Mass Effect 3 ending SPOILERS!

[Sp3ratus]

snip

Look, I get it. You don't want Bioware to have made this big of a mistake. I'm sure I'm just as big of a fan. I've played 200+ hours of all three games combined. Including three playthroughs of the first two. So I know how much one can invest themselves into this game. I don't blame you for wanting to defend them as hard as you have. I almost want to as well. I can only hope that one day you recognize it's okay to admit that an entity you've invested so much into has miss-stepped. It doesn't mean the end of the world. Things can be fixed. The world moves on.

Oh no! Someone has a different opinion than you? Burn the blasphemer!

Why is hard to understand that for some of us, the ending actually made sense and gave ME3 and the series the perfect ending? You act like the opinion that thinking the ending is bad is somehow the correct one. Guess what, it's not. It's not the wrong one either, but it's YOUR opinion, NOT fact.

This is exactly like when Lost ended.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. No one is entitled to their own facts.

If you like the ending, fine, good for you.
If you like the ending because you think it's good don't complain about being criticized.

What the hell kind of an attitude is that? So because we have a different opinion it's open bashing season? Does it work the other way around too, then? Can I tell you that you're stupid and that you "don't get it", because you didn't like the ending? Or can we please try and be just a little bit civilized and keep the trash talk to a minimum and actually focus on the topic at hand?

SgtJon117's post wasn't critism, it was downright condescending and have no place in a discussion like this.

 

[Blindrooster]

Would anyone else have preferred to just lose outright than be given these endings? For something which intended to put you in the difficult and significant choice scenario, you have absolutely no control. I destroyed the relays because it sounded like the only one that keeps everyone alive. However this kills shepard for no fucking reason at all and I still can't fathom why the normandy got fucked over for this. The ending was trash.

I would have vastly preffered a losing ending to these. Think about it, maybe you could at least be with your squad, stuck somewhere, as the reapers close in to finish the job. That sounds alot more epic and romantic than what we were given. Kudos.

 

[Blindrooster]

snip

Look, I get it. You don't want Bioware to have made this big of a mistake. I'm sure I'm just as big of a fan. I've played 200+ hours of all three games combined. Including three playthroughs of the first two. So I know how much one can invest themselves into this game. I don't blame you for wanting to defend them as hard as you have. I almost want to as well. I can only hope that one day you recognize it's okay to admit that an entity you've invested so much into has miss-stepped. It doesn't mean the end of the world. Things can be fixed. The world moves on.

Oh no! Someone has a different opinion than you? Burn the blasphemer!

Why is hard to understand that for some of us, the ending actually made sense and gave ME3 and the series the perfect ending? You act like the opinion that thinking the ending is bad is somehow the correct one. Guess what, it's not. It's not the wrong one either, but it's YOUR opinion, NOT fact.

This is exactly like when Lost ended.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. No one is entitled to their own facts.

If you like the ending, fine, good for you.
If you like the ending because you think it's good don't complain about being criticized.

What the hell kind of an attitude is that? So because we have a different opinion it's open bashing season? Does it work the other way around too, then? Can I tell you that you're stupid and that you "don't get it", because you didn't like the ending? Or can we please try and be just a little bit civilized and keep the trash talk to a minimum and actually focus on the topic at hand?

SgtJon117's post wasn't critism, it was downright condescending and have no place in a discussion like this.

I think a whole lot of the fight this is causing everyone is the fact that it was an ENDING, with little answers and really scrambled the universe we were all used to. While theres nothing wrong with ending a story, it is a little upsetting though, right?

 

[MomoElektra]

snip

Look, I get it. You don't want Bioware to have made this big of a mistake. I'm sure I'm just as big of a fan. I've played 200+ hours of all three games combined. Including three playthroughs of the first two. So I know how much one can invest themselves into this game. I don't blame you for wanting to defend them as hard as you have. I almost want to as well. I can only hope that one day you recognize it's okay to admit that an entity you've invested so much into has miss-stepped. It doesn't mean the end of the world. Things can be fixed. The world moves on.

Oh no! Someone has a different opinion than you? Burn the blasphemer!

Why is hard to understand that for some of us, the ending actually made sense and gave ME3 and the series the perfect ending? You act like the opinion that thinking the ending is bad is somehow the correct one. Guess what, it's not. It's not the wrong one either, but it's YOUR opinion, NOT fact.

This is exactly like when Lost ended.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. No one is entitled to their own facts.

If you like the ending, fine, good for you.
If you like the ending because you think it's good don't complain about being criticized.

What the hell kind of an attitude is that? So because we have a different opinion it's open bashing season? Does it work the other way around too, then? Can I tell you that you're stupid and that you "don't get it", because you didn't like the ending? Or can we please try and be just a little bit civilized and keep the trash talk to a minimum and actually focus on the topic at hand?

SgtJon117's post wasn't critism, it was downright condescending and have no place in a discussion like this.

If I say I have a different opinion about that, will you call me a meanie? Or is having an opinion only okay if certain people like you perhaps approve of it?

Having an opinion is alright, but it's just an opinion. Every idiot and his uncle can have one.

Listen, I get the ending. It's not complicated. That's kind of the problem, it's too simple.

And the condescension was very justified. Not because someone has an opinion, but because that someone ignores relevant points even after they've been explained again and again.

 

[Harb]

Endings were blindingly unoriginal which is probably the only thing I can objectively mention as a flaw. Deus Ex all over again and I only wonder if there is a hidden ending in ME3 where the whole Normandy crew dances on a dance floor with music and lights.

I have been reading again and again that choices you make during ME1 and ME2 don't matter when faced with the ME3 ending. I agree, since it seems that all the effort went null with relays gone and galaxy crippled. However, I took a step back and looked at the whole Mass Effect 3 as an ending itself. Imagine 35 hours long (+-) ending scene where you are told how the decisions you made before affected the the final battle (but through an interactive form of a game). Not the outcome of the battle, but the way the battle happened.
Therefore you don't make decisions during ME1 and ME2 to see different endings at the end of ME3, but to see different Mass Effect 3.

I picked the control version, since Synergy wasn't available for whatever reason, maybe because I left the Collectors' Base up (it seemed as a valuable war asset after all even though I was against using humans for fueling). For me it was logical since I was told Mass Relays would be done. But with the control over Reapers and their logistics power I could help other civilizations settle in. Destroying was simply too brutal and I wasn't ready to loose all the technology, EDI and Geth.
For me the Control ending is the best and it satisfied me.

The endings were, from time to time, illogical and probably badly narrated. I got hit by the red beam with Garrus and Liara in my squad, but I saw them both leaving the crashed Normandy. Without any sort of explanation. Also what the hell was Normandy doing there?

I only wish Obsidian had done the ending (or the whole story), looking back at Mask of the Betrayer, which was amazing but still bittersweet or at both Fallouts. If there was a sliding show with Stargazed telling what happened to each civilization I would be totally happy. Hell I went through the whole Fallout 2 just to get New Reno in line since I did pick the wrong family there.

Endings could have been so so so much better and I'm shocked more time / though hasn't been put in them. The sense of completion or even bittersweet satisfaction is somehow lacking.


An ending we could have gotten (my idea):
*Shepard sits next to Anderson after The Illusive Man dies and we hear their conversation*
*Anderson's head drops and we see Shepard looking at her / his injuries*
*Hackett calls that nothing is happening, so Shepard gathers all remaining strength and hits a button on the console*
*The screen goes black slowly with Shepard breathing on the ground exhausted*
*Cut and we see a blue light emitting from the Citadel disabling all Reapers, but leaving Mass Relays intact*
*Shepard is lying on a sunbed on a beach without any injuries, drinking with her / his love interest (or alone) without anyone else around, both are chatting and relaxing and look happy. Garrus is slowly walking past them on the background with reasonable distance*
*The screen slowly goes black again*
*Sad music starts playing* *We see a hospital room (similar to one on Citadel) with located in London, Big Ben is clearly visible in the background through the large glass. Shepard is lying on the hospital sick-bed severely injured, blanked covers half of her / his body, head is bandaged. The love interest is sitting on a chair next the sick-bed, holding Shepard by her / his hand.*
*The camera steadily back up and away and we can hear the hospital beeping slowly going flat, implying the beach was only a dream*
*As the camera backs away, there is a man on wheelchair (also severely injured, but stable) in a corner, watching Big Ben*
*When the hospital equipment stops beeping a doctor reluctantly comes to the wheelchair, we notice Admiral Anderson as he looks up and behind him, nodding at the doctor. The Doctor grabs the wheelchair handles and gently walks off the screen while pushing the wheelchair*
*The hospital equipment is still making the flatline sound and the screen goes black*


Why didn't we get something like this? Very, very grim, but at least with a sense of completion.

 

[Erttheking]

Isn't that why we are playing this game? To have fun?

The ending wasn't fun for me. I found it insulting.

I'm sorry for your loss. Would you like a sandwich?

God damn it now I'm hungry. BRB, making myself lunch.

 

[voltron]

The point about Reaper technology SajuukKhar and synobal made is interesting, but they both seem to ignore or miss two reasons why the endings are such letdowns:

1. Several parts just made no sense. The "explanations" I read for why the Normandy is flying through a relay all of a sudden are pure speculations, since there is nothing to back them up. So the ending videos do not play out in real time? The fleets have time to retreat to their homeworlds? Then show this! Or at least drop hints.

2. The game clearly lacked a proper epilogue. The stargazer part was nice, but not nearly enough. Side arcs in ME3 itself had absolutely glorious closures. The scene where the genophage cure is released and the ME1 Vigil music plays is one of the best in gaming history, and was an absolutely fulfilling end to the Krogan story. Same with the Quarian and the Geth: the Quarian finally returned to Rannoch, living in peace with the Geth. Astonishing.
Yet the main storyline fails to deliver a similarly excellent ending. And it fails *hard*. The series made an excellent job of getting us to sympathize with the characters. The endings do not tell us what happened to them. If you want to see how it should be done, watch the epilogue in Baldurs Gate 2: Throne of Bhaal. Also, the ending felt rushed, sloppy, and done in a hurry. The nonsensical Normandy sequence is an example. Worse, it demolishes the earlier closures. The quarian fleet that came to Earth will starve eventually. So will the Turians. Tali will never see Rannoch again. Wrex will never see Tuchanka again.

Here is a nice twist: do not destroy the Mass Relays immediately, just destabilize them. Everybody sees that they are about to fail within 1-2 days. The fleets retreat to their respective worlds, and come up with plans to rebuild the comm buoy systems (remember, these are miniature mass relays used just for communication, and work independently of the Reaper ones!), they go, Mass Relays disintegrate, and the worlds are isolated for a while, using the barely functional extranet as a means to coordinate a decades-long program for recreating their own mass relays. (Matriarch Aethyta hints in ME2 at the fact that at least the Asari know how to build them.)

 

[Pikey Mikey]

You can't honestly tell me that those 3 endings don't differ in what they accomplish and how it will alter the future.

May I do so dishonestly?
Joking aside, that was just how I felt.

 

[Sp3ratus]

If I say I have a different opinion about that, will you call me a meanie? Or is having an opinion only okay if certain people like you perhaps approve of it?

Having an opinion is alright, but it's just an opinion. Every idiot and his uncle can have one.

Listen, I get the ending. It's not complicated. That's kind of the problem, it's too simple.

And the condescension was very justified. Not because someone has an opinion, but because that someone ignores relevant points even after they've been explained again and again.

Ah yes, "justified". There's a "pot calling the kettle black" if ever I saw one. You and other people, who hate the ending are just as much ignoring everything SajuukKhar and others present as their arguments as we're "ignoring" your side presents as their arguments.

When did I ever say that it's only okay, having an opinion if "someone like me" approves of it? I have, in every post here, maintained that having an opinion, regardless of what it is, is okay. What I'm not okay with, is presenting that opinion as somehow better and more correct than an other opinion and trying to bully those of us with the "less correct" opinion into shutting up.

I think a whole lot of the fight this is causing everyone is the fact that it was an ENDING, with little answers and really scrambled the universe we were all used to. While theres nothing wrong with ending a story, it is a little upsetting though, right?

Well, to me and others, it was an ending and gave me the answers I wanted and the closure I needed. There's nothing wrong with being upset over the ending, but that's no excuse for being mean to people who like the ending and try to explain their point of view.

 

[MomoElektra]

I have been reading again and again that choices you make during ME1 and ME2 don't matter when faced with the ME3 ending. I agree, since it seems that all the effort went null with relays gone and galaxy crippled. However, I took a step back and looked at the whole Mass Effect 3 as an ending itself. Imagine 35 hours long (+-) ending scene where you are told how the decisions you made before affected the the final battle (but through an interactive form of a game). Not the outcome of the battle, but the way the battle happened.
Therefore you don't make decisions during ME1 and ME2 to see different endings at the end of ME3, but to see different Mass Effect 3.

What you say is true and certainly a saving grace. It took away some of my disappointment when I saw some different outcomes with some allies on youtube.
To be honest, if the game had ended before Hackett's call, they had shown some back flashes and more cut scenes from the characters, I think I would have been okay with that. That would at least feel like an end and closure.

 

[MomoElektra]

Ah yes, "justified". There's a "pot calling the kettle black" if ever I saw one. You and other people, who hate the ending are just as much ignoring everything SajuukKhar and others present as their arguments as we're "ignoring" your side presents as their arguments.

That's simply not true. How can you ignore an argument when you point to its weak spots?

What I'm not okay with, is presenting that opinion as somehow better and more correct than an other opinion and trying to bully those of us with the "less correct" opinion into shutting up.

Then you must have missed it when SK did it, because you don't berate him.

I really don't mind someone having a different opinion, but pulling lame ass explanations out of thin air is not "just having an opinion".

 

[ZeroMachine]

HEY, EVERYONE!

Ok, I'm gonna give my final view on the ending, and then I'm gonna stop lurking the forums for about a month. Kinda sick of all the shit being flung back and forth about ME3. Both sides are being dicks, and many are in denial about certain details both in favor of and against the ending.

There are many people that are keeping it civil. To those who are, you're awesome. Stay awesome <3

To everyone else, grow up.

NOW, my final views (not that I'm some important figure, I just want to see if anyone agrees with me):

Spoiler: Was it good?

I think so. It was sad- no matter what, it was sad. Sometimes bittersweet, but it always fucks with your heart, no matter what.

But to say it's just outright BAD is just wrong. Could it have been done better? Holy FUCK yes, it could have. But it's a definitive end. Shepard's story is over. That's what had to happen. And I'm happy it happened. I wouldn't have wanted to see Shepard star in another game.

This is his/her trilogy, and it is his/her ONLY trilogy. Sometimes, it's fitting for a character's story to continue after a story arc is done (Halo 4), but in this case, it'd just be a bad idea.

So, yeah. It could have been presented in a much better fashion. But it delivered on what they promised- the end of Shepard's story. So it's at least an OK ending.

Whether you like it or not is up to you, obviously, but they delivered on what they promised- an ending.

Spoiler: Did it negate everything the player did?

There seems to be a massive event in the third game that went overlooked by pretty much fucking everyone. At one point in the game, Liara says she's been working on a project. This project is similar to the Prothean memory shard- it's a record of everything that happened... including Shepard.

This means that everything you did throughout each game- every damn thing- will go down in history.

Everything you did is an example to future generations. Some of your choices are, undoubtedly, fucked over. But in the long run, you proved that so many things could be done, so they can be done again if need be.

So, no. Nothing the player did was negated. Unless you told Liara to lie.

I'm surprised so many people forgot that detail.

I personally wish the ending was a bit better but I didn't want to see a "all is well and everyone lived happily ever after" ending. So I'm ok with it.

Now, good bye, everyone.

I'll be back when the bitching stops.

 

[Ifrit7th]

Honestly, no matter how they ended this game, they were going to piss a large group of people off.

I think this is pretty much the worst argument ~for~ the endings, ever. I find even the asinine "The people who think the endings are terrible just don't get it!" reasoning more satisfying than this.

Because, sure, there are people who would probably be upset at whatever ending existed. There always are. But "you can't please everyone!" does NOT, in any way, excuse bad writing. And the endings, as they are, are poorly written. They directly contradict the internal logic of the game, they contradict what you see and play in the game itself, they contradict the character development that the ME games have built up through the series.

I would rather you actually believe that everyone who hates the ending is simple than to be content with what there is just because "*throws hands up* people would be upset anyways!"

Also, saying that just lumps everyone into an "unpleasable fanbase," which allows you to ignore any legitimate complaints that people might have.

Except I'm not trying to excuse the endings for being bad, I'm saying that as an empirical fact; no matter what Bioware did, the expectations on this game were so great it was bound to divide the fan-base. We've seen it in a thousand other games before, and likely we'll see it in a thousand games since. Look at Sonic, MLP, Warcraft, Final Fantasy, Legend of Zelda, ect. Every fan-base ever is going to get angry if some element changes in a way that's not consistent with their vision. It's not an excuse about the quality of the product, ill or good, but a fact about the fan-base itself.

I'm not saying they shouldn't have bothered with an ending, but that they should have put enough effort into it that at least if it didn't fit your vision, it was something that you could accept. If you care to read my previous posts, I stated my opinion on why I feel the ending was lacking. I agree that they were poorly written, that the catalyst comes out of nowhere and the lack of epilogue really ruins what was otherwise a great experience.

 

[MomoElektra]

Except I'm not trying to excuse the endings for being bad, I'm saying that as an empirical fact; no matter what Bioware did, the expectations on this game were so great it was bound to divide the fan-base. We've seen it in a thousand other games before, and likely we'll see it in a thousand games since. Look at Sonic, MLP, Warcraft, Final Fantasy, Legend of Zelda, ect. Every fan-base ever is going to get angry if some element changes in a way that's not consistent with their vision. It's not an excuse about the quality of the product, ill or good, but a fact about the fan-base itself.

Could that have to do with the fact that the people who play these games are more and more, hmm "normal" people instead of hardcore gamers?
I remember that Mass Effect supposedly attracted a lot of women players and non-hardcore players.

So there is this huge group of really different people, some have played all games, some have watched all movies and TV-shows, some have read all books (little exaggeration). That means it gets more and more difficult to imagine a story, characters and ending that seems original and engaging to the majority.

Only, Mass Effect used a very simple, completely unoriginal concept. It was still original and engaging. I wonder why just the ending seems so out of place. That I don't get. Maybe they switched writers a few minutes before midnight.

Edit: Also, I don't think the fan base is divided, actually. In fact it seems very united on this.

 

[Ifrit7th]

Except I'm not trying to excuse the endings for being bad, I'm saying that as an empirical fact; no matter what Bioware did, the expectations on this game were so great it was bound to divide the fan-base. We've seen it in a thousand other games before, and likely we'll see it in a thousand games since. Look at Sonic, MLP, Warcraft, Final Fantasy, Legend of Zelda, ect. Every fan-base ever is going to get angry if some element changes in a way that's not consistent with their vision. It's not an excuse about the quality of the product, ill or good, but a fact about the fan-base itself.

Could that have to do with the fact that the people who play these games are more and more, hmm "normal" people instead of hardcore gamers?
I remember that Mass Effect supposedly attracted a lot of women players and non-hardcore players.

So there is this huge group of really different people, some have played all games, some have watched all movies and TV-shows, some have read all books (little exaggeration). That means it gets more and more difficult to imagine a story, characters and ending that seems original and engaging to the majority.

Only, Mass Effect used a very simple, completely unoriginal concept. It was still original and engaging. I wonder why just the ending seems so out of place. That I don't get. Maybe they switched writers a few minutes before midnight.

Edit: Also, I don't think the fan base is divided, actually. In fact it seems very united on this.

Again, merely stating a fact, which occurs for the reasons you've chosen to sarcastically emphasize. Why does everyone insist on a demeaning tone rather then to express their opinion rationally, especially when it appears we completely agree on the quality of the ending.

I will say this though, I do agree with your edited point, the majority does seem to disfavor the endings as they stand, but the fact that there are people still defending it proves the point.

Edit: The reason for the slipshod ending, as I understand it, was because EA was switching writers out of this thing through production. Towards the end there were only two writers on the project.

 

[MomoElektra]

Except I'm not trying to excuse the endings for being bad, I'm saying that as an empirical fact; no matter what Bioware did, the expectations on this game were so great it was bound to divide the fan-base. We've seen it in a thousand other games before, and likely we'll see it in a thousand games since. Look at Sonic, MLP, Warcraft, Final Fantasy, Legend of Zelda, ect. Every fan-base ever is going to get angry if some element changes in a way that's not consistent with their vision. It's not an excuse about the quality of the product, ill or good, but a fact about the fan-base itself.

Could that have to do with the fact that the people who play these games are more and more, hmm "normal" people instead of hardcore gamers?
I remember that Mass Effect supposedly attracted a lot of women players and non-hardcore players.

So there is this huge group of really different people, some have played all games, some have watched all movies and TV-shows, some have read all books (little exaggeration). That means it gets more and more difficult to imagine a story, characters and ending that seems original and engaging to the majority.

Only, Mass Effect used a very simple, completely unoriginal concept. It was still original and engaging. I wonder why just the ending seems so out of place. That I don't get. Maybe they switched writers a few minutes before midnight.

Edit: Also, I don't think the fan base is divided, actually. In fact it seems very united on this.

Again, merely stating a fact, which occurs for the reasons you've chosen to sarcastically emphasize. Why does everyone insist on a demeaning tone rather then to express their opinion rationally, especially when it appears we completely agree?

I will say this though, I do agree with your edited point, the majority does seem to disfavor the endings as they stand, but the fact that there are people still defending it proves the point.

Actually, no sarcasm was used to make that posting. Could you for a moment consider the possibility that you imagine hostility where there is none?

Edit: The reason for the slipshod ending, as I understand it, was because EA was switching writers out of this thing through production. Towards the end there were only two writers on the project.

That does explain a lot. Now I get all the EA hate.

 

[Sp3ratus]

Basically, the guy's saying there's a difference between saying you like something and saying something is good.

It's basically my shtick with Starcraft 2. I have no problem with people liking its story, but I won't let anyone say it's good, because it's filled up to the brim with plot holes, logic gaps, overt convenience and other things that make for a godawful piece of writing.

This, being a 5 minute segment, is a little harder to criticize on that front, but still, it's seriously anti-climactic, shoves away all the player input in a supposedly make your own story franchise, and is mostly nonsensical. These are facts, and on these facts most people base their disappointment.

You're free to tell people they don't get it as far as I see it, but have good reasons for it.

And I'm not disagreeing about that SgtJon117's comment. That's a seriously fail attempt at paragon dialogue.

I can't really agree with you that the ending being anti-climatic and that all the player choices have been ignored or that it's nonsencisal, being fact. All the player choices, for an example, are still in play, something like curing the genophage is still in play and isn't being undone by what happens at the end of ME3. It's an opinion, but not fact.

Ah yes, "justified". There's a "pot calling the kettle black" if ever I saw one. You and other people, who hate the ending are just as much ignoring everything SajuukKhar and others present as their arguments as we're "ignoring" your side presents as their arguments.

That's simply not true. How can you ignore an argument when you point to its weak spots?

What I'm not okay with, is presenting that opinion as somehow better and more correct than an other opinion and trying to bully those of us with the "less correct" opinion into shutting up.

Then you must have missed it when SK did it, because you don't berate him.

I really don't mind someone having a different opinion, but pulling lame ass explanations out of thin air is not "just having an opinion".

I'm not okay with anyone trying to bully their way to people accepting their opinion as the correct one, SajuukKhar included. I must indeed have missed it, because the last time I remember reading him doing it, was in the very beginning of this thread, which is a while back.

I've seen very few of the things presented by SK presented as having been pulled out of thin air. The explanation as to why Normandy is in the mass relay is one example, you could arguably point to, as it is merely a guess as to why it's there, but to me, it's a very sound guess.

I don't know how you can keep ignoring the things presented by SK, every thing that's been pointed out as being an inconcistency or a weak spots has been countered and explained by SK, but most of them have been ignored or met with comments like "that makes no sense", despite being sound explanations.

 

[Ifrit7th]

Except I'm not trying to excuse the endings for being bad, I'm saying that as an empirical fact; no matter what Bioware did, the expectations on this game were so great it was bound to divide the fan-base. We've seen it in a thousand other games before, and likely we'll see it in a thousand games since. Look at Sonic, MLP, Warcraft, Final Fantasy, Legend of Zelda, ect. Every fan-base ever is going to get angry if some element changes in a way that's not consistent with their vision. It's not an excuse about the quality of the product, ill or good, but a fact about the fan-base itself.

Could that have to do with the fact that the people who play these games are more and more, hmm "normal" people instead of hardcore gamers?
I remember that Mass Effect supposedly attracted a lot of women players and non-hardcore players.

So there is this huge group of really different people, some have played all games, some have watched all movies and TV-shows, some have read all books (little exaggeration). That means it gets more and more difficult to imagine a story, characters and ending that seems original and engaging to the majority.

Only, Mass Effect used a very simple, completely unoriginal concept. It was still original and engaging. I wonder why just the ending seems so out of place. That I don't get. Maybe they switched writers a few minutes before midnight.

Edit: Also, I don't think the fan base is divided, actually. In fact it seems very united on this.

Again, merely stating a fact, which occurs for the reasons you've chosen to sarcastically emphasize. Why does everyone insist on a demeaning tone rather then to express their opinion rationally, especially when it appears we completely agree?

I will say this though, I do agree with your edited point, the majority does seem to disfavor the endings as they stand, but the fact that there are people still defending it proves the point.

Actually, no sarcasm was used to make that posting. Could you for a moment consider the possibility that you imagine hostility where there is none?

"Could that have to do with the fact that the people who play these games are more and more, hmm "normal" people instead of hardcore gamers?"

That doesn't sound derisive to you?

 

[wicket42]

Just some other things that bug me.

The Catalyst says "The Created will always rebel against the Creators."

The mission with Legion in the Geth Server actually shows the Quarians were the ones trying to kill the Geth; the Geth acting in self defense. Additionally, once the Quarians flee, we see the Geth letting them go, Legion telling us there was no reason to pursue them as they were no longer a threat.

The Catalyst says "without us to stop it, the synthetics would destroy all organics". The Catalyst is a synthetic dedicated to preserving organic life.

So either the Geth (also EDI) disprove the Catalyst, or the Catalyst itself disproves the Catalyst, or both. There are other problems, but I don't know how much simpler I can make it.

I, and I suspect others, don't have a problem with the relays being destroyed, or Shepard dying, or even Joker getting stranded (how did my crew even get back on the normandy when we saw them all in London anyway?).

I have a problem with the fact that the reason the Reapers exist doesn't make sense. I know I'm repeating myself, but it's cathartic to me

Certainly more cathartic to come and complain about a nonsensical ending, than to do nothing.

God, it's like eating a sub sandwich, the best you've ever tasted, and the last bite has a big ol turd for filling, and it puts you off ever eating another sandwich again.