Polarizing would imply that there was DISAGREEMENT among how terrible the ending to this game was, at least to a point where one could call it a 'balanced' argument.
Anyone with a literary sense, who has played a game with a good story, or happens to read for enjoyment of well-crafted words rather than as an excuse to see the nude pictures behind the text is pretty unanimously agreed that the ending was crap.
It's a big world. There's bound to be a couple folks out there who disagree. But we can't rely on UNIVERSAL CONSENSUS every time.
For the sake of this argument, it's pretty safe to say that the VAST MAJORITY of people identified the ending to Mass Effect 3 as being completely indicative of either very poor story-writing, or complete and utter laziness. Sure, there's also the 'mindfuck' group and the conspiracy theorists... but really... the point all boils down to the same thing.
From the standpoint of quality, the ending sucked. There's not a lot of argument on that. That isn't divisive. That isn't polarizing.
That's rapidly overestimating the amount of bullshit your audience is willing to suspend their disbelief for, and coming back with a quick and poorly-articulated -excuse- for why the ending to a game which prides itself on having an excellent story and robust universe was so poorly thought out and even more-poorly written.
These things happen, though. I don't need a NEW ending for the game, although I (like some others) would certainly not mind some epilogue DLC which offers clarification to a handful of events (as well as some enjoyable extended gameplay, yes?)
Still, I accept that sometimes, a writer just screws up.
I can forgive it, when they fess up and admit to their mistaken judgement or poor choice. I can even forgive it when they keep their mouths shut and stand by their work in silence. But this comes off as being trite, pathetic, and deeply representative of the disconnect between game-makers and their audience.
They have no qualms with lying to our faces, blatantly. They show no hesitation to double back on themselves and refute their own previous statements. But most importantly, they show remarkably little understanding of what happens when you repeatedly and severely disappoint your audience time and time again.
Mass Effect 3's ending is the equivalent of writing a story about a hero who slays a dragon, only to have the last five sentences of your book occupied by the Dragon God King coming down from on high to hand you a couple of out-of-nowhere "Choose Your Own Adventure" story-book endings, thereby trivializing the entire story up to this point.
Having stripped any meaning from the narrative, what the consumer is left with is a technically exceptional game with mostly-entertaining mechanics, but whose plot leaves a foul, murky taste in one's mouth.
And they call that POLARIZING? Why?
Because people out there are imagining it can't POSSIBLY be as awful as it was, and are HOPING AGAINST HOPE that there is some deeper meaning to it than there most probably is.
Polarizing will be what happens when they inevitably attempt to resolve the issue, and inadvertently make it worse.
