you play, how poor your decisions, how inept you are at rallying the galaxy .... you will win the big game.  The only thing that you can effect is if (a) Earth is destroyed or not and ( If life in the universe is organic, organic/synthetic or cyborg.   5 years, 100s of hours ... 2 footnotes.

[ejkeecha]

I won't say I love or hate the endings. It is what it is.
Maybe they should have an ending where you get to adopt the god child. Or an end where you decide to ditch the Normandy with your squadmates on some remote world where you live without tech in the hope of going unnoticed. There was always going to be a limited number of endings. And artistically, sometimes some decisions are taken out of your hands no matter how hard you try. Accept that Shep said his goodbyes and most story arcs were coming to an end during the game.

So if you all considering choice, maybe at the beginning shep shouldn't have interacted with the prothean artefact on Ilos. So if this was all about choice you seem to have no issue with that choice being taken away from you.

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

wow, ive read some psots...but come on!

why do people who liked the ending believe others who didnt want an happy forever afther?

why did shepard accept the cathalyst so easy? he fought all the time choosing his path.

we didnt get 17 difrent endings just 3
they said it wasnt going to be an A B or C chooise an ending and it turnd out it was.
having lower war assests doesnt change anything besids less war assests.

when i first played it i liked the ending i tought it was wierd joker was in a relay drive and and even stranger was how liara popped out of the normandy afther she was killed by harbinger cause i took her with me on team.

i love dark endings, and my gripe on mE3 is that i played as a paragon it was so easy to unite everyone and get everything it didnt feel bleak at all. i felt like it will be a roll over.
besids legion and morodin that died for the greater good nothing else bad really happend.

so instead of maiign it look like an mission impossible by having more people die along the way (zaeed,katsumi,etc etc etc) it would have bene alot better for me. give me a sence of last battle ending of franchise. but no....just the last run to the beam and all of a sudden we got a difrent game.

they said with quotes they would give us diverse endings that will have me 1 and 2 choises depend on it. well, you dont you only got 3.

so afther i finished the other endings it felt really cheap.
and in the ME2 DLC a relay explodes destryong a star sythem....geus what the relays did?

exploded, so we could also say every sythem with a relay exploded.

there too many holes and stiffs, to actually like the ending.
im a movie buf and i like the dark sci-fi setting.

but make it atleast logic.
i loved 2001: a space odyssey and sunshine. also nice endings with dark sides.

as for ME3... i cant like it. shepard all of a sudden jsut does what the kid says. given so much freedom and control in other 2 games here striped form it entierly.

if shepard died, or the reapers would win, or both or you win but at the cost of almost everything (fleet, crew, etc) id be cool with those endings not this...not joker fleeing away from the battle with a resureccted team member....doesnt add up.
ME3 missed alot of options i felt it was rushed abit. you cant really choose your path anymore and that really killed it for me.

still like the game but its definatly not a great one.

[Kastrenzo]

Does anyone else feel that the sacrifice card was too mainstream and predictable?

I mean, I was in shock when I first started seeing the endings, but later I started saying to myself "I should have expected this BS"

Not that I agree with it, I don't go around screaming "hold the line" and that, but I'm in full support of an alternate ending,

[Manton-X2]

ejkeecha wrote...
So if you all considering choice, maybe at the beginning shep shouldn't have interacted with the prothean artefact on Ilos. So if this was all about choice you seem to have no issue with that choice being taken away from you.

In my opinion, the difference between someting like that and the ending is, the ME universe couldn't be open ended .... there have to be points where the story is taken under control and things -have- to be in order to move along.  This, however, is the end.  There is nothing past it.  There was no need to guide or inhibit in that way.  There could easily have been a dozen truly different endings based on what you did.  Everything from the total win to total defeat and shades of gray in between.

[Galateaaa]

I think it won't be too much to ask for a ending that is both conclusive and logical. Dark endings or not doesn't really matter. Just too many loopholes in the final 10 to 15 minutes

[RagingCeltik]

Can I just make the point the the majority of game endings suck? It's actually rare to find a game where the ending leaves you totally satisfied. Endings are traditionally not given as much thought in the development cycle. Mass Effect 3 is no different except for the fact it was highly anticipated *because it is the end of Shepard's story.*   That's rare.  Most games aren't marketed as a finale, so generally there's not much anticipation in that regard.

If you're happy with the way that it ended, that's great. For me, out of the many thousands of books, movies, plays, and games I've ingested, this one of the worst story finales I've ever seen. The ending to this story utterly destroys any emotional connection I had with the characters or the world they live in by leaving me in the dark with no resolution.    Structurally and thematically it completely betrays the artistic integrity of the rest of the work.

That's why I don't like it, but that my opinion. I like my resolutions to come with some...resolution.

Modifié par RagingCeltik, 20 mars 2012 - 10:58 .

[Bourne Endeavor]

Valo_Soren wrote...

If the catalyst says shepard could control the reapers and gives him a chance to then I believe it, to be honest while people say 'why would shepard just take the catalyst at his word' in my opinion the reapers, both sovereign and harbinger were always completely honest with shepard, they had no reason to lie to him, neither does the catalyst, they don't work on trickery, they believe nothing can stop them so there is no reason to think they would have to trick their way out of a situation. The catalyst could likely easily kill shepard or have lured him into a trap why would he give him some choice and make him think he was helping the galaxy if he really wasn't helping the galaxy, there would be no reason to, the catalyst has no reason to trick him, its a being thats milions of years old that has repeated the same process over and over again every 50,000 years, nothing had been able to stop the reapers until now so literally a new solution is needed, so there is no reason to think the Catalyst is not being truthful.

That bold portion is precisely why we can indeed both question the Godchild and reach the conclusion it would lie. Up until this point of its existence, no one organic has every accomplished what Shepard has. She has altered the very foundation of their plan and forced them into a different, uncertain direction. Sovereign speaks before any of these events have transpired, it has no reason to lie. Harbinger is in a similar position, but now we have reached a point of potentially ending the cycle, of destroying the Reapers. The Godchild has every reason to lie in hopes of preserving the cycle in some capacity.

Notice how it largely supports the two ending where the Reapers survive? You are told these are the "correct" choices. Furthermore, the galactic armada is making headway, they are damaging the Reaper fleet, although to what extent is never indicated. This puts the Godchild, the creator of the Reapers, in a precarious scenario; for the first time in history, the Reapers have been challenged. In all previous attempts, their success hinged on the unknown, civilization never expecting the Citadel to turn against them. The only option to maintain the cycle is by convincing Shepard the path they have chosen (sound familiar?) is the proper evolution.

Who is to say they will not regain control and repeat the cycle of destruction again, thus invaliding all Shepard has done? Destroy is the only alternative to ensure this possibility never comes to fruition and yet it still creates a bleak and desolate future for the galaxy. Even if some races do survive long term, all those fighting with you are doomed to starvation, numerous other species like the Krogan could not survive without space travel and so forth.

I was promised choices, not a bleak, hopeless future. BioWare even claimed the ending would be bittersweet. This is just bitter.

[bo_7md]

It is what it is folks. I expected at least some sort of DA text stuff that tells you what happens based on what you decided but none. There might be some DLCs later on but who knows. Now other than the ending yes i feel misled because now MP is a big part of the single player and i have to take time to raise my % and i find that breaks my immersion in the game.

[Bourne Endeavor]

RagingCeltik wrote...

Can I just make the point the the majority of game endings suck? It's actually rare to find a game where the ending leaves you totally satisfied. Endings are traditionally not given as much thought in the development cycle. Mass Effect 3 is no different except for the fact it was highly anticipated *because it is the end of Shepard's story.*   That's rare.  Most games aren't marketed as a finale, so generally there's not much anticipation in that regard.

Actually, I would have to disagree. While some indeed lack a quality, there are plenty, especially in this genre, that are quite satisfying.

Chrono Cross - How to do a polarizing ending properly, albeit it is convoluted as hell. You have closure in an odd sense and the fate of one character is left to the interpretation of the player.

Xenogears - Despite the near destruction of the planet, our heroes survive and life can begin anew. Yes, the world will struggle but that possibility is made evident by what the two main characters represent. The ending is open to interpretation but closure is provided for our friends and humanity can rebuild even with more than half wiped out. Frankly, it did what Mass Effect 3 only dreamed.

Lunar Silver Star Story - This is your typical happy conclusion to a remarkable game. The heroes survive and live their lives in a peaceful world they retook from evil. Cliche perhaps but the journey was fantastic and the ending more than satisfying.

Final Fantasy X - A truly bittersweet ending; the hero must sacrifice himself knowing in doing so he will break the cycle of death the world could not escape. The emotion because Tidus and Yuna and the eventual conclusion is absolutely beautiful. While their story ends on a somber note, Spira's has hope.

List goes on really. These games are all considered masterpieces and rightly so and their endings are great in their own way. If ME3 ended with any of their premise, then it would have been better for it.

[RagingCeltik]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

RagingCeltik wrote...

Can I just make the point the the majority of game endings suck? It's actually rare to find a game where the ending leaves you totally satisfied. Endings are traditionally not given as much thought in the development cycle. Mass Effect 3 is no different except for the fact it was highly anticipated *because it is the end of Shepard's story.*   That's rare.  Most games aren't marketed as a finale, so generally there's not much anticipation in that regard.

Actually, I would have to disagree. While some indeed lack a quality, there are plenty, especially in this genre, that are quite satisfying.

Chrono Cross - How to do a polarizing ending properly, albeit it is convoluted as hell. You have closure in an odd sense and the fate of one character is left to the interpretation of the player.

Xenogears - Despite the near destruction of the planet, our heroes survive and life can begin anew. Yes, the world will struggle but that possibility is made evident by what the two main characters represent. The ending is open to interpretation but closure is provided for our friends and humanity can rebuild even with more than half wiped out. Frankly, it did what Mass Effect 3 only dreamed.

Lunar Silver Star Story - This is your typical happy conclusion to a remarkable game. The heroes survive and live their lives in a peaceful world they retook from evil. Cliche perhaps but the journey was fantastic and the ending more than satisfying.

Final Fantasy X - A truly bittersweet ending; the hero must sacrifice himself knowing in doing so he will break the cycle of death the world could not escape. The emotion because Tidus and Yuna and the eventual conclusion is absolutely beautiful. While their story ends on a somber note, Spira's has hope.

List goes on really. These games are all considered masterpieces and rightly so and their endings are great in their own way. If ME3 ended with any of their premise, then it would have been better for it.

You are my new best friend for mentioning Xenogears...

But my point stands I think.   The ones you mentioned are absolutely great endings that satisfied me, but on a whole the majority of endings are letdowns or afterthoughts.   Great endings are more often exceptions than the rule.

[Spherexius]

I could forgive a lot (animations, sprites of people you could walk up to, bugs and glitches) while playing, as there were so many other moments that were amazing, but when you know how it all ends, it gets a lot tougher.

Here's a good summary of why people have issues with the game in it's current form:

Modifié par Spherexius, 20 mars 2012 - 12:16 .

[Skyline45]

Valo_Soren wrote...

So in essence the war assets control the variables you get with each ending how well your forces do in the final push affects the ending of the three different big choices that you are given, so therefore there are in fact, 17 different endings, as Bioware stated based on that war asset number. SO THEREFORE, there was in fact no lying or deceit involved. They gave us exactly as they promised.

No you're right. The majority of the fan base is wrong.



And again. Thank you for your feedback. ^.^

[Lonely_Fat_Guy]

Skyline45 wrote...

Valo_Soren wrote...

So in essence the war assets control the variables you get with each ending how well your forces do in the final push affects the ending of the three different big choices that you are given, so therefore there are in fact, 17 different endings, as Bioware stated based on that war asset number. SO THEREFORE, there was in fact no lying or deceit involved. They gave us exactly as they promised.

No you're right. The majority of the fan base is wrong.



And again. Thank you for your feedback. ^.^

haha i read that too, i mena really? where did you get youre difrent endings with difren war assets. almost tought he wasnt serious but very sarcastic

[Fat Head]

Joolazoo wrote...

....i dont understand how everyones saying the mass effect universe is so dark. The premise is dark, but the story has always been about how everything is dark but if you make good choices YOU can change that. Mass effect is a conventional story....its not some incredible niche thing where we have been lead to expect some shockingly esoteric ending. Rarely has a significant plotline been ended in a dark way if you played it right in the ME universe.

QFT.

[ergonomalous]

leonia42 wrote...

Faridarsabra wrote...

 -The three choices through Shepard’s eyes.
Another thing I would like to say, is that throughout the series, the player has been Shepard, our choices have been his choices, but we have been able to meta-game; We know for a fact that the upper right dialogue choice will be Paragon, and the lower choices will be Renegade, we have been told by developers that decisions in previous games will affect the last game, we have been able to go on websites to find out what the best course of action is in dialogues etc. We can use guides! But Shepard (as a person) did not have this ability.

I interpret the last 15 minutes as Shepard’s choices, not ours. Why? Because the choices we are given are not clear on whether they are good or bad, we have no red or blue color that will tell us what will be the good or bad, even the choices themselves don’t have their right color (destroy is red, control is blue). We are seeing the choices through Shepards eyes, he have never known what the “right/Paragon” answer is. Throughout the series, the player is the one that have seen what choice is paragon/renegade, not Shepard.

He had three bad and ****ty choices to choose from, we as players are clear on what we want to choose (even if we do not like the choices we are given), but for Shepard, they are all grey answers, there are no right or wrong  for him, he can’t go on youtube and see how the three endings play out, and then go back to the Citadel and say “oh well I will survive if I take the red choice so I’ll just go with that”, but as players, we can do this if we want to. Shepard can’t meta-game, so what is he supposed to ask a million years old AI, at the end of his own life?

I take the ending for what it is, we get to see Shepard do the single most important decision in the history of this Cycle; And we get to see him do it at his utter worst.

And that is exactly why choices matter, not OUR choices but Shepard's. It is the Shepard Trilogy after all, thanks for reminding us all of this. 

Aetius5 wrote...

Some people will just always accept
what's given to them - whether its crap or good is up to interpetation.
We can all argue what makes for good/bad until our fingers go numb, but
it shouldn't be argued that a deus ex machina ending makes for good
story telling

Why not? Seeing as good and bad are subjective (as you yourself just said), then why can't we argue about it?

If it is shepards choice then why give us any choices at all? Why not start the actual ending after the scene with anderson. At that point we can just watch what happens.

[chkchkchk]

Faridarsabra wrote...

TLDR;

-I don’t agree with Indoc theory
-I believe that the last 15 minutes are played out as if we are Shepard, and not players playing as Shepard.
-Yes, English is not my native language.

The ending left me utterly speechless and very confused, and at first I thought it was fine if it was one of the many endings we were promised. But I have come to accept the ending and now have a positive "meh" feeling about it.

I don't really know where I stand, I guess I have one foot in each camp; I am fine with the ending my Shepard got, but I would not mind a Closure DLC. I want to know what happened after, what happened to my squad mates and the rest of the galaxy, I want to know more about the Reapers and the Catalyst, more varied endings depending on choices made throughout the series, have choices matter. I don't agree with the indoctrination theory, simply not my flavour. I instead interpretate the ending for what it is (in my opinion):

My Theory:

Before getting to the Citadel:

Shepard was seriously injured when Harbinger blasted him, this is evident not only on the damage you can see on his armor, but also on the way he walks and bruises on his body - Shepard took a massive hit. The screen is all blurry and Shepard can't aim straight, my interpretation is that he got a concussion. Furthermore, mr. Marauder Shields shot Shepard and injured him. He now has a bullet wound! This is the first time we get to see Shepard this injured, and for all the badass things he have done through the series -swatting armies of Geth, Reapers and Mercs like flies-, we have never seen him physically injured this badly. I think that Shepard at this point is in shock and not fully aware of what is going on. Matter of fact is that we do not know how Shepard reacts to a situation or to pressure in his current state.

At the Catalyst:

This takes us to his conversation with the Catalyst. A lot of people say that their Shepard would never accept any of these three choices.  But he did. It is in the game. 

-Why did Shepard simply accept these three choices?

My interpretation of Shepard’s behavior is that he is simply in no state to argue, the guy have just been barbequed by Harbinger and probably suffered a serious concussion (bleeding from the mouth, nose and ears if I recall it right), he has a bullet wound, shot his friend Andersson (granted, not by choice but still), and had a long nice conversation with TIM: all the while he has been suffering from serious blood lost.



So when he finally meets the Catalyst, he is in no shape or condition to argue, he is still in shock and probably only half aware of what is going on (notice that he struggles to keep his eyes open). Notice that his response to the Catalysts options is basicly "but will the reapers die/leave?", He is too tired and shocked to argue, he just want the basic information of the choices: How will it affect the Reapers.

 -The three choices through Shepard’s eyes.
Another thing I would like to say, is that throughout the series, the player has been Shepard, our choices have been his choices, but we have been able to meta-game; We know for a fact that the upper right dialogue choice will be Paragon, and the lower choices will be Renegade, we have been told by developers that decisions in previous games will affect the last game, we have been able to go on websites to find out what the best course of action is in dialogues etc. We can use guides! But Shepard (as a person) did not have this ability.

I interpret the last 15 minutes as Shepard’s choices, not ours. Why? Because the choices we are given are not clear on whether they are good or bad, we have no red or blue color that will tell us what will be the good or bad, even the choices themselves don’t have their right color (destroy is red, control is blue). We are seeing the choices through Shepards eyes, he have never known what the “right/Paragon” answer is. Throughout the series, the player is the one that have seen what choice is paragon/renegade, not Shepard.

He had three bad and ****ty choices to choose from, we as players are clear on what we want to choose (even if we do not like the choices we are given), but for Shepard, they are all grey answers, there are no right or wrong  for him, he can’t go on youtube and see how the three endings play out, and then go back to the Citadel and say “oh well I will survive if I take the red choice so I’ll just go with that”, but as players, we can do this if we want to. Shepard can’t meta-game, so what is he supposed to ask a million years old AI, at the end of his own life?

I take the ending for what it is, we get to see Shepard do the single most important decision in the history of this Cycle; And we get to see him do it at his utter worst.

/flamesuit on.

I think this is a perfectly valid interpretation, and it's cool you're able to enjoy it that way.  Even though I don't like the endings, this is pretty much what I was thinking until I adopted the indoctrination theory.

And there's definitely no need for people on either "side" to be flaming anyone.  We're all fans of the same great franchise.